Dynadot

information Do You think We Need an Internet License?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

WINNA

Established Member
Impact
93
With the Internet growing exponentially, do you think it would be useful to have an Internet License for anything that connects to the Internet to protect Internet Citizens?
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
2
•••
Licensing - the surest avenue to censorship.
No. Instead, let's all join hands to fight cyber crimes, not limit freedom!
 
8
•••
I agree. No. Besides censorship, it'll be a way for some corporation to charge whatever they want for "registration"...a profit making machine.
 
3
•••
No. Look at the mess in the EU with refugees from the 17th century messing up the Internet with their damned GDPR rubbish and trying to legislate for something they cannot understand.

Regards...jmcc
 
3
•••
Not just "NO", but "HELL NO".

The Internet has become the town square. The ability to engage with others online is not a privilege but a human right. If someone does a crime, online or offline, arrest them, try them in a court, and if indeed breaking the law, then put them in a place where they cannot be online and where they can think about how to live their life better.

By the same token, just because some gangbanger in Chicago uses a gun to kill someone in a gun-free zone, does not mean you take away the right of everyone else to own a gun and use it responsibly. This is the mistake that many countries made, and now they are powerless to defend themselves lawfully and of course the true criminals know it.

Knowledge is power. You don't need a license to find it, use, it or share it.
 
7
•••
3
•••
No, Never, Internet is platform for all where all are equally valuable and contributor for together growth and empowerment in digital economy either individual, society, business, or Government. Everyone has Equal Right with Right to equal use and prosperity. INTERNET FOR ALL FOR SOCIO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
 
3
•••
because some gangbanger in Chicago uses a gun to kill someone in a gun-free zone, does not mean you take away the right of everyone else to own a gun and use it responsibly. This is the mistake that many countries made, and now they are powerless to defend themselves lawfully and of course the true criminals know it.

I agree with everything else, however:

I'm divided on gun gun control as I understand both sides of the argument but I definitely feel safer because most people cannot own a gun in my country.

Also, don't most studies show it's actually a safer place to live where there are strict(er) gun laws? I get why a lot of people in the US are pro gun rights from a historical point of view.

I personally don't feel the need to be able to defend myself against my government in a violent way. That being said, I don't rule out my country will never be governed by a less democratical government so... It's an interesting debate but most arguments are emotional based where data clearly shows the better side of the argument.
 
1
•••
I agree with everything else, however:

I'm divided on gun gun control as I understand both sides of the argument but I definitely feel safer because most people cannot own a gun in my country.

Also, don't most studies show it's actually a safer place to live where there are strict(er) gun laws? I get why a lot of people in the US are pro gun rights from a historical point of view.

I personally don't feel the need to be able to defend myself against my government in a violent way. That being said, I don't rule out my country will never be governed by a less democratical government so... It's an interesting debate but most arguments are emotional based where data clearly shows the better side of the argument.

Thanks -- the parallel might be extreme for some folks, but the point is that there is an abundance of case law that shows that when it comes to those of us who don't live under authoritarian regimes, the unaccountable actions of a few should not be taken as license to restrict the liberties of the many.
 
4
•••
do you think it would be useful to have an Internet License for anything that connects to the Internet to protect Internet Citizens?
Why don't you go get one and let us know how it works out.
 
3
•••
Thanks -- the parallel might be extreme for some folks, but the point is that there is an abundance of case law that shows that when it comes to those of us who don't live under authoritarian regimes, the unaccountable actions of a few should not be taken as license to restrict the liberties of the many.

I hear you on that. Maybe it's not the ideal solution to restrict gun ownership but it might make it safer, less deadly.

I always imagine it like this. If everybody could 'freely' own a gun. I'm 100% sure I would have one. Now imagine a burglar entering my premises. I'd defend myself no questions asked. As he would be carrying as well the outcome of this situation would be rather nasty.

Now, if there are no guns involved all this burglar would encounter is me and my dogs. That may result in an ugly situation as well but presumably less deadly.

If that burglar would be armed (illegally) I would have liked to be armed as well to be able to defend myself better. Chances of this are slim though just because of the strict gun laws.

Anyway, I know we're gonna agree to disagree on this matter but knowing that a lot of idiots can freely carry a gun scares me more than the though of being less able to defend myself.
 
1
•••
Nope. But if we're not careful, it's where we're headed. A license to surf. A license to online development.

Canada, for example, is slowing becoming a totalitarian, 3rd world society. Most are oblivious to the changes, thinking this country is a "first world" and the greatest. Whilst all crumbles. People in hospital hallways for 3 days, waiting. Maybe we need a license to live?

The Internet does not require licenses. Why? Because it's all on the digital plane. NO ONE can be hurt. It's not like driving a car.
 
3
•••
I hear you on that. Maybe it's not the ideal solution to restrict gun ownership but it might make it safer, less deadly.

I always imagine it like this. If everybody could 'freely' own a gun. I'm 100% sure I would have one. Now imagine a burglar entering my premises. I'd defend myself no questions asked. As he would be carrying as well the outcome of this situation would be rather nasty.

Now, if there are no guns involved all this burglar would encounter is me and my dogs. That may result in an ugly situation as well but presumably less deadly.

If that burglar would be armed (illegally) I would have liked to be armed as well to be able to defend myself better. Chances of this are slim though just because of the strict gun laws.

Anyway, I know we're gonna agree to disagree on this matter but knowing that a lot of idiots can freely carry a gun scares me more than the though of being less able to defend myself.

Perhaps I should not have taken us on this tangent. This thread is about internet licensing not firearm licensing. I tried to draw a parallel. I realize it is a polarizing one, particularly in some parts of the world.

However, I understand that as the Internet becomes more "weaponized", there will be those who try to "disarm" some people from being able to project a voice.

I believe initiatives like ID 2020, possibly in combination with IPv6 rollout, are able to license internet access. While I won't be a fan of these attempts but I don't doubt that the attempts will be made.

Already as it is, much of the Internet is now accessed through managed funnels, and that worked very well, until those funnels overreached with censorship moved.

The predictable response is that the Internet is now federating very quickly:

- Mastodon is becoming a federated social media alternative, e.g. Gab.com
- PeerTube is becoming a federated YouTube alternative, e.g. see Us.Tv, powered by Epik.com
- Cryptocurrencies are a federated alternative to PayPal, etc. Epik runs its own BTC Pay Server.
- File sharing solutions like Armored.net and IPFS file sharing can be used instead of Google Drive

So, yes, we have decentralization. It is now almost unstoppable and is gathering speed. Given the abuses by the power-brokers of Silicon Valley, and their sponsors, I would say that this decentralization trend is a good thing, and that Orwellian Dystopia might have been narrowly averted.

Nevertheless, right now we have most of Venezuela under blackout-. When a government really wants to prevent digital decentralization, they can simply unplug the power. Of course that has the effect of collapsin the entire economy in the process so seems a path of last resort for a failing government!

Recently we saw governments turn off the entire Internet in the Ethiopia, Congo and Sudan. Somehow I struggle to imagine that this was done with benevolent intent.
 
4
•••
Perhaps I should not have taken us on this tangent. This thread is about internet licensing not firearm licensing. I tried to draw a parallel. I realize it is a polarizing one, particularly in some parts of the world.

However, I understand that as the Internet becomes more "weaponized", there will be those who try to "disarm" some people from being able to project a voice.

I believe initiatives like ID 2020, possibly in combination with IPv6 rollout, are able to license internet access. While I won't be a fan of these attempts but I don't doubt that the attempts will be made.

Already as it is, much of the Internet is now accessed through managed funnels, and that worked very well, until those funnels overreached with censorship moved.

The predictable response is that the Internet is now federating very quickly:

- Mastodon is becoming a federated social media alternative, e.g. Gab.com
- PeerTube is becoming a federated YouTube alternative, e.g. see Us.Tv, powered by Epik.com
- Cryptocurrencies are a federated alternative to PayPal, etc. Epik runs its own BTC Pay Server.
- File sharing solutions like Armored.net and IPFS file sharing can be used instead of Google Drive

So, yes, we have decentralization. It is now almost unstoppable and is gathering speed. Given the abuses by the power-brokers of Silicon Valley, and their sponsors, I would say that this decentralization trend is a good thing, and that Orwellian Dystopia might have been narrowly averted.

Nevertheless, right now we have most of Venezuela under blackout-. When a government really wants to prevent digital decentralization, they can simply unplug the power. Of course that has the effect of collapsin the entire economy in the process so seems a path of last resort for a failing government!

Recently we saw governments turn off the entire Internet in the Ethiopia, Congo and Sudan. Somehow I struggle to imagine that this was done with benevolent intent.

Amen to to that.
 
2
•••
Back