<![CDATA[Gizmodo: Icann]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gizmodo.com.png <![CDATA[Gizmodo: Icann]]> http://gizmodo.com/tag/icann http://gizmodo.com/tag/icann <![CDATA[ ICANN Opens Door For Crazy Domain Names Like Crap.Crap ]]> ICANN has just made a decision that goes beyond allowing .xxx to be a top level domain; they're allowing all words to be top level domains. That means you're going to see domains like fuck.shit, shit.shit, shit.fuck, whatisthisshit.fuck, and so forth. What's not allowed is domains that conflict with trademarks (.pepsi was the example), too similar to current top level domains, or names associated with countries or governments (juicy.turkey). Companies will also register their products and services, leading to really annoying domains like pleaseplayyour.ps3pleaseplease, or dontyouwantanother.ipod. Nice one, ICANN. Nice one. [USA Today]

]]>
Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:40:30 EDT Jason Chen http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5020372&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ US Control Over Core Internet Systems Called Into Question ]]> ICANN1GI.jpgNext week, in Rio, an international meeting will get underway concerning the internet and its current status. The itinerary for the discussion includes spam, free speech and internet access costs. However, it seems that American dominance in the governing of the internet is more likely to be the unofficial topic for debate.

Two years ago, the Internet Governance Forum was formed due to a compromise between world leaders, consequently the forum decided to meet yearly to discuss matters concerning the information medium. The first meeting concluded that the US should maintain control of the internet, but the position was agreed to be open to discussion on an annual basis. At present, the US government is responsible for the nomenclature of internet addresses. This point is resting increasingly less easy with other world leaders, as the naming system really defines how users make use of the internet. With the internet's increasing power as an information source (propaganda tool), governments globally, understandably, all want a piece of the action.

As the US government funded much of the internet's development, it holds veto rights against Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, (the California based nonprofit organization it selected to manage domain names). The event is unlikely to make any fundamental changes to the infrastructure as it stands, yet the voices of dissent signal an unsettling future for the governing parties that wield control over the internet's current direction. Is it time for a change to the original system? What do you guys make of the underlying discourse? [Yahoo News]

]]>
Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:10:00 EST Haroon Malik http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=321303&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ ICANN Testing Domain Names In Chinese, Cyrillic, Arabic and Other Alphabets ]]> ICANN, the governing body of domain names, says it will test out web addresses using Arabic, Persian, Russian, Hindi, Greek, Korean, Hebrew, Japanese, Tamil and both simplified and traditional Chinese. I guess this means that the inevitable collapse of all language into a bloated English hodgepodge is on hold. While it's nice for people to get domain names they can actually read, it pisses me off, because I like navigating non-English sites by their forced use of Roman-alphabet tags. Ironically, as machine translation gets better, the use of more and more languages and alphabets on the web might not really detract from its universality. But I can't help thinking there's something scary in this decision, scary, that is, for monolingual America. [Yahoo/AFP]

]]>
Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:10:11 EDT Wilson Rothman http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=310151&view=rss&microfeed=true