Now that the government is selling out the world by giving up

>>56239397
>Now that the government is selling out the world by giving up its DNS servers.

Nigger what?

File: 1447529393108.jpg (101KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1024x768px

Fucking what?

What the fuck?

>>56239397
Bump this ting

I sense a moronic /pol/ conspiracy thread

>>56239397
> DNS
> Gubmint operated

Lrn2internet faggot. Also sauce on whatever the fuck it is you think you're talking about.

>>56239581
So you trust a private company to control them? You do realize the American government cant pick and choose what it gets to deny but private companies can.

File: 1439995116511.jpg (49KB, 406x364px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 406x364px

>>56239397
You talk about Obama bullshit ?

>>56239606

As long as they're not controlled by a single private company, I'd say it's for the best that DNS servers get put in private, rather than public hands. Would you really want to give the power to government to censor the Internet by pulling DNS records, thus killing a website for anyone who didn't already know the IP?

are you talking bout this?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/14/icann-internet-control-domain-names-iana

>>56239650
The Government cant censor it, legally. Thats the point. Freedom of speech prevents it. In any hands but the US government it can and will be censored. Which is why Obama is selling out. 4chan will not be 4chan on the primary default DNS servers. It will be at the top of the list on the chopping block. Sure you can still come here if you know the IP but it will effect the website.

The Internet will become more less TV with this change. This will circumvent network neutrality.

I would trust a private non-profit over a US government organization, especially as a non-American.

>>56239685
>people can't come to 4chan unless they know the IP

Sounds like a plus

>>56239685
>4chan will not be 4chan on the primary default DNS servers
lol what? what are the "primary default DNS servers"?

this is what happens when technologically illiterate people try to describe the future.

>>56239685
Wtf is going on? I'm confused, tell me why I can't point to a different DNS server, one that respects freedom?

>>56239897
Maybe retard over here thinks the US Gov has the power to take control of all of the root DNS servers world wide.

File: 383658FC-6A82-58E2-F076-9119FF14A18E.png (440KB, 607x455px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 607x455px

>>56239685
>the government can't censor it legally
>freedom of speech
this is not the first amendment. don't act like a legal scholar if your understanding of the law is this stupid.

the first amendment only guarantees that congress can't make a law infringing on freedom of speech. law enforcement absolutely can restrict someone's speech in response to something like a crime.

you're not allowed to call out "fire" in a public enclosed space. you're not legally allowed to profit from selling the stories of crimes you committed to publishers and whatnot.

when a site gets taken down by the FBI with one of these takedown images, do you think they're violating the constitution? you wouldn't be that retarded, would you?

>>56239926
this is /g/. it shouldn't surprise us that there are people here who think this shit.

>>56240428
Websites that break the law are the ones that get taken down. The examples that you posted are situations where people can get killed for buttering a word and killing someone is a much larger violation of their rights.