So why is no one fucking talking about Obama giving the US Internet

File: upUTcnX.gif (2MB, 310x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 310x197px

I don't live in America so I don't care.

What did obama do?

>Oh noooo, we have to prepare for the worst which is manually typing 4chan's IP.

Did censoring thepiratebay worked in the UK? No. 578382994884 proxies grew up the next month.

A site listing popular websites' IP will appear in no time, something like the onions subreddit.

Now fuck off with this non issue.

>>56434086
You use sites that are hosted on servers in the US. It'll matter when those sites become shit.

>>56434322
>imblying 99% of popular sites won't just bend over and take it rather than playing hide and seek with the law
ok kid

>>56434475
tor/freenet exists

>>56434322
>using proxies

I just put a different DNS address on to my IP's

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/other-publication/2014/myths-and-facts-ntia-announcement-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-

>Myth:
>This transition is “giving the Internet to authoritarian regimes.”
>Fact:
>The U.S. Government has made it clear that we will not accept a proposal that replaces its role with a government or intergovernmental organization.
>The criteria specified by the Administration firmly establish Internet governance as the province of multistakeholder institutions, rather than governments or intergovernmental institutions, and reaffirm our commitment to preserving the Internet as an engine for economic growth, innovation, and free expression.
>The U.S. government will only transition its role if and when it receives it receives a satisfactory proposal to replace its role from the global Internet community — the same industry, technical, and civil society entities that have successfully managed the technical functions of Internet governance for nearly twenty years.
>Myth:
>With the U.S. withdrawal from stewardship over the IANA functions, the U.N.’s International Telecommunication Union will take over the Internet – making it easier for repressive regimes to censor speech online.
>Fact:
>The transition process that is underway will help prevent authoritarian countries from exerting too much influence over the Internet by putting control of key Internet domain name functions in the hands of the global community of Internet stakeholders — specifically industry, technical experts, and civil society — instead of an intergovernmental organization.

You can all relax. Letting another government agency take over is not part of the deal. If ICANN needs to be given an antitrust exemption, then that's what's probably going to happen, because they're not going to be allowed to take another governmental organization as stewards.

>>56434495
Yeah and they're all shit.

File: screen-grabs-linksys-internet.jpg (68KB, 600x450px)

68KB, 600x450px

so this is real?

>>56434531
>I just put a different DNS address on to my IP's
How?

>>56434910
>You can all relax.
Oh thank god, Minitru. They almost had me going for a second.

>>56434495
I'd advise not to use tor as your primary browser

What do we need to do to either stop this from happening or
prepare for the worst?

>>56436912
Thanks for correcting the record!

>>56434010
Can you provide a source at least? I want to read about it but can't find anything

>>56436933
Please do not let this thread slide. This is of grave importance. Obama plans to hand over the internet to an organization named: ICANN; ICANN will then immediately hand over the reigns to the UN, which will enable authoritarian regimes to censor anything they don't agree with at will. This just doesn't affect America, this affects the ENTIRE WORLD. Please spread the following links to as many as you can:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fv1Wo9Eg40k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8uAYP7DsF8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIJO3Xm8esw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCJu0leRXkk
http://www.wsj.com/articles/an-internet-giveaway-to-the-u-n-1472421165
http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/new-pushback-over-obamas-internet-giveaway/

>>56436914
Can I have a source?
__

http://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/u-n-human-rights-council-first-resolution-on-internet-free-speech/

This is a GOVERNMENT Website. (.gov). There is no denying it's credibility because it comes straight from the white house.

If you want alternative sources, however.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/29/icann-un-take-internet-oct-1/

http://rickwells.us/free-speech-dies-us-conditioned-censorship/

http://endingthefed.com/october-1st-could-mark-end-of-free-speech-on-the-internet-how-obama-regime-may-be-turning-control-of-internet-over-to-u-n.html

Your right to shitpost on the internet is coming to an end.

>>56434010
>no one talking about
This is what, the fourth day in a row that there's at least one thread about this.
Also it's fucking nothing.

>>56436995
>it's fucking nothing.
Thanks for correcting the record!

File: image.png (234KB, 1266x889px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 1266x889px

>>56437013
Dude, memes kel

>>56437093
>stop taking the globalization of the internet so seriously, silly goyim.
>haha, silly memer.
You're right, Goldstein. I now see the error of my ways.

>not using a VPN
>using a US based DNS server

>>56436948
You are an uninformed idiot. ICANN has always had control of the Internet.

File: 603716161-594957297.jpg (108KB, 751x1000px)

108KB, 751x1000px

I don't live in America so I don't care

Oh look, another Trump fearmongering thread
Sage and report

>>56437452
Wtf i love foreign dns now

>>56437142
>I've seen the error of my ways
>Antisemitism for no reason except america meme
No, I dont think you did. Go get an education, and I don't mean what passes for education over there.

As long as I can still get loli porn idgaf.

>>56434010
I don't understand why this would be a problem. Can someone explain?

>>56437452
>Oh look

>>>/r/eddit

>>56434010
barry a good boy, he dindu nuffin.

>>56435018
kinda but with more undersea cables

>>56434010
This is why we're all voting for Trump, so he can undo all of the damage.

The part where he pulls out of the UN, can't wait for that.

>>56440423
>we're all voting for Trump
speak for yourself

>>56436957

>.gov link from 2012 on irrelevant article
>breitbart
>rickwells
>endingthefed

>>>/pol/

Actually relevant links:

On the removal of US internet control:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/14/icann-internet-control-domain-names-iana

On the possibility of a United Nations takeover:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/an-internet-giveaway-to-the-u-n-1472421165

>>56437093
>Advertisement is freedom of speech
lolwut? You're free to speak but I'm free to not listen.

>>56436957
>alternative sources
That's one way to describe breitbart. The term "Internet tabloid of exceptionally ill repute and history of alarmist misinformation" also covers it. Chances are, if breitbart are making a big deal of it, it's not worth the few hundred calories you'll use thinking about it.

>>56441727
I think they're trying to say they want you to turn off your adblocker to help them stay up so they can continue writing news articles and expressing their free speech. The ads themselves aren't the expression of free speech.

>>56437871
Butthurt American

>>56434010
Because majority here don't live in America (Even if they are the biggest nation wise) and don't care

>>56440723
Go back to tumbler fag.

>>56441788
See >>56441573

Breitbart, of course, is absolute garbage, but there are some interesting articles on the topic by WSJ and the Guardian. (Google the title of the WSJ article so that you can read the whole thing for free).