

Brazil's controversial plan to extricate the Internet from US control - lemming
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/20/brazil-dilma-rousseff-internet-us-control

======
PeterisP
It's not that controversial - as we have detected that there's hostile
wiretapping happening, a rational mitigation strategy requires (in the long-
term) infrastructure that would route data between, say, Brazil and EU in a
way that doesn't involve USA.

In a sense, not trying to isolate Brazil, but making it technically possible
to avoid USA if the rest of the world needs to. A few years earlier it could
be argued that it can work something like 'benevolent dicatorship', but now
it's clear that letting USA hold full control of the Internet is nearly as
dangerous as letting, say, Russia or China do so. Currently Internet is not
really independent, too much of core infrastructure goes through USA - and it
obviously needs to change.

~~~
rockyleal
It is presented as a "distributed network" but it is highly centralised, and
therefore (as has been shown) controlled by one player, and yet when someone
(Brazil in this case) moves to making it more distributed a it should be, it
is painted as "controversial".

------
a3n
Eric Schmidt: "[Balkanization] would be a very bad thing, it would really
break the way the internet works, and I think that's what I worry about."

Er, balkanization would really break the way Google et al. make money from the
internet, and that's what he worries about.

Yeah, I prefer a free and open internet, but the US and NSA's fiddling with
the internet shows why we can't have nice things.

