Google DNS and OpenDNS vs CDNs

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Doug Humphrey <doug () joss com>
> Date: December 4, 2009 4:43:35 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Google DNS and OpenDNS vs CDNs

> All of this does beg the meta question - we all seem to agree that  
> it would be bad
> for the government (a "single entity") to "run the internet" and  
> basically control it all
> and have access to the content, and to elements suitable for traffic  
> analysis and other
> such data mining and tracking - but if a non-governmental "single  
> entity" manages to
> achieve the same situation, but via attractive commercial  
> enticements rather than
> through force of law, is that the same thing?  just as undesirable?   
> more?  less?
> same thing or different thing?
>
> An analogy - "the government" provides many services to "the people"  
> but as a general
> statement they have been, throughout history, somewhat disjoint and  
> uncoordinated.
> This is to the general benefit of the people, in terms of privacy  
> and lack of a single
> "exploitable capability" that would have total awareness (re:  
> poindexter/TIA etc) of
> the people - thus you could be on the "outs" with some elements of  
> "the government"
> but still feel pretty safe that it would be ok to talk to the cops  
> about your crazy neighbor,
> or even to file a police report when robbed, etc.
>
> This changes once "any agent of the government is ALL agents of the  
> government" - meaning
> that a call to the cops about a crime results in an automatic "all  
> agencies" awareness of you,
> a speeding ticket results in some proximate action because of a tax  
> situation with the IRS, etc.
>
> Go back to the internet and consider - the disjoint nature of the  
> 'net is sometimes a real
> pain in the butt, but is often a real benefit in terms of privacy  
> (the provider of one service
> on the net may not have access to the logs and records of your use  
> of other providers
> services on the net) and in terms of having "the 'net" not represent  
> a single exploitable
> resource that can be used to "rat you out end to end" - a "'net TIA"  
> capability.
>
> Yes, this can be established via law enforcement on a case by case  
> (and even some
> not-so-case-by-case) basis, but to have it instantly available at a  
> touch of a button on
> everyone and everything - well, things that are that easy to USE,  
> they get USED.
>
> So without trying to delve into MOTIVE here - different screed -  
> what is the practical
> result(s) and desirability of Google becoming the internet - end to  
> end, basically the
> whole thing - if not in terms of service delivery, at least in terms  
> of information awareness?
>
> (and of course - is any better/worse/different if the "single  
> entity" is the gov or the goo?)
>
> That seems to be the meta question the DNS thing raises, for me  
> anyway.
>
> doug
>
> On Dec 4, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Dave Farber wrote:
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > > From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
> > > Date: December 4, 2009 3:08:51 PM EST
> > > To: nnsquad () nnsquad org
> > > Subject: [ NNSquad ]  Google DNS and OpenDNS vs CDNs
> >
> > > Google DNS and OpenDNS vs CDNs
> > >
> > > [ CDN == Content Delivery Network ]
> > >
> > > http://bit.ly/6Wg38V  (Noodle's Blog)
> > >
> > > --Lauren--
> > > NNSquad Moderator
> > Archives        



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com