Is Mark Zuckerberg The 'Most Dangerous Person’ In The World? (video)

UPDATE: Mark Zuckerberg at the EU Parliament Livestream Video Replay here (Brussels, May 22, 2018)

See also: Schedule of video broadcasts | Multimedia centre | European Parliament:

• 18:00 / 18:05 - 22-05-2018, Press conferences :Antonio TAJANI - EP President - Mark ZUCKERBERG - founder and CEO of Facebook - Handshake 

• 18:20 / 19:30 - 22-05-2018, Other events :EP Conference of Presidents with Mark ZUCKERBERG - founder and CEO of Facebook 

• 19:30 / 20:00 - 22-05-2018, Press conferences :Antonio TAJANI - President of the EP

• Meeting with Mark Zuckerberg at the European Parliament - Multimedia centre

• Other info.

Zuckerberg Is The ‘Most Dangerous Person’ In The World: NYU’s Scott Galloway

CNBC.com video above published May 11, 2018: NYU professor Scott Galloway discusses Facebook $FB CEO Mark Zuckerberg, comparing him to historical dictators.

Note: On Tuesday, May 22, Zuckerberg meets with members of the European Union Parliament. The appearance reportedly will be livestreamed here 18:15 to 19:30 in Brussels which means it starts in the U.S. at 12:15 EDT and 9.15 a.m. PDT.

I have personally discussed with Facebook CEO Mr Zuckerberg the possibilty of webstreaming meeting with him. I am glad to announce that he has accepted this new request. Great news for EU citizens. I thank him for the respect shown towards EP. Meeting tomorrow from 18:15 to 19:30

— Antonio Tajani (@EP_President) May 21, 2018

See EU Press Release May 21, 2018.

See also:

• The left turns up the heat to break up Facebook | Axios.com May 20, 2018
• California Today: San Francisco Nurses Protest the Zuckerberg Hospital’s Name May 15, 2018: It has not been a good year for the Mark Zuckerberg name, as Facebook has fallen deep into a series of privacy scandals over allowing millions of users’ personal data to be improperly exploited."--New York Times | NYTimes.com

Breaking up big tech could unleash another 20 to 30 years of unbelievable innovation and shareholder growth. New podcast w/ @karaswisher @Recode #tooembarrassed https://t.co/b3q79PDUf5

— Scott Galloway (@profgalloway) May 20, 2018

Facebook, Inc. (principal domain: Facebook.com) is a US-based online social media and social networking service company with headquarters in Menlo Park, California.
Founded: February 2004, Cambridge, MA
CEO: Mark Zuckerberg (Feb 4, 2004–)
Facebook subsidiaries

Stock Exchange: Symbol | NASDAQ: FB

Source of chart above: Statista.com

What happened to Facebook's plan to wire the world? via @jessiwrites https://t.co/GUoCN1QXxG

— Scott Galloway (@profgalloway) May 19, 2018

Apple CEO Tim Cook Touts Privacy In Duke Commencement Speech

CNBC.com video above published May 14, 2018: Recode managing editor Ed Lee discusses Apple CEO Tim Cook’s commencement speech at Duke University.

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN, DNS Abuse, New gTLDs: Bad Policy, Horribly Implemented

ICANN Questionnaire: Measuring DNS Abuse in New gTLDs:
[note: first 5 questions not included as they only asked for contact information of the person answering the questionnaire]

ICANN is seeking input on the effectiveness of nine safeguards put in place prior to the launch of the New gTLD Program that are intended to mitigate abusive, malicious and criminal behavior in the Domain Name System. In particular, ICANN is looking for ways to measure the effectiveness of these safeguards, which include:

1. Vetting registry operators
2. Requirement for DNSSEC deployment
3. Requirement for Thick WHOIS records
4. Prohibition of “wild carding”
5. Removal of orphan glue records
6. Centralization of Zone file access
7. Abuse contact and documented anti-abuse policy requirements for registries and registrars
8. Availability of expedited registry security request process
9. High-security zone verification

Please answer the questions below to the best of your knowledge and from your own perspective.

6. Which activities do you consider to be DNS abuse?

Answer: Launching hundreds of unwanted, unneeded new gTLDs into the global DNS has to be DNS abuse problem #1 of which the known perpetrator is ICANN itself (along with a few hucksters hoping to make money by exploiting trademark owners and domain name registrants generally), while the victims are businesses, registrants, and the entire global internet community. What has been the effect of ICANN's new gTLDs? Financially failing gTLDs, predatory pricing, malware, rampant cybercrime and trademark infringement, "shady" new gTLDs that "fail to work as expected on the internet" (universal acceptance, collisions, etc.), resulting in reputable security firms advising their clients to block new gTLDs "wholesale" in order to protect the safety, stability, and security of their networks and users.

7. If you could put forth a globally accepted definition of DNS abuse, what would it be? This definition should be broad enough to cover various malicious uses of the DNS.

Answer: Misuse and abuse of the global domain name system (DNS) by ICANN, TLD registry operators, registrars, registrants, or others having access to the DNS.

8. In your opinion, what are the most effective methods to measure the prevalence of abusive activities in the DNS?

Answer: Measure which TLDs are being blocked "wholesale" by network administrators and others globally for reasons of safety and security. Also measure which registry operators, registrars and registrants are connected to domains identified as having abusive activities. Contact firms like IID and Blue Coat to help ICANN staff begin to "understand and comprehend" the magnitude of the problem ICANN has created with its new gTLDs program, and the damage being inflicted upon the DNS and global internet community. ICANN's new gTLDs program is an example of "bad policy, 'horribly implemented.'"

9. As part of the New gTLD Program, ICANN introduced safeguards to mitigate potential DNS abuse in new gTLDs (listed above). How would you propose we measure the effectiveness of these safeguards?

Answer: Since ICANN itself is a source of the problem--see answer to #6 above--accordingly, "ICANN safeguards" were insufficient and ineffective from the start. If ICANN never had a clue how to measure the effectiveness of its own safeguards, ICANN should have never introduced new gTLDs.

10. What has been your experience, personally or on behalf of an organization, with these safeguards? Please tell us:
A. Which were and/or were not effective? How so and why do you believe they were or were not effective?
B. Are there safeguards that should have been included but were not?

Answer to 10A&B: My experience has been as a user of the internet, domain name registrant, and website developer/publisher/editor. ICANN's "safeguards" were ineffective and insufficient--see answers to #6, #7, #8, #9 above. ICANN's new gTLDs program--bad policy, horribly implemented--is a complete indictment of ICANN and its own peculiar form of the "multistakeholder model" of internet governance.

Submitted to ICANN February 1, 2016

See also on Domain Mondo:

• ICANN Insiders On New gTLDs: Mistakes, Fiascos, Horrible Implementation 
• Security Firm Recommends Blocking ICANN's "Shadiest" New gTLDs
• Cybersecurity Firm IID Predicts New gTLD Websites Will 'Go Dark'
• ICANN 54: New gTLDs Still Beg For Money, Claim Severe 'Implications'
• Blocking New gTLDs, ICANN's 'Shadiest' Top-level Domains, 'Wholesale'
• Housing Bubble Like New gTLDs Mania? The Big Short Trailer (video)
• New gTLD Domain Names, Defects, ICANN Liability, FTC Complaints
• Verisign, ICANN, Internet Root Zone, Risk Factors to the Root Domain
• ICANN, Domain Registry Operators, Monopoly, Antitrust, FTC Statement
• New gTLD Domains, the Walking Dead and Dying, ICANN FY15 Results
• ICANN is NOT a new gTLDs Marketing Agency: ICANN 53 Review, Part 3
• What Does That July 29th Deadline Mean For .brand TLD Applicants?
• The dot SUCKS Conundrum: ICANN, FTC, OCA, New gTLD Domains
• ICANN 52, Universal Acceptance, New gTLD Domain Names "break stuff"
• Why New gTLD Domain Names Fail To Work Across the Internet
• Will the IETF, RIRs, ccTLDs + Verisign Just Walk Away From ICANN?
• Google Just Killed The Last Remaining Rationale for New gTLD Domains
• ICANN Admits New gTLDs Compromise Internet Stability and Security
• ICANN Process for New gTLDs Dysfunctional -- from the beginning
• ICANN, New gTLD Domain Names, Universal Acceptance Another #FAIL
• Reason #2 Why New gTLD Domains Are a #FAIL
• Why ICANN's New gTLD Domains Are A #FAIL, Reason #1

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Blast from the Past: ICANN, New gTLD Domain Names, Conflicts of Interest (video)

Kinderis Says New Web Domain Names Create Opportunities - but for whom?

Published on January 11, 2012: (Bloomberg) -- "Adrian Kinderis, a member of the ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) advisory council [ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO)] and CEO of ARI Registry Services, talks about domain names. ICANN, manager of the Web's address system under a U.S. Commerce Department contract, will start accepting applications for new top-level domains today [January 11, 2012]. The Marina del Rey, California-based group may approve hundreds of new Web address extensions to the right of the "dot," including company and brand names, cities and almost any word in any language. Kinderis speaks from New York with Susan Li on Bloomberg Television's "First Up." (Source: Bloomberg, emphasis added)

No obvious conflict of interest at play here, right? Good Ol' ICANN--LOL!

Of course, at this same time (early 2012), the US Department of Commerce was threatening to pull the IANA contract away from ICANN due to its poor conflicts of interest policy:

Ethics Fight Over Domain Names Intensifies - New York Times March 18, 2012: "The Commerce Department ...warned the organization [ICANN] that it needed to tighten its rules against conflicts of interest or risk losing a central role.... ICANN has come under heightened scrutiny because of an initiative to increase vastly the number and variety of available Internet addresses. Under the plan, which ICANN is putting into effect, hundreds of new “top-level domains” — the letters like “com” that follow the “dot” in addresses — are set to be created. Some business groups say the expansion of domains will cause a rise in trademark violations and cybersquatting, while some governments object to ICANN’s move to create address suffixes like .xxx, for pornography. But the initiative has been cheered by companies that register and maintain Internet addresses. A number of current and former members of the ICANN board have close ties to such registrars or to concerns involved in other areas that stand to benefit from the expansion.“ICANN must place commercial and financial interests in their appropriate context,” said Mr. [Rod] Beckstrom [former ICANN Chairman]... “How can it do this if all top leadership is from the very domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate independently? “A more subtle but related risk is the tangle of conflicting agendas within the board... the United States government is also dissatisfied with ICANN. The Commerce Department said it had canceled a request for proposals to run the so-called Internet Assigned Numbers Authority because none of the bids met its requirements: “the need for structural separation of policy-making from implementation, a robust companywide conflict of interest policy, provisions reflecting heightened respect for local country laws and a series of consultation and reporting requirements to increase transparency and accountability to the international community.” Eyebrows were raised last year when Peter Dengate Thrush, former chairman of ICANN and a fan of the domain name expansion, joined a company that invests in domain names." (emphasis added)

And now, 3 years later, what have ICANN's new gTLDs given us (besides a lot of money in ICANN's pocket)?

Cyber-squatting disputes up 300% amid web address explosion - Telegraph: "There has been a 313 percent increase in the number of disputes over the new generation of web addresses [new gTLD domain names] in the last eight months"

This internet address costs $2,500 annually—and it sucks - Quartz  "At the heart of the controversy is what .sucks is for. Critics see it as a “predatory shakedown scheme,” in the memorable words of one American politician."

ICANN must have no shame.

keywords: ICANN, new gTLDs, GNSO, domain names, conflict of interest, public interest, exploit, increased costs, fraud,

Follow @DomainMondo