Let's talk about the Domain Name Server Root Zone! That's something I don't understand - and it's overseen by the United States Commerce Department! [RAISE TRUMPET TO LIPS: Duh-duh-duh-dooooooo!]

Oversight is being passed on to the ICANN crowd in 2015. I CANN, you can't! The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.

The US gurm'nt - under pressure from the international community for bugging German Chancellor Angle a-Mirkin's phone, puttin' the heavy on whistleblowers Edward "Facty" Snowden and Chelsea Manning, and bein' a 'streperous 'n' sneaky bitch in general - has decided that the best bet is to relinquish the DNS root zone to private hands.

Was anyone calling for this in the international community? Not once did I hear Putin mention it. In February, Merkel said that it was high time the EU developed its own independent data hub. Totes Obvs a dig at her phone being hacked by NASA. Or the NSA. Further, the European Union telecommunications capo said that technical control of the internet needed to pass beyond the United States government's bailiwick. The British support the move too. "Global stakeholder community".

Stakeholders, they're called, these people who'll do the bizz. The US doesn't want the UN gettin' their hands on it. Maybe they feel those damn blue hats ask the questions first and then wait to be shot. Blessed be the Peacekeepers. The US says no one single government or group of countries ought to have control. So these "stakeholders" are those with an interest in the interweb.

Here's a repeat picture of yesterday's cables:

Oh no wait! I got that one wrong. It'll do though.

But privatise stuff and you get self-regulation, right?

Here's what some people have said:

"Whatever you think our country has done wrong, the United States has been by far the country most committed to keeping the Internet free and open and uninterrupted." Former Preh'den BJ Clinton

I think he's right.

“The timing is right to start the transition process. We look forward to ICANN convening stakeholders across the global Internet community to craft an appropriate transition plan." Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information Lawrence Stricklin.

But Principal Stricklin (Back to the Future pseudo-reference), privatisation usually goes pear-shaped. Light regulation in the financial sector? Increased expenses for the user in any sector? Feel free to make up your own reasons. At the time of writing, members of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are polishing their guns. (Not really. I just threw that in there.)

Who's paying for it? The US taxpayer, funding the whole planet as per usual? But what will be lost? Did any international security violations come from the Department of Commerce? Or is this data sweeping and mining being carried out by the NSA and associated espionage agencies (relatively exclusively)? I don't know that the Commerce Department was involved.

"While the Commerce Department rarely intervened publicly in ICANN's affairs, the implicit threat of its ability to do so will be gone. That could have an unforeseen impact in the future, particularly if cyber-weapons continue to play a larger role in military and counter-intelligence activities." Gautham Nagesh, Tech Policy reporter in the Wall Street Journal.

As well on top of that, also, as well, if there's one thing - among others, like being caught on official overseas visits not paying for prostitutes - the United States government is good at, it's imposing hefty fines on miscreants.

Whether it's an exposed Jackson nipple at the Superbowl, or the total burying of one of the Big One Point Five accountancy firms - Crosby, Ernst, Stills, Nash & Young, and the Arthur Andersen - United States gur'men fines are a headache for lots of corporations - all the time - who get slapped for being a bit dip-shitty. Pot, kettle, black, but the US shouldn't free things up to let China and Russia be even more spy-ey!

Anyway, I am discombobulated, uninformed, and just sayin'. I am JUST SAYIN'!

Sources if you don't believe me: