[ALAC] At-Large Travel Fresh Start

[Evan Leibovitch]

Hi Lance,

On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 5:19 AM Lance Hinds via ALAC <
alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:


> A part of me asks that with twenty years of the existence and operation of
> the At-Large under our belt, what is the state of the At-Large?
>

That's a very broad question and can be seen from a number of angles. One
may evaluate the diversity of composition or the relevance and quality of
outcomes. That is, "how is ICANN different because ALAC exists?" -- from
the perspective of someone not deeply involved. Moreover, what is the
cumulative result of the many thousands of person-hours of volunteer hours
spent by At-Large participants in ICANN, many of those hours just learning
the lingo and the secret handshakes?

The unspoken reality about ALAC is that it is and forever will be populated
by self-selected elites despite best efforts otherwise. Most of the world
simply does not care about domain names, a small-and-shrinking component of
Internet infrastructure. Very few have the technical aptitude to understand
ICANN's processes, and even fewer of THEM are prepared to make the massive
investment of time required to learn how this vehicle works, let alone try
to put one finger on the steering wheel. The greatest diversity initiatives
one can imagine still have to encounter these many obstacles, not to
mention a culture dominated by money and where that money comes from.


>   We range from the very underserved in the south to the highly proficient
> in the North.
>

"We", collectively, are the foundation of a mere advisory committee (ALAC)
that the rest of the ICANN community funds but is not required to heed --
and often does not. Meanwhile the commercial vested interests in this
community have the literal power to compel the Board to serve their
interests. Who gives a damn about *their* diversity?

What is most painful to watch in outreach activities here is the conceit
expressed within them that ICANN has anything to do with access. It
deceives members of underserved communities facing physical, financial or
cultural obstacles to Internet participation by claiming they will be
better served by advocacy within ICANN than through participation in
protocol standards, hardware evolution, user-interface improvement, or
changing policies and priorities within their own governments.

If ICANN was ever about Internet accessibility for end-users, it certainly
is not that now.

Once upon a time "memorable" domain names were the key way for someone to
find what they wanted on the Internet. They even once held the promise of
useful categorization that would help people explore communities and
industry sectors.  But the domain industry got greedy, and an ICANN that is
financially dependent upon it went along with its demands. Because here the
inmates run the asylum; "contracted parties" effectively sit on both sides
of the negotiating table.

As a result of this greed, a massive proliferation of TLDs has taken place
without much thought to end-user consequences but to maximize domain-rental
revenue. ALAC has proven ineffective at containing the damage, not for lack
of trying. But elsewhere in response, the tech world devised ways to avoid
using domain names directly -- search engines, QR codes, URL shorteners and
now AI chats. As the world moves to apps and chats to find what they want
on the net, ICANN's products will increasingly be reduced to the domain
(pun intended) of multinational corporations, vanity registrations,
defensive registrations and speculators. A massive wasted opportunity, far
too late to recover.

Standards such as Unicode and multilingual keyboards became widely
supported as a way for people to use the Internet in the language of their
choice. Increasing voice-to-text capabilities make input tasks even easier.
Meanwhile, ICANN devised its own protocol for IDNs, which the world sees as
just a new way to sell domains but ICANN (and those inside its bubble)
still insist are about access. Nobody is fooled, despite ICANN's futile
"universal acceptance" campaign.

As for those with physical or financial obstacles to Internet
participation, there is nothing within ICANN that can advance their needs.
Some here still hold onto the myth that a domain can serve as a personal
identity, despite the fact that domains cannot be owned, are merely rented
and are trivially forfeited for non-payment. Meanwhile, many other forms of
permanent, secure, low-or-free-cost paths to digital identity have come to
the forefront that have nothing to do with domains. As for physical access,
I would recommend initiatives such as the Inclusive Design Research Centre
<https://idrc.ocadu.ca/>. I've had the honour and pleasure to work with the
people there on international collaborations; they accomplish more within
their small offices to improve digital access through innovation and
advocacy than ICANN could ever hope. And centres like that need volunteers
too.

ICANN is a tiny and shrinking part of the world's Internet infrastructure,
however it has all that revenue from domain rental so it can afford things
not offered at the real places to get access or standards improved. Could
any small NGO -- or even IETF or ISO -- afford the level of staff support
or travel subsidy that ALAC enjoys?

It is through this PoV that I see ICANN outreach and diversity initiatives;
well-meaning but utterly misdirected. They use the attraction of the Bright
Shiny Things that ICANN's domain rental revenue can produce, coupled with a
false claim of improving access ... rather than steering people to channels
through which they can really accomplish their goals of making the whole
Internet (not just generic-TLD domain names) more accessible, accountable
and ultimately more useful. The highly-technically-minded still have an
ICANN place within groups like SSAC, but that's not where the money or hype
flows.

Does ICANN, with its focus and priorities, still continue to be fit for
> purpose?
>

I hope the above answers this. IMO it is fit for purpose, but that purpose
is shrinking, and ICANN hasn't been about improving Internet access for a
long time.


> Can ICANN reach the next million without functional changes?
>

I'm unconvinced that ICANN needs to "reach" anyone. Its role is
infrastructure, meaning that most people only care about it if it stops
working. It attracts technical experts, commercial exploiters and a small
number advancing the public interest within this limited role. Not sure it
needs more, unless you consider all the billions of people who have never
bought a domain. Given ICANN's true orientation, does this constitute a
community ... or a target market?

Cheers,

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20240420/e1e03512/attachment.html>