I went back and have alex back in economics and got a couple degrees. I did work in the united universityn two computer networking operations. I had an internet policy project in the former soviet union. When you Bring Technology and the internet to another country, how do you do that . Depends when you do it. I put computers and some african countries as a matter of education, working with vendors, making sure you have the right prerequisites like electricity, making sure there is a process that has to happen and people are dedicated to, and making it happen. With the internet, it has been a little different. You need people who are in the country who are champions of the country. We did that primarily in the Internet Society when i was a trustee there by training people from developing countries how to do it. How to bring their computers online, how to develop networks, and how to do internet governance, Network Administration at the time. You have to work from the ground up. We accelerated by helping people understand what they had to do and what they needed to know. Is there a case for you have to lay a wire or cable in that country to get an internet . Not initially. Usually they begin on existing telephone systems. The initial connection between many developing countries and the Global Internet was by means of a modem over a regular wire. Access to use motives to the internet. Whole countries use modems to access the internet. On to better things, more bandwidth through the telephone system. Now it is interesting how the roles have been reversed. Much of the telephone system rides on the internet rather than the other way around. Spring, egyptarab essentially cut off Internet Access to that entire country. How did that happen . Case, the minister of i. T. At the time was one of our students in the workshops. Togetheroth trustees for i can. In and said the president has ordered you on the basis of National Security to take down the internet. And he said it was the law, he had to do it. We have never talked about this in detail, but i suspect if he had done it, the army would have done it by themselves. Is in a case of flipping a switch . Turning off a server . For those of us who dont understand the technical probably a case of flipping a number of switches. If your agreement doesnt have power, there is no way it is going to be able to keep the Network Connection up. Inre are varieties of ways which you can shut down the internet. Turning off the power is the obvious one. Could you do that in the United States . No, absolutely not. In the case of egypt, there was one connection to the outside world. A the United States, we have very Robust Network with lots of crossed connections, lots of alternate routes to go from place to place. You cant do it. What are your Major Concerns about the future of Internet Freedom . Internet freedom, you say . Problem with Internet Freedom is you try to get the whole world to agree on it. At the moment, we still live in a world dominated by nationstates. They are our form of legitimate governments, whether we like certain aspects of it or not. Not a shareddom is concept. It is not something that is practice in the same way in different countries. I think we need once we have or greaterreement global consensus on freedom of access to information, then the internet is going to take care of itself. Internet behavior is really a reflection in many ways of noninternet behavior. The fact we have divisions among countries and societies is reflected both in the behavior of people off the internet and on the internet. So i am concerned when countries try to shut off Internet Access or monitor the internet in a major way. That is not my concept of Internet Freedom, although the current method of governance, they have the right to do it. You mentioned your work or experience in russia. Is the internet governed heavily in that country . From what i know, the leaky inis much more russia than in other countries, in the sense that it is not totally controlled by the government. I think china has a much better control over what happens on the internet in china that russia does, and i think north korea probably has a very good sense of what is happening in the internet in its country. Icam system work in your view . Yet. Yeah. Manage, toup to administer the identifiers that make it possible for one person on the internet or one location on the internet to go to any other location on the internet. Its an addressing system. There are two ways to it, the ip addresses which routers understand, and the Domain Name System which consists of things you and i can read, for the most part. We understand that. Containsthe dns that mechanisms to translate one to the other. How networkeloped should be managed, how the identifiers should be managed, and how the domain names should be expanded. The rules under which the domain names industry should operate. I think it has been moderately successful. There are certain things that i might like to see differently and certain things that all but bypants would, and large, it is giving this right to the multistakeholder notion that i hope will work well for the indefinite future. You were supportive of the multistakeholder system going into effect . I was. The multistakeholder is a code word for everybody who is affected since at the table, and we all decide what is best for the collective us. Ican operates under a specific substantiation of the multistakeholder system. There are multiple constituencies to do with things domains,al level governmental advisory committee, Civil Society, users have a role. They get together according to the way in which the bylaws have put them together to sit together and make these judgments, to recommend policy with regard to the editor fire system. The identifier system. It is working well so far, and i hope it continues to. One of the concerns i have is that in order for this to work, the birth but have to buy into the fact that sometimes not everybody is going to get their way. Part of the discussions are different because of because if everybody agreed, there would he multistakeholders. It would be one stakeholder. Say we havepeople turned the internet over to china or north korea. What is your response . I wish they do what the truth was. I think it was Daniel Moynahan who said you are entitled to your opinion, but not entitled to your own facts. This is a case of that. We havent turned the internet over to anybody. What you are talking about is the transition from the department of commerce having a ,ontract with a piece of ican and that was really limited in the fact that whenever there is a redelegation of country code that the department of commerce looked at it and said, is i can n following its own policy . And the answer was never know was never no. Its not even a political issue in terms of how the internet should be governed. It was a very minor tweak. The United States government still has as much influence and to say in what happens as any other government. I am somewhat mystified. Sometimes people glom onto something because it reflects a different opinion that they have or another point did want to make. It just isnt true. Thank you for your time. Thank you. What are you doing here at the state of the net . I am an expert on internet governance, so i was invited to be on a panel about internet governance. The guy who put together the program. Put alls asks that we these panels and always ignores me and puts Washington People on. I told him to get people from other countries and other parts of the internet i am just joking about that. We do have a european on the governments the governance panel. You are a professor at georgia tech. What exactly is internet governance . It is how the internet is policies inrms of how you act on the internet, but also the technical underpinnings. Get a domain name, somebody has to coordinate to make sure that domain name is unique. Those addresses have to be handed out in certain ways. There are issues of Cyber Security. Most of the governance is kind of hard to understand. People are confused about this issue and what it means because it is distributed governance. It is lots of different people making decisions. There is no centralized government. That is what we call it governance instead of a softer form of government. At the 30,000 foot level, how does internet governance affect regular losers regular users . Is just to make sure the thing actually works. ,f you dont have a consistent consolidated ordination of some of these functions, the United States might be disconnected from latvia or even canada. You have to have certain forms of management and policy to make sure everything actually is compatible, everything works together. That is the most fundamental form of the way it affects. Most people dont know about it because most of the time, almost all of the time, it is working. They just take it for granted that they can hit the enter key and the packets will go from their house to wherever they are sending their email, and they dont even have to worry about that actually happening. Where theres times are problems or crises. Attackmple, you had this on these videocameras, the internet of things, a few months ago. People in the internet has suddenly worked together and coordinate things to solve the emergency. That is a distributed form of governance. It might mean the ip address registries are getting information about where these devices are on the internet and who is in control of them. It might mean Law Enforcement agencies are rating a command and control center. It might mean the internet are doingoviders technical tricks to block the flow. Of Different Actors involved, and they are all spanning national jurisdictions. There is no one Government Back and say, here is what we are going to do. Does a distributed system work better in your view than a centralized system . Definitely. I think it is much more flexible, much more conducive to person because no one can seize control and say, this is the way it is going to be. If you are going to get control, youre going to have to get a consensus from a large number of people. Ica system workedn . Yes, it is a new institution we created about 70 years ago to coordinate the policymaking progress for the Domain Name System. It is had some rough times. It had issues because it wasnt pioneering an institution. It was meant to be scrollable grow old it was meant to be growable in scope. Fragmented. We have to be accountable to internet users. How do you do that . Wayss been many different of trying to make it accountable. One way is to have nationstates negotiate. It doesnt really work on the internet. Doesnt really know what is going on technically. Number two is that they get too politicized. Want to drag internet stuff into geopolitics. If you are for the internet, you want to avoid that. Third thing [indiscernible] you need input from the stakeholders were making decisions to make the domain names work. That means the naming registries and Internet Service providers and direct users and customers of those systems. It is a new form of Global Governance we have been developing. With the final move from the u. S. Government giving up control, i think we have finally got to the point where we can say this is a successful freestanding institution that is reasonably accountable. Not totally accountable, but reasonably accountable to the people it serves. If you are proInternet Freedom, should the chinese allow the New York Times at the New York Times app to be downloadable . Of course it should. Should they have the right to say no . Of the universal declaration of human rights, they not have that right. In terms of the power and sovereignty right, there is tension. Is why we created a global petition to coordinate the ican stuff, we didnt want sovereignty. We wanted uniformity and global compatibility. Unfortunately in the world of nationstates, they are still divided into territorial sovereigns. The rest ofa lot the world can do about it. Even with wifi and wireless. The wifi transmitters have to be set up on chinese soil to be local form of communication. Im sure that china licenses or somehow controls who can set up wifi transceivers. Then they set up gatekeeping functions that somehow control. But they do have holes in the system that you can circumvent. That is one of the interesting foreignpolicy issues of internet governance. The u. S. Is promoting circumvention for censorship through the state department. Of course, the chinese didnt like that, so it is a point of tension. And we dont like it when the chinese do Cyber Espionage and break into our systems and steal data. Theres a lot of interesting governance issues. Is there pressure on the editorial side to further governance when it comes to content . Yes, i think unfortunately, freedom of expression is always kind of unpopular because it is always something that somebody doesnt like that gets said or printed or published. The latest thing, for example, is the terrorism account on twitter and facebook. Sense, they have the right to remove these accounts because they may be illegal organizations that technically have no right to exist, but what i am inody just says favor of isis . Under the u. S. First amendment, it is not illegal to say that. Of course it is illegal to kill somebody, but it is not necessarily illegal to just say i support islamic fundamentals and believe in the program of isis. But there is a lot of pressure on the intermediaries, facebook, google, twitter, to suppress the communication of these people who are proisis. So that is one of these fine lines that you have to draw in internet governance. Features is the intermediaries that have so much power. There is a very interesting orate about censoring regulation or moderation of content by these intermediaries, and how far that should go, and whether it is done by a private more like a state actor because they are getting pressure from governments to do these things. Where you fall in that argument . That is all fairly on the extreme profreedom side. I think the states should not be pressuring the intermediaries to do their own dirty work, to do their censorship. I think it is ok for a private actor to say, this is my property and myspace, and im going to moderate the content to make sure my customers think this is a good place to be. That to me is pretty legitimate. That is editorial discretion, just like cspan exercises. Unfortunately there is this wedding between states and private intermediaries. Frequently when they are negotiating these private agreements about what sensor and what not to censor, the Civil Society and free speech advocates are not at the table. It is more of a private conversation between Law Enforcement and the government and the intermediary. I dont like that. I think we have to be a little more open on that. There is an open forum on internet governance. What are you hoping to achieve their . What point are you hoping to make . Im going to be talking about Cyber Security and how that is transforming internet governance. Years when 15 someone spoke about internet governance, they were speaking about ican. As somebody who is participating directly in the transition, that chapter is kind of closed in the is,e that we know what ican we have performed it it is not that interesting is the centerpiece of internet governance. I think Cyber Security is. The question we have to ask about Cyber Security is, are we going to get pulled back into a nationstate driven system of because itvernance is linked to National Security through the cyber conservative through the Cyber Security concern . Likewe have an ican institution for Cyber Security governance . Can we move away from a nationalistic direction . Georgia tech is really a leader in Cyber Security. We had the first masters degree in Cyber Security more than 10 years ago. Have just revised that masters degree, which was a Computer Science degree. Now they have expanded it to include policy, the kind of stuff i do, and energy systems. So the cyber physical, the energy grid threats, so on and so forth. We have something called the internet governance project, which i run. Then there is the institute for Information Security and policy, which is an old Umbrella Organization an Umbrella Organization. Is a very engineering dominated school. There are tons of there is tons of highly Technical Research going on there, like issues of attribution. There is Research Going on about socalled information warfare, about how people in government may manipulate the dialogue of other countries. A lot of interesting stuff going on right now. The professor a georgia tech is cofounder and codirector of the internet governance project. Toouncer if you would like see more of cspans communicators programs, go to cspan. Org and look under the series link on the home page. Announcer tonight, a look at the jump administration and how it compares to previous president ial terms. You will hear remarks from former speechwriter from the carter and reagan administrations, as well as some white House Counsel john dean nixon white House Counsel john dean. You can see it at 8 00 eastern on cspan. After that, academics and Public Policy analysts look at u. S. Foreignpolicy and how it has changed since world war ii. The panel was part of a series hosted by the Ethics Center and bard college. It gets underway at 9 05 p. M. Eastern, also on cspan. Announcer cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up sunday morning, Florida International universitys Jose Miguel Cruz discusses president trumps crackdown on gangs and cartels. Shatter,ew book antihillary clintons doomed campaign, looking at clintons failed president ial bid in 2016. Be sure to watch washington journal sunday morning. Join the discussion. Announcer sunday on newsmakers, kentucky representative John Yarmouth discusses congressional efforts to fund the federal government beyond this coming friday. He currently serves as Ranking Member of the house budget committee. He also talks about future budget issues. Watch newsmakers, sunday at 10 00 a. M. And six clock p. M. Eastern on cspan six a clock p. M. Eastern on cspan. Announcer this week on q and of speech ison going back to 1989. The 20th century senator who has been written about the most is george mccarthy. But there is no biography of the senator who had the backbone to stand up to him first, margaret smith. Do you are member how you went about preparing for that speech . Hardest ive ever worked on anything ive ever delivered from a podium. Announcer historian David Mccullough on his book the american spirit, sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspans q and a. Announcer sunday night on afterwards, Congressman Ken Buck of colorado, also a member of the freedom caucus, discusses his book, drain the swamp, how washington corruption is worse than you think. When you arrived in washington dc and have the surroundings i described, you get very comfortable in that situation. You dont want to give up those comforts. The way to continue to earn those comforts is to spend more money and grow government. Problems, but to create programs and take credit for those many levers of congress are here, we have had the highest paying job we have ever had. It is jobs that they do not want to give up. Their reelection is more important than the actual problem solving that needs to go on in d. C. Watch afterwards on cspan through two. Next part of a conference on trumped administration and policies, the current Political Landscape in washington. This focused on the president s relationship with congress and efforts being made to pass a Health Care Bill and other republican proposals. For Economic Development this is one hour. Good morning, everyone and thank you for joining us for the committee for Economic Development spring policy conference. , i would likeand to first of all thank our sponsors and if you look around the room, you should see signs and we will put them up during the day but without these wonderful people, we would not be able to do this. Triple creek ranch, the graham corporation, tiaa, insignia,