Originally posted by SomeBozo:

---

They are leading us backwards? We are in the 21st century now.

---

That was sarcasm, Sheldon

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

I thought it was the 22 century... and as long as information is uncensored and unfiltered I don't care whos the regulatory board is.

---

Perhaps if we live to see the year 2101 it will be accurate to consider it the 22nd century (whether A.D. for 'anno domini' or C.E. for "common era"), but not before then.

The only thing I want to come out of these treaty talks is an agreement to designate as a criminal act of felony the intentional purveyance by anyone, individual, business enterprise or state actor, of malware intended for 1) theft of intellectual or financial property or 2) physical or operational damage of industrial and other institutional control systems, with conviction to warrant large financial compensation extracted by and lengthy imprisonment for the perpetrators.

Or would you prefer to have unrestrained proliferation of malware such as Stuxnet, Storm, Flame or Shylock and so many others (all perniciously worse as time passes)?

If so, then you're more likely to be among the miscreants behind that sort of criminal activity who trumpet "Freedom of the Internet!" as a smokescreen, or affiliated with a state actor who wants to retain the ability to conduct clandestine cyberwarfare or industrial espionage with zero oversight or acknowledgment.

Thus all the more valid to have uniform legal code treatment among nations for the actions and activities involved with purveyance of malware. Embedding that principle within an international treaty seems legitimate to me.