Mike Orcutt

Companies that do business online are missing out on billions in annual sales thanks to a bug that is keeping their systems incompatible with Internet domain names made of non-Latin characters. Fixing it could also bring another 17 million people who speak Russian, Chinese, Arabic, Vietnamese, and Indian languages online. Those are the conclusions of a new study by an industry-led group sponsored by the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the organization responsible for maintaining the list of valid Internet domain names.

The objective of the so-called Universal Acceptance Steering Group, which includes representatives from a number of Internet companies including Microsoft and GoDaddy, is to encourage software developers and service providers to update how their systems validate the string of characters to the right of the dot in a domain name or e-mail address—also called the top-level domain.

What will happen if the Federal Communications Commission successfully eliminates President Barack Obama’s network neutrality rules? Unfortunately, that seems like anyone’s guess, and such an uncertain environment could leave us with even less investment by Internet service providers and content providers alike—more than 800 tech startups wrote FCC Chairman Ajit Pai recently, urging him not to kill the rules.

It’s plausible that we could end up with no regulations at all, at least for a time. The agency could try to enact new rules, which would likely be more business-friendly and allow certain things that weren’t allowed under Obama’s rules, like Internet fast lanes. Ultimately, Congress has the power to step in and clarify the situation with legislation that establishes some sort of yet-to-be determined protections for content providers. If recent history is any guide, however, it's a long shot that this Congress will come up with a compromise on net neutrality anytime soon.

When the maker of Snapchat filed recently to go public, it also stepped directly into the contentious political debate surrounding net neutrality, warning that if the government removes the Federal Communications Commission’s “open Internet” rules it could seriously harm its business. Smaller wireless streaming video providers like Snap are among those with the most to lose if the Open Internet rules are rolled back. In its filing for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Snap warned that if they are modified or removed, “mobile providers may be able to limit our users’ ability to access Snapchat or make Snapchat a less attractive alternative to our competitors’ applications.”

Governments damage their economies when they shut down Internet applications and services, according to a new analysis. During the past year, 81 disruptions in 19 countries cost those economies at least $2.4 billion, according a study by Darrell West at the Brookings Institution that estimates the cost of disrupting a nation’s online activities. Governments can cut off citizens’ Internet access for a variety of reasons, including to quell dissent or force a company to comply with a law. In 2011, the Egyptian government shut down access for five days to prevent communication between protesters, while more recently, Brazil blocked the messaging app WhatsApp after it refused to comply with requests for user data.

Whether or not your ethnic group has political power in the country where you live is a crucial factor determining your access to the Internet, according to a new analysis. The effect varies from country to country, and is much less pronounced in democratic nations. But the study suggests that besides censorship, another way national governments prevent opposing groups from organizing online is by denying them Internet access in the first place, says Nils Weidmann, a professor of political science at the University of Konstanz in Germany.

Internet access is clearly linked to individuals’ socioeconomic status and the level of development where they live. These factors contribute to “digital divides” seen throughout the world. In the new analysis, Weidmann and his coauthors aimed to shed light on a factor that isn’t as well understood: political divisions between ethnic groups. excluded groups had significantly lower access compared to the groups in power, and that this can’t be explained by other economic or geographic factors (like living in rural vs. urban areas). Weidmann says the results add a new layer to our understanding of how national governments control Internet use. “You don’t have to censor if the opposition doesn’t get access at all.” He says organizations aiming to increase Internet access for humanitarian reasons must bear that in mind, and be careful not to reinforce such political bias.

[Commentary] While the continued expansion of the Internet has often prompted calls for a major overhaul, this latest sputter doesn’t mean it is nearing a breaking point.

The infrastructure can often be upgraded on a piecemeal basis rather than overhauled to deal with growing pains. Fears over the Internet’s health are overblown.