On 1 Mar 2014, at 18:03, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote:
Getting authorised access is as easy as asking for it. The only practical limitations in the number of visitors are the size of the room, and the effect of interruptions on a scripted ceremony.
Indeed. This is one of my many gripes about the piece, possibly the biggest one. It's just wrong for the piece to give the impression that this reporter got super-special privileges or there was something magical about observing the ceremony in person. That annoys me. It gives the false impression that this ceremony -- which apparently can turn off the interwebs y'know -- is secret. That helps to spead FUD which is unlikely to be a productive influence on the current discussions on reform of Internet governance and "control of the root". I suppose too the paranoid might well be upset that an untrustworthy reporter -- who could be a terrorist or computer hacker -- is allowed to get anywhere near such a critically important thing. Well, something the paranoid consider "the critically important master switch for the Interwebs". Your tinfoil hats might vary.