Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Network

ICANN Names New CEO, Will Pay Him $800,000 To Run the Internet 141

Posted by Soulskill
from the i-just-be-he-cann dept.
darthcamaro writes "ICANN has officially hired a new CEO to replace the Rob Beckstom. ICANN industry unknown Fadi Chehade is taking the top job — but there is a catch. He can't start for another 90 days, even though ICANN has been looking for a new CEO for months. Even better is Chehade's salary. ICANN will pay him $800,000 a year. Is the CEO of ICANN one of the highest paying jobs in the Internet governance landscape?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ICANN Names New CEO, Will Pay Him $800,000 To Run the Internet

Comments Filter:
  • by dgatwood (11270) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:15PM (#40417477) Journal

    I can't imagine I'm the only one.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by youn (1516637)

      I'd definitely do it for half than that ... but if they insist on paying me 800k, I will not complain lol

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Or hire a woman and pay her $616,000.

    • half is the bribe

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Nashville Guy (585073)

      Do you know how to run it? Seriously, everyone here has an opinion but do you have the expertise to run it? In a way that would make everyone happy and that would be net neutral and that would satisfy politics? In the real world? In a way that would allow Nepal to bitch and China to still express an opinion and have both the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Premier ready to come visit you at your house for drinks and a round of golf with you and Bill Murray?

      Bitch about $800k all you want, but at $400k I think

      • by Anonymous Coward
        My thoughts exactly. I run a company that affects approx. 1/10000000 of the people. I get paid about 1/8 of his salary. This is not an unreasonable amount of pay (for either of us), and I actually think he is underpaid.
      • by jmerlin (1010641)
        I wouldn't hire someone who is an expert DBA, expert front-end and back-end developer, expert IT in every operating system ever made, and a professional athlete, too. I don't expect such a person exists, so putting a price-tag of $5,000,000/yr on that position is ridiculous. If the job entails a lot of work in different fields such that it's difficult to find a single person capable of doing every task, you split it up. It's the same reason you don't encapsulate tens of thousands of lines of unrelated co
        • I agree with what you are saying.

          I am curious, though. Why doesn't the Internet community form its own domain system, and not worry about ICANN?

      • Run it perfectly? No. Run it better than it has been run for the last few years? I can think of about 100 people off the top of my head that could do that...
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Bitch about $800k all you want, but at $400k I think we get a $400k run internet.

        Indeed, back when the internet was free of commercial interests ICANN was not needed, as people could (and would) get stuff done because they wanted to, for no charge.

      • Do you know how to run it? Seriously, everyone here has an opinion but do you have the expertise to run it? In a way that would make everyone happy and that would be net neutral and that would satisfy politics? In the real world? In a way that would allow Nepal to bitch and China to still express an opinion and have both the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Premier ready to come visit you at your house for drinks and a round of golf with you and Bill Murray?

        Hell, yes I'd do it better. It wouldn't be hard to. Currently, the TLD thing shows how corrupt the system is. And I really don't understand why you are talking about WenJiaBao, or the Dalai Lama in the same sentence when we are talking about ICANN: you must have smoked weed or something. But when we're at it: that's the problem, politics should not be involved in something that should stay neutral.

        Bitch about $800k all you want, but at $400k I think we get a $400k run internet. Pay for performance is a world-wide metric. Do I want someone to do it for free? No, because that is what I will get in return.

        At the beginning of the Internet, it wasn't run by a company, and it was working well. The way ICANN runs thing

        • by rs79 (71822)

          "Seriously, everyone here has an opinion but do you have the expertise to run it?"

          Why yes. I did this from 1996 to 2006. Cost: $0.

          Postel used to do it as a part time $15K/yr "task".

          It really reallly isn't hard. If you'd tried or done it you'd know that. They make it look scary to justify the gold plated nonsen$e they get away with.

      • by 1s44c (552956)

        It's simply too much money for the job, smart people do great jobs for considerably less. What they are going to get for that kind of money is a MBA drone who talks in buzzwords, has no imagination, and only cares about acquiring as much personal wealth as possible.

        People that get paid more just get more greedy and more not less susceptible to bribery and other types of corruption. You can't pay someone enough to change their human nature.

      • by amoeba1911 (978485) on Saturday June 23, 2012 @08:00AM (#40420133) Homepage

        Pay for performance is a world-wide metric.

        Please stop perpetuating lies. It's an old wives tale that has absolutely no scientific backing. Evidence shows the opposite: high compensation has a detrimental effect on productivity of creative white collar employees. (This does not apply to manual labor workers)

        http://blog.ted.com/2010/05/31/dan_ariely_asks/ [ted.com]

        So yeah, I would like the guy getting paid $100k instead, and use the remaining $700k to add new fiber infrastructure.

        • Unfortunately, $700k doesn't buy that much fiber. Besides, that's the job of the carriers, whether they've been doing it well or not. Personally, I'd rather see that money go towards startups which exemplify the values of an open Internet, run by passionate individuals who want to drive growth. They would make more positive change than this guy and work at least an order of magnitude harder to make it happen.
      • by citizenr (871508)

        Bitch about $800k all you want, but at $400k I think we get a $400k run internet.

        Exactly, thats why you pay CEOs multi million dollar bonuses to succed in the market like Bear Sterns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs etc

      • by rs79 (71822)

        How to run it? Are you kidding?

        First of all the CEO is never in the office. Second, ICANN has been around for a decade and has burned though ten of millions of dollars. Show me the deliverables. If any other government agency acted like this there'd be charges.

        Keep in mind Beckstrom succeeded a guy that lied to congress about how much money he made (it's on youtube!) and was quickly sent home back to Australia.

        I mean, that much money to run THIS: http://rs79.vrx.net/opinions/ideas/internet/domains/eyestar/i [vrx.net]

      • by Rary (566291)

        makes enough doing so that bribery is not a major source of income.

        After a certain point, higher salaries actually tend to be indicative of a greater likelihood of bribeability. Someone who is interested in the work first, and money only as a means to an end, is relatively unbribeable. Someone who is only willing to do the work if the price is right is willing to do anything if the price is right. And there's always someone who can offer more than the salary, no matter how high you set it.

      • by kermidge (2221646)

        Woman at the bar to man next to her, "$100? I wouldn't sleep with you for $200!"
        "Okay," says the man. "How about $300? We already know you're a whore, now we can haggle price."

        Please do note nothing on talent or skill is addressed.

        I dunno, but ICANN seems to have been screwing up by the numbers of late. I realize non-profits can be a great dodge for the upper crust, but $800k to facilitate extortion for silly domains? And competence is still not addressed.

      • Pay for performance is only a world wide metric if you consider the song and dance performances corporate officers give to justify their obscene salaries.

        Seriously their only real job skill is selling their own self worth to their bosses, or board of directors.

    • ... and I'll start tomorrow!

      Except I'd tell the UN, with their grabby little paws, to get stuffed so probably I don't qualify. Oh, and the offices are moving from LA to Bermuda or Grand Cayman.

      Oh, and I outsource registration for the new TLD's to existing registrars with good track records, so people don't need to use ICA clients to virtual machines with dubious availability to fill out forms.

      OK, one more: I reduce the ICANN fees by 75%, but only after there's enough money to build a 50' monument to Jon

    • by 1s44c (552956)

      Based on your low slashdot ID you will do a better job too.

      This guy is being paid way too much. ICANN is behaving irrationally by paying this much money, this reeks of corruption.

    • by rs79 (71822)

      I used to do it for free.

  • CEO Pay (Score:5, Interesting)

    by religious freak (1005821) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:15PM (#40417481)
    If it's not the highest paid it probably should be. If someone can run ICANN they can run a lot of other stuff too. Competition for qualified talent is difficult at the CEO level.
    • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Informative)

      by Herkum01 (592704) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:37PM (#40417617)

      Yeah, I mean, he has to run the business unit, ensure that sales and marketing are doing their jobs and that products are delivered to stores. Oh wait, HE AIN'T running a business at ALL!

      People keep trying to rationalize these salaries as if there is some CEO shortage. Really it all about the good ole boy network and I will pad your salary and you pad mine. I remember after the banking crash in 2008 and they had someone reviewing salaries at banks. Every banking officer claimed that they were above average and deserved a raise!

      I tell you what, lets set some goals for this guy as a CEO and if it meets them then he can have his huge salary. Otherwise this is just a welfare check to the overpaid.

      • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Funny)

        by cjcela (1539859) on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:06PM (#40417817)
        Mod parent up. He is right on the money.
      • I'm curious: how much do you think that someone who runs the internet should be paid?

        Keep in mind that many parts of it are now the commercial/communication/entertainment hub to the world.

        Do you think it should be less than priceline.com ($50M), Qualcomm ($36M), Viacom ($31M), Time Warner ($20M), and eBay ($15M). Presumably, he has the skillset to do most of these jobs. Microsoft clocks in at $1.4M, so he is making roughly half of that...

        He isn't exactly getting stock options to sweeten the deal...

        I find

        • Re:CEO Pay (Score:4, Insightful)

          by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Friday June 22, 2012 @09:37PM (#40418289)

          > I'm curious: how much do you think that someone who runs the internet should be paid?

          How much is enough?

          Keep in mind: Greed has no limit.

          • Same for any job. Enough to be immune to luring away (or bribing) from the competition. Enough to afford for the individual's set of skills. Enough to be commensurate with responsibility.

            The CEO of NPR makes $450K/year. The CEO of Unicef makes $473K/year. The CEO of the American Red Cross makes $1M/year. The CEO of the Boys & Girls Club makes $1M. This list could go on.

            I would, however, say that the role of ICANN is more important, requires a higher skillset, and is more likely to be bribed than

            • by Raenex (947668)

              Enough to be immune to luring away (or bribing) from the competition.

              Greed knows no limit. Somebody demanding an $800k per year salary could easily be bribed for a few million if they are prone to being bribed. What's really silly is just how little people can be bribed for, people who could afford the things they are being bribed with.

              The CEO of NPR makes $450K/year. The CEO of Unicef makes $473K/year. The CEO of the American Red Cross makes $1M/year. The CEO of the Boys & Girls Club makes $1M. This list could go on.

              The list just shows that CEOs are overpaid. Nothing new there. A CEO just needs to be a competent manager, and there are plenty of them around.

              • Re:CEO Pay (Score:4, Informative)

                by ArsonSmith (13997) on Friday June 22, 2012 @11:21PM (#40418711) Journal

                "A CEO just needs to be a competent manager, and there are plenty of them around."

                Funniest thing ever said on slashdot!!

                • No, I think there are plenty of competent managers. Most of them are smart enough to stay out of management.
                • by Raenex (947668)

                  Despite the Dilbert mentality techies like to have about managers, I've known several good managers who were smart people and good at what they did. I've known some bad ones, too, but the same could be said about my tech colleagues.

                • by jcdr (178250)

                  The problem is that the management competence is not enough to be a CEO. You must have a close relationship with big players in finance that will set the goal of the amount of money there expect to extract from your business. The CEO salary, from there point of view, is just a small return on the massive profit there expect to get.

                  So if you don't have a plan to be very profitable, you will not be selected as CEO. If you ever get selected, this is because you promise massive profit and naturally expect a big

                • There ARE plenty of competent managers around. They just never get to the position of CEO, since they don't spend enough of their time backstabbing their coworkers.

            • by Znork (31774)

              If you're hiring someone you feel you need to make 'immune to luring away (or bribing)' you're hiring someone you already know is bribable and who you know would leave you for a larger salary. That rather sounds like a mistake.

              Frankly I'd wager it's more a case of paying him enough that he'll pay you or your friends more when he's a member on the board of the company in which you're applying for the CEO position.

              Most high paying corporate jobs have less to do with skills than with membership in the boys clu

        • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Insightful)

          I'm curious: how much do you think that someone who runs the internet should be paid?

          2.718 times the average industrial wage.

          I believe that's somewhere in the region of $135,000, but I don't have exact figures for the median US wage. The multiplier is obvious.

          Do you think it should be less than priceline.com ($50M), Qualcomm ($36M), Viacom ($31M), Time Warner ($20M), and eBay ($15M).

          Yes. Moreover, I think that such salaries should not be permitted in publicly listed, limited liability companies.

          Presumably, he has the skillset to do most of these jobs.

          A screaming money casting its dung around the office probably has the skillset to run run them as well, since running them into the ground appears to be the only thing modern CEOs actually do in return for their compensation. That and engage in crime, but I digress.

          I find that I am comfortable with this number.

          Then doubtless you will be comfortable with the corresponding increase in your tax bill required to pay for it and the multitude of linked salaries. Moreover, you will of course be perfectly contented in seeing your own wages decrease in value of in real terms to support the increasingly bloated and unearned salaries of the class you so admire. Enjoy your banana republic.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by bky1701 (979071)
          "I'm curious: how much do you think that someone who runs the internet should be paid?"

          Nothing. No one should run the internet. But if I HAD to pick someone? It wouldn't be someone making 800k; it would be RMS or someone from the EFF, who, I suspect, would happily do so for free or nearly so.
        • Dude, he doesn't "run the internet". His job, apparently, is nothing more than finding new ways of polluting the gTLD namespace. If he didn't turn up for work for the next three months, the internet would not suddenly collapse.

          • This. Oh my god, this. ICANN "runs" absolutely nothing. They have no bearing on anything the carriers do. If you want to see who does run the Internet, just look at who is driving the most users and most traffic. I assure you, it's not ICANN.
          • by rs79 (71822)

            " If he didn't turn up for work for the next three months"

            You think the CEO actually turns up at the office? Hahahaha, you haven't checked, have you?

            Congress was surprised to find this wasn't true either: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnjgqrx3Wmc [youtube.com]

        • I'm curious: how much do you think that someone who runs the internet should be paid?

          Someone who runs the Internet? A hell of a lot! And there should be multiple redundant copies of him!

          The head of ICANN? Much less.

        • by rs79 (71822)

          "I'm curious: how much do you think that someone who runs the internet should be paid?"

          He doesn't run the Internet. He heads up the company that for a decade has blocked the development of new top level domains for the trademark lobby/mpaa/riaa. This could have all been finished in 1998/1999.

          Notice the Internet ran fine - and grew - before ICANN? And that since the there have been very few innovations and development. Just the way the intellectual property lobby wants it.

          ICANN. Doesn't. Actually. Do. Anythi

    • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hondo77 (324058) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:39PM (#40417641) Homepage

      Competition for qualified talent is difficult at the CEO level.

      Says who?

    • by Hatta (162192)

      $800,000 isn't even all that much, when you're talking about executive pay. That's probably less than 10 times what an engineer at ICANN would make. In contrast, the average CEO made 380 times [cnn.com] what the average worker made in 2011.

      • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Informative)

        by ShanghaiBill (739463) on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:10PM (#40417831)

        the average CEO made 380 times what the average worker made in 2011.

        No. The average CEO made far, far less than that. The figure you quote is only for CEOs of 300 of the largest public corporations. It doesn't include the millions of smaller corporations.

        • Re:CEO Pay (Score:4, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 22, 2012 @09:47PM (#40418321)

          Apparently, you're right if you count only the salary, in which case a CEO makes roughly 90 times the worker salary. If you include all income, it is close to 500 times the worker salary. Sorry, but I don't see how this can be justified in terms of productivity or management skills or whatever.

          In 1970, CEO salary and bonus packages were typically about $700,000 - 25 times the average production worker salary; by 2000, CEO salaries had jumped to almost $2.2 million on average, 90 times the average salary of a worker, according to a 2004 study on CEO pay by Kevin J. Murphy and Jan Zabojnik. Toss in stock options and other benefits, and the salary of a CEO is nearly 500 times the average worker salary, the study says.

          From here [payscale.com]

          • by Thruen (753567)
            Your quote suggests that in 1970 average production worker salary was $28,000 and that seems awful high for 1970 wages, while your year 2000 number suggests average worker salary of only about $24,000, which is below average pay. See how your statistics have been manipulated already? Regardless, I find it hard to believe that those numbers aren't hugely affected by those 300 of the largest public corporations. It's like stating that the average global income is $7,000 while a full third of the world makes a
          • by rs79 (71822)

            Don't forget the 4X a year first class flights to five star hotels for a week for "meetings".

      • by Bengie (1121981)
        Or higher 3 senior engineers for 1/3 the price.
      • $800,000 isn't even all that much, when you're talking about executive pay.

        We're talking about an honorific position here, of someone who should be listening to the world. We aren't talking about the CEO of a big corp/bank making billions. Oh and when we're at it: even bankers shouldn't get that much. Let's put it this way: for ANY position, this is too much money, yet even more in the case of ICANN, where it should be a charge rather than a gift.

    • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Insightful)

      by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:08PM (#40417827)

      You should have used sarcasm tags.

      The thing I've seen over the years is that the good CEOs make a big difference for their companies. With the effects of their decisions being as important as they are they can swing billions of dollars one way or another.

      The bad ones can ruin a company, or at least drive it into the gutter.

      The problem is that both the good and bad get extremely high pay, and only the good ones are worth it.

      The way CEO incentives work is all wrong.

      Then the way boards and CEOs interact is often broken too.

      • I agree. Plus exactly what risk taking is this position about that would justify the salary? (btw: how can one fuck-up the ICANN more than it is at the moment?)
    • Sadly, the "qualification" is not the ability to competently run something, but rather, the membership in the special club which may or may not correlate with actual competence. For instance, Carly Fiorina....

      Do you really believe, that in a nation of 300M people, that we couldn't find people willing and capable to do almost any administrative job for far less than 800k in total remuneration?

      • Re:CEO Pay (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Gorobei (127755) on Friday June 22, 2012 @09:09PM (#40418157)

        The "hire a great CEO" problem is very similar to the "hire a great programmer" problem.

        The real deal in both roles commands a huge salary, and is totally worth it. The trouble is, if your company doesn't already have one, it has no expertise to judge if the person they want to hire is worth the money.

        The second-rate software company that hires a $500/hour consultant is no different from the big firm that hires a $5000/hour CEO. They have little ability to judge skills, and so tend to get suckered by a smooth, well-groomed candidate.

        The firms with the expertise in place (e.g. Google for technical hires, Goldman Sachs for management hires) do not make this mistake, and shell out big bucks for the people who are actually worth it.

        • We aren't talking about a company which goal would be to make money. We're talking about the Internet governance. You should be comparing such a position with a job at the UN rather than at a big corp. You're being fooled by the word CEO here.
        • by rs79 (71822)

          Speaking of "technical", how wise do you think this all Miscroft shop really is?

          This came out just now: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-23jun12-en.htm [icann.org]

          If you think ICANN is the "best and the brightest" or "runs the Internet" then you don't understand life on this planet.

    • Re:CEO Pay (Score:5, Interesting)

      John Postel used to do the same job of ICANN CEO and an entire swathe of their senior management for free. That was only 20 years ago.

      While the net may have increased in scale since then, its complexity has not, and its has not grown to the point where someone needs to be paid $800,000 a year plus bonuses etc just to keep it all ticking over.

      As for the "competition" at the CEO level; while there is indeed a worldwide race to the very bowels of vapidity, fecklessness, and incompetence in this field, again, the cream of this crop are not worth paying $800,000 a year for.

      • by expatriot (903070)

        20 years ago most of the management was goverment or education organizations. Postel was employed by the University of Southern California.

      • by rs79 (71822)

        Wasn't free, it was a $15K/yr "part time task".

        Biggest mistake Jon ever made, because when the government gave him this money that was all the excuse they needed to claim aegis over it.

        That's what happened. I was there. I saw this.

    • Competition for qualified talent is difficult at the CEO level.

      That's why we should have a H1-B program for CEOs.

      I'm sorry, but GM's CEO is not 34 times more talented or more qualified than Toyota's CEO. I say we outsource all our CEO positions to Japan.

      If someone can run ICANN they can run a lot of other stuff too.

      Yes, they can probably run Fannie Mae.

      It must be really difficult to run a government-granted monopoly as if it were your own private domain. With an almost unlimited budget, it must be really difficult to hire consultants who are going to do all the work for you.

    • Are you insane?

      Really?

      Sir/Madam, you give these people far too much credit.  You should talk to some actual CEO's sometime.  In 99% of the cases, they are nothing special at all.  At best, they are simply well connected.

      That has some value, but "talent" is not something I would call it.
  • Reason (Score:5, Funny)

    by leromarinvit (1462031) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:15PM (#40417485)

    Q: Why do you pay your CEO so much?
    A: Because ICANN.

    • Dude, the guy doesn't fucking 'run the internet.' Nobody runs the internet. It's like a flame, it's a manifestation.

    • I have another question: if there's such a thing as "the Rob Beckstom," are there other Rob Beckstoms elsewhere?
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I just changed my computer to OpenNIC's DNS servers and now I see this

  • Only fair (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mwvdlee (775178) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:18PM (#40417509) Homepage

    They got all those millions selling useless TLD's, they have to spend it somewhere.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Mashiki (184564)

      To to be honest, I always thought that it would be a good idea if you could have a carname.gm or carname.ford or item.microsoft, or routername.cisco, siri.apple instead of .com. It just makes sense outside of a tech circle. Doesn't it make sense when you think about it? Governments should have a country.gov though, and same for countries. Yeah it might seem like a pain in the ass, and it is. But for the average person it's simple, it makes sense.

      But then again, for duplicate companies and all that the

      • People can easily set their own bookmarks, so why can't they be given tech that allows them to safely modify their own hosts files, or maybe given the addresses to private name servers?

        I agree with you. I honestly don't get why we all have to use the same naming scheme.

        I would prefer countries be given gov.country, as opposed to the other way around.

    • by 1s44c (552956)

      They got all those millions selling useless TLD's, they have to spend it somewhere.

      That might have something to do with it. They are a non-profit who used their granted monopoly to make millions ( at least ) by selling text strings for obscene amounts of cash.

      Isn't it time we replaced the whole messed up DNS setup and got these nasty people off our Internet?

  • Low (Score:4, Insightful)

    by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Friday June 22, 2012 @07:55PM (#40417739)

    Average pay for a S&P 500 CEO was 10.7 million in 2007.

    This guy has all those tubes to worry about.

    • by fox1324 (1039892)
      I'd gladly see him make $10mil if he did the job well; the internet is important enough to warrant that expenditure IMO.
    • This guy has all those tubes to worry about.

      I think 800k is quite above average for the CEO of a plumbing company!

  • by gstrickler (920733) on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:22PM (#40417879)

    Or am I the only one who first read it that way?

  • by Cyberax (705495) on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:30PM (#40417911)
    What does it do? It doesn't administer number resources - IANA, ARIN, RIPE, and *NICs do that. ICANN doesn't administer root servers (various companies do that).

    WTF is he doing?
    • by oldhack (1037484)
      I thought the US Commerce Dept was gonna shitcan ICANN. Not soon enough.
    • by jmerlin (1010641)
      Corruption, it's always the same answer: money.

      1. Come up with useless retarded ways to extort money from businesses and/or people.
      2. Hire a CEO and funnel the money into his pockets to draw attention from the ridiculous salaries people who don't even come into work make.

      SOP for businesses these days. It's about time we cut the legs out from under ICANN, and maybe even remove the head, too. ICANN has such an insignificantly infinitesimal role in Internet management, they could be shut-down today and
  • wait (Score:4, Funny)

    by macshit (157376) <miles.gnu@org> on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:31PM (#40417929) Homepage

    What does ICANN actually do, anyway?

    I mean, besides supporting various tourist economies with their biweekly meetings in exotic locations...?

  • by damn_registrars (1103043) <damn.registrars@gmail.com> on Friday June 22, 2012 @08:39PM (#40417979) Homepage Journal
    ICANN doesn't do shit these days (it can be argued they hardly ever did). All the current ICANN does is find more crappy ideas to make money off of. By chance did they hire the pointy-haired boss from Dilbert?
    • by Nidi62 (1525137)

      By chance did they hire the pointy-haired boss from Dilbert?

      Couldn't have. His ineptitude is at least entertaining.

      • By chance did they hire the pointy-haired boss from Dilbert?

        Couldn't have. His ineptitude is at least entertaining.

        The ineptitude of the bosses of ICANN can come across as entertaining - until of course you realize that the idiots making the unbelievably stupid and short-sighted decisions are supposed to be "experts".

  • Running the Internet is easy. All the work is done on remote routers during the early morning hours on weekends by a race of Nibelung living their moms' basements. Or so the ancient Saga claims.

    Inventing the Internet must have been a bitch and a half. We all probably owe someone gazillions in Intellectual Poopery fees for doing that.

  • I'm not sure, but I think you misspelled "ruin" in the headline.
  • Some people here seems to agree that 800 kUSD is a reasonable income. The problem is that excessivve income are hamrful to real economy. The sums required to pay such a salary are taken from real economy and are too big to return to it as good consumption or real economy investements. A lot of this money will end up in financial economy, feeding bubbles and preparing the next burst.

    Moreover, who can claim his work cannot be done by someone else for less than 800 kUSD? Such an income is not necessary to ge

    • Excessive CEO salaries are primarily harmful to the companies that pay them; the "real economy" reacts by buying cheaper products (say, from China).

      These salaries only become harmful if they are coupled with government-granted monopolies that destroy market mechanisms, as they do for example for ICANN (goverment license to fiddle with the Internet), and Apple/Microsoft (patents).

      • by manu0601 (2221348)

        Excessive CEO salaries are primarily harmful to the companies that pay them; the "real economy" reacts by buying cheaper products (say, from China).

        That runs small SMB out of business and destroy jobs, I think this is indeed a damage to real economy.

  • Hey Vint (Just in case your reading)

    I don't know his renumeration, but between pension, shares and the rest, he's gotta be coming close to this number.

    There was a number of .com packages going around, and in all honesty to the larger companies 800k isn't a lot of money (Level Crossing, I'm looking at you). You negotiate the right deals at the right level and look after the company you work for and all of a sudden you've paid for your pay cheque a couple of times over.

    I've seen people in purchasing (I don't

  • by goodmanj (234846) on Saturday June 23, 2012 @06:48AM (#40419955)

    You don't pay the heads of powerful regulatory agencies big bucks because their job is difficult. You pay them well to ensure that they are difficult to bribe.

    It's true that some of the corporations who'd stand to gain from bribing this guy can drop $800K like it's pocket change, but the larger the bribe, the harder it is to hide.

    • by rs79 (71822)

      "You pay them well to ensure that they are difficult to bribe."

      You have't looked at Twomey's record in much depth have you. Codeword: Tina.

  • ICANN Names New CEO, Will Pay Him $800,000 To Ruin the Internet?

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Working...