79% of adults everywhere believe internet is a right...

[fleshconsumed]

No..I outlined that already. They are convinces. A right is something you are entitled to at birth, something that you need. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, food, water. Those are rights to me, things that you are entitled to.

As pointed out by someone else already you're inconsistent. First you say water is not a right, then you say food and water is. Should government provide food and water for you free of charge?


Anyway, I'd classify it in the following three categories:
1. Right to free speech, right to guns, etc, basically Bill of Rights. Rights which are inalienable to you from birth.
2. Essentials, meaning car and utilities such as phone, water, gas, electricity and yes, internet. You shouldn't have a right to these things, but all of those should be heavily regulated to ensure cheap and fair access to them.
3. Privileges.

As I mentioned internet has become an essential part of life, and while I would struggle to define it as a right, meaning government has to provide it for everybody, internet providers should be regulated. Sadly, this is something that has not happened because telcos and cablecos have too much of a stronghold over the congress.

 

[Tristicus]

You're dodging the question. What right takes precedent?

Alright, so what if the world is taken over by aliens?

You can what if all you want. Fact is, it isn't, and chances are it won't be in the foreseeable future. If someone is holding you from your rights, you have the right to fight against that.

 

[yllus]

Because society has made it that way. You could go live in a heavily wooded area somewhere, and make a life all to yourself without being noticed for some time. The fact is, you can do it, and people DID do it.

And who wouldn't consider the Unabomber a functioning member of society?

Is it too early to call this as an official thread backfire? I imagine we were all supposed to pile on to the glorious conservative insight on how crazy those liberals have gotten with the definition of a right, when instead all that happened is the OP was exposed for not having really understood what the poll was asking.

 

[nageov3t]

I'd think it's as much of a right as free speech.

not that I think the government should be paying for everyone's high speed internet connection, but firewalls like we see in Iran or China seem to be as much of a violation against free speech as outright government censorship.

 

[Tristicus]

As pointed out by someone else already you're inconsistent. First you say water is not a right, then you say food and water is. Should government provide food and water for you free of charge?


Anyway, I'd classify it in the following three categories:
1. Right to free speech, right to guns, etc, basically Bill of Rights. Rights which are inalienable to you from birth.
2. Essentials, meaning car and utilities such as phone, water, gas, electricity and yes, internet. You shouldn't have a right to these things, but all of those should be heavily regulated to ensure cheap and fair access to them.
3. Privileges.

As I mentioned internet has become an essential part of life, and while I would struggle to define it as a right, meaning government has to provide it for everybody, internet providers should be regulated. Sadly, this is something that has not happened because telcos and cablecos have too much of a stronghold over the congress.

Excuse me? When did I say, before this post especially, that water was not a right?

Internet is not a right. It's a convenience. End of story.

 

[Tristicus]

And who wouldn't consider the Unabomber a functioning member of society?

...what?

Is it too early to call this as an official thread backfire? I imagine we were all supposed to pile on to the glorious conservative insight on how crazy those liberals have gotten with the definition of a right, when instead all that happened is the OP was exposed for not having really understood what the poll was asking.

No, you're supposed to think for yourself. Which is (hopefully) what you are doing. I think you really need to examine what is needed in life to survive, then consider internet into that equation.

 

[BigDH01]

Alright, so what if the world is taken over by aliens?

You can what if all you want. Fact is, it isn't, and chances are it won't be in the foreseeable future. If someone is holding you from your rights, you have the right to fight against that.

Why is this so difficult for you to answer? It's a simple question.... and, in fact, one that can and does pertain to today. I see many people here rail against any form of Socialism (and I would assume all associated belief sets such as Georgism), and collectively owned hunting and water preserves would certainly fall under that purview. In that light, what is your alternative in a world with unlimited private ownership of land and water when someone who doesn't own land and water wants to exercise their unalienable right to life?

 

[Moonbeam]

In this thread we will have the literalists, you don't need a computer to breathe for you vs the holistic who will see the acquisition of information vital to a live worth living. It will be a basically useless debate, fundamentally, because the pin head literalists will go away, no more able to access right brained thinking then when they came into the conversation, and the expansive thinkers will be even less impressed with linear thinking.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Excuse me? When did I say, before this post especially, that water was not a right?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=29489911&postcount=14

I asked you if phone, water and electricity are rights and you said no.

 

[yllus]

...what?

It's fairly obvious but not worth the time to explain.

No, you're supposed to think for yourself. Which is (hopefully) what you are doing. I think you really need to examine what is needed in life to survive, then consider internet into that equation.

Okay, here's a little test of integrity and honesty for Tristicus. Please read the BBC News article (Internet access is 'a fundamental right') and reply back here answering this question: Did the poll ask if everyone should have free Internet access, or did it ask if everyone should have the right to access the Internet? Do you understand the difference?

 

[SandEagle]

i wish the internetz would just go away. i miss being free and uninformed

 

[spidey07]

No way can it be considered a right. There is just no logical means to make it so. It's an electronic communications network and nothing else. It's like saying having phone service is a right.

Not surprised by the results. Entitlement mentality has taken full root. Ask these same people if cell phone service, cable TV, et al is a right and I'm sure you'd get the same results.

 

[Fear No Evil]

So is dialup OK or must we provide the ability to stream netflix movies?

 

[nageov3t]

No way can it be considered a right. There is just no logical means to make it so. It's an electronic communications network and nothing else. It's like saying having phone service is a right.

Not surprised by the results. Entitlement mentality has taken full root. Ask these same people if cell phone service, cable TV, et al is a right and I'm sure you'd get the same results.

so you have no problem with how they control the internet in Iran?

 

[MovingTarget]

I recently heard that some countries/groups were considering broadband access to be a right. I don't think that it is the case, especially outside of the first world.

The only 'right' in question here is access to information and communication. This can be better taken care of not by ensuring every home has fiber access, but making sure that local libraries are well-equipped and accessible to the general populaion.

 

[Cogman]

A right? No. A necessity to function in society? Yes. 30-40 years ago, if you wanted to publish a paper, or communicate in society on almost any level, you needed a typewriter. While it certainly isn't as important as the internet is, it was up there on the list. Does that mean that it was a right for everyone to own a typewriter? No. It may have been a necessity for daily life, but not a right.

Rights, IMO, are things like "freedom of speech, religion, peaceable gathering." They are broad and don't change with technology. Societal necessities, on the other hand, can change almost yearly, but shouldn't be dictated by the government.

 

[WHAMPOM]

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/79-percent-of-adults-believe-web-access-is-a-fundamental-right/



That's utterly stupid...

"Access to information shall not be infringed."

 

[Moonbeam]

One thing about 79% of the population believing something is a right. It quickly will become one.

 

[BoberFett]

Well, I'm just curious. Do you consider phone, water and electricity rights? And if yes why? What is your criteria for a right and a privilege?

If those are rights, then can I build a house in the middle of the Mojave desert and demand that government provide phone, water, electricity, and internet? I don't care what it costs, just do it, because goddammit it's my right!

 

[StageLeft]

Another way to look at this: What existing rights do we have that are material goods because essentially that's all we're talking about here, some physical tangible thing given to each citizen and I can think of nothing else that qualifies.

Rights, unless you are religious, are man made and malleable. I'm not even sure what the point of this discussion is. We all agree the internet pwns the sh*t out of us so probably we're actually asking: Should government subsidize internet access? and to that I would, perhaps as a surprise to myself, say in some cases yes it should and again I go back to the awesomeness of the net. In the same way poor receive cheap cell phones so they can try and get a job interview call back I think it would benefit them and thus society to give them internet access. Most will just read failblog.org and icanhascheese but some will learn something.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Where the Hell did thinking that government "provides" rights come from anyway? Rights != government handout.

 

[Hacp]

Obama will pay for my Internets now?

 

[Hacp]

Where the Hell did thinking that government "provides" rights come from anyway? Rights != government handout.

Its a ploy for the courts. If they convince everyone that the Internet is a right, and a case gets to the courts, activist judges will order the government to give the internet away to everyone for free. Its kinda like how they forced government to pay for the criminal's lawyers if the thug can't afford one.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Its a ploy for the courts. If they convince everyone that the Internet is a right, and a case gets to the courts, activist judges will order the government to give the internet away to everyone for free. Its kinda like how they forced government to pay for the criminal's lawyers if the thug can't afford one.

Yeah, that whole legal representation thing is such a scam.

 

[dmcowen674]

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/79-percent-of-adults-believe-web-access-is-a-fundamental-right/



That's utterly stupid...

Tell you what. Let's shut off Internet access to the entire U.S. starting with yours and let's see how the U.S. does.