Slashdot Mirror
Spain Codifies the "Right To Broadband"
Reader adeelarshad82 writes to lets us know that Spain has now codified a "Right to Broadband," thus following the lead of Finland. Spain's industry minister announced that citizens will have a legal right from 2011 to be able to buy broadband Internet access of at least 1 Mb/sec at a regulated price wherever they live. The telecoms operator holding the so-called "universal service" contract would have to guarantee it could offer "reasonably" priced broadband throughout Spain.
This is not a "right" to anything. These people need to look up the definition and history of what a "right" is.
This is merely a law that regulates the Internet providers, requiring them to offer service to everybody for a regulated price. That's a regulation on the business side, not a "right" on the consumer's side. There is a pretty big difference. If it were a "right", it would not cost anything.
We have similar laws. For example, within certain geographical limits, my local utility is required to offer me electricity at a regulated rate, no matter who I am. It's exactly the same kind of law. But that doesn't mean I have a "right" to electricity! If I get too far behind on my bill it can get shut off. It's merely the ability to buy something, not a "right" to it. If I had a "right" to electricity, nobody could legally shut it off.
Maybe I'm answering to a flamebait, but theres nothing wrong with web applications. Many people want to have their email in webmail instead of using a client. Many people write to forums, news sites and sites like slashdot instead of newsgroups (as you seem to do too). Many people are perfectly fine using twitter and facebook for communicating (facebook even has that IM "client"). And because bandwidth is considerably cheap now a days (well in some countries at least, and it's getting there everywhere too), it becomes easier for people to upload a video file to a web service to convert it to another format than to download all the required codecs and find a software that can do it. Remember that majority of people aren't geeks.
That doesn't mean there's no desktop application alternatives and that you couldn't use them. I do for email, IM and many more things because it suits me better. But it doesn't mean other people couldn't do otherwise.
If you do not like those web applications developed by "modern hipster web devs", just don't use them and let people who like them use.
(and 1mbps is the minimum guaranteed speed in the news)
With the coming of age of the Internet, it will soon be as important as phone service. With the Internet, you can get legal information about registering your vehicle, and about smog-check stations, about filing a complaint with the relevant state agency. You can get information about universities. You can check whether your jury group is required to appear in court on a particular day.
10 years ago, the Internet was an exciting fad. Now, the Internet is an indispensable tool for living in modern society.
Of course, the best use of the Internet is to read articles on Slashdot.
Everything's hated by someone, and I'm fairly sure the Lisbon Treaty doesn't give the EU "carte blanche". I freely admit I know relatively little about the Lisbon Treaty, but I do know that unjustified hyperbole isn't going to help your argument.
You've confused efficiency with convenience.
A good developer will attend to function first and form second. Part of function is efficiency.
A bad developer barely even understands the concept of efficiency and function is frequently their last priority - just barely enough of a requirement to justify the site in the first place.
Look at slashdot for fuck's sake - you can't even metamod without javascript.
Like we need fucking javascript to click a fucking radio button for good/bad/no-rating?
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
First, the Lisbon treaty is far from being hated. Most people are in fact pretty indifferent about it, and a sizeable percentage of the population (especially the more informed art) actually support it. Second, it doesn't give anyone a carte blanche to do anything, I'd suggest you actually read the treaty before making such wild (and completely ridiculous) statements.
Also, "the EU" doesn't want to do anything. Some members of the european commission have expressed sympathy for cutting off offenders, the european parliament is opposed to it. But that question has nothing to do with what the article speaks about, since everything that the spanish government does is to force the major telcos to offer a 1MB connection at a "reasonable" price everywhere in the country. If you can't or don't want to pay, you still get nothing. This wouldn't contradict any law to cut off offenders either. It's effectively the same as with a phone line, the major telcos are forced to offer you a phone line anywhere in the country, but if you don't pay your bill you can still be cut off.
Last year, Spain granted human rights to apes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/opinion/14mon4.html
Does this mean apes also have the right to broadband? And please, no jokes about Nigerian scammers.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
a good web developer focuses on form _and_ function. In web development space, at least, they are equally important. things have to look as good as well as they perform. why is it that people always think it has to be one or the other.
maybe at slashdot at least, people here generally prefer the function part.
"A good developer will attend to function first and form second."
Depends on the application...
"Part of function is efficiency."
And part of efficiency/functionality is form.
The Lisbon Treaty is self amending. There does not need to be another vote for anything by the people. I think that qualifies as "carte blanche" for them to do what they like.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
While I strongly disagree with everything you claimed and find it to actually have no relevance to this discussion, let me point out that since 1963 it has been virtually been agreed to that European Union law is supreme to member state law. Here's the verdict:
..
By contrast with ordinary international treaties, the EEC Treaty has created its own legal system which, on the entry into force of the Treaty, became an integral part of the legal systems of the member states and which their courts are bound to apply.
By creating a community of unlimited duration, having its own institutions, its own personality, its own legal capacity and capacityof representation on the international plane and, more particularly, real powers stemming from a limitation of sovereignty or a transfer of powers from the states to the community, the Member States have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and have thus created a body of law which binds both their nationals and themselves
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?