Slashdot Mirror
Is Mobile Broadband a Luxury Or a Human Right?
concealment sends this quote from an article at CNN:
"Moderating a discussion on the future of broadband, Mashable editor-in-chief Lance Ulanoff tossed a provocative question to the audience: 'By quick show of hands, how many out there think that broadband is a luxury?' Next question: 'How many out there think it is a human right?' That option easily carried the audience vote. Broadband access is too important to society to be relegated to a small, privileged portion of the world population, Hans Vestberg, president and CEO of Ericsson, said during the discussion. Dr. Hamadoun Touré, secretary-general of the International Telecommunication Union, echoed Vestberg's remarks. 'We need to make sure all the world's inhabitants are connected to the goodies of the online world, which means better health care, better education, more sustainable economic and social development,' Touré said."
"When living your life often requires [...something...], then it becomes a right"
Hogwash. The world does not owe you survival. Your neighbour is not violating your "human rights" because he fails to donate you something "your life often requires".
My initial reaction was the same, but having read some of the discussion I think there is a subtle distinction that needs to be made.
You have a right to broadband but not an entitlement to broadband.
That is, if the government makes it illegal to have broadband - then it is violating your natural right to be left alone, and your political right to freedom of speech (since broadband is a method of speech like the printing press).
However, you do not have a right to have the government or anyone else provide the broadband for you. If you want to use broadband it is your responsibility to either build it yourself or to find someone who is willing to do it for you (perhaps in exchange for some form of payment).
In recent years the distinction has become muddied by the constant mis-use of the term "right" such as when people claim that a refusal to pay for someone's contraception somehow violates that person's right to contraception.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
Oh spare us the human "rights" that involve other people paying for the stuff you want.
Hell yeah, access to food or medicine can't be a right either. Or someone might have to pay for it. So down with foodstamps, unemployment payments, etc, etc.
In a civilized society, we establish some minimal bar (food, water, shelter), which we try to provide for every member of that society. That's how I read "right" - as in, we'll try to provide it, if you can't afford it. Even if someone does have to pay for it
You're confusing rights with entitlements. Free speech is a right. A broadband connection to enable you to exercise that right in a very specific medium is an entitlement. This isn't just semantics.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
None of those things are necessities for life. To survive, to be alive, I do not need to use on-line vendors.
Here in the Netherlands we increasingly need to... Various government taxes already can only, be handled online. Currently the taxes that can only be handled online are those for all (small and large) businesses. And if those businesses refuse they are put out of business. Individuals can still get a paper form for their income tax but it's already strongly discouraged. More and more parts of the government are going an online-mostly or only route, not only for additional stuff but the essentials.
Many businesses stopped sending bills through 'snail' mail. Most communication businesses (telephone, cable and internet providers) were the first to do so. Banks are decreasing their number of offices throughout the country rapidly. Most of the time only the major cities still have one (1) office where you can do your banking business. (Such an office would have to serve ten of thousands of customers if not a majority was doing his/ber banking online.) For the rest they only offer online services. The least expensive health-insurers (with the basic package) only offer you service if they can send bills electronically and medicine can only be ordered through an internet-apothecary (after you get a prescription by a certified GP or specialist of course).
With other things, not interacting online causes a hefty financial penalty. Getting your receipts through mail is a value-added option, not included in the basic packages for those businesses still offering it that don't have to send you the actual goods by mail (like shops... which are cheaper most of the time, by the way, if you order the goods online). The best deals on contracts for electricity, cooking gas, all insurances, savings accounts, mortgages and other financial products, communication products, etc. are found online.
If you want to access the educational system, you have to be online, if only it was to sign up for an actual school or university (for college education or equivalents or better).
A person in the Netherlands which doesn't have access to the internet has either a very poor standard of living or a very high one (because he can afford to opt-out).
I would say, here in the Netherlands the ability to have an internet connection capable of doing all this described above is a right. Of course that does not imply you should get a connection for free. You should still pay a proper (but also limited) fee for your connection if you decide to use the services of a provider that provides you with said internet connection. The providers however are (and increasingly so) regulated, for example, by means of laws for things like net-neutrality and the anti-telecoms-monopoly agency OPTA. And there are also government subsidies for providers willing to implement connections to places less profitable. Which is all fair, considering you can't really live in the Netherlands without having an internet connection of some sorts.