3 ms·

Sure, but let's understand we've changed the subject. If the claim is that a state should not, by threat of violence, block a private firm from serving a volunt

by timtas 11y ago

Sure, but let's understand we've changed the subject. If the claim is that a state should not, by threat of violence, block a private firm from serving a voluntary customer, I could not agree more. That's entirely different from saying that someone has a positive obligation to provide a certain product.

DanBC 11y ago
Except now it's a right I can expect someone to provide minimum viable Internet for no or low cost. In England you can get internet access via their computers for out-of-work benefits in JobCentres; there's other Internet access in public libraries; some hospitals and gp surgeries provide wifi. That Internet is not great - slow, with quite a lot of limits, but it is provided.
timtas 11y ago
Because something is in fact provided, be it by the government or the market, does not in the least confer to me a right. If it does, then I have no idea what you mean by "right." The fact that I can rely on the existence of high-quality open source software to use in my projects does not mean that I may demand that you or anyone else write it and offer it for free. If I go hiking on the trail near my house, I know that I can expect "free" plastic bags in the city dispenser to clean up after my dog. Their existence does not make it my "right" to receive them for free.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Are you replying to me? I pointed out where the UN says it's a right. You say that it's not about being cut off, it's about provision, so I point to it being provided, and now you say that's not what you mean either. I dunno what to tell you. Access to the Internet is seen as a right in some regions, and you shouldn't be kicked off the Internet for IP violations, and someone should be providing access to the Internet, and in England that someone is national government (Department of Work and Pensions) and local government (public libraries).

by timtas 11y ago

DanBC 11y ago

Except now it's a right I can expect someone to provide minimum viable Internet for no or low cost. In England you can get internet access via their computers for out-of-work benefits in JobCentres; there's other Internet access in public libraries; some hospitals and gp surgeries provide wifi. That Internet is not great - slow, with quite a lot of limits, but it is provided.

timtas 11y ago

Because something is in fact provided, be it by the government or the market, does not in the least confer to me a right. If it does, then I have no idea what you mean by "right." The fact that I can rely on the existence of high-quality open source software to use in my projects does not mean that I may demand that you or anyone else write it and offer it for free. If I go hiking on the trail near my house, I know that I can expect "free" plastic bags in the city dispenser to clean up after my dog. Their existence does not make it my "right" to receive them for free.

DanBC 11y ago
Are you replying to me? I pointed out where the UN says it's a right. You say that it's not about being cut off, it's about provision, so I point to it being provided, and now you say that's not what you mean either. I dunno what to tell you. Access to the Internet is seen as a right in some regions, and you shouldn't be kicked off the Internet for IP violations, and someone should be providing access to the Internet, and in England that someone is national government (Department of Work and Pensions) and local government (public libraries).