3 ms·
Well, the reason I asked is to start a debate as to whether regulation is desirable or otherwise. I tried to emphasise that a one sides argument is being put fo
by Ardit20 16y ago
Well, the reason I asked is to start a debate as to whether regulation is desirable or otherwise. I tried to emphasise that a one sides argument is being put forward which is slowly trying to lessen the resistance to regulating the internet. Thus there is no debate and we know that "schooling" works.
I don't like oligarchies for the same reason that I do not like monopolies. There are big players on line, but I do not think there are oligarchies. I think instead we are slowly moving towards that direction.
I don't know how old you are, but I do not like paying ten pounds or twenty when I leave university. And that is while the internet is present. That might not be a great amount, but I sure could have used it in much better ways as a student.
Also, if you are like 14, you live on pocket money, so being charged is not cool.
Besides, my point is much larger. You might have your textbooks and the like in America and your parents might be willing to buy you any book you like and as many as you like, but, someone, somewhere else or even in America might not.
For example, why do I have to pay for a research paper or an article journal when it is their job to produce the research or write the journal?
Also, why should I pay for Faust when it was written more than a century ago, or Dante's Comedy and the writers are dead?
Why should a poor kid be penalised just because he was born in a poor family by not being able to watch a film, or read classes, or books, or music.
In the real life we know why, but should that apply to the internet too? Are these things really expensive overall, or is instead information expensive because some would like to make millions, some billions, accumulate an obscene amount of wealth at the expense of all others.
But, there are arguments for regulation too, so to finally answer your question I have not made up my mind because I do not think you can generalise so I thought it would be great to have a debate, but maybe that is for another time, or maybe we'll never have it because it will be too late.
- michael_dorfman 16y agoI don't know how old you are, but I do not like paying ten pounds or twenty when I leave university. And that is while the internet is present. That might not be a great amount, but I sure could have used it in much better ways as a student. I'm in my late 40s, and I don't like paying for food. I don't expect others to feed me, though. For example, why do I have to pay for a research paper or an article journal when it is their job to produce the research or write the journal? Think about this for a moment. I'll wait for the other shoe to drop. Who pays them to do "their job" to produce the research or write the journal article? There you go. Also, why should I pay for Faust when it was written more than a century ago, or Dante's Comedy and the writers are dead? Because the paper and printing still take labor. If you want an electronic copy, they're freely available (out of copyright) at no charge. Of course, you can get the dead trees edition at the public library, but you've already stated your opposition to those....
- Ardit20 16y agoWell you did expect others to feed you when you were 14. The students pay for them in the manner of university fees and too the public at large in the manner of taxation, yet still they hide them behind pay walls. In regards to this point I think you have missed my question. I was asking why should someone pay for Faust on the internet, in the context of course of regulation and the like.
- michael_dorfman 16y agoThe students who pay for the academic journals, in the manner of university fees, etc., get free access to said journals through their university library. You seem to be arguing, if I understand you correctly, that the academic journals ought to be free to all-- which destroys their business model. I have close relatives who have edited academic journals, and I can assure you, there is an enormous amount of work involved. Regarding "Faust", do you know of anyone who has attempted to put "Faust" behind a paywall? I doubt it; if they did, they'd have little success, as "Faust" is in the public domain (except for recent translations, naturally). The question you should be asking yourself is: if all content is going to be free, who is going to pay for the production of content? At the moment, your argument seems to be that content should be free because you don't want to pay for it. While, as you indicated in your comment above, this attitude may be commonplace in 14 year olds, but is not the basis for a sustainable society.