11 ms·

Why is exactly Internet access a "human right" (whatever that term means) more than television or going to a football match?

by uzzgx 7y ago

Broken_Hippo 7y ago
Because watching television or going to a football match is clearly entertainment. But you get a discount on electric installation if you sign up for your new service online. Internet service isn't just entertainment: It is communication, banking, and lots of very basic things folks need in life. It just happens to be multi-purpose, so you get the entertainment value as well. Many jobs require internet access to apply: Fewer and fewer take any sort of paper applications and not everywhere has kiosks to apply and test at (low paying jobs, at least). Heck, game disks are getting rarer, so you sometimes need to be online to use a PC game. Lots of research for school papers is done online. Also, communication. Few folks send snail mail letters anymore due to email. Chat programs work well too. If you aren't connected to the internet, you are at a disadvantage. I cannot say that about television in general or a football match - going without those sometimes means you don't have as much to talk about with folks that consume those.
- uzzgx 7y ago
  >But you get a discount on electric installation if you sign up for your new service online. That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. >Internet service isn't just entertainment: It is communication, banking, and lots of very basic things folks need in life. You can still walk into the bank. Checking your account from home is cool, but hardly a vital thing. >Many jobs require internet access to apply: Fewer and fewer take any sort of paper applications and not everywhere has kiosks to apply and test at (low paying jobs, at least). Heck, game disks are getting rarer, so you sometimes need to be online to use a PC game. Lots of research for school papers is done online. I doubt they can pull this shit off in a place where 25% of people have no access to the Internet. Otherwise they wouldn't find applicants. >Also, communication. Few folks send snail mail letters anymore due to email. Chat programs work well too. A bummer. Hardly a "human rights" issue.
  - thebooktocome 7y ago
    > You can still walk into the bank. Checking your account from home is cool, but hardly a vital thing. What are you talking about? A lot of Alabama (and the US generally) is unbanked specifically because there's no bank in walking distance.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. So instead of giving a discount for signing up online, they should charge everyone the same price which would be the non discounted price - how does that help?
  - thehoff 7y ago
    What if they don’t want a job in their area (ie want to move away?
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    > That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. There are all kinds of things where there's a service fee tacked on for more expensive or convenient ways of accessing city or public services. I can apply for parking permit or pay parking tickets for free if I walk to the parking office, or for the cost of a stamp, envelope, and a check if I mail it, or for a 2.75% (minimum $1.50) convenience charge if I use a credit card. Am I being discriminated against without even realizing it?
- scarface74 7y ago
  Even without home internet, cell phones with data plans are cheap and ubiquitous. Even most “poor” people have at least a cheap Android phone with a prepay plan with data.
- amelius 7y ago
  Curious if this was also true in the old days with telephony.
claudiawerner 7y ago
It's interesting you point this out, because a few philosophers and legal scholars have questioned why free speech is a "human right" rather than (their examples) "running" or "eating chips".
emodendroket 7y ago
There are many practical reasons not having Internet access is a hindrance to poor households, but let's consider Adam Smith for a moment on what constitutes a necessity: > By necessaries I understand not only the commodities which are indispensably necessary for the support of life, but what ever the customs of the country renders it indecent for creditable people, even the lowest order, to be without. A linen shirt, for example, is, strictly speaking, not a necessary of life. The Greeks and Romans lived, I suppose, very comfortably, though they had no linen. But in the present times, through the greater part of Europe, a creditable day-laborer would be ashamed to appear in public without a linen shirt, the want of which would be supposed to denote that disgraceful degree of poverty which, it is presumed, nobody can well fall into, without extreme bad conduct. Custom, in the same manner, has rendered leather shoes a necessary of life in England.
troydavis 7y ago
The best short summary I’ve seen is https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3kxmm5/the-case-for-internet-access-as-a-human-right https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3kxmm5/the-case-for-inter... (and some of the pages it links to).
imgabe 7y ago
I hate framing things like this as "human rights". Rights are an imaginary construct that humans created. All we need to ask is: Does it create a more effective/equitable/propserous society for us if we collectively provide / subsidize this? If yes, then let's do it. If not, then let's not. No need to argue about whether it's some ineffable "right" or not, which ultimately comes down to personal philosophy.
datashow 7y ago
Even if we accept "internet access" a "human right", it still doesn't mean the internet access must be from home. Schools and public libraries can provide internet access.

Why is exactly Internet access a "human right" (whatever that term means) more than television or going to a football match?

by uzzgx 7y ago

Why is exactly Internet access a "human right" (whatever that term means) more than television or going to a football match?

Broken_Hippo 7y ago

Because watching television or going to a football match is clearly entertainment. But you get a discount on electric installation if you sign up for your new service online. Internet service isn't just entertainment: It is communication, banking, and lots of very basic things folks need in life. It just happens to be multi-purpose, so you get the entertainment value as well. Many jobs require internet access to apply: Fewer and fewer take any sort of paper applications and not everywhere has kiosks to apply and test at (low paying jobs, at least). Heck, game disks are getting rarer, so you sometimes need to be online to use a PC game. Lots of research for school papers is done online. Also, communication. Few folks send snail mail letters anymore due to email. Chat programs work well too. If you aren't connected to the internet, you are at a disadvantage. I cannot say that about television in general or a football match - going without those sometimes means you don't have as much to talk about with folks that consume those.

uzzgx 7y ago
>But you get a discount on electric installation if you sign up for your new service online. That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. >Internet service isn't just entertainment: It is communication, banking, and lots of very basic things folks need in life. You can still walk into the bank. Checking your account from home is cool, but hardly a vital thing. >Many jobs require internet access to apply: Fewer and fewer take any sort of paper applications and not everywhere has kiosks to apply and test at (low paying jobs, at least). Heck, game disks are getting rarer, so you sometimes need to be online to use a PC game. Lots of research for school papers is done online. I doubt they can pull this shit off in a place where 25% of people have no access to the Internet. Otherwise they wouldn't find applicants. >Also, communication. Few folks send snail mail letters anymore due to email. Chat programs work well too. A bummer. Hardly a "human rights" issue.
- thebooktocome 7y ago
  > You can still walk into the bank. Checking your account from home is cool, but hardly a vital thing. What are you talking about? A lot of Alabama (and the US generally) is unbanked specifically because there's no bank in walking distance.
- scarface74 7y ago
  That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. So instead of giving a discount for signing up online, they should charge everyone the same price which would be the non discounted price - how does that help?
- thehoff 7y ago
  What if they don’t want a job in their area (ie want to move away?
- sokoloff 7y ago
  > That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. There are all kinds of things where there's a service fee tacked on for more expensive or convenient ways of accessing city or public services. I can apply for parking permit or pay parking tickets for free if I walk to the parking office, or for the cost of a stamp, envelope, and a check if I mail it, or for a 2.75% (minimum $1.50) convenience charge if I use a credit card. Am I being discriminated against without even realizing it?
scarface74 7y ago
Even without home internet, cell phones with data plans are cheap and ubiquitous. Even most “poor” people have at least a cheap Android phone with a prepay plan with data.
amelius 7y ago
Curious if this was also true in the old days with telephony.

claudiawerner 7y ago

It's interesting you point this out, because a few philosophers and legal scholars have questioned why free speech is a "human right" rather than (their examples) "running" or "eating chips".

emodendroket 7y ago

There are many practical reasons not having Internet access is a hindrance to poor households, but let's consider Adam Smith for a moment on what constitutes a necessity: > By necessaries I understand not only the commodities which are indispensably necessary for the support of life, but what ever the customs of the country renders it indecent for creditable people, even the lowest order, to be without. A linen shirt, for example, is, strictly speaking, not a necessary of life. The Greeks and Romans lived, I suppose, very comfortably, though they had no linen. But in the present times, through the greater part of Europe, a creditable day-laborer would be ashamed to appear in public without a linen shirt, the want of which would be supposed to denote that disgraceful degree of poverty which, it is presumed, nobody can well fall into, without extreme bad conduct. Custom, in the same manner, has rendered leather shoes a necessary of life in England.

troydavis 7y ago

The best short summary I’ve seen is https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3kxmm5/the-case-for-internet-access-as-a-human-right https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3kxmm5/the-case-for-inter... (and some of the pages it links to).

imgabe 7y ago

I hate framing things like this as "human rights". Rights are an imaginary construct that humans created. All we need to ask is: Does it create a more effective/equitable/propserous society for us if we collectively provide / subsidize this? If yes, then let's do it. If not, then let's not. No need to argue about whether it's some ineffable "right" or not, which ultimately comes down to personal philosophy.

datashow 7y ago

Even if we accept "internet access" a "human right", it still doesn't mean the internet access must be from home. Schools and public libraries can provide internet access.