4 ms·
The right to general purpose computing should be part of the constitution in any country that claims to value free speech.
by _Algernon_ 3y ago
The right to general purpose computing should be part of the constitution in any country that claims to value free speech.
- bcjordan 3y agoFreedom of expressions
- nonethewiser 3y agoAnd who is obligated to provide these resources? There is a big difference between the government not being able to restrict you in some way, and some party providing you with something (general purpose computing in this case). Presumably someone should have provided printing presses as well.
- _Algernon_ 3y agoYou pay for drinking water, it's still a human right. You have the right to free speech, but aren't entitled to somebody else providing you with a platform. These things aren't incompatible. This would be more about putting a limit on the degree to which this right can be impeded in the legal system and by regular laws which happens to be the main point of a constitution.
- acdha 3y agoWhat right do you think is being violated, though? It’s not like anyone is arguing that you must use YouTube so I don’t see freedom of association or your control of what you do on your computer being impacted. I would support claims if, say, a public school required students to watch videos but that would be against the school for having picked an unsuitable vendor rather than YouTube.
- _Algernon_ 3y agoRights aren't necessarily added to the constitution because they're currently being violated. They're added to secure the rights into the future. There are many developments that are moving in the direction of this being violated, the most recent of which is Web Environment Integrity[0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity
- freedomben 3y agoI'm not sure if you're arguing a positive right to general purpose computing (where somebody has to provide you with) or a negative one (where somebody can't stop you from having). Could you please clarify?
- _Algernon_ 3y agoI'm arguing a negative right: "This would be more about putting a limit on the degree to which this right can be impeded in the legal system and by regular laws which happens to be the main point of a constitution."
- acdha 3y agoSo what precisely are you asking for?
- _Algernon_ 3y agoAs I said, "The right to general purpose computing should be part of the constitution in any country that claims to value free speech."
- acdha 3y agoYes, but that’s not related in any way to using a private service without paying for it. You have that now and if YouTube shut down tomorrow you’d still have it.
- _Algernon_ 3y agoI believe my comment is perfectly clear in the context of the comment I was responding to.
- acdha 3y agoThat’s probably why you aren’t getting much support: if you can’t specify what you’re saying in enough detail for anyone else to even know what you mean it’s going to be hard for us to talk about it.
- vharuck 3y agoFor hardware, the government could subsidize manufacturers for units sold in the country that meet requirements. Or provide a tax rebates to citizens who purchase them. Nobody is saying "A car in every driveway, and a server farm in every basement." Just ensuring a general purpose computer is affordable for families earning some fraction of the poverty line. For software, The government could give grants to developers of FOSS operating systems and essential software, similar to how the US encourage the arts through the National Environment for the Arts. The grants would come with a requirement for distributing the works online to any citizen (e.g. download link on a public page). For people with crappy or no internet, the gov could mail USB sticks or CDs for cost plus shipping.
- bluescrn 3y agoThe battle for general purpose computing (as opposed to locked-down content-consumption devices) is already lost.