[FoRK] [tt] Vint Cerf is
wkearney99 at hotmail.com
Thu Jan 5 13:40:21 PST 2012
It's easy to throw stones, a lot harder to make the argument.
I disagree that access is a right. But I insist that any access when
purchased must not be encumbered or otherwise filtered, restricted, (folded,
spindled or mutilated...). I vote such with my wallet when purchasing IP
Thus it seems entirely reasonable to legislate that if access is going to be
offered as a saleable commodity to the citizenry that said access be
entirely unfettered. It seems entirely /unreasonable/ to insist that access
be provided for as if it were some kind of right (of a constitutional
So yeah, if you can't afford it you're fucked, now go away you flea-bitten
However, this shouldn't preclude anyone or any entity from giving it away.
But in doing so they're still be required to offer it without filtering.
Plenty of places do this, for various reasons.
The workplace, however, being the obvious exception. You're on company
time, so it's company rules. Feel free to seek employment elsewhere or
readjust your IP access demands until you're off the company clock/premises.
On 1/5/12 3:48 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
| (ability to TCP/IP is free speech. period.)
Ability to use it, if it exists -- agreed.
When I read Cerf's piece earlier today, I wondered how much more he
could jumble his premise, and still get something published! Cerf seems
to wobble back and forth between discussing "actually having internet
access," and "being allowed to use internet access."
True, "actually having" IP tone seems merely a privilege. Someone needs
to pay for it, at least, which hinders ubiquity.
However, "being allowed to use" IP tone seems as close to a universal
human right as anything that has appeared in my lifetime...
More information about the FoRK