[Lancaster] Twitter

[mp]

Richard Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 02:13:30PM +0000, mp wrote:
>> Richard Robinson wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:30:16PM +0000, mp wrote:
>>>> Mike Dent wrote:
>>>>
>>>> While you can't really stop using their services, you can demand that they
>>>> keep them free.
>>>>
>>>>> yes it would be nice if the internet were run on free open source
>>>>> software routers which were powered by wind/hydro/solar power but I
>>>>> don't think it will happen for many years to come.
>>>> Not unless you stand up for the idea. Who do you think will drop it in
>>>> your lap? God? Corporations?
>>> This looks like the Free Speech != Free Beer thing ?
>> In which way?
> 
> In that the services run on a system are a different issue from the way in
> which that system is powered.
> 
> The above appears to conflate free ("as in speech") software and free (as in
> "not paid for") energy.

I see, but you can also say that renewable energy is an issue of
environmental freedom, as in free speech. I am not sure that the
difference necessarily translates into that beer/speech distinction.

Anyway, the power issue is not the original problem, but it is certainly
relevant for future policy making, given the extreme energy use we're
talking about. How the Internet is powered is also a public matter and a
question of environmental justice and freedom. After all it is the
fastest growing industry in terms of carbon emissions - since 2007 it is
heavier on the environment to sustain cyberspace than the aviation
industry.

With regard to the Internet and enclosure: The way that it is seen - the
traffic prioritisation threat, that is - in the debate currently is by
analogy to road infrastructure and what is commonly called common
carriage, which corresponds to privately built, maintained and owned
roads, but which have been regulated/conditioned, through government
regulation, according to the common carriage principle. Hence, those
roads are de facto public infrastructures, although privately managed.
No one can deny you access to "any" road if you have an MOTed vehicle
and a license.

What is happening with regard to the Internet, to remain in the analogy,
means that for instance if you want to get on the T6 by Birmingham (a
toll/pay per trip road), and you turn up in your little, personal,
non-corporate car, you are then told to park at the side of the road for
half an hour, because there is a Disney convoy coming past that requires
all the road for a while.

No one would accept such a condition, I suspect, in the context of
roads. When it comes to the Internet, however, it seems, some people
just say "it's certainly not our right" to demand common carriage. We
should just enjoy the road while we can.

Perhaps better than thinking free speech is thinking freedom of movement
and communication.

-mp