[Lancaster] Twitter

[Ken Hough]

MP, at al,

As a fairly mature (at least in terms of years) cynic/realist, I am 
disappointed in the way that otherwise intelligent people continue to bang on 
about 'rights' and 'freedom'.

It seems to me that in the real world there are no 'rights' to anything. By 
general consent and the odd war or two, we eventually manage to agree to 
grant our selves certain PRIVILEGES which may be and often are withdrawn.

Fact: There are no rights in this world.

In the eyes of some, 'freedom' means being 'free' to do whatever one wants. 
Unless one were to be the only individual on earth (or at least in the 
locality) this clearly isn't workable. Our actions impinge on others so as to 
curtail their views of 'freedom'.

Unfortunately (or not?), the human species doesn't function like colonies of 
ants where individuals always act for the benefit of a colony. With notable 
exceptions such as Ghandi, we are driven by self interest.

We are not an altruistic species! Major advances in human endeavours are 
driven by the possibility of personal gains. Unless we were to be genetically 
re-engineered, this is unlikely to change for a very long time.

Yes, I know advances are sometimes initiated by farsighted persons, but 
development is invariably driven by the possibility for commercial, 
political, or military gains. Such enterprises might well benefit a 
community, or perhaps even a majority.

For example, it would be difficult to argue that Bill Gates and the eventual 
commercial clout of Microsoft didn't bring about the widespread and 
economical availability of our PCs and some of the 'freedoms' that we enjoy 
today. Of course, not everyone is happy with this. 

That's not to say that I condone all of the present or past ruthless business 
practices of that company, but it is as a result of their success that we now 
have easy access to personal computers, the Internet, etc, and hence the 
opportunity to even consider making related choices wrt 'freedom'. THIS WOULD 
NOT HAVE HAPPENED without the degree of success that Microsoft have had.

So let's get real!

I believe that we should consider ideals/goals for ourselves and for society, 
We must also recognise that others are likely to hold to other ideals and 
ideas as to how to work towards these.

If your own view of 'rights' and 'freedom' is to succeed, then you must 
convince others that they too will benefit.

Ken Hough


On Friday 20 February 2009 18:18:38 mp wrote:
> Mike Dent wrote:
> > Sorry I had to come back in on this.
> >
> > The Internet was developed by universities and military to provide a
> > means of communication between their sites, I am sure you all know that.
>
> This is a very simplistic perspective on a series of complicated
> convergences of factors (from Greek poetry, Roman rhetoric and medieval
> mystics, through Babbage, to phone systems, information theory and so
> on), the most important one of which, perhaps, is the development of the
> Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (http - or the World Wide Web), which was
> very explicitly crafted for freedom of use (this is not equal to
> gratis!): http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/144
> http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2006/06/7127.ars
>
> Read Berners-Lee's Weaving the Web for his own story of the last leg.
>
> See also this comprehensive article about network neutrality:
> http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?70+Law+&+Contemp.+Probs.+51+(spring+2
>007)
>
> > Since when did that infrastructure become something that should be free
> > and we should have a right to use? Or, have I got the whole thing wrong
> > and you guys do not expect it to be your right to use those networks for
> > free?
>
> There is no such thing as a free lunch anyway - however, this is a
> matter of freedom. So far we all pay for a hole into the internet by
> giving money to Richard Branson or someone like that.
>
> You have an odd approach to the issue of "rights". I have already
> spelled it out, but here goes again: rights don't drop from the sky,
> they are not something you "have" unless you fight for them. If not
> hundreds of thousands of people had died for the rights you enjoy now,
> you wouldnt have them. This also includes the right to private property
> of which I imagine you are an supporter. The middle classes, no matter
> what one might think about the bourgeoise/capitalist revolution, secured
> the rights you enjoy to live, if you do, in your own house and
> accumulate wealth under your roof and in the bank.
>
> Also, once gained, rights still have to be maintained. They can be
> eroded very quickly; for instance most privacy rights gained in
> processes that began a bit more than a hundred years ago are
> disappearing through such draconian laws as the UK Terrorism Act 2000.
> More background on privacy here:
> https://knowledgelab.org.uk/Privacy&Surveillance
>
> Rights and civil liberties struggles in general are inter-generational
> processes. You fight today for your children's rights tomorrow, but with
> your attitude there won't be any, since you neither seem to want any,
> nor to realise that they are not given or naturally correct/incorrect.
> They are social constructions - we choose to make them or we don't. If
> you prefer to have a closed down Internet I can't for the life of me
> understand where you are coming from, unless you just want to provoke
> mindlessly.
>
> > When did it get the fluffy name Cyberspace or cloud or such things, does
> > that make it easier to claim our rights on it?
>
> Cyberspace as a term predates the web. However, reification and myth
> making are crucial tools in the historical struggles for civil liberties
> and freedoms. For sure.
>
> > It is a network of wires and routers/switches that people own. Do we not
> > have to pay for the use of that equipment or pay for the power to run it
> > all, the manpower to install it?
>
> You miss the entire point here. It is not a question of payment - so
> Richard is right, it seems: you have the wrong end of the beer/speech
> stick. I refer to previous post for clarification about what is at
> stake. That said, I do think it should be free to use, like the library.
> In fact it is a library.
>
> > Perhaps in future we will have a internet tax licence to pay, every time
> > your packets need access to another country you will have to pay tax on
> > for that country before they proceed, kind of funny but I guess it could
> > happen :)
>
> That is pretty much what is on the cards - but I fail to see the funny
> part?!
>
> -m
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lancaster mailing list
> Lancaster at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/lancaster