METROCAST BLOCKS RESIDENTIAL E-MAIL

[Fred]

On Tuesday 07 March 2006 21:12, Jeff Kinz wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 05:52:53PM -0500, Ben Scott wrote:
> > On 3/7/06, Neil Joseph Schelly <neil at jenandneil.com> wrote:
> > > This isn't something to get so bent out of shape for really.
> >
> >   Sure it is.  Didn't you know that Internet access is a
> > Constitutional Right?  ;-)
>
> Don't laugh Ben, its already been seriously discussed.  :-)
>
> "Access to information shall not be abridged."
> (Bujold, 1991, 358)
>
> And the way our technological society is moving, eventually we must
> ~somehow~ insure that everyone  who wants access to the net
> can get it it even if they can't pay for it.
>
> Why?
>
> One reason: It will be cheaper to deliver many of the government
> managed services to persons in need via the web than any other way
> and since some of those services are either mandated or court ordered,
> we (The taxpaying citizens), might as well get it done at the lowest
> cost.

Since when has the government been interested in delivering service to us at 
the lowest cost? While it may make perfect sense to us, the government mind 
does not think that way. Usually, the government has to be dragged kicking 
and screaming into doing things more efficiently and at a lower cost. And 
the *cost* of dragging the government there can itself be pretty high.

Nope. The government has a gun to our head on the tax side. And as long as 
that's the case, the government will never be interested in doing things at 
a lower cost. What, all they have to do is raise taxes! And we'll pay it or 
loose our assets, go to jail, etc.

> Another reason is that persons who don't have some net access will be
> (are!) seriously disadvantaged in a way that is roughly comparable to
> being functionally illiterate has been a disadvantage for the past 100
> years.

Having access to the Net is not the panacea for all those supposedly 
"disadvantaged", if there is such a beast. Alas, one must be able to *read*, 
use the technology, and find what one wants. There are many people who are 
simply technology-phobic, and not necessarily in the so-called 
"disadvantaged" groups, either. I personally know of one or two who would 
have a hard time just using Google! 

And talk about being "functionally illiterate", those that fall into that 
category are going to have a hard time using the Internet anyway.

Then there is my adage:

You can lead a man to knowledge,
But you can't make him think!

Today, nearly everyone who wants Net access has it. Kinda like the TV. And if 
you don't have it at home, you can always get it at your local Library. 
Those that don't have it are either technophobes or illiterate or simply 
don't see the value.

As far as Internet Access being a "Constitutional Right", I'm a little dicey 
on that. While I hold that all should not be restricted from accessing the 
Internet, I don't want to see that turn into a "we must give everyone 
Internet Access at taypayers' expense" political ploy. If you are such a 
lazy bum as to be too pathetic to drag yourself out of bed and down to the 
Library, that does not count as a "restriction".

-Fred