It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should access to the Internet be completely free?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   
This seems like an appropriate forum. Anyway, I was just thinking about this question. Should access to the Internet be completely free? Can Internet access be described as a necessity nowadays, such as clean, cold/hot water, gas (for stoves and heating one's home), and etc.? Sure the aforementioned things can be described as utilities (and thus one has to pay for them), but these are necessary for comfortable living. Now, what about Internet access? We are in the 21st century and many use the World Wide Web now, right? What do you all think?




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by they see ALL
 


Costs money to operate and build the networks, with technology getting faster and faster, if the service was free, there would never be any increase in the amount of speed, or new technological advances in internet hardware and wiring.

It's just not feasible alternative, comapnies will always need to charge in order to compete and maintain the industry as it is today.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by they see ALL
 



When they stop charging for water, AC and heat then we can talk about not charging for the internet.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Since one sentence replies are not allowed, let alone one word replies, I'm forced to write a one word reply in two sentences, the second sentence being as follows.

Absolutely!



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I think all incomes should be equalized enormously and all costs on a sliding scale, either that or adapt the moneyless resource society. But the internet should be shared between nations and delivered at its highest levels to all citizens as should health, dental and education on to graduate studies, free of charge. Theres more I could add but I'm getting tired.


[edit on 21-4-2009 by mystiq]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
It's just not feasible alternative, comapnies will always need to charge in order to compete and maintain the industry as it is today.


Great point, and I see your logic (and it makes perfect sense). What about basic cable, though? Is that free? Maybe it is included under the "electric" category. If this is the case, then can basic television be described as a necessity and is thus either free or very inexpensive (compared to cable where one has to pay monthly and etc.). I am just under the impression that the World Wide Web is a necessity nowadays.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
When they stop charging for water, AC and heat then we can talk about not charging for the internet.


Sure. I'll agree that some things are more important than others. I am not complaining about Internet prices, I just thought this was a thought-provoking question.


Originally posted by Albertarocks
Absolutely!


Awesome!


Originally posted by mystiq
But the internet should be shared between nations and delivered at its highest levels to all citizens as should health, dental and education on to graduate studies, free of charge.


That's a beautiful vision!



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Oh man... I mis-understood the question. When you said "free", I thought you were referring to "not censored". I got caught red-handed. I saw the headline question and came to a quick and erroneous assumption... a sin in the world of blogging.

I can't see how it could possibly be free with all the infrastructure that's required. It's just not feasible. But then again, I suppose anything's possible, after all, beer is free in Canada.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Albertarocks]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I would recommend that we all defer this question to Al Gore since he clearly indicated that he invented the Internet.

Thus, we'll get the most enlightened response from the very creator.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
If it were free in order for a person to get online every single device would need to be linked to the person through an identifying number (like a MAC address), it's sort of having a virtual RFID chip with more enhanced controlling capabilities.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Albertarocks
I can't see how it could possibly be free with all the infrastructure that's required. It's just not feasible. But then again, I suppose anything's possible, after all, beer is free in Canada.


Firstly, it is!? I don't even drink and I'm shocked! Anyway, just think about what the World Wide Web is for a minute or two. We, as in regular folks, make up the main portion of the information on it, right? We participate in sites like this one, blogs, wiki's, and etc. We aren't asking money for what we post, that's the domain of the hosting sites. So we have to pay to read the human race's information, views, opinions, and etc.?



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enculeur
If it were free in order for a person to get online every single device would need to be linked to the person through an identifying number (like a MAC address), it's sort of having a virtual RFID chip with more enhanced controlling capabilities.


Interesting. Let's take a step back, however, and not be concerned with the technological/economic problems that this question may cause. If we do this, I believe, we will have a much more philosophical discussion. Then we can move on to any technological/economic problems. Okay?



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Isn't Australia doing something similar to this? I read somewhere a couple days ago that the Australian government is providing free broadband access to most of their citizens. Correct me if I'm wrong; I might have misread the article.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by A L T A I R
Isn't Australia doing something similar to this? I read somewhere a couple days ago that the Australian government is providing free broadband access to most of their citizens. Correct me if I'm wrong; I might have misread the article.


Cool! A quick Google search gave me this and this, but I am not sure if these are what you are referring to (they don't look too governmental). What I just did (the Google search) was a great example of the necessity of free Internet access for everyone. The Internet is useful in seemingly small tasks like what I just did.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by they see ALL]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by they see ALL
Cool! A quick Google search gave me this and this, but I am not sure if these are what you are referring to (they don't look too governmental). What I just did (the Google search) was a great example of the necessity of free Internet access for everyone. The Internet is useful in seemingly small tasks like what I just did.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by they see ALL]


Alright, I wasn't able to find the article but I did find the Wikipedia entry:



The National Broadband Network is a Fibre to the Home (FTTH) network set to be built in Australia. The Australian Government is to build and operate an Open Access Network providing download speeds of up to 100 Megabits per second to 90% of Australian homes and businesses, for which it is offering to contribute an initial cash injection of A$4.7 billion. The remaining homes and businesses will be supplied using wireless and satellite technologies. The network will be built as a public private partnership.[1] It will be the largest single infrastructure investment in Australia's history.[2] The construction of the network will begin in the state of Tasmania by July 2009, subject to legislature approval.


en.wikipedia.org...

Apparently, it isn't free but it will provide cheap broadband internet access to the majority of Australian citizens. It would be nice if the US government took this idea and ran with it. There are still many locations in the area I live in that don't have access to broadband provided by cable companies, much less DSL access.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Apparently, it isn't free but it will provide cheap broadband internet access to the majority of Australian citizens. It would be nice if the US government took this idea and ran with it. There are still many locations in the area I live in that don't have access to broadband provided by cable companies, much less DSL access.


Keep in mind that the Rockefellers are horrified of the internet and Jay Rockefeller himself was even quoted as saying that they (the NWO bankster cabal) would be better off if the internet had never been invented. Of course, this is because of the freedom of speech on the internet, we are aware of the NWO agenda and are waking more and more people up every day.

But none the less, their agenda of censoring the internet is in progress and the first nation to begin to comply with censorship on the net is.... you guessed it, Australia. So no wonder it's nearly free in the land down under. That way, the providers of this wonderful "free" service can simply turn it into a different version of FOX and there won't be a damned thing the people can do about it.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Albertarocks]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Albertarocks
Keep in mind that the Rockefellers are horrified of the internet and Jay Rockefeller himself was even quoted as saying that they (the NWO bankster cabal) would be better off if the internet had never been invented. Of course, this is because of the freedom of speech on the internet, we are aware of the NWO agenda and are waking more and more people up every day.

But none the less, their agenda of censoring the internet is in progress and the first nation to begin to comply with censorship on the net is.... you guessed it, Australia. So no wonder it's nearly free in the land down under. That way, the providers of this wonderful "free" service can simply turn it into a different version of FOX and there won't be a damned thing the people can do about it.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Albertarocks]


That's a valid point; if the US did offer cheap, broadband access on a nationwide level, you could bet your ass that it would eventually be censored to heck and back, if not censored outright. A lot of cable/television companies, many of which are tied to the Rockefellers/Rothschilds, are in full support of a limited form of internet access; users would be able to select 'channels' to view or watch but would not be able to access 'unauthorized' sites or information. Basically, the Internet would turn into a form of interactive TV.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
You can access the internet free at your local library. That's what i used to do back in the day, before internet service was offered in my area. Should it be free to access the internet from your home? No, if the government foots the bill for internet access, that would give them a say-so in what content can be accessed, and would increase taxes dramatically.


TheAssociate



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
anything that costs something has got to be paid for by somebody. In most cases the end user pays for it in one way or another, either directly, through taxes, or perhaps by giving "eyeball time" to advertising.

Its already cheap to get on the Internet...even a homeless person can go into a public library and surf the web in most places. For owners or renters of various dwellings, internet access is among the cheaper outlays. Personally, considering how much time I spend on line and how much free information I access with an Internet connection (everything from up-to-the-minute news to the views of you good people to clips of the latest movies to online versions of all the world's great books...), the sum I pay for it has already paid for itself many many times over. I really can't see it getting much cheaper than it already is.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by A L T A I R
Apparently, it isn't free but it will provide cheap broadband internet access to the majority of Australian citizens. It would be nice if the US government took this idea and ran with it. There are still many locations in the area I live in that don't have access to broadband provided by cable companies, much less DSL access.


Although it's not free, it's still a great idea. Giving Internet access to many people, if not everyone, is what governments/businesses should want, as we are living in a technological world.


Originally posted by Albertarocks
Keep in mind that the Rockefellers are horrified of the internet and Jay Rockefeller himself was even quoted as saying that they (the NWO bankster cabal) would be better off if the internet had never been invented. Of course, this is because of the freedom of speech on the internet, we are aware of the NWO agenda and are waking more and more people up every day.


In a day where people desire to censor the World Wide Web, the question asked in this thread becomes extremely important (if it wasn't already).


But none the less, their agenda of censoring the internet is in progress and the first nation to begin to comply with censorship on the net is.... you guessed it, Australia. So no wonder it's nearly free in the land down under. That way, the providers of this wonderful "free" service can simply turn it into a different version of FOX and there won't be a damned thing the people can do about it.


This is horrifying!


Originally posted by TheAssociate
You can access the internet free at your local library. That's what i used to do back in the day, before internet service was offered in my area.


Yes, but this is an inconvenience.


Should it be free to access the internet from your home? No, if the government foots the bill for internet access, that would give them a say-so in what content can be accessed, and would increase taxes dramatically.


I see your reasoning.


Originally posted by silent thunder
anything that costs something has got to be paid for by somebody. In most cases the end user pays for it in one way or another, either directly, through taxes, or perhaps by giving "eyeball time" to advertising.


This makes sense.


Its already cheap to get on the Internet...even a homeless person can go into a public library and surf the web in most places. For owners or renters of various dwellings, internet access is among the cheaper outlays. Personally, considering how much time I spend on line and how much free information I access with an Internet connection (everything from up-to-the-minute news to the views of you good people to clips of the latest movies to online versions of all the world's great books...), the sum I pay for it has already paid for itself many many times over. I really can't see it getting much cheaper than it already is.


It's cheap, yes, but let's think about what you are paying for. You mentioned people's views and online versions of the greatest books (which, I assume, you get for free, as they were written way back, right?). At least those two things are simply humans sharing information with other humans (the first of those two things is a better example of this). Why should we pay for the sharing of knowledge? This is a great question! I can see, however, why one might have to pay for such things as news and movie clips, but I still think access to the Internet should be free, as really everything is just the sharing of knowledge.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join