Re-write the Bill of Rights?
Apparently you have a right to broadband access. Somehow I don't think that our founding father's would have seen this as something that should be enshrined as a "right of citizenship". Setting aside all of the political and philosophical arguments, what does this mean to the future development and deployment of new world changing technologies?
Its one thing for government to drive the deployment of new technology for the sake of some great national interest; the railroads and telecommunications systems of the industrial age were great tools of both commerce and national defense. However, when governments take over entirely, things tend to stagnate. I understand that there is an underlying need for government to improve emergency communications systems and in someways free itself from landline communications systems. Fine. Does that mean that government should run the show? No. Does that mean that we should enshrine broadband access as a "right of citizenship"? No. Does that mean that government should reward (read: pay for services) private ventures for creating, managing, and making profitable the systems that government can use in time of emergency? Yes!
Politicians pandering for votes make our governments less agile and less capable to adapt to these longer term changes, changes that they aren't concerned with because they will be long gone from power. Enshrining broadband access as a right for all will only require that the government forever provide a backwards compatible solution for your connectivity needs. What happens when Google* wants to move on to the next technology and you are left sit on a park bench with an 802.11a wireless card that isn't supported? Are you going to sit by and let them take your "rights" away? I really hope we never have to have that debate.**
*Google is currently in the running for the contract to provide free wireless access across San Francisco.
**Surprisingly, I just couldn't set aside the political debate.
Its one thing for government to drive the deployment of new technology for the sake of some great national interest; the railroads and telecommunications systems of the industrial age were great tools of both commerce and national defense. However, when governments take over entirely, things tend to stagnate. I understand that there is an underlying need for government to improve emergency communications systems and in someways free itself from landline communications systems. Fine. Does that mean that government should run the show? No. Does that mean that we should enshrine broadband access as a "right of citizenship"? No. Does that mean that government should reward (read: pay for services) private ventures for creating, managing, and making profitable the systems that government can use in time of emergency? Yes!
Politicians pandering for votes make our governments less agile and less capable to adapt to these longer term changes, changes that they aren't concerned with because they will be long gone from power. Enshrining broadband access as a right for all will only require that the government forever provide a backwards compatible solution for your connectivity needs. What happens when Google* wants to move on to the next technology and you are left sit on a park bench with an 802.11a wireless card that isn't supported? Are you going to sit by and let them take your "rights" away? I really hope we never have to have that debate.**
*Google is currently in the running for the contract to provide free wireless access across San Francisco.
**Surprisingly, I just couldn't set aside the political debate.
posted by Patrick at
2:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home