On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 05:47:18PM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote: > On 6/22/2011 14:33, Nathan Eisenberg wrote: > >> I agree, the whole use of the terms 'need' and 'want' in this conversation > >> are > >> ridiculous. It's the Internet. The entire thing isn't a 'need'. It's > >> not like life > >> support or something that will cause loss of life if it isn't there. The > >> only thing > >> to even discuss here is 'want'. Yes, consumers 'want' super-fast Internet, > >> faster than any of us can comprehend right now. 1Tbps to the house, for > >> everyone, for cheap! > > > > Wait, the internet isn't a need? Is this 1991? Of course it's a need, as > > surely as heat or electricity are needs. > > > > Without even trying, I can think of a dozen life-safety systems that rely > > solely on the internet for their functionality. > > > > Life safety aside, enough common stuff is moving online (whether it's > paying bills, schoolwork, or preparing forms for the DMV ahead of time), > and it's slowly becoming a disadvantage to not have the internet.
A friend is having to job-hunt. It pretty much _requires_ Net access. -- Mike Andrews, W5EGO mi...@mikea.ath.cx Tired old sysadmin
