On 5 January 2012 16:22, Jay Ashworth <j...@baylink.com> wrote: > Vint Cerf says no: http://j.mp/wwL9Ip > > But I wonder to what degree that's dependent on how much our governments make > Internet access the most practical/only practical way to interact with them. > > Understand: I'm not saying that FiOS should be a human right. But as a > society, America's recognized for decades that you gotta have a telephone, > and subsidized local/lifeline service to that extent; that sort of subsidy > applies to cellular phones now as well. > > Thoughts? >
You don't need a new right. The human rights include education and access to be able to participate in your culture. A human banned from using the internet would not have access to culture, and will be banned from participate in it. Based on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights 5.5 5.7 5.7.* Practical terms: The ugly conclusion is that you can put a men in jail, but that don't include ban such men to access the internet. Say, you put in jail a cracker. The judge as to remove him from two rights, the right to freelly walk anywhere, and the right to post in his favorite forum/mail list. -- -- ℱin del ℳensaje.
