[ecobiker]

I'm personally disappointed by the comments in this article and others, specifically from people here in the Western world, that portray the fight by the internet activists as a fight against internet access to the poor. No one would make arguments like that here. Almost everyone rallied behind Net-Neutrality. Why is that it's ok for the poor to give up their liberty because they can get something of value in return? "beggars cannot be choosers"? Come on - no one is begging for internet.

[polyomino]

what exactly are the poor giving up?

[vaishaksuresh]

>>Why is that it's ok for the poor to give up their liberty because they can get something of value in return?

In this case, choosing how to access the Internet.

[Pyxl101]

I don't see how anyone is giving up the choice of how to access the Internet. Opposing Free Basics is opposing that choice. Free Basics is offering a new choice, and more choices is always a rationally better thing.

What is your position on the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics? http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethi...

[vaishaksuresh]

Nobody is giving up a choice at the moment, but if Free Basic becomes a thing, there won't be a choice in the future. That is the problem people have with it. Almost everyday I hear people complaining about how Comcast/ATT have monopoly in the US and how they are exploiting the helplessness of people. How is FreeBasic any different? For a lot of people, the only internet they will know will be the version that FB thinks is right for them. This is less a question about choice, more about net neutrality.

About the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics, I am not knowledgeable enough to form an opinion yet. I'll get back to you on that.

[tim333]

It's ok for the poor to 'give up their' liberty by using crappy free internet in the same way it's ok for me to 'give up my liberty' by watching crappy free TV. It's not perfect but it's not the end of the world either.

[ecobiker]

http://www.theopeninter.net/

[tim333]

Though the Indian situation isn't really like that, being charged for access to certain services. It's more crappy internet for $0/month or open access for like $5/month. I'm not convinced banning the $0 option helps the people you take that choice from.