Should Internet access be free?

[Spectral]

A lot of things that become "free" sure seem to cost a lot of money.

Snark aside, I think local, freely available WiFi networks are a basically good idea. If my state proposed subsidizing towns to provide WiFi, I'd be in favor of it.

[Shakadam]

Internet access is a luxury and is not required so no it *shouldn't* be free. At least not yet.

As has been mentioned previously in this thread food and water are the bare necessities for survival, the absolute minimum required to prevent death, and they are not free. They ARE made available via many means but other than in certain welfare related situations are not free.

Then you have the next tier, shelter to protect you from the elements, fresh running water to maintain hygiene, electricity so you can see at night as a safety concern. None of these are free either.

Internet access is a luxury and it's a pretty pathetic human that would focus on this being made free before any of the above.

Internet access these days is a utility just like running water or electricity, it's not a luxury. Actually where I live internet access is defined as a legal right which means it cannot be taken away from you (unless you don't pay the bills obviously) and no matter where in the country you live ISP's must provide a way for you to have broadband internet access.

That said though, we do still pay for water and electricity so I don't really see why internet access should necessarily be free?

[Stormdash]

No. If a thing has cost, someone is paying for it. All wanting to brand something "free" means is you want one or more other people than yourself to absorb all or most of the cost for you.

[Shakadam]

A lot of things that become "free" sure seem to cost a lot of money.

Snark aside, I think local, freely available WiFi networks are a basically good idea. If my state proposed subsidizing towns to provide WiFi, I'd be in favor of it.

To me it seems that "free WiFi" is a poor bandaid patch to a problem that shouldn't be a problem. It's oh so easy for wireless communication providers to have no data caps on mobile data yet it seems many people have simply accepted that mobile data is capped. Data caps are simply a way for these companies to make more money per customer, it's not needed as such and I don't really know why people aren't more upset about it.

[Puupi]

Internet access these days is a utility just like running water or electricity, it's not a luxury. Actually where I live internet access is defined as a legal right which means it cannot be taken away from you (unless you don't pay the bills obviously) and no matter where in the country you live ISP's must provide a way for you to have broadband internet access.

That said though, we do still pay for water and electricity so I don't really see why internet access should necessarily be free?

Free internet and it being a right has a twofold meaning:
1) Free access to internet - this happens in public libraries for example.
2) Everywhere in the country you have a right to an access to get a broadband internet connection to your home or business.

[Spectral]

To me it seems that "free WiFi" is a poor bandaid patch to a problem that shouldn't be a problem. It's oh so easy for wireless communication providers to have no data caps on mobile data yet it seems many people have simply accepted that mobile data is capped. Data caps are simply a way for these companies to make more money per customer, it's not needed as such and I don't really know why people aren't more upset about it.

I can't speak for others, but the reason that I don't make much of a stink about it is because I don't use anywhere near as much data as a typical plan offers anyway. Of course, YMMV.

[Soeroah]

I'm not sure about free, but after watching the NBN roll out in Australia over the last four years I think government needs to take the goddamn thing serious instead of treating a nationwide upgrade as a political issue instead of wasting billions of dollars on outdated tech with no future proofing.

By the time the damn thing is finished it'll need to be done all over again because according to the people in charge the "average user" doesn't need faster than 25 megabits a second and couldn't possibly in the next few years.

[namecraft]

yep
education, healthcare, water, public toilets should all be free

if you don't agree, I don't care, I hit & run posts

[Total Crica]

It should be considered a utility like electricity, gas, and water.

Now that our ISP info can legally be made public in the US, the path has been paved to make US ISP public utilities.

The US ISP corps set up their own downfall, imo, by seeking the legal right to make US ISP info public.

[Hammerfest]

If it's free, how do you expect it to get paid for?

[prwraith]

It should be considered a utility like electricity, gas, and water.

Not according to republicans /shocker

[xanzul]

In this point, no. More important things to worry about when it comes to tax dollar spending like healthcare or even education. Once we can manage these priorities, I see no reason for gov't funded Internet if financially viable. Lot of this I don't expect to happen anytime soon.

Education would actually be one of the primary reasons to make the internet free for everyone.

[Twizy]

Absolutely not. Nothing is free, so you are really asking is should the US use tax dollars to provide free WiFi? No! If you want WiFi in your home get a job and pay for it.

[Fencers]

Yes, it should. Everything should be free. We should live without wealth.

[Spectral]

Absolutely not. Nothing is free, so you are really asking is should the US use tax dollars to provide free WiFi? No! If you want WiFi in your home get a job and pay for it.

Doesn't that seem like a bit of a waste of resources relative to having a commons? Internet access seems like about as straightforwardly a public good as any budget item could be.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, it should. Everything should be free. We should live without wealth.

[xanzul]

My cable bill is my lowest monthly bill. If you can afford water and electricity, you can afford high speed internet. If you can't afford those things, then having internet access in your home is the least of your problems. I live in a podunk rural southern town and we have free WiFi hubs all over the place. If you need free internet, you already have access to it.

And pray tell how exactly are people going to improve their financial situation when even looking for work or job interviews are being done online (and many, many, many companies have completely phased out paper applications)? This would actually be another primary reason to make the internet free as it puts everyone on a level playing field.

[Logwyn]

How do I go about making Comcast suffer for their shit tier service?

Keep a log. The threaten to call and report them to the public services commission. If the service is not back up when they say.

[xanzul]

Why do Millennials think everything should be handed to them?

This is like saying people wanting free education are just looking for handouts.

[Twizy]

Okay with that opinion, why shouldn't electricity, water, housing, medical, gasoline, a vehicle, etc. all be free? You "need" all of that stuff as a straightforward public good, right? So why shouldn't you have to get a job and pay for what you need to include WiFi? I know some will get upset and strongly disagree, but no one "needs" WiFi, no one will die because they were denied WiFi. Also, there are so many areas that private companies are providing free WiFi, you are really talking about a convenience to access WiFi for free in your home. If you are out and about stop by a McDonalds, they have free WiFi 24 hours a day.

[xanzul]

"Should be handed" means other people should work to pay for it.

You could argue that everyone benefits, and in some small way everyone would probably benefit with free internet access. But there's also harm present. It's harmful to infantilize adults and condition them into being more and more entitled/dependent. When all your basic needs are covered, when you have a free cellphone and internet access, subsidize cable, etc. where does the urge to work for your own things come into play? Why work 40 hours a week only to do 20% better? You'll also start convincing people who do work not to. I'd take a substantial pay cut if I got to stay at home and not work, and you're kidding yourself if you honestly don't think most people would do that - especially if they know a big chunk of their taxes goes to pay for people who don't work.

My suggestion is to focus on fixing the economy and job markets to help people find work and pay for their own. Society functions only because people work. We don't need to incentivize working less or not working at all with more and more freebies.

How can people find work if they can't apply for a job without having the internet?

- - - Updated - - -

We don't even have free food and water. These are the only two resources human cannot survive without, yet still commercialized. Free Internet doesn't make sense without basic requirements becoming free first.

Plus, unless we are talking about free 100+ Mbps unlimited Internet, I'm not going to use it anyway.

I guess you haven't heard of food stamps before.