Hi,
Patricio comment was more complete than that.
Net neutrality is about fast/slow Lane. WP0 is about a free Lane. Bis
argument was pretty sensible.
I'm not sure why we should fear a free Lane. The worst it does is
providing free access, not a better QOS or a filtered/unfiltered access to
the Internet.
N'est,
Christophe
Le 10 août 2014 18:00, "Anirudh S. Bhati" <anirudhsbh(a)gmail.com> a écrit
:
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Jens Best <jens.best(a)wikimedia.de>
wrote:
According to the press Patricio Lorente, member
of the Foundation's
board, said:
"Access to information is a basic human right. If net neutrality is
hurting a human right, we have to rethink net neutrality."
Haven't heard such a single-sided, unbalanced and self-righteous statment
for a while.
So, people standing for net neutrality are now became enemies of basic
human rights in the understanding of the foundation. - Well, if this low
level of discussion is reached, I guess it doesn't make sense to discuss
the subject with the foundation at all.
Last I checked, "self-righteous" could be used to describe the advocacy of
a one-size-fits-all solution implemented in an absolutist fashion without
regard to the rights and interests of those who would be most affected by
it, i.e. the owners of private property.
You like "net neutrality"? Go buy your Internet access from a company
that promises to adhere to those principles. Or better yet, raise some
money and start your own infra and ISP business. Don't force others to
play by your rules - that would be self-righteous.
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors