Why should the Internet not reflect the values of society, as reflected in existing regulations on cars, media, etc.? If people want the Internet to remain free they should work to change the template: free up control over other aspects of our civilization a If that fails, then society doesn't really value what you value.
You are a much less cynical person than myself if you think that society is a reflection of its members' values. There is a mismatch between what people say/think that they value, and what people actually value. It takes only sidelong glance at the current political climate in the US to see myriad examples of people voting against their own best interests.
By and large, people expect the status quo, and as it has been, so shall it be. Had the internet been born in some corporate boardroom - restricted, tiered, filtered - people would expect nothing more.
I suspect we only a few rebrands from control be wrested away - look at Verizon/Google's net neutrality bill making a distinction between wired and wireless internet access. Certainly a reasonable person might agree that wired vs wireless internet access are conceivably "different" - and if the average person can be convinced that there is a difference, they will accept the terms of this difference as it is given to them.
I think that like most things in life, the internet will be controlled by a few people with a desire to shape it. The question is whether or not the people who value freedom, take a vested interest as well.
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
Most of regulations on certain fields come from the fact that it's users are operating on a finite number of resources and areas, which do not expand proportionally to the userbase growth. Second of all, there often aren't efficient ways to avoid unwanted interactions, such as tools letting users selectively exclude the content of those environments. That's why people are more likely to accept regulations on those fields.
Internet is different in both of those aspects, and that's one of the reasons why applying regulations is artificial and recieves negative reception by the general public.
The best way to start fixing and/or improving a particular aspect of our society is probably not by fixing and/or improving everything else in our society first. You have to start somewhere, and the internet is a great place to do so, especially because there are many parties looking to impose rules inconsistent with internet freedom; if these rules are put into place, they will be much more difficult to remove later.
Comments
Why should the Internet not reflect the values of society, as reflected in existing regulations on cars, media, etc.? If people want the Internet to remain free they should work to change the template: free up control over other aspects of our civilization a If that fails, then society doesn't really value what you value.
You are a much less cynical person than myself if you think that society is a reflection of its members' values. There is a mismatch between what people say/think that they value, and what people actually value. It takes only sidelong glance at the current political climate in the US to see myriad examples of people voting against their own best interests.
By and large, people expect the status quo, and as it has been, so shall it be. Had the internet been born in some corporate boardroom - restricted, tiered, filtered - people would expect nothing more.
I suspect we only a few rebrands from control be wrested away - look at Verizon/Google's net neutrality bill making a distinction between wired and wireless internet access. Certainly a reasonable person might agree that wired vs wireless internet access are conceivably "different" - and if the average person can be convinced that there is a difference, they will accept the terms of this difference as it is given to them.
I think that like most things in life, the internet will be controlled by a few people with a desire to shape it. The question is whether or not the people who value freedom, take a vested interest as well.
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
Most of regulations on certain fields come from the fact that it's users are operating on a finite number of resources and areas, which do not expand proportionally to the userbase growth. Second of all, there often aren't efficient ways to avoid unwanted interactions, such as tools letting users selectively exclude the content of those environments. That's why people are more likely to accept regulations on those fields.
Internet is different in both of those aspects, and that's one of the reasons why applying regulations is artificial and recieves negative reception by the general public.
The best way to start fixing and/or improving a particular aspect of our society is probably not by fixing and/or improving everything else in our society first. You have to start somewhere, and the internet is a great place to do so, especially because there are many parties looking to impose rules inconsistent with internet freedom; if these rules are put into place, they will be much more difficult to remove later.