More People Online Benefits Everyone (Including Those Already Online).
Metcalfe posited that a network's value is proportional to the square of the number of nodes/users of that network. Whether you ascribe to Metcalfe's Law or some variant thereof, the reasoning is simple -- when more people use a telecommunications system, the social and economic benefits of expanding the network accrue to everyone. Thus, it's in everyone's best interest to get as many people connected as possible.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
"... it's in everyone's best interest to get as many people connected as possible" - provided, of course, that not a single individual is forced to pay the cost of doing so involuntarily. It makes absolutely no sense to expound the virtues of choice while stepping all over the individual liberty to choose. I would not hesitate to voluntarily assist those I can to acquire network access, however, if my assistance becomes compulsory, I will resist with all that I am able until my last breath.
The issue here is not the value of an easily and cheaply accessible internet. The issue is who will bear the inevitable costs of such a network, will that responsibility be voluntary or compulsory, and what will be the justification such such compulsion.
Charity that is "involuntary" isn't charity at all. It is slavery. I and I alone decide what is "in my best interest" until it is clear I cannot.
That day has not yet arrived. Any claim that it has must be supported by fact and consistent logic. Another's need is NOT a warrant on my life, nor is my need a warrant on there's. If those who desire a socialist internet do not understand this, perhaps it is time they pause for reflection on this issue. They will be saving their own lives in the process.