From: shaun@octel.com (Attacking Deep Structure)
Subject: Re: Why freedom of information must be garenteed!!!
Organization: Octel Communications Inc., Milpitas Ca.
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:16:36 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.004804.7140@ac.dal.ca> rclarke@ac.dal.ca writes:
>Hello,
>But the rich will also be dependant on the computers to maintain there postion
>of power.  The poor will probably be prety much excluded from the net (except
>for a few cyber cowboys).  The net will probably not affect the poor very much
>  So if someone were to find a hole in the net then bring it down you would
>knock the support out from under the rich and they would be off balence (though
>I admit that it wouldn't be for long) and the poor might have a chance to fight
>back.  The sutting down of the net would be nessary because if the rich were
>still able to use the net they would be able distroy (sp?) any uprising that
>occured.  

Any revolution or uprising that changes more than the name of the era in the
history books will have to make sensible well-informed use of whatever resources
are available.  It's not a big stretch to see that information, which controls
access to wealth and power is the most valuable of all resources.  Even something
as simple as up to the hour weather maps are available over the Internet.

I also disagree that the poor will be excluded from "the net."  Phones are the 
first step, and phones are coming to lots of second and third world countries in
ways that you probably haven't imagined -- and they aren't all cellular.  The
only thing "the net" is really good for is communicating information.  (Obvious,
right?  Sometimes I wonder.)  Once phone service of one kind or another is 
available inexpensively to a large percentage of the people in the world, allowing
them to communicate, they'll realize that destroying their communications
infrastructure would be as suicidal as throwing away things like maps, hunting &
agricultural implements, and bonds of friendship.  Also, I really, really hope
that the political and socioeconomic problems every country faces can be solved
without a lot of violent rebellions and revolutions.  The way the people of 
former Yugoslavia are handling things, for instance, is the opposite of the
right way.  

Well, I'm about to fly off on a tangent, so I better stop.  I'll summarize by 
saying that making interpersonal communication possible on a large scale is
always a good thing, and I think it would be stupid for "the poor" to destroy
any personal communications system simply because it is used by "the rich."  
Anyone can benefit from email and voice phone service, assuming they have 
their more urgent Maslowian needs (food, shelter, etc.) met.  If one is going
to destroy the net because "the rich" use it, one should also tear up the
roads and highways, the water distribution and purification system, wells,
dams, electricity generation and distribution systems, etc., and just let
everyone starve until those who are left reach a balance with with nature
in what's left of the forests or in the ruins of the cities, at least until
all the canned food is gone.

Note: I'm also not sure what you mean by "the rich" and "the poor."  The 
controlling elite in the USA, China, and Guatemala are all very different,
as are the underclasses of those countries.  I'm also unsure what "the 
poor" of any individual country could do impact things like communications
satellites or communications systems not local to themselves.  

@Man

-- 
shaun@octel.com  ||  "Now is the time on Sprockets when we Lambada!"
              
Laundry: the process of turning perfectly good clothes into lint. 
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk