Kudos to the Finnish government, which has just introduced laws guaranteeing broadband access to every person living in Finland (5.5 million people, give or take).
This is reportedly a first worldwide.
Starting July 2010, every person in Finland will have the right to a one-megabit broadband connection as an intermediate step, says the Ministry of Transport and Communications. By the end of 2015, the legal right will be extended to an impressive 100 Mb broadband connection for everyone.
Amazing!
Found by QB.
So if health care and broadband need to be rights because people need them, why has no one passed a law that guarantees everyone gets food?
I mean, by this logic, such a bill should’ve been passed first.
Not 1.5, not 3, not 6.
100.
Wow!
Huh? Life, liberty and property are the rights. And healthcare certainly falls under this, as a subcategory of life. But how does broadband fit into this. Might as well make high def TV a right, or a right to a car, or what about making chocolate a right.
If this applied to the USA, Comcast would most certainly throttle that one-megabit broadband connection.
Everyone will think that I’m a right-winger on this (which I am definitely not) but how about Europe pay us back for all those years of the threat of communism that we (U.S.) in a fair part paid for first! Harsh, but that’s my initial thought. On another thought, I would love to live in Finland… minus the cold.
I can hear the official announcements now…
“You got Finns to the left, Finns to the right, and we’re the only Net in town”
All I can say is that is about time
I have no idea what this actually means. Does it mean that you get ‘free’ broadband paid for by taxes? Having the right is one thing but how does that right manifest itself as actual broadband?
Just one other thing. This must be S O C I A L I S M , and therefore evil.
Big deal 5.5 million people, thats a lot less people then New York City. I don’t think you can really call this a major achievement.
@jobs That is a pretty silly attitude to have. They may only have 5.5 million people. But olthey also only have the wealth and resources of 5.5 million people. It’s just a smaller country, and everything is of smaller scales. Doesn’t mean it’s easier for them at all.
#10 Bobbo
According to the UN Human Development Index, Finland ranks #12, just above the US.
Interestingly Australia ranks #2 and we generally have shite broadband. I guess internet access isn’t everything 🙂
#6 The Fins did pay of their war debts to us.
This is odd because it was the Germans that were helping them fight of the Soviets who invaded them at least partly to grab an ice free seaport on the Arctic sea.
How can anything be a right if it requires other people to be working to produce it? Rights are things that can be taken away by government, but not given by government.
Government agreeing to provide certain things for its citizen with the assumption that it will be able to pay for them or produce them has nothing to do with ‘rights’. Whether you agree with such a program or not, calling any government program a right is a misnomer.
When the people making the TVs for the government stop agreeing to work for what the government will pay them, can they be sued for violating citizens’ rights? And when socialized medicine becomes reality in the US, if all doctors go on strike, can they be charged with violating patients’ rights?
Some people have an ass-backwards understanding of rights.
#16:
“How can anything be a right if it requires other people to be working to produce it?”
This seems to be the major point of disagreement these days. Thank god. I was getting sick of the socially liberal/conservative shite.
#16 you are awesome
“How can anything be a right if it requires other people to be working to produce it? Rights are things that can be taken away by government, but not given by government.”
#15, doill,
This is odd because it was the Germans that were helping them fight of the Soviets who invaded them at least partly to grab an ice free seaport on the Arctic sea.
That is pretty interesting as Finland doesn’t border the Arctic Ocean. The Soviets already had Murmansk on the Arctic and St. Petersberg which is on the Baltic, as well as the other Baltic States, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia.
Could it be that Finland used to be a part of Russia from 1809 until 1917 and the Soviets wanted their province back?
#6 Bastian
You’re kidding right? Try reading. To begin with Finland is part of NATO, as was the rest of cold war Europe, they did pay their defense dues, and then some. Typical American attitude, like the world owes the USA soooo much. I imagine you’re just the victim of the media conditioning you recieved. I might suggest a little world travel,
Don’t all of these 5.5 Million Finnish a-holes all work for Nokia? Free wireless broadband eh?
# 11 Hugh Ripper
“I have no idea what this actually means. Does it mean that you get ‘free’ broadband paid for by taxes? Having the right is one thing but how does that right manifest itself as actual broadband?”
Most likely, it means that you cannot be cut off from an internet service you’ve paid for no matter what — a response to the on-going EU regulations row about the penalties for online copyright infringement (as a counter-example to France, where three strikes means you get banned from the net…) among other things.
It’s also likely to mean that, if you’re heavily in debt and/or living on wellfare, your internet access isn’t one of the things they can liquidate or force you to give up to get out of that situation.
And finally, it most likely means that if you’re being denied said minimum service level by an ISP for any reason, you can take them to court.
#16–crankygeek==you said: “How can anything be a right if it requires other people to be working to produce it?” /// Because there are different kinds of “rights.” You are referring to “natural rights” expressed in the Constitution. You also have many other rights that are given by statute. If a law is passed that you can’t be cut off from electricity without a 30 day notice then that right as valuable as any other right, perhaps even more valuable, is granted by STATUTE. And thats what the Fins have done==by statute. Pretty simple to see. The more “ADVANCED” a society is, the more rights will accrue==both natural as in the extension of equal rights for homosexuals, and statutory rights as in broadband, healthcare, minimum pay, vacation time, pregnancy leaves==ETC. How did you ever miss the more advanced nature of rights?
THEN you go on to say: “Rights are things that can be taken away by government, but not given by government.” /// Its nice for a bumper sticker and national ethos, but there is really no difference between the two. If your government is not giving you the freedom of speech, what good is it to supposedly have it incohate? Its a silly notion really.
Either it’s a pretty safe bet that the Fins won’t even be using all that bandwidth, so why not promise it to them. Or Finland has recently become the new haven for the world’s tax cheats. And this is their reward for keeping mum about who’s got their millions tucked away it their banks. Since prostitution is basically legal there. The Fins probably don’t feel the need to download a lot of porn videos. But they might be uploading them for others to pay for.
# 20 amodedoma
Finland part of NATO? You know nothing. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlandization
First and foremost, it is my observation that rights, especially rights in today’s corrupted [faux] democratic societies, are “created” for just one purpose and one purpose alone:
To be taken away. [mostly, just because it feels good]
“oops, you had unclean thoughts about the government..
-No broadband rights for you! -ever.”
(*Oohh..ahhh…that felt so good”)
yeah, this’ll be a great idea. :s
————————–
[-and now, my other delusion]
I can’t put my finger on it, but somehow, this strikes a very bad chord in me.. alarm bells going of everywhere.. it raises a lot of questions.
Firstly, I’d like to know what the penalty is for NOT providing this “right”
Will this right have to be enforced for those in prison? (imagine the barter power)
How much in additional taxes will this cost?
And who is the main party that scored BIG on this ludicrous contract(er right) to supply the electronics and infrastructure for this “right”
further..
Access to what?? a wall jack? -the Verizon family?
By extension, does this mean that minimally, a basic “netbook” must be provided as well in order to truly facilitate and realize “the access?” to this right? -and who will provide
these if so?
Will these netbooks have to comply with minimal, “rightful” software as well?
Might they be advert supported units
if so?
…must the content of this “rightful” access be of a specific nature.. and NOT “these specific natures over here?”
Will the right to be offended by “the harsh truths of Life and Reality” which is quite often mistaken and persecuted as gross and lewdful things [usually for political power gains and favours] -be just as a freely available to those who know the difference…?
-Just as the right to NOT be offended by “the harsh truths of Life and Reality” that is currently enjoyed by the majority of the planet, who live in a complete fantasy world that is spoon-fed to them by their respective governments? [and make life miserable for the rest of us]
-Should the U.N. adopt this, will some, International Con Man who speaks for the entire world [*cough obama, cough*] suddenly decree that all of Africa’s woes are because they have no “rights to broadband”?
[dream sequence]
“And as such, I decree that all the 1st world countries race to *build* out the entire continent of Africa so that her people can finally realize their inalienable right to broadband access they have long desired”
-which of course, would be the perfect cover, i mean reason, to build-out a parallel infrastructure to help Africa “realize the full potential of her mineral wealth” I mean what the
heck..we have all the construction gear here already to build the broadband infrastructure, “right”(?) [snicker]
[remember, Africa is one of few “easily conquered/compromised countries” left that has all the rare-earth minerals that will be needed to usher in the new era of game-changing electromagnetic devices and new electrics that will make their appearance over the next five years.
[currently, china happens to supply and control 95% of this market.
Surprised?
-guaranteed to be a most ironic situation when the “real” Zero footprint, green Power Stations become mainstream and America has the technological know how to make them but alas, has none of the right minerals to build them with. [which would really help get us out of the decade long depression we are about to enter]
KBR, Haliburton and 100,000 sub-contractors will be hired to the build-out, of course.
-and Hillary will be made the new “African Czar” {but that will only last two months.. -after which Michelle will have had Hillary meet with a tragic end. This in turn, will allow Michelle to be properly crowned “African Queen” by the Queen of England in praise of her tireless service to help distract the masses with her dreadful attire and meaningless banter.
[/end dream sequence] ;p
So you see, while on the surface this may sound all very wonderful and forward thinking.. -and gives the do-gooders their usual misplaced, warm fuzzy feeling inside…I think just under the surface, it signals the beginning of the final death knell for the “old, uncensored real web” we all “grew up” with.
It’ll open the way for another 20 layers of bureaucratic intrusional BS to be thrust onto the masses at large.
-No doubt, it will be soon adopted by all the “me too” democracies around the globe.
Finland may be largely immune to these nefarious delusions[of mine], but heaven help us if we get a bug up our arse to follow in kind..
-it would be the perfect excuse to legislate the “politically correct” and safe for the “innocent children to play in” Web v2.50 that the left’s social misfits have been having wet dreams of creating since the web’s inception.
I mean after all, you wouldn’t want your right to broadband access trampled on by social deviants, would you?
-kookoo for coco-puffs
(Film at 11)
# 24 Glenn E
Prostitution is basically legal here in Victoria, Australia, but I still find downloading porn to be more convenient 😉
Did the ijits ever consider that maybe the internet service connection is supplied through the government owned telephone service?
Since the government is the people and the people want to be connected to the internet at broadband speeds then so be it. Their already owned service will connect them. If they want more speed or service then maybe private sector ISPs can connect them.
Isn’t it just terrible how a government owned entity can be so inefficient and poorly run they can’t provide basics?
Awesome. The country is small enough to provide this service to it’s people.
It’s about communications and hope the US will include upgrade today’s guaranteed telephone service access to broadband.
The Republicans should like this. Providing broadband access to the yahoo conservatives living in bumfuck Egypt should be good. Glenn Beck internet channel is just what will increase the sheeple population.
There is nowhere stated that there is a right to FREE broadband internet access. I guess that this in effect means that there is going to be infrastructure for broadband access everywhere, and that everyone has the right to pay for having that access. There will probably be some pricing regulations as well, to ensure fair pricing even in areas where some ISPs may end up with monopoly.
#29, henny
There is nowhere stated that there is a right to FREE broadband internet access.
There is now in Finland.
Mr Fusion
# 27 “Did the ijits ever consider that maybe the internet service connection is supplied through the government owned telephone service?”
It’s not.
# 29 “There is now in Finland.”
No. Finns now have the right to have their homes connected to a decent broadband network, just like they have the right to have their house connected to electricity, to have running water etc. You still have to pay for these services, and if the cost is too high, you can choose not to. However, it is now illegal for Finnish service providers to deny you access to internet service if you’re willing to pay for it. That’s really all it is. The “but you live too far from our grid” argument no longer cuts it. The “but the RIAA hates your guts” doesn’t cut it either.
# 28 Dallas
“Awesome. The country is small enough to provide this service to it’s people.”
Size isn’t that important — it’s density that matters, and as it happens, Finland is roughly half as densely populated as the US 😉
The thing is, like the other Nordic countries (all of which are very sparsely populated), Finland has long since figured out that infrastructure pays for itself especially when you’re dealing with low population density. Cost is a lousy argument that almost always shows that you haven’t done the maths right in the end. If people can communicate easily — even if it’s only virtually — geography quickly becomes far less of an issue, and you don’t have to worry as much about domestic migration or over-urbanisation, and suddenly the entire country becomes economically viable. Infrastructure investments = more money in your coffers, almost immediately, on top of huge piles of cash saved on not having to waste time with inefficient, non-functioning or just malfunctioning means of communications.
Many people on the right seem to have problems with the word “rights”. Never understood why.