Putting the Highway in Information Superhighway

Podcast Picks, Technology
Share

In a recent episode of This Week in Google, Jeff Jarvis, with some support from Leo Laporte, suggested that perhaps, given the incredible importance of the Internet, it should be treated like the highway system, with the government paying companies to build it out, but having state guaranteed access. I enjoy listening to TWIG, and many other programs on the TWIT network, but this idea immediately made me think of an old SNL skit:

Compared to turning the Internet into something like the highway system, the ideas in that clip are absolute genius. Consider what the government routinely does on the highway:

  • It limits speed, sometimes in opposition to highway engineers’ opinions
  • It sends out patrols searching for contraband
  • It claims the right to stop and inspect travelers’ cars based on the judgment of the police officer (probable cause)
  • It levies taxes on machines which use the highways, above and beyond the taxes it already collects on the purchase
  • It licenses users, charging them for the right to drive, on top of the taxes it already levies on the sales of vehicles and license plates
  • It mandates insurance, corrupting the insurance industry and incentivizing them to support government policies and donate to political campaigns
  • It forbids the use of technology to hide the interior of the car (window tinting laws) as well as technology to avoid speeding tickets (bans on radar jammers and detectors)

Turning the Internet into something like the highway system would mean government inspecting Internet traffic, blocking it, or even arresting users for things like copyright violations, setting policies on how traffic is prioritized, banning encryption except for approved encryption which the government can decrypt at will, taxing users for the right to use the Internet, and mandating the purchase of security programs. It is hard to imagine a finer example of a Bad Idea.

Putting the Highway in Information Superhighway Read Post »

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange influenced by libertarianism

Anti-Statism, Imperialism, War
Share

imageAndy Greenberg has a fascinating interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange posted at Forbes.com. Assange states that he has been significantly influenced by “market libertarianism,” and though I disagree with the conclusions of his “expertise in politics and history” he is most assuredly a friend to the cause of liberty. Check out this excerpt from the interview.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange influenced by libertarianism Read Post »

Re: Should We Boycott Amazon.com?

Anti-Statism, Statism
Share

[I just posted this on LewRockwell.com]

Lew, I agree completely with you (and Rozeff). As detailed in posts by S.M. Oliva and Glenn Greenwald, it seems clear Amazon is just a victim of the state, and as a libertarian I make it a policy never to blame the victim. And who can blame them for capitulating any more than taxpayers are to be blamed for coughing up the dough? Amazon is  skating on thin ice as it is in heroically helping people avoid sales tax. Of course it’s rational to fear the state. Thus I disagree with condemnations of Amazon by libertarians and Antiwar.com’s call for a boycott of Amazon.

Further, Amazon’s managers have an obligation to the shareholders; they have no right to risk or waste shareholder money for political grandstanding. It’s not their money they would be risking. I also think that in addition to the anti-war libertarian activists who are up in arms about Amazon’s pursuit of profits instead of activism, a number of left-libertarians are using this as an excuse to pile on Amazon because it’s big, a corporation, and profitable.

And I, like you, have always disliked boycotts. That said, libertarians can disagree on this tactical issue; and I of course regard antiwar.com as heroic. Thus, to bolster my dislike of boycotting, and even though I disagree with antiwar.com’s stance on Amazon and their intentional rejection of Amazon revenues, I’ve  just donated $100 to Antiwar.com (and $200 to LRC).

Update: PayPal has also refused to deal with Wikileaks.

Clarification: In some of my online writings about the Amazon boycott, I’ve apparently given an impression to some that I do not wish to give. Some of my comments have been construed as more than just friendly disagreement. Let me be crystal clear: I am a strong supporter of antiwar.com. They are one of the most heroic libertarian institutions on the planet, and I greatly respect, admire and appreciate everyone who works for and supports it.  I love what they do and remain a strong supporter.

Re: Should We Boycott Amazon.com? Read Post »

Scroll to Top