Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Internet and Freedom: The Egypt Lesson

When I was little, my grandmother had a plaque on her wall that read, "If you want to know how precious home is, go away and keep the key." In other words, while you're in your home you can take it for granted. If you leave its comforts, but keep the key (remember that it's there and can still be returned to) you'll gain appreciation for it.

Here I sit, typing on Blogger.com, connected to a free Wi-Fi connection at a restaurant, my inbox has dinged a few times already with new emails from friends, and soon you (the reader) will likely discover this new post via my Facebook or Twitter stream. I have opinions, and I have the liberty to share them. But, more importantly, I'm afforded the ability to share them via this thing called the Internet that we all have taken for granted.

Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes commented on the recent Internet ban in Egypt with some profound statements about our society's Internet-dependence. "Although the turmoil in Egypt is a matter for the Egyptian people and their government to resolve, limiting Internet access for millions of people is a matter of concern for the global community. It is essential to communication and to commerce. No one should be denied access to the Internet."

Essential? His words are strong. It's essential to communication and to commerce. It's not a nice thing. It's no longer a luxury, according to Noyes. It is required to have an economy to speak of. And, Noyes adds, nobody should ever be denied access to it. It's a basic human right, so to speak.

I'm not sure I agree with the severity and weight of Noyes' opinion, but he hints at truth. If not a God-given right, it's certainly a very very important thing. It's like a car, or a phone. It's hard, if not impossible, to contribute to a modern economy and society without Internet access.

So, that being the case, what is the role of free-world ISP's? Not the U.S. nationally, as a government entity, but of internet service providers headquartered outside of Egypt with the ability to subvert the Egyptian government's decision. And, what's at stake? It's one thing to take a passive role: make internet available via satellite and radio wave spectrum, such that if a rebel on the ground could get to it, they may. ISP's have done this already. It is quite a different thing to put workers on the ground creating temporary "triage infrastructure" not dependent on state-controlled networks. Building new, after-the-fact infrastructure could be accomplished but at great risk.

The first question is this: Is internet as vital as Noyes says it is? Secondly, if Internet is so vital, like food and water, then is it the natural responsibility of those who have it to take an active role in supplying it even against the government's will? If you've answered yes to the above two (and I'm not sure I can yet) the ultimate end to this logic is the third question: what are you doing about it?

Labels: Broadband, Egypt Internet, Fixed Wireless Broadband