A lot of the things we do on a daily or weekly basis have ways of doing them that can either be private or communal, some of these which we do not think to consider as having that characteristic.

For example, bathing in the Roman Empire used to be communal, but then Rome fell and citizens in the splinter countries began taking baths privately.

Receiving mail is another example. There are countries which don’t have mailboxes and everyone gets their mail at the post office in the PO boxes. It was the United States which pioneered the idea of the modern mail system, which is why we associate it as a private act.

There are activities as well which don’t have any history as jumping between one or the other that might benefit from it, for example I think towns might benefit if internet was free and freely accessible but only at the local library.

What’s a non-communal aspect of life you think should be communal?

  • CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    If it’s only available at one place, it’s not freely accessible.

    Logistically, how would that work? Libraries would have to be everywhere and they’d have to be massive. The IT infrastructure to support that would be immense. How would privacy work? Where could I go to have a private telehealth appointment, for example?

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Freely accessible just means anyone can get to a library, no? I’m not saying that internet should ONLY be at the library. That’s OP, lol

      Libraries where I live offer internet access to any patron (who must be a resident of the city). I can comfortably walk to 3 libraries, but only 1 is within a 15-minute walk. Not everyone in my city is so fortunate, but someone with limited internet needs has many options for free here.

      • CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh I understood. I agree with you.

        I would argue that something that was once available at home that is then restricted to a single place that must be shared with lots of people isn’t freely accessible.

        My local library is within walking distance, but it’s pretty small. The Internet is free but not awesome in terms of speed.

    • CraigOhMyEggo@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      In such a system, people would still have their own devices that can connect wirelessly to a library, even from outside the building (people who live immediately near the library I work at get free wireless internet, at least from 10 to 8), it’s only the signal that would come mainly from the library.

      Another factor that comes to mind that I forgot to mention in my other replies is that the internet comes from undersea cables that are long enough to wrap around the Earth 180 times, which then enters into servers which then enters into cable lines which then reaches peoples’ houses, and these are all an absolute hassle to maintain, both because of wildlife attacking them (yeah, a single fish can take out a country’s internet) as well as bad actors, and on the cable side, bad weather can take them out. The service strain would be a lot less if we didn’t try to put too much on our plates, allowing more maintenance to be maintained.