Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- From: Ye Old One <usenet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 23:25:57 GMT
On 2 Jun 2006 14:14:54 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@xxxxxxxxxxx> enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:00:59 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2 Jun 2006 03:28:33 -0700, caryatis_1@xxxxxxxxxxx enriched this
group when s/he wrote:
Hasn't this old chestnut been laid to rest since the 1901 debate? Our
taxes have not paid for the censuses as they arrive on the internet.
Our taxes paid for the census and for its storage/protection since it
was completed. The actual data therefore belongs to us.
Sure. And the delivery of the data into your home via the internet
wasn't part of the deal. Those servers don't run themselves, and the
data didn't magically transform to web pages.
But the costs involved in that are tiny when compared to the number of
people who would gain by having access.
Look at it another way - why should the taxpayers be expected to foot
the bill to make someone's hobby more convenient to pursue?
In this case, yes. I think public money should be spent to get the
data online, a small charge to UK people and a slightly larger charge
to overseas readers would soo recover the costs.
They then pay the government a
royalty on the revenue they generate from your payments.
Truth this government to extract money from the people for data that
is already their property.
Sure, the data is already yours. The access to it, and the added
convenience, is the "value add" here.
You are still welcome to travel to London and view them for free at the
Family Records Centre, at the tax payer's expense. Do you remember what
it was like searching through the films before there were national name
indexes?
Or you can perform some simple searches from your home computer or
local library. Why exactly should this be provided to you for free?
Because it is our data.
Then drive your ass down to London and look through it yourself.
Problem solved.
I do, when I can, but not everyone can.
At the moment the charges levied by people like Ancestory.co.uk are
FAR to high. Move the decimal point left one place and they would
still make money.
And you know this how, exactly? What do you know about running servers
in a fault-tolerant environment, exposed to the public internet? How
much do you know about data security and the costs involved? What
direct knowledge do you know of their expenses and income?
I have run a web hosting company since 1999.
Information costs money to move around.
These days, very little.
That's how it is. You're not
being forced to pay anything; you're free to just not use the digital
format. So much better that the taxpayers aren't forced to pay for some
boondoggle for some hobbiest who wants to whine about subscription
costs.
The typical reply of someone with a very narrow view on the subject.
--
Bob.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- From: Dave Hinz
- Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- References:
- Ancestry.co.uk
- From: Dominic
- Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- From: Ye Old One
- Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- From: caryatis_1
- Re: Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- From: Ye Old One
- Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- From: Dave Hinz
- Ancestry.co.uk
- Prev by Date: Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- Next by Date: Re: Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- Previous by thread: Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- Next by thread: Re: Ancestry.co.uk
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading