To be honest I do not fully understand this passage however I do have something to say about the electronic human rights. In the article the author commented that there may be companies or governmental web developers who may interfere with or snoop on Internet traffic; and that’s a compromise to basic human network rights. As far as I’m concerned, the interference is not only a compromise to human rights, but also a negative impact on the market economy.
The interference had happened all the time — as we have to admit. Having faster access to a certain online shop is like having less distance to a physical store. Paying more to get more attention from the public and thus get more benefit has always been a thing in the history. However, the difference between how far you are from a store with how fast you can access a website is huge. For example if a store doesn’t have a better location than another one then it can always choose another location where there’s even better geographic advantage. But for an online store, the accessing speed is globally shared, which leave no alternative for the disadvantaged store than snooping his opponent even more. It will definitely lead a distorted competition between stores which is not about the quality of their product but rather about the quality of hackers as I would say. It is definitely a bad way for the market economy to develop, but for any individual or community of shared interests, it always seems appealing to snoop on internet traffic to get more clicks and thus gaining more profits. As a result, just as human’s benefit-oriented nature has to be regulated by laws, the unhealthy competition between the community of shared interests should also be regulated. It will take a considerable amount of time before—hopefully—a society where healthy competition occurs and electronic human rights relatively equally distributed could be established.