3 ms·

I agree with you, but also: right now Facebook is effectively the main web browser for millions and millions of people. Even without Internet.org, those 50 webs

by benwerd 11y ago

I agree with you, but also: right now Facebook is effectively the main web browser for millions and millions of people. Even without Internet.org, those 50 websites are all a lot of people see. How can we change this model in a realistic, attractive, non-techno-utopian way? (Also, in light of Internet.org, Instant Articles seem like a pretty democratic thing to do - bringing external content that would otherwise be blocked into this context.)

firasd 11y ago
Facebook might be monopolistic in some contexts because that’s what people want to use but the issue with internet.org is that communications networks are licensing public spectrum and then cutting deals for preferential access to certain websites. Regulators and the public have a direct interest in figuring out whether these sorts of schemes are acceptable.
- eggie 11y ago
  Facebook is what people want to sue because many (maybe most) had no idea that you could hang out with friends online in a big broadcasty way until it came around. Will that be true when they realize they can make their own website or blog with their own style to share with friends and family, download torrents, edit Wikipedia, chat or IRC, or use Twitter and HN? I don't really know, but I hope they would go for the bazar over the cathedral. I don't see why Facebook should get a first shot at hiding the reality of the system from them.
Namrog84 11y ago
I remember reading something a while ago that many people tboguth Facebook and the internet were 2 seperate things. Stemming from so you use the internet much? Most said not that much. But when asked if they used Facebook much. They said all the time. And apparently even when asked. Thougt of them as distinct entities
- vbezhenar 11y ago
  That might be because some providers have free facebook-only plans and paid internet plans.
mangeletti 11y ago
> Facebook is effectively the main web browser... I'm pretty sure that's exactly the problem. Internet.org sounds like an effort to create a monopoly by collaborating with governments, at the expense of real Internet access by the citizens those governments are supposed to represent, to ensure they're in charge of the Internet when these markets become robust. It sounds terribly corrupt, to me. If Facebook's corrupt efforts can help to define what "Internet" means for most of a continent, imagine the consequences.
semi-extrinsic 11y ago
main /= only. And I'd like to see a source for the assertion that it's the main browser for millions. Facebook is kinda out these days, most of my friends (predominantly not working in technology) don't post anything there except birthday greetings, use it as an event planning/invite tool, and send the occasional message.
thrownaway2424 11y ago
Isn't Google's approach "realistic"? They're just pulling fiber in Africa, without walled gardens. They now have better networks in Uganda than we have in the Bay Area. https://www.google.com/get/projectlink/ https://www.google.com/get/projectlink/
- jzd 11y ago
  Despite a lot of fiber in Africa, connectivity is hampered by ISPs refusing to pay for bandwidth, ultimately resulting in super slow connection speeds and horrible latency.

by benwerd 11y ago

firasd 11y ago

Facebook might be monopolistic in some contexts because that’s what people want to use but the issue with internet.org is that communications networks are licensing public spectrum and then cutting deals for preferential access to certain websites. Regulators and the public have a direct interest in figuring out whether these sorts of schemes are acceptable.

eggie 11y ago
Facebook is what people want to sue because many (maybe most) had no idea that you could hang out with friends online in a big broadcasty way until it came around. Will that be true when they realize they can make their own website or blog with their own style to share with friends and family, download torrents, edit Wikipedia, chat or IRC, or use Twitter and HN? I don't really know, but I hope they would go for the bazar over the cathedral. I don't see why Facebook should get a first shot at hiding the reality of the system from them.

Namrog84 11y ago

I remember reading something a while ago that many people tboguth Facebook and the internet were 2 seperate things. Stemming from so you use the internet much? Most said not that much. But when asked if they used Facebook much. They said all the time. And apparently even when asked. Thougt of them as distinct entities

vbezhenar 11y ago
That might be because some providers have free facebook-only plans and paid internet plans.

mangeletti 11y ago

> Facebook is effectively the main web browser... I'm pretty sure that's exactly the problem. Internet.org sounds like an effort to create a monopoly by collaborating with governments, at the expense of real Internet access by the citizens those governments are supposed to represent, to ensure they're in charge of the Internet when these markets become robust. It sounds terribly corrupt, to me. If Facebook's corrupt efforts can help to define what "Internet" means for most of a continent, imagine the consequences.

semi-extrinsic 11y ago

main /= only. And I'd like to see a source for the assertion that it's the main browser for millions. Facebook is kinda out these days, most of my friends (predominantly not working in technology) don't post anything there except birthday greetings, use it as an event planning/invite tool, and send the occasional message.

thrownaway2424 11y ago

Isn't Google's approach "realistic"? They're just pulling fiber in Africa, without walled gardens. They now have better networks in Uganda than we have in the Bay Area. https://www.google.com/get/projectlink/ https://www.google.com/get/projectlink/

jzd 11y ago
Despite a lot of fiber in Africa, connectivity is hampered by ISPs refusing to pay for bandwidth, ultimately resulting in super slow connection speeds and horrible latency.