So that should be addressed by education and banning misleading advertising, not by banning the program altogether. Did I say I was against an open internet? I

So that should be addressed by education and banning misleading advertising, not by banning the program altogether. Did I say I was against an open internet? I'm against government regulation of the Internet, while the people arguing with me here are in favor. There's more than one way to frame this about "open". I could also snarkily ask you why you don't think the poor deserve to have access to anything, which is what will happen if internet.org isn't allowed. If you really think that poor people deserve free internet, start a charity that brings it to them. But banning other providers from taking gradual steps towards internet access won't help them.