8 ms·

What's mind boggling is the amount of money FB is spending on advertisements & lobbying so that they can be allowed to be "charitable". What's funny is that Mar

by chdir 11y ago

What's mind boggling is the amount of money FB is spending on advertisements & lobbying so that they can be allowed to be "charitable". What's funny is that Mark's getting upset that people don't want "disingenuous charity". There are a thousand effective ways in which you can help the underprivileged. Partnering with ISPs to decide what's "basic" internet is not one of them. P.S. Many professors from India's top tech institutes, startups, entrepreneurs & other eminent people have spoken against "Free Basics". https://github.com/net-neutrality/no-free-basics https://github.com/net-neutrality/no-free-basics - Feel free to add more with a Pull Request.

pinkunicorn 11y ago
This one point alone is enough for me to reject Free Basics: "HTTPS support: We encrypt information for Free Basics wherever possible." Huh? As a service provider, why would I want YOU to encrypt traffic between my customer and me? I mean, it defeats the purpose of HTTPS. Its literally saying "I'm going to be a Man in the Middle and for a change, I'll also have the keys to decrypt the traffic". Yeah, right.
- chdir 11y ago
  More wonky stuff : https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-technical-guidelines https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-t... "When people use the Free Basics mobile website, information is temporarily decrypted on our secure servers to ensure proper functionality of the services and to avoid unexpected charges to people."
  - pinkunicorn 11y ago
    Facebook servers will be saying, "Hold on, so you want to buy a Camera, noted down(I've recommendations for you by the way). We're good now and I can send you to your destination. All for performance reasons of course." I had respect for Zuckerberg, have lost it completely.
    - wutbrodo 11y ago
      > I had respect for Zuckerberg, have lost it completely. Do you mind if I ask why? Zuckerberg is perhaps alone among tech figures in that I've never really had any respect for. Hell, Steve Jobs was a pretty scummy guy, to users/competitors/partners/everyone, and yet I still have more respect for him. Zuckerberg's attitude towards the user has been pretty consistently shitty going all the way back to the very beginning of the "thefacebook" service ("they trust me -- dumb fucks"). The guy's as cynical as they come.
bko 11y ago
> P.S. Many professors from India's top tech institutes, startups, entrepreneurs & other eminent people have spoken against "Free Basics". Or essentially everyone that would not be a target market for this service.
- Manishearth 11y ago
  Do they have to be? They can be smart enough to rationally weigh the pros and cons here. Really, there aren't any pros of Free Basics when you take into account the fact that a similar, net neutral business model can and has been implemented (by Aircel). The details are different (data cap or speed cap instead of walled garden), but the business model is the same -- get people to start using the internet for free in a limited way, and some of them will come to the non-free services. But net neutral. You can basically take Facebook and the walled garden completely out of the picture and it would probably have similar efficacy. Why can Facebook and Zuckerberg support free basics -- when they're not even from India, but these smart Indians cannot oppose it because they're not the target audience?
  - bko 11y ago
    Well, I just think its a little classist to have these elite Indians decide what free service should or should not be allowed to be provided to poor Indians. They're essentially deciding the sacrifice that the poor will make (by forgoing this service) to serve their ideal (net neutrality). Their words and beliefs bare no cost but will be involuntarily paid for by others. The pros are that its a service that people have a choice to use so if a customer freely chooses to do so, that person is obviously off. If you, or Aircel, want to provide a more competitive service you are free to do so. A different model that you feel is more effective is not an argument to restrict another competing model.
    - chdir 11y ago
      > elite Indians decide what free service should or should not be allowed to be provided to poor Indians What's you definition of elite ? There's a very diverse background of people who have spoken against "Free Basics". Also keep in mind, that your average Joe won't even bother to read the fine print about the pros/cons of "Free Basics". So in a way, you have to depend on someone with a keen interest to voice an opinion.

by chdir 11y ago

pinkunicorn 11y ago

This one point alone is enough for me to reject Free Basics: "HTTPS support: We encrypt information for Free Basics wherever possible." Huh? As a service provider, why would I want YOU to encrypt traffic between my customer and me? I mean, it defeats the purpose of HTTPS. Its literally saying "I'm going to be a Man in the Middle and for a change, I'll also have the keys to decrypt the traffic". Yeah, right.

chdir 11y ago
More wonky stuff : https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-technical-guidelines https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-t... "When people use the Free Basics mobile website, information is temporarily decrypted on our secure servers to ensure proper functionality of the services and to avoid unexpected charges to people."
- pinkunicorn 11y ago
  Facebook servers will be saying, "Hold on, so you want to buy a Camera, noted down(I've recommendations for you by the way). We're good now and I can send you to your destination. All for performance reasons of course." I had respect for Zuckerberg, have lost it completely.
  - wutbrodo 11y ago
    > I had respect for Zuckerberg, have lost it completely. Do you mind if I ask why? Zuckerberg is perhaps alone among tech figures in that I've never really had any respect for. Hell, Steve Jobs was a pretty scummy guy, to users/competitors/partners/everyone, and yet I still have more respect for him. Zuckerberg's attitude towards the user has been pretty consistently shitty going all the way back to the very beginning of the "thefacebook" service ("they trust me -- dumb fucks"). The guy's as cynical as they come.

bko 11y ago

> P.S. Many professors from India's top tech institutes, startups, entrepreneurs & other eminent people have spoken against "Free Basics". Or essentially everyone that would not be a target market for this service.

Manishearth 11y ago
Do they have to be? They can be smart enough to rationally weigh the pros and cons here. Really, there aren't any pros of Free Basics when you take into account the fact that a similar, net neutral business model can and has been implemented (by Aircel). The details are different (data cap or speed cap instead of walled garden), but the business model is the same -- get people to start using the internet for free in a limited way, and some of them will come to the non-free services. But net neutral. You can basically take Facebook and the walled garden completely out of the picture and it would probably have similar efficacy. Why can Facebook and Zuckerberg support free basics -- when they're not even from India, but these smart Indians cannot oppose it because they're not the target audience?
- bko 11y ago
  Well, I just think its a little classist to have these elite Indians decide what free service should or should not be allowed to be provided to poor Indians. They're essentially deciding the sacrifice that the poor will make (by forgoing this service) to serve their ideal (net neutrality). Their words and beliefs bare no cost but will be involuntarily paid for by others. The pros are that its a service that people have a choice to use so if a customer freely chooses to do so, that person is obviously off. If you, or Aircel, want to provide a more competitive service you are free to do so. A different model that you feel is more effective is not an argument to restrict another competing model.
  - chdir 11y ago
    > elite Indians decide what free service should or should not be allowed to be provided to poor Indians What's you definition of elite ? There's a very diverse background of people who have spoken against "Free Basics". Also keep in mind, that your average Joe won't even bother to read the fine print about the pros/cons of "Free Basics". So in a way, you have to depend on someone with a keen interest to voice an opinion.