> But it cannot be exploitative to give something of value for free One of the (many) criticisms of Nestle is that they went to 3rd-world countries and gave ne

> But it cannot be exploitative to give something of value for free One of the (many) criticisms of Nestle is that they went to 3rd-world countries and gave new mothers free supplies of bottled formula. Then after the mothers switched to formula and stopped lactating, they took away the free milk offer and forced them to pay out the nose for a life-essential product that their bodies would have otherwise produced naturally. Just like with Nestle, giving away limited Internet that can only access Facebook/Wikipedia has the effect of forcing those services to become critical architecture. It denies nations the autonomy to decide how their own networks should be run, and puts them at a massive disadvantage when competing on those networks or building their own services. In exchange for giving away access to their product (and only their product) for free, Facebook gets a monopoly-level stranglehold on how information is transmitted across those regions -- and that's not just bad for the Internet as a whole, it's bad for the countries and their citizens.