3 ms·
Yes, it gives away free access of 38 sites. But by doing so, they also encourage more people to forgo purchasing complete internet plans and hence accessing all
by Tinyyy 12y ago
Yes, it gives away free access of 38 sites. But by doing so, they also encourage more people to forgo purchasing complete internet plans and hence accessing all of the other millions of websites out there. This indirectly drives traffic to this 38 sites that they’ve picked through a very skewed and opaque process, and undermines the concept of net neutrality.
- froo 12y agoThere is no such thing as a free lunch. This is simply an example of this in effect. If people want full internet access.. pay for it. There is no story here.
- detaro 12y agoI think the worry is about the other direction. Want to offer something to people who only pay for this limited access? Then you better don't do anything these sites don't like, because you have to use them to communicate with your customers (unless you are already big and powerful enough to negotiate such deals yourself)
- dingaling 12y agoBut people won't know there is "full" Internet access, or will be unable to justify the cost versus making do with the "free 38". At present in the UK my monthly broadband connection costs just over one day of minimum-wage salary. Or nearly a week of groceries. I can see how easily that could be seen as a worthwhile saving for people on low incomes.
- adventured 12y agoIs your theory that, people who can already afford to buy such access, will now not want to buy access to the rest of the Web / Internet - despite the value proposition offered by that?