4 ms·

I don't know what Zuckerberg has in mind, but in India at least, there have been literally a million[1] mails sent to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

by vshan 11y ago

I don't know what Zuckerberg has in mind, but in India at least, there have been literally a million[1] mails sent to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in favour of Net Neutrality: and hence India has taken a negative stance on Internet.org, since it sets a wrong precedent. So yeah, we don't need first world people to speak for us saying how it's helping the poor and stuff. If they are so interested in connecting the poor, then they can just allocate a certain amount of data for consumption rather than act as gatekeepers. Also, Facebook is a corporation aiming to increase their shareholders money. Why would anybody trust them with Internet.org? Wikipedia is non-profit, so it's fine with me if it's offered for free. [1] : http://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/news/trai-receives-over-1-million-petitions-on-net-neutrality-685028 http://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/news/trai-receives-over-1-m...

mkagenius 11y ago
> So yeah, we don't need first world people to speak for us saying how it's helping the poor and stuff. Let the poor speak. Oh wait they can't access internet!
- vshan 11y ago
  http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-NOJGZZ6TTDS001-4G6MDSDMUTIQH0QD5LU8ULP33P http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-NOJGZZ6TTDS00... Please read.
- sanmon3186 11y ago
  Free access to Facebook wouldn't help 3rd world speak for itself. Poor are the products here and not free Facebook. Bill/Melinda Gates received one of the highest civilian award[1] in India this year, and people wholeheartedly supported it as far as I know. [1] http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/01/28/bill-and-melinda-gates-receive-indian-civilian-award/ http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/01/28/bill-and-melin...
nomercy400 11y ago
1 million emails out of 1.2 billion people is 0.08% of the people. I wouldn't be impressed.
- vshan 11y ago
  Keep in mind that only 19%[1] of Indian population is connected to the internet, and regardless of the percentages involved, it still means that over 1 million people went out of their way and claimed their rights. [1]: http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users-by-country/ http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users-by-country/
zorked 11y ago
This is so right. It's not that the rich countries can't do anything to help, but that they are so often clueless in their approach. Internet.org is one such example even if you assume it's well-meaning. This reminds me of all the ridiculous cheap laptops for the Third World projects - all of which completely failed. Meanwhile the factories in China keep churning out ever-cheaper laptops and phones which are having a real impact without any of the grandiose talk about Helping The Poor. Cheaper laptops work. Laptops with hand-cranks because The Poor Don't Have Electricity don't. Internet.org is at best the Internet with a hand-crank. It's not even a step towards solving the problem.
- imakesnowflakes 11y ago
  And I wonder what the problem is exactly? Getting internet to the poor? How about the mobile network providers first stop robbing them blind with numerous scams and offers with hidden costs and ambiguous claims? "New offer! Reduce your call charge to .9 Rs per 60 seconds when when you charge[1] for 350 Rs". --Charges with 350 Rs.-- "Congratulations. Now you just need to charge again to enjoy the offer you just paid 350 Rs for!!" Yes, that is the kind of exploitation that can happen with things like this, and there is not one damn thing that the poor can do about it. [1]. Around here in India, "Charging" refers to adding prepaid talk time to a mobile connection often by purchasing a coupon.
  - briandear 11y ago
    This is sort of veering off topic, but it does seem appropriate to mention in this context.. They have similar nonsense in Mexico, Carlos Slim (incidentally the majority shareholder of the NY Times) make billions off of the backs of the poor in Mexico. The cell phone costs in Mexico are more expensive than in the US. So when adjusted by purchasing power, cell phones represent a huge financial burden on those least able to afford it but most likely to need it (due to decayed or non-existent telecom infrastructure in many parts of the country.) If you want to see the effects of limiting competition (especially on the poor), Mexico is a case study. Before the Downvote Brigade starts naming Telcel competitors, one must remember that Carlos had an over 5 year monopoly on telecoms in Mexico before other market entrants were allowed to join the market, so essentially Carlos Slim and Co. were able to own the market before they had to compete, however by the time competition happened, they had a massive head start. Slim also owns/controls Telmex giving him almost total control of the internet infrastructure (and land lines) as well as cellular infrastructure. Mexico is a place where your cell phone plan might include "5 SMS messages a month" as part of your plan. That's right, 5. There's a reason WhatsApp just went nuts down there.
rsync 11y ago
"I don't know what Zuckerberg has in mind" Then you need to purchase and read the excellent book _The Master Switch_ by Tim Wu. It is a book length answer to your specific question.

by vshan 11y ago

mkagenius 11y ago

> So yeah, we don't need first world people to speak for us saying how it's helping the poor and stuff. Let the poor speak. Oh wait they can't access internet!

vshan 11y ago
http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-NOJGZZ6TTDS001-4G6MDSDMUTIQH0QD5LU8ULP33P http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-NOJGZZ6TTDS00... Please read.
sanmon3186 11y ago
Free access to Facebook wouldn't help 3rd world speak for itself. Poor are the products here and not free Facebook. Bill/Melinda Gates received one of the highest civilian award[1] in India this year, and people wholeheartedly supported it as far as I know. [1] http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/01/28/bill-and-melinda-gates-receive-indian-civilian-award/ http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/01/28/bill-and-melin...

nomercy400 11y ago

1 million emails out of 1.2 billion people is 0.08% of the people. I wouldn't be impressed.

vshan 11y ago
Keep in mind that only 19%[1] of Indian population is connected to the internet, and regardless of the percentages involved, it still means that over 1 million people went out of their way and claimed their rights. [1]: http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users-by-country/ http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users-by-country/

zorked 11y ago

This is so right. It's not that the rich countries can't do anything to help, but that they are so often clueless in their approach. Internet.org is one such example even if you assume it's well-meaning. This reminds me of all the ridiculous cheap laptops for the Third World projects - all of which completely failed. Meanwhile the factories in China keep churning out ever-cheaper laptops and phones which are having a real impact without any of the grandiose talk about Helping The Poor. Cheaper laptops work. Laptops with hand-cranks because The Poor Don't Have Electricity don't. Internet.org is at best the Internet with a hand-crank. It's not even a step towards solving the problem.

imakesnowflakes 11y ago
And I wonder what the problem is exactly? Getting internet to the poor? How about the mobile network providers first stop robbing them blind with numerous scams and offers with hidden costs and ambiguous claims? "New offer! Reduce your call charge to .9 Rs per 60 seconds when when you charge[1] for 350 Rs". --Charges with 350 Rs.-- "Congratulations. Now you just need to charge again to enjoy the offer you just paid 350 Rs for!!" Yes, that is the kind of exploitation that can happen with things like this, and there is not one damn thing that the poor can do about it. [1]. Around here in India, "Charging" refers to adding prepaid talk time to a mobile connection often by purchasing a coupon.
- briandear 11y ago
  This is sort of veering off topic, but it does seem appropriate to mention in this context.. They have similar nonsense in Mexico, Carlos Slim (incidentally the majority shareholder of the NY Times) make billions off of the backs of the poor in Mexico. The cell phone costs in Mexico are more expensive than in the US. So when adjusted by purchasing power, cell phones represent a huge financial burden on those least able to afford it but most likely to need it (due to decayed or non-existent telecom infrastructure in many parts of the country.) If you want to see the effects of limiting competition (especially on the poor), Mexico is a case study. Before the Downvote Brigade starts naming Telcel competitors, one must remember that Carlos had an over 5 year monopoly on telecoms in Mexico before other market entrants were allowed to join the market, so essentially Carlos Slim and Co. were able to own the market before they had to compete, however by the time competition happened, they had a massive head start. Slim also owns/controls Telmex giving him almost total control of the internet infrastructure (and land lines) as well as cellular infrastructure. Mexico is a place where your cell phone plan might include "5 SMS messages a month" as part of your plan. That's right, 5. There's a reason WhatsApp just went nuts down there.

rsync 11y ago

"I don't know what Zuckerberg has in mind" Then you need to purchase and read the excellent book _The Master Switch_ by Tim Wu. It is a book length answer to your specific question.