Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 243 posts

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#51

Post by vthallam »

sremani wrote: post #42

What humors me most is that no one is up in arms against Reliance. On top of it, no one is suggesting Reliance whose owner is a billionaire long before Zukerberg was, to give free interwebs to his fellow Indians. India has 80% adults with no access to Interwebs, how are you going to solve this problem in next 5 years? *Do not tell me INR 20 dataplan, I know its there and I would not wish it on my worst enemy.

You could solve this problem if the govt provides more spectrum to the telco companies and in turn ask them to subsidize it to the poor. In this day and age, its not tough to do it. Just because it's tough, you would not want to accept some unfair offering.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#52

Post by stevenwliao »

kuschku wrote: post #23
mr_luc wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not in the same way at all. Google Fiber is real internet; 'free internet basics' are an attempt to turn the internet into a walled garden.

> Google Fiber is real internet Minus the things their ToS forbids. Only recently they started allowing you to host game servers, for Minecraft, for example. Their Fiber team heavily opposes Net Neutrality, too. Sadly.

As stated, the Google Fiber restrictions seem more like a QoS and bandwidth concern rather than a content concern.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#53

Post by zanny »

mwsherman wrote: post #38

There is a remarkable disconnect between the critics and the users here. Note that no users were cited in the article. I understand not liking Facebook’s motives, that’s fine. Perhaps we can defer to the preferences of users here, who can choose to accept those motives or not, and to decide if the trade-off is an acceptable one. If we believe that they are unqualified to make this choice, one should explain that posi…

How is a poor Indian citizen supposed to make a judgment on if having a locked down Internet where they can only use Facebook is better than this Internet they might not have even heard of with millions of websites? They only see one side of this argument if any at all. From their perspective they do not know alternatives even exist.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#54

Post by vthallam »

petke wrote: post #45
gearoidoc wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess because it leads to "full" internet subscription which generates revenue (assumedly profits) for them.

This makes a big difference to me. I was actually for Facebook basics, when I thought Facebook picked up the bill so that poor people could access at least some internet. But if the operators are paying for this ... then what value is Facebook actually providing?

They say they provide the platform and guidelines and works with telcos across the world. But it's not a convincing answer to a normal user. Thing is, if FB can do it, certainly Google and other major companies can do it.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#55

Post by zanny »

icebraining wrote: post #37
amelius wrote: post #12

Data infrastructure should be controlled by the government only. Why? Well, imagine that every transport company had to support their own road network... Alternatively, imagine that one company controlled the roads, creating effectively a controlled market nested inside a free market.

Except fiber cables are not at all like roads, in that you can run dozens side by side in less space than a single water pipe. And for the same reason, the companies vs government dichotomy is invalid here as well. Even if we want to provide a public service to avoid private monopolization, there's absolutely no reason to forbid private companies from competing with it. After all, if the problem is that private compa…

It is still hugely expensive to have redundant infrastructure, and that has real economic consequence to a country who decides to have private companies lay their own independent wires than at least compelling price controlled renting of those lines.

But there is the other side of the equation that matters too. If you have complete government control there is no more market pressure on innovation at all. Nobody would have a reason to develop faster consumer fiber systems since there is no money to be made.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#57

Post by lunula »

harveywi wrote: post #40
devindotcom wrote: post #15

Personally, I believe Zuckerberg is sincere in wanting to connect everyone in the world with each other. However, I believe he is also sincere in thinking that Facebook is the best and perhaps only platform by which this is possible. In this he is sincerely mistaken. I feel sure he doesn't think of it as a land grab, even privately. But he is looking from the inside out. If he wants to be seen as the Great Connector,…

Personally, I believe Zuckerberg is sincere in wanting to connect everyone in the world with each other. I feel sure he doesn't think of it as a land grab Does anyone recall what Zuckerberg said about the people who "trust him"?

Apparently we shouldn't mention this here because he said it when he was young and likely to say reprehensible things.

But, has he ever apologized?

I am discontent to watch the world lay power at his feet, and proud of Indians for standing up to him.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#58

Post by vthallam »

tokai wrote: post #32
beccasanchez wrote: post #4

Even though it's obviously a land grab... no one other than massive corporations is capable or willing to provide this. I don't like it either, but that's how corporatocracy works. Might as well fight against gravity.

Humanity have a long and distinct history of fighting against gravity.

Exactly! That too, a democracy like India would never approve something so capitalistic with a pro-poor cover.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#59

Post by sremani »

vthallam wrote: post #51
sremani wrote: post #42

What humors me most is that no one is up in arms against Reliance. On top of it, no one is suggesting Reliance whose owner is a billionaire long before Zukerberg was, to give free interwebs to his fellow Indians. India has 80% adults with no access to Interwebs, how are you going to solve this problem in next 5 years? *Do not tell me INR 20 dataplan, I know its there and I would not wish it on my worst enemy.

You could solve this problem if the govt provides more spectrum to the telco companies and in turn ask them to subsidize it to the poor. In this day and age, its not tough to do it. Just because it's tough, you would not want to accept some unfair offering.

So why is it not being done? From my previous life spent in India, government subsidies are guaranteed income for politically connected.

Re: Facebook's “free internet” programme hits a roadblock in India

#60

Post by forgottenpass »

click170 wrote: post #33
oxide wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Personally, I believe Zuckerberg is sincere in wanting to connect everyone in the world with each other. >I feel sure he doesn't think of it as a land grab, even privately. why?

I can't speak for op but I agree with them and can explain why I feel that way. I believe most humans are inherently not evil even if they don't agree with me. They want to make the world a better place, and they are simply pursuing an agenda that accomplishes that in their eyes. I don't have any evidence that most people aren't evil, but in my day to day interactions I have yet to meet someone who I believe is since…

I believe most humans are inherently not evil even if they don't agree with me.

I believe most people are incapable of recognizing well-intentioned but bad actions when they agree with the intentions. Even when you don't agree with the intentions, it's can still be hard to spot without the benefit of hindsight.

Should you fault someone for being the change they want to see in the world?

"Fault" is quite a slippery word to use in this context. As it means both a failing of character and responsibility for wrongdoing.

Obviously with the second definition it's easy to fault someone when you see their actions as wrongdoing.

With the first it's mixed, and I suspect that's the one you mean. Someone who is "being the change they want to see in the world" is seen as virtuous. But when that virtuous person is also too headstrong to see, acknowledge, and correct the negatives of their plans when they encounter well-articulated resistance? Yes, I would very much fault that person.

Post reply on HN