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

231–240 of 243 posts

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

#231

Post by mrow84 »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #129
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…

Exactly this. It is downright appalling every time I see someone from a place of privilege declare what's best for the unprivileged. All this vitriol against FreeBasics is exactly that. Until I see a mass of extremely poor indians with no internet access reject FreeBasics because they don't want facebook to have their "data", all this hate is just self-serving bluster in my eyes.

Do you think that there are no issues with information asymmetry between Facebook and the people who they are trying to co-opt into their programme?

You appear to believe that the motivations of the Internet-literate about the consequences of Facebook's programme are more nefarious than the motivations of Facebook itself, which is contractually bound to operate in the interests of its shareholders.

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

#232

Post by everly »

prostoalex wrote: post #131
everly wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found that using AOL to make this analogy is helpful in explaining the issues with free basics (and net neutrality in general) to non-technical folks. For example, many people have experience with parents who think the only way to receive their email is by logging in through AOL's desktop application, installed on their Windows computer.

The way that story played out is that people hooked on AOL validated the concept and paved the way for broadband and Web as we know it, so not sure how it's illustrative of the issues with Internet.org.

That's a fair point. Another way that it played out is that people like my parents were under the impression they still had to pay $9.99/month for AOL email as recently as like 2 years ago.

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

#233

Post by hackinthebochs »

BlackFly wrote: post #208
hackinthebochs wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. It is downright appalling every time I see someone from a place of privilege declare what's best for the unprivileged. All this vitriol against FreeBasics is exactly that. Until I see a mass of extremely poor indians with no internet access reject FreeBasics because they don't want facebook to have their "data", all this hate is just self-serving bluster in my eyes.

So what you are saying is that this article is worthless because it doesn't contain anecdotal opinions of the people who would be served? Going back in history, there were plenty of woman during the suffrage who stood up and proclaimed they should not be given the vote. Further back, there were plenty of abused wives who proclaimed they should not be allowed to divorce their husbands. Further back, there were plenty…

The critical difference is that those fighting for suffrage were fighting to increase women's choices. Any woman who thought women shouldn't vote was free to not vote. In this case, people are lobbying to prevent people from having the choice.

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

#234

Post by vaishaksuresh »

sidthekid wrote: post #203
vaishaksuresh wrote: post #104

For the people arguing that rich people are preventing the poor from getting internet access, please read about the Nestlé baby formula scandal. This is exactly the same thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestlé_boycott#Baby_milk_issue

It is somewhat similar because the long-term effects were malicious/not known in the short term. But its not exactly the same because anyone can switch internet carriers at any time (nobody gets medically tied to Free Basics). 'Facebook addiction' isn't as objectively proven as the side effects mentioned in the article. 'Tracking usage data and privacy snooping' isn't as harmful as the side effects mentioned, because…

>But its not exactly the same because anyone can switch internet carriers at any time (nobody gets medically tied to Free Basics)

Given how there is no alternative, it is pretty much facebook or nothing.

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

#235

Post by Lawtonfogle »

tobtoh wrote: post #213
tim333 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> farmers...illiterate, exploited by higher-ups... millions ...would have been much better spent by actually donating that money to the farmers One of the things you might hope for connecting them is they could educate themselves, organise and fight back against being exploited. Maybe their kids can go online if they are illiterate themselves. That kind of thing is more likely to improve conditions than a modest amou…

Actually it doesn't. There has been quite a bit of research and the most effective form of charity to improve conditions is through direct cash transfers. Basically, the recipient is the best positioned to identify what will help them improve, not some well meaning remote do-gooder. Ref: 1. http://www.givewell.org/international/technical/programs/cas... 2. http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/alliancehpsr_dfidevidencepa.…

Is there any measure of how advertising affects this?

For example, there are many in the US who are poor, but who often do not allocate the money in ways that serve their best interests, but this may largely be the result of advertisers manipulating what people think is in their best interest. But for the world's poorest, they don't have enough to be worth the investment to inundate with advertisements, so they may have better ability to decide what is in their own best interests.

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

#236

Post by fleitz »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #212
fleitz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Umm... free internet/basics/walled garden is an additional choice... Not sure how free basics reduces choice.

If you don't know what real shrimp tastes and you are force fed surimi during a massive disinformation campaign that tells surimi is all shrimp you need, would you call that a choice?

I dunno but I can tell you that if I was an indentured servant I would under no circumstances accept a free lobster dinner more than thrice a week.

I hear that Facebook employees don't even have such minimal guarantees as indentured servants who could reasonably expect to bw offered something other than lobster at least 4 times a week.

Zuck has brainwashed people to such a degree that they think this 'lobster' is actually good food.

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

#237

Post by ecobiker »

tim333 wrote: post #200
ecobiker wrote: post #47

I'm personally disappointed by the comments in this article and others, specifically from people here in the Western world, that portray the fight by the internet activists as a fight against internet access to the poor. No one would make arguments like that here. Almost everyone rallied behind Net-Neutrality. Why is that it's ok for the poor to give up their liberty because they can get something of value in return?…

It's ok for the poor to 'give up their' liberty by using crappy free internet in the same way it's ok for me to 'give up my liberty' by watching crappy free TV. It's not perfect but it's not the end of the world either.

http://www.theopeninter.net/

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

#238

Post by kinj28 »

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,…

people who have no access to wifi or 3G internet would be the most likely users of free basics. And infrastructure in form of pathetic internet connectivity in form of 2g or edge or even gprs would be the given. Heartening thing I would look up to is if this would compel telcos to improve infra

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

#239

Post by tim333 »

ecobiker wrote: post #237
tim333 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ok for the poor to 'give up their' liberty by using crappy free internet in the same way it's ok for me to 'give up my liberty' by watching crappy free TV. It's not perfect but it's not the end of the world either.

http://www.theopeninter.net/

Though the Indian situation isn't really like that, being charged for access to certain services. It's more crappy internet for $0/month or open access for like $5/month. I'm not convinced banning the $0 option helps the people you take that choice from.

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

#240

Post by rubberstamp »

First of all, this is not "free internet" they are trying to provide. Second point - if they were trying to genuinely provide a free internet service, nothing is stoping them from doing it without all the legalise TOS that surrounds it at the moment. Third point - Free 200MB or 500MB data per month for each person is the best way to do it(no video streaming/big files download), if "helping" was the actual intention. If the only services that is accessible through it will be the ones approved by facebook, stop calling it "free internet".

Also the cost of providing the service is on the ISP/carrier that FB ties up with.

The key factor that is glossed over is:

> Though the programme is promoted by Facebook, its costs are borne by the mobile-telecoms operators.

I was all for facebook basics when I thought Facebook was paying for poor people to access at least some restricted internet access. But its actually the operators that are paying for this. Giving away free access to some sites in a walled garden, hoping those same users will pay to access other sites at some points.

So Facebook is just a beneficiary in all of this. Getting new users at no cost. Taking the credit for it, while operators are actually paying the bills.

Post reply on HN