If internet.org were to succeed, it will be SO interesting to see all the fun hacks that are created to proxy through the whitelisted sites.
About Internet.org and net neutrality
11–20 of 77 posts
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#12I am not a Facebook user (let's say, the reason is x) so can't comment there, but he seems to be avoiding the main question. He was asked why "Facebook gets to chose which services will be available" to which he replied "telcos do, not Facebook", but the spirit of the question remains unanswered. Why telcos? How does that not conflict with net-neutrality?
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#13Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#14So what are the people who are pulling from internet.org proposing? Are they supplying more open internet? Are they providing access to these people/locations to all websites? Are they doing ANYTHING?
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#15There is a lot of double-speak in this post by Zuckerberg. And it starts with a thinly veiled "think of the children". He talks about "basic Internet services", not clarifying that this is only access to a few sites, including Facebook, and says they respect net neutrality. As if those two things were not contradictory. To me this feels like it is about a market grab, camouflage, probably even to himself, as a humanitarian effort.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#16> Net neutrality ensures network operators don’t discriminate by limiting access to services you want to use.
Internet.org provides some services for free and other services... not at all. That certainly sounds like "limiting access" to me. He's saying they don't limit access to other services since you can keep paying for them exactly as you are now... which is exactly the same as the argument that speeding up traffic from some sources doesn't hurt anyone, since it's not like they're slowing down traffic from others; you can keep getting it exactly as you are now.
This is what net neutrality is all about. How can a non-free service compete on a level playing field with a privileged, free service (of which Facebook is one, naturally)?
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#17[deleted]
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#18[deleted]
In Mark's world, Email is not an "essential service" but Messenger is: http://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-now-available...
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#19Quick, someone develop a way to tunnel any website through Facebook. :)
Maybe disguise the http traffic as seemingly legit FB conversations and/or media.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#20There is a lot of double-speak in this post by Zuckerberg. And it starts with a thinly veiled "think of the children". He talks about "basic Internet services", not clarifying that this is only access to a few sites, including Facebook, and says they respect net neutrality. As if those two things were not contradictory. To me this feels like it is about a market grab, camouflage, probably even to himself, as a humani…
It's a sneaky ploy to become to gatekeeper. How come e-mail isn't a "basic internet service" but FB Messenger is?
Internet.org is neither the Internet nor a .org.