Internet.org is in clear violation of net neutrality and zuckerberg is trying to fool people.well does he want to do charity?do one thing.give at least 500mb 3g data free for all and foot the bill for it.now isn't that how charity works?
About Internet.org and net neutrality
51–60 of 77 posts
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#52Here's the full reply from India's SaveTheInternet.in coalition exposing Facebook's chicanery --> http://www.hindustantimes.com/technology-topstories/mr-zucke... This piece can be instructive and useful to others in US/Europe & any country where such deceptive zerorated plans are trying to make their way in. Be it of FB or anyone else. Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made…
Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made free for the poor. We're saying poor Indians should have access to the same full open globally-connected internet as we all take for granted. And that free & fair competition will & should take care of things like access on the cheap, sachet-mktg etc. (...) As of today on my Vodafone India plan I can get a 2G plan starting for 22¢. I ag…
You are right. The problem is with the telcos they are partnering with. The spectrum belongs to the public and the license was given with conditions and expectations of good faith (such as neutrality).
Facebook can build a wired network with only FB/Whatsapp available on it. No license required and no expectations of neutrality (they still shouldn't call it an "internet connection" though). It's not the Internet if links don't work or one link costs more than another. The telco can charge for data, the website can charge for its content. The telco should NOT charge a link based on its destination.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#53Internet.org is in clear violation of net neutrality and zuckerberg is trying to fool people.well does he want to do charity?do one thing.give at least 500mb 3g data free for all and foot the bill for it.now isn't that how charity works?
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#54It seems most people here are against this because of Facebook's (or other service providers') gain from it, but no one is arguing against Mark's actual point: "some access is better than none at all", which I think is more important. Internet.org may not succeed at the end, because of the conflict of interests in many parties (corporate and political) involved in its running. But the idea of providing limited access…
> "some access is better than none at all" Not really. Mark said that governments and telcos decide which services go on internet.org Do you really want the government (or even your telco) deciding which news source that the poor (who are easily influenced) read? Leaving aside the preservation of competition, government deciding what news services to provide to the poor has huge political ramifications, especially wh…
the poor (who are easily influenced)
Thanks for making plain what others are implicitly saying. The arguments against zero-rating in general always seem to be based on the argument that the poor are stupid and as their superior, we know better. Paternalism at its finest.
In the case of Internet.org, I agree that the name is misleading bordering on fraud, and shouldn't be allowed. But besides that, how about letting people choose if they prefer to pay for full Internet access?
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#55Here's the full reply from India's SaveTheInternet.in coalition exposing Facebook's chicanery --> http://www.hindustantimes.com/technology-topstories/mr-zucke... This piece can be instructive and useful to others in US/Europe & any country where such deceptive zerorated plans are trying to make their way in. Be it of FB or anyone else. Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made…
Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made free for the poor. We're saying poor Indians should have access to the same full open globally-connected internet as we all take for granted. And that free & fair competition will & should take care of things like access on the cheap, sachet-mktg etc. (...) As of today on my Vodafone India plan I can get a 2G plan starting for 22¢. I ag…
it's not a superior vs inferior product. This was just an example to show that telcos are making money at the entry level too & they should (screenshot - http://i.imgur.com/gpsgRLh.png). This data plan has nothing to do with FB or internet.org.
Just a 2G data plan that I can use to surf any site. Fb/internet.org on the other hand is free to users & paid for (or howsoever they do it), decided by a secret cabal behind the scenes between telcos/FB/govt bodies (mark's words) and whoever else is monopolistic enough to be at the table.
Perhaps I didn't understand your question?
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#56Here's the full reply from India's SaveTheInternet.in coalition exposing Facebook's chicanery --> http://www.hindustantimes.com/technology-topstories/mr-zucke... This piece can be instructive and useful to others in US/Europe & any country where such deceptive zerorated plans are trying to make their way in. Be it of FB or anyone else. Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made…
> Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made free for the poor. We're saying poor Indians should have access to the same full open globally-connected internet as we all take for granted. And that free & fair competition will & should take care of things like access on the cheap, sachet-mktg etc.
To be honest you are not offering an alternative to Zuck's expanding coverage, you are offering the status quo which for a person without any internet sucks. You can claim Zuck's plan is corrupting and should be stopped for that reason alone but I doubt you'd find agreement from the people who don't have any access under your system but would get limited access under Zuck's system.
The idea of net neutrality grew out of common carrier ideas, most similarly to the telcos. You could pick up your phone you can call basically anyone, it costs the same as anyone else you called in the same location... except some companies could set up toll free numbers to make it a little bit easier to call them. That analogy seems to work strongly for what FB is doing here.
The fact that FB and Bing are paying for "toll free numbers" would make a lot of other businesses like Google do the same. The competition would tend to lower prices as if 90% of the traffic on the telco lines are subsidized by BigCo's they only need to charge 10% for the remainder. In this instance it all seems like a net good from the expanding access angle.
edit: nileshtrivedi's comment below[1] has a much stronger argument against Zuck's plan:
The spectrum belongs to the public and the license was given with conditions and expectations of good faith (such as neutrality).
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9393040
So that seems fairly cut and dried, if those are the conditions for the spectrum license and it seems reasonable that they are. Still we could consider whether the greater good of expanded access might outweigh the benefits of strict net neutrality and the answer to that might not be the same everywhere. It might be interesting to see how full internet access develops in two similar neighboring areas with completely different regulatory regimes here.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made free for the poor. We're saying poor Indians should have access to the same full open globally-connected internet as we all take for granted. And that free & fair competition will & should take care of things like access on the cheap, sachet-mktg etc. (...) As of today on my Vodafone India plan I can get a 2G plan starting for 22¢. I ag…
it's not a superior vs inferior product. This was just an example to show that telcos are making money at the entry level too & they should (screenshot - http://i.imgur.com/gpsgRLh.png ). This data plan has nothing to do with FB or internet.org. Just a 2G data plan that I can use to surf any site. Fb/internet.org on the other hand is free to users & paid for (or howsoever they do it), decided by a secret cabal behind…
I'm saying that FB/Internet.org is an inferior product (since it's limited to a few services) in the same market as the Vodafone plan, which only costs a few cents more. If so, then what's the problem? FB/Internet.org will likely just fail to attract any significant number of users.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#58Here's the full reply from India's SaveTheInternet.in coalition exposing Facebook's chicanery --> http://www.hindustantimes.com/technology-topstories/mr-zucke... This piece can be instructive and useful to others in US/Europe & any country where such deceptive zerorated plans are trying to make their way in. Be it of FB or anyone else. Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made…
Zuck wants a walled-garden version of internet (with FB as gatekeeper) to be made free for the poor. We're saying poor Indians should have access to the same full open globally-connected internet as we all take for granted. And that free & fair competition will & should take care of things like access on the cheap, sachet-mktg etc. (...) As of today on my Vodafone India plan I can get a 2G plan starting for 22¢. I ag…
"You must be on the Reliance network to use Internet.org. If you'd like to access these websites for free, use a SIM card from Reliance" --
What I see when I visit internet.org from my wired & wireless, non-Reliance telco.
Think of this as FB passing off 'free AOL CDs in the mail' as The Internet in India for millions of first timers who are getting sub-$100 smartphones, using poor villagers--& benevolent Wikipedia to provide covering fire.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#59[deleted]
In Mark's world, Email is not an "essential service" but Messenger is: http://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-now-available...
That's the biggest problem to me here. We're not even talking about the Internet, we're talking about the web. The web is wonderful and its simplicity has allowed it to grow where it is today, but it's not the only way to use the internet and, most importantly, it's not the hammer that hits all nails. I fear this is the greatest threat in the long term.
Re: About Internet.org and net neutrality
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's not a superior vs inferior product. This was just an example to show that telcos are making money at the entry level too & they should (screenshot - http://i.imgur.com/gpsgRLh.png ). This data plan has nothing to do with FB or internet.org. Just a 2G data plan that I can use to surf any site. Fb/internet.org on the other hand is free to users & paid for (or howsoever they do it), decided by a secret cabal behind…
I'm saying that FB/Internet.org is an inferior product (since it's limited to a few services) in the same market as the Vodafone plan, which only costs a few cents more. If so, then what's the problem? FB/Internet.org will likely just fail to attract any significant number of users.
The problem is akin to being a frog in the well.
Millions of first-time internet users will be onboarded (using shady mktg techniques - that's just how things work on the ground where it gets real dirty) onto free flavors of handpicked services.
They have no idea of real internet. Please see the very first link I posted which gives our full reply. It answers your Qn in depth.