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

Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#61

Post by jace »

minot wrote: post #52
rjaco31 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would be amazed by the number of webmails that still offer plain HTTP on their login page, and yet people use them. I'd say it's better than no Internet.

> and yet people use them People won't know the difference but we should. We need to find the root of the problem. So far, it seems the root of the problem is that developing nations do not have access to a fat enough pipe to the Internet backbone. Now, why do developing nations not have a fat enough pipe to the Internet backbone? What's the reason here? We should try to fix that at the same time as we try to improve…

The pipe's fat enough. There's plenty of dark fiber. It's the last mile (wireless) that isn't cheap enough yet, because telcos want to protect themselves from being turned into dumb pipes before the users arrive -- internet.org is their smart pipe card (among similar, competing plans).

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#62

Post by personjerry »

I think despite all our criticisms (especially noting that we as a community are far more aware of the consequences of net neutrality), we are missing the big picture. There is no net neutrality without the net. The idea of bringing internet access worldwide is a noble one, and though there certainly might be problems that arise in the attempt to get there, the entire Internet.org project, in my opinion, is a step forward in some fashion. Consider additionally the intentions of the project. While corporations do need to be profitable, ultimately I have the impression that Mark Zuckerberg is one of the less soulless CEOs, and I like that of all the ways he could've attempted to make more money, he chose one that has great benefits for people.

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#63

Post by patrickaljord »

madez wrote: post #15
pmontra wrote: post #6

Better than their first attempt but still not the real thing. If you want to give internet for free to some people there are no alternatives than paying them a full blown data connection with no artificial limits. I believe that my original comment of 2 weeks ago is still relevant: "Dear Mark, this open-to-ISP initiative is one way to look at what you're doing. Another one is closed-to-most-of-the-Internet. Let's tur…

Facebook is a business. Don't be naive. They don't care for poor people, they care about getting money. They are even obligated to do so. Don't expect business to solve all issues for humanity, because they won't. A government is needed to take responsability we don't want to entrust business with and to do necessary things no business wants to do, and it needs to be strong to be able to do it even if business oppose…

That's an old debate, are businesses more effective than governments at taking people out of poverty? I don't think people will ever agree on that, I believe businesses are more effective for the simple reason that they create things of value that people want to buy and work for, unlike governments.

It could also be said that although businesses primary motive is making money and not helping the poor, a politician's primary motive is getting elected and helping himself, his party, his cronies, his electors and than at the bottom of the list comes the poor. So don't be naive either in believing politicians have better motives and are more efficient at pulling the poor out of misery.

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#64

Post by _lce0 »

> We’re building an open platform and anyone who meets these guidelines will be able to participate,

They are anything but open.

They have already proven that they only care about "open" to get some traction about their new platform; once they have many people using it, they will lock down the garden.

open-graph anyone?

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#65

Post by anoncow »

madez wrote: post #15
pmontra wrote: post #6

Better than their first attempt but still not the real thing. If you want to give internet for free to some people there are no alternatives than paying them a full blown data connection with no artificial limits. I believe that my original comment of 2 weeks ago is still relevant: "Dear Mark, this open-to-ISP initiative is one way to look at what you're doing. Another one is closed-to-most-of-the-Internet. Let's tur…

Facebook is a business. Don't be naive. They don't care for poor people, they care about getting money. They are even obligated to do so. Don't expect business to solve all issues for humanity, because they won't. A government is needed to take responsability we don't want to entrust business with and to do necessary things no business wants to do, and it needs to be strong to be able to do it even if business oppose…

Since they are a business and are not obligated to do anything for the poor is precisely the reason why internet.org will harm future Zuckerbergs. Internet.org will become a gatekeeper of sorts. This eventual appstorification of the internet should be opposed in my opinion.

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#66

Post by bottled_poe »

patrickaljord wrote: post #63
madez wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is a business. Don't be naive. They don't care for poor people, they care about getting money. They are even obligated to do so. Don't expect business to solve all issues for humanity, because they won't. A government is needed to take responsability we don't want to entrust business with and to do necessary things no business wants to do, and it needs to be strong to be able to do it even if business oppose…

That's an old debate, are businesses more effective than governments at taking people out of poverty? I don't think people will ever agree on that, I believe businesses are more effective for the simple reason that they create things of value that people want to buy and work for, unlike governments. It could also be said that although businesses primary motive is making money and not helping the poor, a politician's…

> businesses are more effective for the simple reason that they create things of value that people want to buy and work for, unlike governments.

Not sure about you, but I can think of a few minor things provided by government which some people might value:

1. Social order

2. A legal system

3. Safety and security services

4. Political representation at a national level

5. An education system

6. Public transportation network

7. Medical services

It is absurd to dismiss government as having no value to society. Without government you would barely have a society.

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#67

Post by pjc50 »

macns wrote: post #60
dfabulich wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook does NOT have to follow this rule today in its zero-rated India service. https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-t... > Your service will be proxied by Internet.org. Since we cannot support SSL, TLS, or HTTPS as part of proxying, your content or service should not rely on passing or collecting encrypted information — resources that do so will not be accessible within Internet.org or will b…

> proxying for third-party sites does not allow for this in its current implementation without introducing man-in-the-middle capabilities Since they're just proxying, it makes sense to abandon encryption all together, not? I mean after all, HTTPS is supposed to protect from man-in-the-middle attacks, but aren't they themselves exactly that?

You can have HTTPS proxies which only connect to a predefined list of IPs if you want. Because this is a surveillance-value-based product, they don't want to do that.

(Given the Indian govt vs Blackberry, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they had a hand in this somewhere. Very convenient if all mass political organisation goes through unencrypted facebook...)

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#69

Post by Trombone12 »

patrickaljord wrote: post #63
madez wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is a business. Don't be naive. They don't care for poor people, they care about getting money. They are even obligated to do so. Don't expect business to solve all issues for humanity, because they won't. A government is needed to take responsability we don't want to entrust business with and to do necessary things no business wants to do, and it needs to be strong to be able to do it even if business oppose…

That's an old debate, are businesses more effective than governments at taking people out of poverty? I don't think people will ever agree on that, I believe businesses are more effective for the simple reason that they create things of value that people want to buy and work for, unlike governments. It could also be said that although businesses primary motive is making money and not helping the poor, a politician's…

I agree that (some) people will probably never agree on the government vs private enterprise debate, but I will point out that prior to the welfare state and world war 2 wealth inequality was either high or growing rapidly: these are the historical facts.

So from history we learn that private enterprise reduces relative poverty primarily by destroying the capital of the wealthiest, not by distributing or generating wealth in the poorest part of the population.

Also to claim that governments that produces such things as the law, education systems, and national defence have no valuable products is a bit odd.

Re: Facebook Opens Internet․Org to All Developers Due to Net Neutrality Concerns

#70

Post by diafygi »

userbinator wrote: post #56
dfabulich wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook does NOT have to follow this rule today in its zero-rated India service. https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-t... > Your service will be proxied by Internet.org. Since we cannot support SSL, TLS, or HTTPS as part of proxying, your content or service should not rely on passing or collecting encrypted information — resources that do so will not be accessible within Internet.org or will b…

so anybody can read my email unencrypted or even send email as me For webmail login it'd be a problem, but email is almost always sent over the Internet in plaintext; those who want encryption and authentication will be using something like PGP.

No, the vast majority uses opportunistic encryption in transit.

http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/saferemail/

Post reply on HN