Facebook completes construction of first full-scale aircraft, Aquila [video]

Post by nostalgiac » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 10:35 AM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #43

baddox wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because internet.org's proxy server gives Facebook monopsonic control over the internet. You mean control over the internet access they're providing, that otherwise doesn't exist?

Are you okay with Comcast doing IP shaping and charging Netflix? If Comcast didn't exist, internet access wouldn't exist for many people. That's why it's a false dichotomy. Internet.org could very easily be rate and data capped alternatives. >connect the two thirds of the world that doesn’t have internet access. -Internet.org This would give them monopsonic control over the internet.

Post by eric-hu » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 10:57 AM UTC

roymurdock wrote: post #45

There's an interesting phenomenon where people in developing countries begin to think that Facebook is the full extent of the internet: Indonesians surveyed by Galpaya told her that they didn’t use the internet. But in focus groups, they would talk enthusiastically about how much time they spent on Facebook. Galpaya, a researcher (and now CEO) with LIRNEasia, a think tank, called Rohan Samarajiva, her boss at the tim…

Post by czzarr » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 12:56 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #78

dylanjermiah wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some internet > no internet

That isn't true. One of the reasons why France tends to be a bit behind in all things internet even today is that they had 'minitel', a system that wasn't quite the whole internet (it was information services reachable by phone using a custom terminal with the prestel protocol). It worked so well that they didn't replace their system with the internet when it became available and as a result have been playing catch-u…

Post by mseebach » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 1:07 PM UTC

eric-hu wrote: post #101

mseebach wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the telcos that build pretty much the full entirety of the "last-mile" internet as we know it today can not but trusted in the least to be at all involved in any new last mile provisions what so ever. We (fairly rich, definitely reasonably connected, people) cannot allow the third world to enjoy something as humiliating as imperfect internet (to a standard we barely enjoy ourselves, however immensely beneficial…

I think I agree with your view, but the sarcasm in your post threw me for a loop. I'm not sure what point you want me to walk away with.

Post by robocat » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 1:42 PM UTC

czzarr wrote: post #106

jacquesm wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't true. One of the reasons why France tends to be a bit behind in all things internet even today is that they had 'minitel', a system that wasn't quite the whole internet (it was information services reachable by phone using a custom terminal with the prestel protocol). It worked so well that they didn't replace their system with the internet when it became available and as a result have been playing catch-u…

Actually France is far ahead of the US in its internet coverage, at a much lower price.