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

India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

blog.savetheinternet.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 224 posts

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#141

Post by tzs »

cmadan wrote: post #4
dingo_bat wrote: post #3

>Two key aspects of the Net Neutrality consultation that remain: firstly, the proposed requirement for providers of VoIP services like Whatsapp, Viber and Skype to obtain a government licence, which would mean that telecom operators could be required to treat traffic from unlicensed VoIP providers differently from the rest, and secondly, allowing telecom operators the ability to slow down and speed up websites, givin…

Its a step in the right direction. TRAI was only deciding on differential pricing not slow/fast lanes and currently no ISPs are implementing slow/fast lanes whereas differential pricing (i.e. free plans for Facebook, Whatsapp, their own shitty apps etc) were all over.

So does this mean Wikipedia Zero will have to be shut down in India?

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#142

Post by splintercell »

unprepare wrote: post #138
splintercell wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And you think enabling tens of millions of people to access these resources will make them....worse? Nope, just saying that non-English Indian language internet sucks. Yes it gets better when more and more people are using it, but that still doesn't change the fact that millions of people currently don't have internet in a form which they can use to make their lives better. > What do you say to the Indian coder who…

So you are working under the assumption that without the aid of Facebook et al, India will cease developing internet connectivity? Frankly, I dont see a scenario where the third world remains unconnected through 2030, including India. There is much profit to be made connecting Billions (with a b) of people to the world economy; far too much profit that something as insignificant as running cable will forever keep the…

> So you are working under the assumption that without the aid of Facebook et al, India will cease developing internet connectivity? Nope, not at all. If I took half of all your wealth, does that mean you'd now be completely poor? No, you'd be poorer and it will harm you.

Even though the poor in India will eventually get Internet (let's hope so) now they will get Internet a lot later and a lot fewer of them would it.

I was lucky enough to get Internet access during the 1990s in India, but there are so many people I wish had Internet. I don't expect them all to become techies like me, but I definitely think it will make their lives a LOT better rather than waiting for the government to do something.

This is what government's services gets you (it's a link to a Hindi comedy show from 1990s which satirizes how many years you had to wait to get a telephone line).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i132W_iOKu0

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#143

Post by kamaal »

splintercell wrote: post #140
kamaal wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Same thing you're going to say to that 18 year old kid in the year 2030 whose life could have been different had he lived in a more connected India. There is a patient suffering from a heart disease, medicine arrives in a few days. You seem to be suggesting that another drug, which can relieve the patient of some of the pains for the next hour, but is sure to kill the patient in the next few months be administered…

> There is a patient suffering from a heart disease, medicine arrives in a few days. We fundamentally disagree upon the nature of net neutrality. I do not believe net neutrality is a good thing, and getting rid of it would be a good thing. The fundamental fact is that all bits aren't created equal. Facebook wants to pay for some bits by attaching the economic value of future customer, and that is fundamentally a just…

>>Facebook wants to pay for some bits by attaching the economic value of future customer, and that is fundamentally a justified thing.

Facebook realizes there is very little value they can add to whatever they have done so far. So now the only way to be safe from competition is to create a monopoly and prevent others from even getting a chance from competing with them.

>>People on HN are hell bent on claiming that somehow this is a bad thing

It is.

>>for most people this makes their lives better.

Its the first step these companies take before they start charging for VoIP calls.

>>I'm surprised that TRAI (an organization which should be gotten rid of completely according to me) caved in to Net Neutrality proponents.

I'm only surprised it took them this late, after this much activism.

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#144

Post by kamaal »

sremani wrote: post #136
coldtea wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Same place where France's Google, Germany's Amazon is at, they don't need it. Germany and France are 1/10 the population of India or smaller. India is 2x+ USA populations. > China is wasting effort by creating things because they don't wanna use the things rest of the world uses, and the rest of the world doesn't wanna use their things because it would be giving power to a non-liberal democracy. Then of course US c…

You need to read the glorious days of protectionism and economy of India from 1950-1990. 4% growth has its own nick-name, "Hindu rate of growth".

This has been debated to death. There is no evidence to prove this was wrong.

People who are this childish to question government policy right after independence should understand prevailing conditions then. India just got free from a colonial power which had sneaked in with trade as a excuse and then ruined pretty much everything for the next 3 centuries.

Conditions prevailing, Nehru did what he could. He saw what had emerged from partition riots and saw secularism as the most natural outcome. He realized the only way Indian borders that would ever be secure is we learn to be self sufficient, not just militarily, or with advanced weapons like Nuclear weapons. But with our indigenous economy, with our own industries, with our trained workforce and our own technology and manufacturing capabilities.

If anything you should thank them, what we were was a predominantly peasant economy(like Bangladesh), we now have means to defend any invasion, we have our own nuclear weapons, we have our own space program, we developed a lot of early industrial and manufacturing capabilities. We built our own engineering, medical other academic institutions purely out of nothing. The period between 1950-1990 was a period of institution building.

If you wish to look what has become of other countries with over zealous ideas look at Pakistan, Bangladesh and even Sri Lanka.

In fact bulk of engineering education infrastructure in cities in Bangalore directly derives from industries like ITI, BEL et which were established in the city, fueling the demand.

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#145

Post by cmadan »

vertex-four wrote: post #80
cmadan wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proposal to regulate VoIP apps is before TRAI only because of lobbying by telcos who are still in denial over the world moving towards data and want to hold onto their voice call revenues. I'm not sure what purpose licensing will serve from a law enforcement perspective. Banning VoIP apps that refuse to apply for a license will be like playing whack-a-mole as people can easily add a VPN to get around it or the se…

On the other hand, unlicensed VoIP apps would not be allowed to advertise in India, whether that's on TV, billboards, newspapers, or popular Indian websites. They would likely not be allowed to be sold in the Indian locale of Google and Apple's app stores. A communications app that few have installed is close to useless - even in countries with significant freedom, we use Facebook Messenger, Hangouts, Whatsapp and Sn…

Whatsapp has never done any advertising in India and had more users in India than Facebook before it was bought by Facebook.

Indians don't have a very high trust barrier to overcome - NSA/privacy barely figures in the public discourse.

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#146

Post by ignoramous »

splintercell wrote: post #73
electriclove wrote: post #55

Great quote on a different article covering the same story: http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/08/technology/india-facebook-fr... ---------- Mahesh Murthy, a prominent Indian venture capitalist, last year described the program as "imperialism and the East India Company all over again," carried out under the guise of "digital equality." "What Facebook wants is our less fortunate brothers and sisters should be able to poke e…

> "What Facebook wants is our less fortunate brothers and sisters should be able to poke each other and play Candy Crush, but not be able to look up a fact on Google, or learn something on Khan Academy or sell their produce on a commodity market or even search for a job," he said. Indians use connectivity very differently than the rest of the world(or at least different from the developed countries). To Indians, phon…

The closed nature of the internet is dangerous for reasons far beyond "mom and pop can't use the rest of the internet anyway" argument:

1. Content Quality reduces due to lack of choice, and lack of exposure: Closed-groups are places where spam, false information, propaganda breed to a high degree. Other parts of internet help verify claims/suspicions/hypothesis.

2. Sets up a monopoly, vendor-lock-in, changes habits: Facebook would hold immeasurable power, once they've got people hooked onto thinking that there's nothing beyond their apps. The content they censor, never appears on their networks; the content they don't like die a bad death, the apps they don't interface with die a rather quick death, the business they don't bless die a death by the guillotine, the businesses they do business with die a death by a thousand paper cuts.

3. MBAs ride the wave with their business plans, corrupt official enact new laws, freedom is lost: Similar schemes by multiple powerful corporations crop-up everywhere. Internet gets fragment, and everyone is left to rue the freedom they gave up. 'Cause its a long battle up the hill, once the rules and laws are in place, they're very difficult to change because of the inherent momentum it affords to all those "rent-seekers" and "opportunistic" businesses that crop up around it. For a case study, refer how the Airline industry squeezed out every ounce of leg-room, and comfort, for more seats, and in hope to turn more profits...

There's a lot of other things that might happen, or not happen at all... but, remember, when something's free, the product is usually the user.

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#147

Post by splintercell »

shubhamjain wrote: post #105
splintercell wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never said that. Also Net Neutrality regulation isn't the only thing preventing ISPs from blocking all the websites they want willy-nilly. What ISPs want is ability to charge more for priority services (which includes but not limited to 'express lanes'). What NN supporters think this would mean is that ISPs will block websites. Anyone has a right to block any content on their private property. Newspapers can censor a…

I read a book called "Economics in One Lesson" [1] which is quite in few ways similar to your arguments. The gist of the book is Government should avoid doing anything in capitalistic market, goes on to argue against Minimum wage Laws, Labour unions, Price control etc. and how a free market will solve every economic problem. The problem with your arguments / analogies and of that book, is that they tell a simplistic…

> You say that a 'no-blocked sites package' and 'whitelisted site package' could co-exist but fail to see that, the former one could be priced so high (once the latter gains a very large market share) that it becomes necessary for an ordinary person to limit his choices.See this is where pretty much everywhere gets it wrong. Prices aren't set by one side. Prices are ALWAYS set by both sides coming to an agreement.

People believe that prices are set by seller or employers, because they are usually the buyer or the employee, and they feel that they don't have the power to set prices, when the truth is that the price they want isn't just being set (and this is a good thing).

General package(no blockage) will be priced based on the supply and demand. Same is with whitelisted site package. The fact is, for most people whitelisted package where a bunch of competition websites are blocked is not a big deal. This annoys people who want cheap 'open' package.

This is precisely the reason where most proponents of net neutrality fall. You want things a certain way, but since the market will not provide you the option you want, you want it to be enforced by the government. If nobody can block anything, then there won't be any non-general packages. So make it about freedom. But it's no different than when groups interfere in the lives of other people, like preventing gay people from having sex by criminalizing it because they themselves are disgusted by it.

At the end of the day, the argument is simple, when you allow people to do something freely, will they do something you don't like?

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#148

Post by splintercell »

udibai wrote: post #112
splintercell wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never said that. Also Net Neutrality regulation isn't the only thing preventing ISPs from blocking all the websites they want willy-nilly. What ISPs want is ability to charge more for priority services (which includes but not limited to 'express lanes'). What NN supporters think this would mean is that ISPs will block websites. Anyone has a right to block any content on their private property. Newspapers can censor a…

Your argument about mangoes has a very big assumption involved and that is the supplier wants everyone to have mangoes and isn't in the market just for the profit. This is similar to what Reagan tried to argue with the Trickle-Down economics, he said if you tax the rich less they'll create more jobs and hence it'll benefit everyone. This didn't happen, 'cuz the rich found other better ways (investment funds etc) to u…

> Your argument about mangoes has a very big assumption involved and that is the supplier wants everyone to have mangoes and isn't in the market just for the profit I thought someone would raise this point. If the seller is in the market for making the maximum amount of profit, then he would sell his mangoes to the highest bidder at maximum profit, then use that money to expand his business to sell more Mangoes to make every last bit of profit from Mango sales. Correct?

I assumed that everybody understood that selling goods to the highest bidder is what a person motivated by profit does. So all I did was assumed that the seller wants to benefit maximum number of people. By performing that thought experiment, I showed that even THEN he would do the same thing as the person motivated by highest amount of greed would do.

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#149

Post by throwaway2048 »

tzs wrote: post #134
unprepare wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it's just that Hindi Wikipedia and Google suck And you think enabling tens of millions of people to access these resources will make them....worse? Wikipedia is a community encyclopedia, by its very nature it gets better the more people access and use it, the more editors there are translating articles from other languages, etc. You have not listed a single thing that would make it a net positive for a corporation t…

> What do you say to the Indian coder who today is working on his WhatsApp competitor? tough shit, facebook already bought the internet in this country? How about saying to him that he should make his WhatsApp competitor work well on feature phones and low bandwidth connections, and then submit it for inclusion with Free Basics? Free Basics is open to almost any site that can meet a few technical requirements, which…

and if facebook says no? or decides to drop you because you compete with them?

Re: India bans discriminatory pricing based on source/destination/app/content

#150

Post by splintercell »

kamaal wrote: post #144
sremani wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to read the glorious days of protectionism and economy of India from 1950-1990. 4% growth has its own nick-name, "Hindu rate of growth".

This has been debated to death. There is no evidence to prove this was wrong. People who are this childish to question government policy right after independence should understand prevailing conditions then. India just got free from a colonial power which had sneaked in with trade as a excuse and then ruined pretty much everything for the next 3 centuries. Conditions prevailing, Nehru did what he could. He saw what h…

> India just got free from a colonial power which had sneaked in with trade as a excuse and then ruined pretty much everything for the next 3 centuries. It's funny though West Germany, which was completely ruined by WW2 emerged as a lot more prosperous country than what India did for the first 40 years. Do you have any idea how badly Germany was bombed.

If you say things like "But Germany is an exception because X", then think why East Germany couldn't be as rich. East Germany was about as poor as West Germany after WW2.

Similarly, Korean split was another one of those examples. You may say that economics doesn't matter, but the fact is that it does. 1990s onwards we have made our lives so much better, and the shit didn't have to be so bad for our forefathers and parents.

All Indians do is give excuses for why India was poor, but nearly all their excuses can be best represented by the biggest excuse of them all 'Hindu rate of growth'.

Post reply on HN