Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, there are actual countries with bandwidth cap and privileged content for Home Internet? Damn, I thought that was just the hypothetical scarecrow of NN defenders =/
eh. It's something that made sense over ten years ago. Very little content was hosted locally within Australia so most traffic had to go over the expensive links to other countries (which are obviously constrained in bandwidth). Privileged/unmetered content was often things like local Steam mirrors or whatnot which was closer to the user/ISP. Now that more and more content is cached locally, there's less and less of…
Blow to Internet.org as Indian Internet Companies Begin to Withdraw
201–203 of 203 posts
Re: Blow to Internet.org as Indian Internet Companies Begin to Withdraw
#202Re: Blow to Internet.org as Indian Internet Companies Begin to Withdraw
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's the opposite of net neutrality. It's picking winners and losers. If Facebook is free, but you have to pay for local home grown Indian social networking sites, well then how will those businesses ever compete? Personally, I'm torn. I'm all for free access to Wikipedia. The problem is, not all of the world's knowledge exists there, so you therefor are only giving people a taste of knowledge. With Facebook…
I see the argument for competition, but I don't think that freedom is as important as the freedom of communication and education. Imagine someone in the slums of India (there are tens of millions in these conditions) wanting to learn more about irrigation. Is it more important that they have no limited internet for the sake for competition, or limited internet?