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

81–90 of 224 posts

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

#81

Post by anon1385 »

NoPiece wrote: post #78
gnaddel wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you elaborate why it is inaccurate?

For example Facebook explicitly does want to support job searches. (Babajob)

Facebook has a list of all current and future job search sites that anybody in India might want to use? What about job adverts that are just posted on the employers own website?

Unless you meant "Facebook wants to monopolise the entire Indian job search market with their own job search site while preventing people from accessing any competitors". That's more believable but hardly undermines the original quote.

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

#82

Post by manigandham »

Sven7 wrote: post #68

This has been like watching one form of misinformation battling another form of misinformation. One set of misguided people battling another set of misguided people. NetNeutrality is a concept that makes sense in a western context where carriers are basically monopolies. It's unbelievable how good arguments in one context, have been blindly applied to a completely unrelated context. Activists in the West (who's rep a…

You vastly misunderstand/misjudge the connectivity of India.

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

#83

Post by NoPiece »

anon1385 wrote: post #81
NoPiece wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example Facebook explicitly does want to support job searches. (Babajob)

Facebook has a list of all current and future job search sites that anybody in India might want to use? What about job adverts that are just posted on the employers own website? Unless you meant "Facebook wants to monopolise the entire Indian job search market with their own job search site while preventing people from accessing any competitors". That's more believable but hardly undermines the original quote.

The quote says Facebook doesn't want poor people to be able to search for jobs. That is obviously wrong or else they wouldn't provide job search. You may believe they want to monopolize job search, but that is not what the guy said. And show me an example of a job site that want allowed on their platform.

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

#84

Post by senthil_rajasek »

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…

"... is a cliche at this point and should be considered racist in India... "

How is that racist?

Expressing nationalism is not racist unless in specific other circumstances. In the U.S, Japanese and Korean auto makers were accused of stealing jobs and Latino Americans still are... I see it as a form of nationalism.

[edited: to remove Europe and fix punctuation]

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

#85

Post by conceit »

ikeboy wrote: post #79
conceit wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the other way around, let facebook build a separate, proprietary infrastructure for their service. I'm not sure if a real Private Network or a virtual PN would be the better comparison.

The government is not allowing that. They're banning differential pricing. Even if Facebook were to build their own network, they wouldn't be allowed to price discriminate based on websites visited. Also, Facebook is not renting a government network, but a private network. That private network wants to partner with Facebook, but the government is stepping in and blocking it.

As it stands, the state, universities and other providers might have sponsored a lot of the infrastructure, while fb is just using it, so if they want their own, they should build it and only offer fb. for free.

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

#86

Post by arihant »

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…

India has different set of laws on it. It's not allowed to create slow lanes in the first place. It's also not allowed to provision a broadband speed of lower than 512 kbit which is due to be revised to 1 mbit/2 mbit minimum depending on where you are later this year. Similar minimum speed rules exist for 2G, 3G, and now LTE.

This new ban works alongside other laws. Broadband operators must adhere to existing neutrality laws, minimum speed laws, laws regarding unlawful banning of websites.

To answer your question, no, a Netflix lane of 0.1 kbps is not allowed, and never was. Even service provider assisted parental control is not allowed. Airtel had to backtrack Quickheal offer a couple years back because somebody saw it as operator influence. You must implement parental control at home, and your service provider can't sell you the software or that service.

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

#87

Post by tmerr »

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…

Interesting point but I'm not sure how it applies to the argument. If websites are low quality, is that justification for an ISP to block them?

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

#88

Post by ikeboy »

conceit wrote: post #85
ikeboy wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government is not allowing that. They're banning differential pricing. Even if Facebook were to build their own network, they wouldn't be allowed to price discriminate based on websites visited. Also, Facebook is not renting a government network, but a private network. That private network wants to partner with Facebook, but the government is stepping in and blocking it.

As it stands, the state, universities and other providers might have sponsored a lot of the infrastructure, while fb is just using it, so if they want their own, they should build it and only offer fb. for free.

If the state thinks it's a bad idea, they can not offer their own infrastructure to FB. That's not what happened. They decreed that nobody, even those who agree with FB, can rent their infrastructure to FB. That's the problem.

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

#89

Post by bduerst »

NoPiece wrote: post #83
anon1385 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook has a list of all current and future job search sites that anybody in India might want to use? What about job adverts that are just posted on the employers own website? Unless you meant "Facebook wants to monopolise the entire Indian job search market with their own job search site while preventing people from accessing any competitors". That's more believable but hardly undermines the original quote.

The quote says Facebook doesn't want poor people to be able to search for jobs. That is obviously wrong or else they wouldn't provide job search. You may believe they want to monopolize job search, but that is not what the guy said. And show me an example of a job site that want allowed on their platform.

Helping the poor is a red herring. Facebook could easily give fair, unbiased acccess, but they want a monopoly.

Would you be so apologetic if Comcast gave everyone free NBC streaming but charged more for Netflix?

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

#90

Post by sremani »

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…

I love the Ghosts of East India Company are always invoked when a foreign company enters India with heft, this was said of Coke, Pepsi and now when referring to Facebook Basics and Amazon. Of course, the stone walling of Foreign Retailers like Walmart. Anybody who talks about EIC is a protectionist trying to play on Colonial insecurities.

Having grown up in Socialist India, the demagogue who summons East India Company talk scares me more than East India Company itself.

Post reply on HN