Simple example- net-neutrality Vs Internet.org.
Initially in India we use to have cable operator providing all TV channels just for Rs.200 per month.
What happened when DTH came in to market they attracted 1 year subscription with low fair, by providing only few channels and we need to pay additional top-up for each channel we need extra. It now crossing more than Rs.400 to have access to all TV channels. I hope even in others countries also it is same. Indian's loves cricket, but know many missed favorite cricket match because few missed to have sports channels or their favorite shows because of DTH
Net-Neutrality is as cable operator provide all websites with basic fair or provide all websites free.
Internet.org is like DTH, but you get free access to few websites who are rich( face book, reliance, uber, etc) and rest of websites we need to end up paying more or end up paying different price for each website to get access, and need to pay more and more for start up websites they do not have much funds to provide free.
Friendly lets support Net-Neutrality, which makes value in access equal for everything.
Don't get trapped with Internet.org
Correct me friends, If I am wrong.
Why can't he and his internet company make their own internal network, which they can offer for free, instead of being on internet?
They can easily have servers without internet access, sort of like Airtel takes you to a recharge page if you don't have internet balance left?
My question is why do they have to take it to the internet?
He does have a point, internet access trumps net neutrality any day of the week. You can talk ethics and ideals AFTER the pragmatic goals have been achieved.
Net neutrality preserves alternatives.
Without alternatives you won't get choice.
Without choice there isn't freedom.
So Net neutrality is freedom of using internet.
socrates, 08 Oct 2015Its appropriate that he was talking to VANITY FAIR. I wonder where he gets this confidence from? im sure he gets his confidence from playgirl but who am I to judge? at least he is trying to do something good unlike other morons. lol but good comment lol made me laugh
Its appropriate that he was talking to VANITY FAIR. I wonder where he gets this confidence from?
Trouble with giving up net neutraility is if the carpool lanes come out of or degrade existing lanes. But giving everybody internet access and in particular areas exercising extreme beliefs as in the middle east with no means for authorities to block the access to alternate beliefs (such as in science and atheism) would be a better way to solve problems than bombs.
Violation of net neutrality is not acceptable on any circumstances...we will fight against facebook,airtel and TRAI(if required) for net neutrality...
The only thing net neutrality will do is, Kill other startups! Companies like Facebook or uber or Flipkart and amazon has huge money. just imagine these sites starts giving free access to public.. so people will start using them more but when the new startups won't be able to provide the free access to public, Nobody will visit them. Ruining net neutrality is the worst idea any developing nations could adopt. it will backfire horribly..!!!
Well Facebook's giving FREE access to the internet, basically paying its own money for poor people to use it, and some complain the connection is restricted? Are you kidding me? Go take free stuff or GTFO. Facebook's doing great job on providing access to the internet, and if more companies support it, the access would become wider. At some point we may have a UNIVERSAL FREE internet without limits on traffic and websites. Facebook's only making the first steps toward it.
I do care. You might think you are getting A for free, but in reality, what you get is charged more to use B, C and D. It is easy to go down a slippery slope if you start like this: then facebook will offer the basic package of A & B, the plus package of A & B & C, and the premium package of A & B & C & D; saying that they are adapting to everyone's economic possilities. In truth, it is segmenting the market to maximize profits (the same way phone manufactures charge differently for 32/64/128 GB variants of their phone, when it would be more cost effective to provide 128 GB for all: They just want everyone pay the most he is willing to pay, because it maximizes profits)
Well... I wonder why those companies raising net neutrality concern, when they don't even care or don't even do anything noteable about these people who initially cannot access internet?
So while doing homework, if i needed to access a math site, say site A, which is in "FREE BASICS", i can do so easily and freely. What about sites B,C,D which are not registered with facebook's "FREE BASICS", which provide alternative solutions to the problem i am seeking? I cannot access those, you are restricting my access to those sites. I know that you are at least giving me access to A where i cannot access B,C,D. Anyways you will be putting ads on Site A and gets more revenue.
Alternative Solution: As per "FREE BASICS" provide 10MB per day to any site.