Re: Why is Mark Zuckerberg angry at critics in India?

.... sorry ... the western democracies have laws/rules FOR maintaining net
neutrality (not against).

On 2 January 2016 at 15:35, Kiritkumar Lathia <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ratendra,
>
> You have deliberately misrepresented what I had written - and not for the
> first time - to come up with some "free market" garbage which has no social
> bearing and completely distorts the reality.
>
> By your definitions, all western democracies, including USA, are
> communists since all have laws against "net neutrality" which is called
> "open internet" in USA. I attach for you and others the FCC Report and
> Order to read -- this is part of the USA "Law" as an FCC ruling. Read the
> Introduction and Executive Summary and also pages 314 - 320 to understand
> why this ruling was made after approx 4 million "testimonies" and 10 years
> in the making.
>
> This is from USA and where Zuckerberg would NEVER be able to run his
> "basic internet" so he goes to developing countries to get his next level
> of revenue stream for FB.
>
> The only countries - to my knowledge - who do not have "net neutrality"
> are the ones you must love: China, Russia, North Korea, ...
> They do not have Open Internet - they block websites and divert traffic to
> "approved" websites just like Zuckerberg wishes to do - but by your very
> definition, they are not communist! A big irony, don't you think!
>
> Please no more old diatribes on this!
>
> FYI: The question you did not understand was that when you visit FB, you
> also use (indirectly) proprietary software from other entities and as such
> FB has to pay for using the Intellectual Properties (IPs) of other
> entities, such as Google (for ex Motorola IPs), Microsoft (which makes more
> money from Android than Google itself), Oracle, etc. FB in turn "sells"
> your FB contents and your personal information, etc. - as far as FB is
> concerned, you are not a "customer" but a "commodity / merchandise" which
> they can use to generate money.
>
> Now they wish to have more Indian merchandise!
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2 January 2016 at 12:43, ken <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Bull!
>>
>> As a supporter of Net Neutrality, I do so primarily because I know that a
>> for profit business is required by law to employ every single tactic
>> available to increase the return on investment for their investors.
>>
>> As such, this legally mandates every provider to direct a customer away
>> from reaching any destination which is seen as less profitable to the
>> corporation. In other words, it is my legal obligation to solicit and
>> service these revenue streams (read, those who elect to pay me to provide
>> this service) and ignoring so puts me at risk of being accused of fiscal
>> mismanagement.
>>
>> Further, your assertion that the Net Neutrality issue was "settled"
>> borders on profoundly ignorant. What you are labeling as some form of final
>> decision is little more than a small victory in a war between whether the
>> Internet should be a totally for profit entity or a communication medium
>> owned by the people who pay for it.
>>
>> But what irks me beyond all description is your attitude that because you
>> have some form of superior understanding of a questionable economic theory,
>> you are now to be accepted as the self-appointed universal authority on
>> this issue. Typically, one has to read Youtube comments to find examples of
>> hubris.
>>
>> As a specific example, please allow me to highlight the following, "There
>> is a group of people who are the shareholder of the companies [ Netflix,
>> Google, Facebook]  unwilling to pay the interconnect charges to carriers.
>> It is like wanting to ride a train without buying the ticket.  These people
>> hire people from group 2 to influence opinion of people of group 1."
>>
>> I chose this one passage (out of a very fertile field) to point out your
>> completely flawed premises.
>>
>> Once I (or any other entity) pay for my connectivity, any traffic I send
>> or receive from the net has been paid for in full. The idea that I should
>> have to continue to pay every single network which may carry any of my
>> packets is not only an accounting nightmare but also would require some
>> form of traffic management that would allow each and every provider to
>> choose only those paths which have been prepaid in order to keep costs to a
>> minimum.
>>
>> To continue your train analogy, what you are suggesting that every time a
>> passenger passes another station they should be required to purchase an
>> additional ticket for that particular stretch of track as if they haven't
>> purchased a full price ticket for their entire trip.
>>
>> And while you may believe your understanding of economics allows you to
>> make these claims, having built, run, designed, and consulted on a number
>> of Internet infrastructure projects too numerous to have counted, similarly
>> allows me to inform you that you claims are patently baseless.
>>
>> Ken DiPietro
>> Cumberland MD
>>
>>
>> On 01/01/2016 11:40 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> People support net neutrality for various reasons:
>>>
>>> 1. First group of people   who support Net Neutrality do so due to
>>> ignorance of how  incentives and costs flow thorough markets and economies.
>>> Such people cannot see how it harms  the  consumer and carriers by creating
>>> perverse incentives and shifting costs to wrong parties.   These people are
>>> misled into believing  that net neutrality will lead  internet into some
>>> kind of  justice-equality utopia of the kind espoused by leftist thinkers.
>>> Majority of people who participate on internet forum and social media to
>>> save net neutrality  fall into this category.
>>> This group of people has either never studied economics, or has been
>>> taught and appreciated leftist version of it. I do not know how they teach
>>> in India these days. During my first year at engineering college, we were
>>> taught leftist theories like law of diminishing return and law of
>>> diminishing marginal utility in a class to introduce economy.   It took me
>>> many years of work to unlearn those notions, or at least be able to see
>>> think in bigger economic scope. I recall my teacher discussing how deficits
>>> are good for economy and all that go with it. I do not want to go into
>>> details. But, I can see how some opinions have  come into being.
>>>
>>> 2. There are politicians, journalists, academicians, corrupt to the
>>> core,  who will write in favor of whosoever gives the job or income.  There
>>> is a reason why politics, academia , and the journalism are three least
>>> trusted professions.  To an unattached person, it is very hard to tell
>>> apart who is telling truth from who is making lies.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. There is a group of people who are the shareholder of the companies [
>>> Netflix, Google, Facebook]  unwilling to pay the interconnect charges to
>>> carriers.  It is like wanting to ride a train without buying the ticket.
>>> These people hire people from group 2 to influence opinion of people of
>>> group 1.
>>>
>>> 4. There may be other groups too who sincerely believe in net neutrality
>>> does for numerous reasons that I cannot think of.
>>>
>>> At least in the case of Net Neutrality, the group 3 has been successful
>>> so far in getting what they want.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Ratnendra Pandey
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/1/2016 6:09 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan wrote:
>>>
>>>> A lot of the support for Net Neutrality I suspect is due to
>>>> techno-skepticism. Nobody today trusts corporations to watch out for the
>>>> people if it means going against their profit interests. After Tobacco and
>>>> Oil, data privacy is the next most lucrative and invasive enterprise.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/classic-apps/techno-skeptics-objection-growing-louder/2015/12/26/e83cf658-617a-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html
>>>>
>>>> is a relevant story.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> India-gii mailing list
>>> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>>> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> India-gii mailing list
>> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii