>Connectivity is a cornerstone for developing nations and allowing young minds to prosper.
So why not give full connectivity? Facebook Net is some next level BS. Facebook is treating poor people as secondary citizens who are only interesting from a consumption perspective while the rest of us have access to the full power of the internet and all the benefits it brings. The gap between the haves and have-nots only continues to expand.
Or Pepsi's campaign in India where you get codes on buying a soda, where each code gets you some data.
If Mark was indeed altruistic, he could get people 50MB of free data, which wouldn't have costed more than what it's costing him now(assuming that people would use more than 50 MB of fb on internet.org).
But that wouldn't have allowed him to create a sustainable monopoly, even if people would have used facebook on a free neutral network, which would still have fetched him money.
The only value of this deal to Mark is that Facebook gets to create a monopoly. This is something that should worry you.
Net neutrality is more important than whatever financial or profit motives the worlds billionaires may have. Facebook could easily connect India completely if it felt like it.
So why not give full connectivity? Facebook Net is some next level BS. Facebook is treating poor people as secondary citizens who are only interesting from a consumption perspective while the rest of us have access to the full power of the internet and all the benefits it brings. The gap between the haves and have-nots only continues to expand.