Yes, it's good for Facebook, obviously, but this is not a zero sum game. The choice to use any better competing service that comes along will always exist. No one else is willing to front the hundreds of millions with little to no returns for 20+ years required, though.
Currently, for lots of phones still used in India, using internet.org means NO HTTPS. So FB (and any other eavesdropping party) gets to snoop on your data and browsing habits. It's not about a walled garden, it's about basic human rights.
The last time the West tried to save backwards people, they stole and murdered and raped their way to wealth. We don't need any more generosity from the West.
> under the assumption that India is too poor or
> backwards to get its shit done
Perhaps until it does "get its shit done" that assumption would appear to hold?I have often wondered what the middle-class Indian dudes who are trying to block their country men from getting Facebook and Wikipedia access are really scared of. Could it just be they're worried about how it looks?
So basically in exchange for free internet, Indians lose security and privacy. Just because these people are poor does not mean that they don't deserve these rights. Somehow, I don't trust fb to act benevolently in this situation when they'll have so much data ready to use.
Great quote from Desmond Tutu:
"When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land.
They said 'Let us pray.'
We closed our eyes.
When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land."
The last time the West claimed to be helping spread enlightenment to uncivilized people, they colonized them and stole their resources and livelihoods. Fuck that, it's not happening again.