[Chapter-delegates] WIFI in Repote Areas

[Gary W Kenward]

I wasn't aware that Google was getting bad mouthed - just the opposite. Which is why I simply asked a question...

I am not paranoid about corporations. I am simply cautious. Corporations, large and small, are human efforts and prone to both good and bad behaviour. Oligopolies tend to be subject to fewer external constraints and sometimes perpetrate misguided behaviour. An action by an oligopoly tends to have a broader impact and is much more difficult to mitigate through legislation or public opinion (insert plethora of examples here).

I consider Google part of an emerging information oligopoly (events like the creation of the DPLA are promising). This doesn't make Google good or bad, just, perhaps, worth scrutiny. The history of Google Books does suggest that Google is capable of self-serving behaviour that doesn't fit the public view of "fair use" of information.

Does this have anything to do with balloons? On it's own, no. However, consider that Google is active, and often dominant, in a number of information technology spaces: Google Search, Google Analytics, Google Ads, Google+, Google Books, Google Maps/Earth, YouTube, mobile devices (Android, Google Glasses), wireless Internet access and more.

So I asked a question. From an Internet governance perspective I believe who owns the landscape is important, particularly if they have a significant regional or global presence.

Cheers all,
Gary


THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. 
THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT TO BE COPIED, PRINTED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR. 

On 2013.06.16, at 11:18 PM, Carlos M. Martinez <carlosmarcelomartinez at gmail.com> wrote:

> Agree - up to a certain point. I do not hear too much about the 'control of information' applied to, for example, Telcos. Yet they carry most of what we type and see on the Internet. They are, in the end, the only ones who can actually match an IP packet to a customer.
> 
> Yet Google gets all the bad mouthing. I'm not trying to defend them (they're big enough to defend themselves ;) ), but I'm curious about why people feel Google bears more responsibility or Google is more to fear than other actors.
> 
> Also bear in mind that in some regions/countries, Google is not even the biggest player. Take Baidu in China and the Russian search engines, and you've got large swaths of the Internet where Google is second (or third).
> 
> regards,
> 
> ~Carlos
> 
> On 6/16/13 7:56 PM, Gary W Kenward wrote:
>> Using balloons to provide coverage in remote areas is a great idea. There are many advantages over fixed infrastructure for providing wireless connectivity to under serviced areas. There are also many technical challenges to be overcome and certainly Google has money to spend on research.
>> 
>> I just find the lack of concern over Google's growing influence - and control over information, curious. The only groups of people who have expressed a concern over Google's growing acquisition of information, as far as I know, are the various library associations around the world. It's a legitimate concern, only offset by Google's assurances of good will.
>> 
>> I suspect that if the vendor involved was a major international telecom, the dialogue would be much different (as exemplified by some of  the discussions around WSIS). 
>> 
>> I am not trying to vilify Google, nor am I suggesting that they even had much of a choice as to whether to cooperate with the NSA on the PRISM program. 
>> 
>> The existence of the PRISM program, the type of data being collected, the list of the companies who provided data and the immense storage facility are not disputed. The fact that PRISM is acquiring massive amounts of meta-data on private communications is not a fabrication of apologists, the apathetic, the fearmongers and the conspiracy theorist(s). The only issue in dispute, within the US, is how this data is being used and what legal protections are in place to mitigate abuse of the information. 
>> 
>> The real question is whether any single commercial entity should have wide spread control over access, storage or dissemination of information. This in particular, includes the pipes that deliver that information, for if the meta-data crosses or is stored in a facility in a US territory, then the NSA - and other law enforcement agencies, have legal access through the Patriot Act.
>> 
>> The real question is whether Canadian's should rely upon the efficacy of US legislation to protect access to information acquired from Canadian use of the Internet.
>> 
>> Colin Hogan's article "Should Canadians Worry About the NSA's PRISM Program? Maybe" gives better background. Mr. Hogan's credentials as a journalist are respectable. The article includes references to concerns expressed by Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart over the deficiencies in Canada's standards when it comes to protecting personal online privacy.
>> 
>> Gary
>> 
>> On 2013.06.16, at 4:43 PM, Carlos M. Martinez <carlosmarcelomartinez at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> What does it have to do with the poor balloons ? 
>>> 
>>> On 6/16/13 3:39 PM, Gary W Kenward wrote:
>>>> I am surprised that so little is being said about Google's growing monopoly on information, globally.
>>>> 
>>>> Particularly in light of the recent disclosures concerning project PRISM, which includes Google providing information to the NSA.
>>>> 
>>>> Gary
>>>> 
>>>> On 2013.06.16, at 11:46 AM, Glenn McKnight <contact at internetsociety.ca> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=192277280
>>>>> 
>>>>> Google scientists have been testing a way to link computers to the internet in rural, war torn or disaster areas where high speed internet does not exist. We hear from Steven Levy, a senior writer with Wired magazine who was embedded with the Google team.
>>>>> Glenn McKnight
>>>>> Membership Outeach
>>>>> ISOC Canada Chapter
>>>>> skype gmcknight
>>>>> "The Internet is for Everyone"
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>>>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130617/cb05ca8d/attachment.htm>