[Chapter-delegates] WIFI in Repote Areas

Mon Jun 17 10:45:24 PDT 2013

Gary,

This is a very good approach to this very difficult issue.

Hector

Héctor Ariel Manoff

Vitale, Manoff & Feilbogen

Viamonte 1145 10º Piso

C1053ABW Buenos Aires

República Argentina

Te: (54-11) 4371-6100

Fax: (54-11) 4371-6365

E-mail:  <mailto:amanoff at vmf.com.ar> amanoff at vmf.com.ar

Web:  <http://www.vmf.com.ar> http://www.vmf.com.ar

De: chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org
[mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] En nombre de Gary W
Kenward
Enviado el: lunes, 17 de junio de 2013 15:50
Para: Carlos M. Martinez
CC: ISOC Chapter Delegates
Asunto: Re: [Chapter-delegates] WIFI in Repote Areas

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
<http://www.ipolitics.ca/2013/06/10/should-canadians-worry-about-the-nsas-pr
ism-program-maybe/> "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"

<https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?view=att&th=13d35e7c9f4238cb&attid=0.1&di
sp=thd&zw> 

_______________________________________________
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 <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 <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 <https://portal.isoc.org/> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130617/18373e6b/attachment.htm>