October 2015 - isoc - Skunkworks Site

Fwd: [Skunkworks] Corporate Sales Account Manager Job Opening
by Barrack Otieno 28 Oct '15

28 Oct '15

Listers, For your information. Regards ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Joe Njogu via skunkworks <skunkworks(a)lists.my.co.ke> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 14:15:37 +0300 Subject: [Skunkworks] Corporate Sales Account Manager Job Opening To: Skunkworks Mailing List <skunkworks(a)lists.my.co.ke> Hi Guys, See the attached - Best Regards, Joe Njogu -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

1 0

Fwd: [Internet Policy] IPU Resolution on democracy, privacy, and mass surveillance
by Barrack Otieno 27 Oct '15

27 Oct '15

Listers, This might be usefull to some listers. Regards ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 16:36:27 +0100 Subject: [Internet Policy] IPU Resolution on democracy, privacy, and mass surveillance To: internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org The Inter-Parliamentary Union is the organization that comprises many of the world's parliaments. It is not well known, but it has recently adopted some resolutions that should be of interest. In particular, a new resolution on Democracy in the Digital Era and the Threat to Privacy and Individual Freedoms, see: http://www.ipu.org/conf-e/133/Res-1.htm Operational paragraph 3 underscores that legislation regarding surveillance must be based, inter alia, on the principles of necessity and proportionality. I believe that this is the first example of a global state institution explicitly adopting those principles (but I believe that some European court judgments also mention both principles). Paragraph 4 calls for removing limitations on freedom of expression (as does paragraph 17) and upholding the principle of net neutrality. Again, I believe that this is the first example of a global state institution explicitly adopting the principle of net neutrality. Paragraph 7 basically calls for an end to current mass surveillance practices. Other paragraphs of the resolution are also significant. Information on the IPU is at: http://www.ipu.org Best, Richard _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

4 4

Fwd: Re: [Internet Policy] Report of WSIS+10 review proceedings in New York
by Barrack Otieno 22 Oct '15

22 Oct '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Robin Wilton" <wilton(a)isoc.org> Date: Oct 22, 2015 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Report of WSIS+10 review proceedings in New York To: "Chinmayi Arun" <chinmayiarun(a)gmail.com> Cc: "wsis10(a)lists.bestbits.net" <wsis10(a)lists.bestbits.net>, "bestbits" < bestbits(a)lists.bestbits.net>, "internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org" < internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org>, "governance(a)lists.igcaucus.org" < governance(a)lists.igcaucus.org> Hi Chinmayi, Many thanks to you and Puneeth for these very useful notes. Looking at the summary of Day 1, what strikes me is the way in which the US, EU, China, G77 and LAC all express different perspectives on the role of human rights in this process. Their positions seem to me (very roughly) to be these: - EU: human rights are a key driving principle here, alongside multi-stakeholder approach and closing the digital divide. - China: human rights can/should be separated from WSIS outcomes. - G77: human rights need not be treated separately from WSIS outcomes. - US: ICTs aren’t the cause of human rights violations. - LAC: ICT needs to be viewed in the context of compliance with international law (including human rights). My interpretation is that each of those positions is the consequence of another, unstated goal; I’d be interested to hear whether those unstated goals come out more clearly in the course of the week. Best wishes, and thanks again, Robin Robin Wilton Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy Internet Society email: wilton(a)isoc.org Phone: +44 705 005 2931 Twitter: @futureidentity On 21 Oct 2015, at 19:30, Chinmayi Arun <chinmayiarun(a)gmail.com> wrote: Dear All, Here are links to CCG's coverage of the WSIS+10 review in New York. Puneeth Nagaraj has been attending on our behalf and has shared/ written up the following: 2nd Preparatory Meeting of WSIS+10 Review: Summary of Day 1 <https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/2nd-preparatory-meeting-of-wsi…> (Covers EU, US, G77+China and Latin American & Carribean States) 2nd Preparatory Meeting of WSIS+10 Review: Summary of ICT4D Discussions on Day 2 <https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/2nd-preparatory-meeting-of-wsi…> (covers South Africa, the EU and the US) Indian government's statements WSIS+10 Zero Draft: Highlights from India’s Statement at the 2nd Preparatory Meeting <https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/wsis10-zero-draft-indias-state…> (part 1 of 2) India’s Statements on Day 2 of the 2nd Preparatory Meeting of the WSIS Review <https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/indias-statements-on-day-2-of-…> (part 2 of 2) We hope that this is useful to you and welcome your feedback on how we can improve our reporting. Best, Chinmayi _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.

1 0

Re: [isoc_ke] Africa Domain Name System Forum 4th to 6th March 2016, Marrakech, Morroco
by Barrack Otieno 21 Oct '15

21 Oct '15

Listers, The 4th Africa Domain Name System Forum will be held in Marrakech Morroco from 4th to 6th March 2016 prior to the ICANN 55 meeting. The Africa Domain name system is an annual open event for stakeholders in the Domain Name Industry in Africa organized by Africa Top Level Domains Organization, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers and the Internet Society. The forum enables registries , registrars and other stakeholder in Africa to share experiences, interact and learn from each other about the domain name system. As a multi stakeholder forum ,the meeting seeks to foster cross border collaboration between registries , registrars and registrants as well as other stakeholders the objectives being inter alia to inspire and encourage local stakeholders (government, registrars, registries, and registrants in the domain name industry to interact at local and International level as well as equipping African Registries and Registrars with the requisite domain name industry business strategies. We will be providing further details regarding registration, sponsorship and exhibition opportunities. Thank you Best Regards -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 www.aftld.org Skype: barrack.otieno

1 0

Fwd: [AfrICANN-discuss] Africa Strategy session , Tuesday 20th, 11-12.15, Room L4 Foyer
by Barrack Otieno 20 Oct '15

20 Oct '15

Listers, You may want to join remotely. Time zone UTC+1 Regards ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dandjinou Pierre <pdandjinou(a)gmail.com> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 00:48:10 +0100 Subject: [AfrICANN-discuss] Africa Strategy session , Tuesday 20th, 11-12.15, Room L4 Foyer To: "africann(a)afrinic.net" <africann(a)afrinic.net> Dear Participants to ICANN 54 and listers, Chers Participants a ICANN 54 et listiers, As you already know, there will be an update on the implementation of ICANN's Africa Strategy at a session scheduled for Tuesday 20th, from 11-12.15 in Room L4 Foyer. Here is the proposed agenda : Comme vous le savez, il est prevu une mise a jour sur la mise en oeuvre de la strategie africaine de l'ICANN pour l'Afrique le Mardi 20 Octobre de 11 a 12.15 dans la salle L4 Foyer; Voici l'ordre du jour propose : - Welcome and presentation of the Africa Strategy (20mn) - Q/A (25mn) - Preparations for Marrakech (10mn) - Q/A (10mn) - AoB (a-Funding mechanisms for the Africa strategy; b-ICANN's presence in Africa..) (10mn) Remote participation will be possible at https://meetings.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/tue-africa-strategy Pierre Dandjinou Cotonou - 229 90 087784 / 66566610 Dakar 221 77 639 30 41 www.scg.bj skype : sagbo1953 -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

1 0

Fwd: [Internet Policy] NYT: Data Transfer Pact Between U.S. and Europe Is Ruled Invalid
by Barrack Otieno 12 Oct '15

12 Oct '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Joly MacFie <joly(a)punkcast.com> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 13:46:23 -0400 Subject: [Internet Policy] NYT: Data Transfer Pact Between U.S. and Europe Is Ruled Invalid To: "internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org" <InternetPolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/07/technology/european-union-us-data-collect… Europe’s highest court on Tuesday struck down an international agreement that allowed companies to move people’s digital data between the European Union and the United States, leaving the international operations of companies like Google and Facebook in a sort of legal limbo. The ruling, by the European Court of Justice, said the so-called safe harbor agreement was flawed because it allowed American government authorities to gain routine access to Europeans’ online information. The court said leaks from Edward J. Snowden, the former contractor for the National Security Agency, made it clear that American intelligence agencies had almost unfettered access to the data, infringing on Europeans’ rights to privacy. The court said data protection regulators in each of the European Union’s 28 countries should have oversight over how companies collect and use online information of their countries’ citizens. Many European countries have widely varying stances towards privacy. Data protection advocates hailed the ruling. Industry executives and trade groups, though, said the decision left a huge amount of uncertainty for big companies. They called on the European Commission to complete a new safe agreement with the United States, a deal that has been negotiated for more than two years. Some European officials and many of the big technology companies, including Facebook and Microsoft, tried to play down the impact of the ruling, saying side agreements with the European Union should allow the companies to continue moving data across borders. But some of Europe’s national privacy watchdogs are expected to make it hard for large companies like Facebook to transfer Europeans’ information overseas under the current data arrangements. And the ruling appeared to leave smaller companies with fewer legal resources vulnerable to potential privacy violations. “We can’t assume that anything is now safe,” Brian Hengesbaugh, a privacy lawyer with Baker & McKenzie in Chicago who helped to negotiate the original safe harbor agreement. “The ruling is so sweepingly broad that any mechanism used to transfer data from Europe could be under threat.” At issue is the sort of personal data that people create when they post something on Facebook or other social media; when they do web searches on Google; or when they order products or buy movies from Amazon or Apple. Such data is hugely valuable to companies, which use it in a broad range of ways, including tailoring advertisements to individuals and promoting products or services based on users’ online activities. The data-transfer ruling does not apply solely to tech companies. It also affects any organization with international operations, such as when a company has employees in more than one region and needs to transfer payroll information or allow workers to manage their employee benefits online. Frans Timmermans, the first vice president for the European Commission, which will be charged with carrying out the ruling, tried to ease the concerns of companies on Tuesday. He said businesses could still move European data to the United States through other existing treaties. He added that the European Commission would work with national privacy regulators to ensure that the court’s decision was carried out in a uniform fashion across the entire region. “Citizens need robust safeguards,” said Mr. Timmermans. “And companies need certainty.” But it was unclear how bulletproof those treaties would be under the new ruling, which cannot be appealed and went into effect immediately. Europe’s privacy watchdogs, for example, remain divided over how to police American tech companies. France and Germany, where companies like Facebook and Google have huge numbers of users and have already been subject to other privacy rulings, are among the countries that have sought more aggressive protections for their citizens’ personal data. Britain and Ireland, among others, have been supportive of Safe Harbor, and many large American tech companies have set up overseas headquarters in Ireland. “For those who are willing to take on big companies, this ruling will have empowered them to act,” said Ot van Daalen, a Dutch privacy lawyer at Project Moore, who has been a vocal advocate for stricter data protection rules. The safe harbor agreement has been in place since 2000, enabling American tech companies to compile data generated by their European clients in web searches, social media posts and other online activities. Under the deal, more than 4,000 European and American companies had been expected to treat the information moved outside the European Union with the same privacy protections the data had inside the region. The United States government had lobbied aggressively in Brussels in recent months to keep the agreement in place. The United States and the European Union have worked for roughly two years on a new safe harbor agreement. The court’s ruling now puts pressure on negotiators to complete an agreement, but it may also complicate matters. Any new deal had already been expected to give Europeans greater say over how their online information is collected, transferred and managed by tech companies. But the talks have stalled over what type of access to European data American intelligence agencies should be given, according to several people with direct knowledge of the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. In addition, legal experts said that even if a new deal is reached, the court’s decision would would still give the national privacy regulators some say over the transfer of data. Penny Pritzker, the American secretary of commerce, said she was disappointed about the European court’s decision, adding she would work with the European Commission to finalize the new safe harbor agreement.In its ruling, the European court noted that the region’s 500 million citizens did not have the right to bring legal cases in United States courts if they believed their privacy had been infringed by American companies or by the United States government. A bill to provide this legal recourse is being debated in Congress, though analysts said it was unlikely to become law before the American elections next year. The legal ruling “puts at risk the thriving transatlantic digital economy,” she said in a statement on Tuesday. The lengthy negotiations have highlighted the different approaches to online data protection. In the United States, privacy is viewed as a consumer protection issue; in Europe, privacy is almost on a par with such fundamental rights as freedom of expression. Last year, Europe’s top court ruled that anyone with connections to the region could ask search engines like Google to remove links about themselves from online results. European campaigners said this so-called right to be forgotten ruling would help protect people’s online privacy, while many in the United States said the decision would curtail online freedom of speech. Those differences became more pronounced after Mr. Snowden revealed how American and British intelligence agencies had seemingly unfettered access to people’s online activities. “The United States safe harbor scheme thus enables interference, by United States public authorities, with the fundamental rights of persons,” the judges said in a statement on Tuesday, referring to access to European data by American intelligence agencies. The case reviewed by the European Court of Justice related to a complaint brought by Max Schrems, a 27-year-old Austrian graduate student, who argued that Europeans’ online data was misused when Facebook was said to have cooperated with the N.S.A.’s Prism program. That program is reported to have given the American agency significant access to data collected by several American tech companies. Facebook denies that the United States government had unlimited access to its users’ data. Mr. Snowden on Tuesday, after the court ruling, posted a message on Twitter praising Mr. Schrems: ‘‘Congratulations, @maxschrems. You’ve changed the world for the better.’’ In a statement on Tuesday, Mr. Schrems, who is pursuing a separate civil class-action lawsuit against Facebook in an Austrian court, praised the decision. “Governments and businesses cannot simply ignore our fundamental right to privacy,” he said, “but must abide by the law and enforce it.” -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

1 0

Fwd: [Internet Policy] An Indian view of zero-rating
by Barrack Otieno 09 Oct '15

09 Oct '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 08:01:27 +0200 Subject: [Internet Policy] An Indian view of zero-rating To: internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org I found that the article referenced below gives a balanced and thoughtful account of the debate regarding zero-rating: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/access-at-the-cost-of-net-neutrality/ar ticle7735242.ece Best, Richard _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

1 0

Kenya lags behind in setting interoperability standards in mobile money
by Ali Hussein 09 Oct '15

09 Oct '15

Listers This may be of interest. Interesting read on how Kenya continues to lag behind its East African neighbors in the development of the mobile money space and freedom to share money seamlessly through networks despite having been the outright global leader in the innovation of mobile money! Airtel, Tigo in interoperable mobile money pilot http://www.biztechafrica.com/article/airtel-tigo-interoperable-mobile-money… How Tanzania Established Mobile Money Interoperability http://www.cgap.org/blog/how-tanzania-established-mobile-money-interoperabi… 04 March 2015 Tanzania's mobile money industry is flourishing, and experts have been watching closely<http://www.cgap.org/blog/tanzania-ready-interoperability-mobile-money> to see if the possibility of interoperability could become a reality. After industry partners agreed in September 2014 on a new set of standards governing person-to-person payments across multiple networks, it's now evident that interoperability is here to stay. In general, mobile money interoperability has seen great strides in a very short time, with five markets - Tanzania, Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka - now offering this as an option for customers and agents. Nigeria also mandated interoperability in 2012<http://www.cenbank.org/out/2012/ccd/timeline%20for%20interoperability%20&%2…>, but this hasn't come to fruition just yet. All of these markets have followed different approaches. Indonesia's and Tanzania's initiatives were primarily industry-led, whereas Nigeria has followed a regulatory model. In Pakistan, ATM switches 1LINK and MNET, the technical infrastructure that facilitates transaction processing, were involved from the beginning. In Tanzania and Indonesia, providers have connected bilaterally through custom APIs. It is still too early to determine the success of these interventions and only time will tell if new models and standards will emerge. How did Tanzania do it? As a key entrant to the "Mobile Money Interoperability Club" it is worth discussing the Tanzania experience, as it offers some insights for markets and operators wishing to embark on similar initiatives. 1. An industry-led process The process towards interoperability in Tanzania started several years ago and has benefitted from the involvement of many partners. The latest round of negotiations that produced the payment-to-payment operating rules was facilitated by IFC and funded by the Bill & Melina Gates Foundation and FSDT. The Bank of Tanzania provided a supportive regulatory environment for engagement. Importantly however, the bulk of the content came directly from the industry. A very clear process was defined at the beginning and based on this a project plan and a team of experts from the payments and mobile industries was assembled. Through frequent meetings, debate, negotiation and eventually consensus, the industry has successfully put together a set of standards that will govern how person-to-person payments will be handled across networks. 2. Common business standards It is often thought that interoperability is a technology challenge and that a "switch" is the solution. However, a switch would merely be a technical solution that facilitates transactions based on a set of pre-agreed rules or standards. Without these rules and standards, in the card industry often referred to as a 'scheme', no transactions can be made through the technical switch. Therefore in Tanzania, the industry opted to develop the common operating standards first. Establishing these standards involved regular meetings to define and record membership and participation criteria, clearing and settlement principles, handling of disputes, principles for intra-party compensation (or interchange) and interparty risk. Now that the standards are in place, what next? There are currently no regulatory mandates in place in Tanzania forcing anyone in the market to implement the new standards. Each company can choose to opt-in to the new standards according to whether it makes business sense for them to do so. So far, four mobile money operators have opted in - Tigo, Airtel, Zantel, Vodacom - through bilateral API connections. Encouragingly, Tigo presented at the GSMA MMU meetings and believes from initial indications that it has been the right decision for its business. This is good news. Card schemes have proved that once the first players start, then the rest will follow. We believe the same holds for mobile money. Ultimately, interoperability offers great benefits to mobile money operators, regulators and customers alike, and should serve to advance financial inclusion. I'm curious. What is stopping us moving forward with interoperability? Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Györgyi Sent from my iPad

1 0

Fwd: [Internet Policy] Facebook and Free Basics - Was Kelvins question on Internet.org now renamed Facebook and Free Basics
by Barrack Otieno 06 Oct '15

06 Oct '15

Might be an interesting read following Kelvin Githira's question ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Delfi Ramirez <delf772(a)yahoo.es> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:38:30 +0100 Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Facebook and Free Basics To: Gary Wayne Kenward <garykenward(a)ieee.org> Cc: "[mailto:" <internetpolicy-bounces(a)elists.isoc.org>, "internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org" <internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> Gary: Thank you very much for your observation and for the projects provided in the link, too. I really appreciate it and find of interest. Far way from my intention, was to pretend or refer a solution in the electrical and electronics engineering area of knowledge and practice, areas where my ignorance is vast, and I apologize if this sense was meant in my letter. I agree with you in saying satellite is just one of the possible options. >From the news Astrid brought us, I realize we were, maybe, entering into a hole discussion about the pros and cons of a tool, the initiative and offer Mark and his company (and the social tool they provide ), instead of, as you well mention, the real issue, which is the funding for infrastructure. I realize there is a collision between interests and means of what is and will be the Internet for a lot of humans who do not have access to it. Not being myself an expert in this field, I guess it would be positive to know what choices are the most favourable, and of course not to allow directly a tool to represent the whole Internet. Which, in other aspect, has become a social need. Cheers Delfín Ramirez Ruiz weblog: http://delfiramirez.blogspot.com skype: segonquart linkedin: http://es.linkedin.com/in/delfin -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 5/10/15, Gary Wayne Kenward <garykenward(a)ieee.org> wrote: Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Facebook and Free Basics To: "Delfi Ramirez" <delf772(a)yahoo.es> Cc: "Astrid Maharani" <amaharanic(a)gmail.com>, "[mailto:" <internetpolicy-bounces(a)elists.isoc.org>, "internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org" <internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> Date: Monday, 5 October, 2015, 21:01 Defli: Satellite Internet is not new. For example, Hughes (the Aeronautics/Defence Company) has operated such a service, world wide, for many years (http://www.hughes.com/technologies/satellite-systems) There are limitations to satellite Internet services, primarily related to power attenuation and propagation delay on the uplink. Wireless backhaul is a very good option for providing Internet connectivity to remote areas. Satellite is one option to consider. So is long haul point to point WiFi. This project might interest you: http://tinyurl.com/nvxquj8. Eventually, the real issue is funding for infrastructure, whether ground station based wireless or satellite or cable or fibre. Cheers,Gary -----------------------------------------------When all think alike, then no one is thinking. – Walter Lippman 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 2015.10.05, at 15:06, Delfi Ramirez <delf772(a)yahoo.es> wrote: Dear All: First at all, thank you vm Astrid for pointing us to these news. It lead us to see and analyse the needed scenario clearly, and take some decisions based on it. Mark ( Zuckerberg) announces a pàrtner agreement with Eutelstat, and -- if I understood it well -- this is why his company is capable and is in real advantage to offer Internet services to those who, unfortunately, cannot use or access them. His solution goes beyond and further other considerations. The goal offered by him is access to those who cannot use the Internet. And his solution does not comes from the choice of a tool ( his own company ) , which may be the subject of most of the objections I have read in this thread, but from the benefit of spreading the connections through the infrastructure and assets a company that offers connectivity between humans has. Eutelstat has the needed infrastructure to provide access to the Internet. Let me , please, explain you something that might be of use. Fifteen years ago, aproximately , when I was analysing the need of trade and communications ( web/email commerce solutions ) I face the same issue of the need to spread the Internet around a region located in South Europe. After some months of heavy work and studies, then, that time, I reached to same conclusion Mark offers to us now. For the access for those zones where cable , or dial-up connections were not present, would be expensive to use or would take too long to be physically implemented, the feasible solution was the need of the active participation and presence and infrastructure of a satellite communications company to act or to be she the provider. Which might look of interest and which we should take in consideration for the feasible alternate solutions ( if any ) we may propose. Instead of talking about possible tools ( Wikipedia, Facebook, etcetera ) my we focus on the deliver of the access, and the costs of them. Mark provide us a solution. Any alternatives around here ? Note: There are, of course, other feasible scenarios that may offer or give us a solution to this concern ( how we give access to the Internet services --all of them -- for a segment or target of population ), which I would be glad to discuss privately with those interestd. Cheers Delfín Ramirez Ruiz weblog: http://delfiramirez.blogspot.com skype: segonquart linkedin: http://es.linkedin.com/in/delfin -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 5/10/15, Astrid Maharani <amaharanic(a)gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Facebook and Free Basics To: Cc: "[mailto:" <internetpolicy-bounces(a)elists.isoc.org>, "internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org" <internetpolicy(a)elists.isoc.org> Date: Monday, 5 October, 2015, 18:58 Hey all, just wanted to share fresh news from Mark Zuckerberg regarding to our discussions here that I've got from his FB Page. Let me know how do you think? Best,Astrid --I'm excited to announce our first project to deliver internet from space. As part of our Internet.org efforts to connect the world, we're partnering with Eutelsat to launch a satellite into orbit that will connect millions of people.Over the last year Facebook has been exploring ways to use aircraft and satellites to beam internet access down into communities from the sky. To connect people living in remote regions, traditional connectivity infrastructure is often difficult and inefficient, so we need to invent new technologies.As part of our collaboration with Eutelsat, a new satellite called Amos-6 is going to provide internet coverage to large parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. The Amos-6 satellite is under construction now and will launch in 2016 into a geostationary orbit that will cover large parts of West, East and Southern Africa. We’re going to work with local partners across these regions to help communities begin accessing internet services provided through satellite.This is just one of the innovations we’re working on to achieve our mission with Internet.org. Connectivity changes lives and communities. We’re going to keep working to connect the entire world -- even if that means looking beyond our planet. Source: https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10102407675865061?pnref=story On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> wrote: On 5 October 2015 at 15:07, Gary W Kenward <garykenward(a)eastlink.ca> wrote: And then there are those - mostly young people, who consider Facebook to be yesterday's news and wonder why you don't use Instagram, Snapchat, Vine [...] In my experience, given the technology time lag and the network effect of any such service (you go where your contacts are), inertia plays a stronger factor for new-to-Internet use than it does with people who are comfortable with it. And this factor has worked well, so far, for Facebook against competitors of its own generation (Myspace, Orkut, Socl, Google+ and many others). As you suggest, the current youth abandonment of Facebook may be more generational in cause than anything else. In my personal experience, people started leaving Facebook once their parents started poking them. We will continue to have cycles of sites that are cool and high demand -- until they're not and people move on. But that level of social media mobility will take time for new-to-the-Internet populations. By the time that present-day new users are comfortable enough to explore Facebook alternatives, there will be many yet-unimagined rivals available. <now, to bring things back on point...> Facebook's challenge is to deter people from moving away from their platform once they have the skill, comfort level (and in our context, affordable full-Web infrastructure) to do so. FB is welcome to dissuade people from leaving by providing superior services and interfaces and value. My concern is that they don't deter people from switching through artificial and deliberate lock-in techniques. - Evan _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. -- Astrid Maharani CaturiadikrishnaProgram Officer for UN-OIC Advocacy Human Rights Working Group (HRWG) Indonesia's NGO Coalition for International Human Rights AdvocacyJiwasraya Building Lobby Floor, Jl. RP. Soeroso No. 41, Jakarta 10350, IndonesiaPhone: 021 70733 505, 3143 015 | Fax: 021 - 3143 058HP: +62856 9588 6369 E: amaharanic(a)gmail.com | Skype: astridmaharanicT: @astridmaharanic | F: www.facebook.com/astridmaharanic -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

1 0

Re: [isoc_ke] Internet.org
by Barrack Otieno 06 Oct '15

06 Oct '15

Hi Kelvin, Interesting question. During the Kenya IGF, NET Neutrality was a very hot topic, the discussion almost derailed the meeting programme. In the end the Safaricom representative proposed that we organize a national forum on Net Neutrality. This scenario repeated itself during the Africa IGF and East Africa IGF and the Internet Freedom Forum held in Kampala last week. It is interesting to note that Face book was represented in the Africa IGF and the Internet Freedom Forum in Kampala. What i know is that Facebook is working with some Telco's on the Internet.org project but i am not sure who they are partnering with on the project to deliver Internet from Space. It would be usefull if any listers in the know might update us on current developements. Best Regards On 10/6/15, Kelvin Githira <kelvin(a)skysys.co.ke> wrote: > *From Mark Facebook CEO * > > > *"I'm excited to announce our first project to deliver internet from space. > As part of our Internet.org <http://internet.org/> efforts to connect the > world, we're partnering with Eutelsat to launch a satellite into orbit that > will connect millions of people.* > > *Over the last year Facebook has been exploring ways to use aircraft and > satellites to beam internet access down into communities from the sky. To > connect people living in remote regions, traditional connectivity > infrastructure is often difficult and inefficient, so we need to invent new > technologies.* > > > > *As part of our collaboration with Eutelsat, a new satellite called Amos-6 > is going to provide internet coverage to large parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. > The Amos-6 satellite is under construction now and will launch in 2016 into > a geostationary orbit that will cover large parts of West, East and > Southern Africa. We’re going to work with local partners across these > regions to help communities begin accessing internet services provided > through satellite.This is just one of the innovations we’re working on to > achieve our mission with Internet.org. > <http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2FInternet.org%2F&h=xAQH2tojtAQENj…> > Connectivity > changes lives and communities. We’re going to keep working to connect the > entire world -- even if that means looking beyond our planet."who are the > local stakeholders working in pertnaship with them ? what is there role, > what will be the need of internet accessible areas with no devices, > training or knowledge ?* > > -- > Kind Regards, > Kelvin Githira ----+254723284562 > Business Development Manager > www.skysys.co.ke > -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

1 0