The Outernet a new possibility of free information?

[Unity+]

With a new source of free information with global access, it might change the world.

 

Imagine life without the Internet. That's the reality for much of the world almost 5 billion people in heavily censored or remote areas where the Internet remains largely unavailable. Outernet, a New York-based tech company, wants to change that.

 

Starting Aug. 11, Outernet will broadcast by satellite more than 5,000 Wikipedia articles, along with several other pieces of Internet content. Anyone in North America or Europe with a small satellite dish and some hardware will be able to receive and locally download the informationalmost like a DVR for the Internet.

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-g-outernet-explained-20140808-htmlstory.html

 

Will the internet become a utility rather than a product of a corrupt system of Isp's(sarcasm)? What do you think?

Edited August 13, 2014 by Unity+

[imatfaal]

With a new source of free information with global access, it might change the world.

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-g-outernet-explained-20140808-htmlstory.html

 

Will the internet become a utility rather than a product of a corrupt system of Isp's? What do you think?

"rather than a product of a corrupt system of Isp's?" Citation required.

 

The content of the internet is not controlled by the ISPs - and in such an open market it would be difficult to argue that in much of the world there is any control over either content or availability. The measure of constraint that does exist is due to governmental pressure both overt through statute and regulation, and implicit through finger-pointing and threat of future legislation. The real control comes through users and usage patterns - the fact that punters go where they can get what they want and avoid that which disturbs them, and that the advertising, the money, and influence follow the punters.

 

5000 chosen pages (a tiny subsection) from Wikipedia seems to me to be a huge trammelling of the freedom of the internet as I am afraid that the decision of which page to broadcast will be made on partially political grounds

[CaptainPanic]

Where I live, internet seems pretty open and free.

 

I think the biggest threat to the open internet is not the censorship by governments. It is the drive by copyrights 'protectors' to block all kinds of content, either through technical changes to the internet, or through lobbying and law.

 

But I applaud the initiative to make information accessible through other means. Are they also going to broadcast porn to countries where it is blocked? (If they will, their initiative might actually be successful, since everybody knows that the internet is 70% porn, 20% cat videos and only 10% useful information).

[Strange]

I would have thought that almost "anyone in North America or Europe with a small satellite dish and some hardware" would already have Internet access.

[Unity+]

"rather than a product of a corrupt system of Isp's?" Citation required.The content of the internet is not controlled by the ISPs - and in such an open market it would be difficult to argue that in much of the world there is any control over either content or availability. The measure of constraint that does exist is due to governmental pressure both overt through statute and regulation, and implicit through finger-pointing and threat of future legislation. The real control comes through users and usage patterns - the fact that punters go where they can get what they want and avoid that which disturbs them, and that the advertising, the money, and influence follow the punters.5000 chosen pages (a tiny subsection) from Wikipedia seems to me to be a huge trammelling of the freedom of the internet as I am afraid that the decision of which page to broadcast will be made on partially political grounds

Those aren't my word, it is merely quotes from arguments from people who talk about "evil Isp's"

 

Also, it isn't about isp's being capable of such content. It is about isp's being able to have tier lists, which cause problems for competing sites. Other censorship deals with problems in china and Australia with their firewalls.

I would have thought that almost "anyone in North America or Europe with a small satellite dish and some hardware" would already have Internet access.

I'm assuming through illegal means? Or am I wrong about that?

Where I live, internet seems pretty open and free.

 

I think the biggest threat to the open internet is not the censorship by governments. It is the drive by copyrights 'protectors' to block all kinds of content, either through technical changes to the internet, or through lobbying and law.

 

But I applaud the initiative to make information accessible through other means. Are they also going to broadcast porn to countries where it is blocked? (If they will, their initiative might actually be successful, since everybody knows that the internet is 70% porn, 20% cat videos and only 10% useful information).

I don't know about porn. They work on a tier system with most requested content being most available, so maybe.

Edited August 13, 2014 by Unity+

[Edwina Lee]

There are so many roque sources of information on the internet as it is.

 

The only reason the existing internet is useful is because there are recognised authorities of information which existed before the internet existed.

 

They asserted their existence and their truths, which allow us to distinguish good information from doggy ones.

 

Outernet is good? Extremely unlikely.