Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Commodore, Oct 5, 2015.
Nobody else is actually talking about Bush or Republicans at all.
Don't forget how terrible Fox News is, oh and obesity in the USA!.
Is the strawman dead? Is it safe to come out yet?
This is what he stated:
This practice with no strings whatsoever obviously stopped with the end of Clinton administration, and didn't restart again until the Obama administration. But let's not let the facts get in the way.
Free internet will lead to the eradication of hunger and poverty!
I'm just wondering who Facebook thinks they're helping if they intend for this to be a charitable event. I'm guessing that not a whole lot of poor Africans have access to the internet, or to mobile devices, and that this will mainly help those who already have the money to buy internet in the first place.
Where did I mention Clinton, Bush or the US in that quote exactly?
I think penetration of mobile, internet-capable devices is decent in parts of Africa. The idea here is that FB is giving away access to the internet and presumably that anyone with an internet-capable device would be able to get it. How they intend on delivering the internet to these devices is unknown at the moment. Though I've reason to suspect they are going to deploy it through pre-existing 4G/3G networks.
Where did you not is the obvious question.
A much better scheme was one done some years ago in India where they built cheapo AMD laptops, and had them heavily subsidized to only cost $50 which they sold mainly to poor students.
On the other hand, free internet isn't helping anyone that cant currently afford food or electricity.
I don't think I can possibly make it any simpler. But here goes:
Clinton: Free condoms and HIV/AIDs medicine for all.
Bush: Few condoms and free HIV/AIDs medicine only for the "right" people.
Obama: Free condoms and HIV/AIDs medicine for all.
If you can't afford food you are likely a substinance farmer who would benefit from the internet by gaining access to weather reports and grain prices. There is enough electricity to run mobile devices (which don't have to be plugged in at all times to function) which is one of the reasons why they have decent penetration in Africa compared to traditional laptops.
No, true. But it vastly benefits anyone who can then decide whether to save for a mobile device or not. And that benefit will have mulitiplier effects.
There's no doubt this will hurt local carriers and their investors. But 'internet access' is probably one of the lowest-hanging fruit for poverty-reduction out there other than disease prevention.
Separate names with a comma.