[Governance] Fwd: [Internet Policy] Telcos Looking For Handouts.

[parminder via Governance]

I mean, isnt it extraordinary that when someone points out, quoting real 
statistics, that Internet traffic today is largely under a few Big Tech 
corporations' control, there are many very intelligent people ( a whole 
train of postings on the ISOC list) who would keep insisting that the 
telco are the real problem, lets focus on them!

On 05/06/22 10:56, parminder via Governance wrote:
>
>
> I though this group may also be interested in this ..
>
> (Lest it becomes just a noticeboard to hang our dear Joly MacFie's 
> ISOC annoiuncements :) )
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: 	Re: [Internet Policy] Telcos Looking For Handouts.
> Date: 	Sun, 5 Jun 2022 10:31:26 +0530
> From: 	parminder <parminder.js at gmail.com>
> To: 	David Lloyd-Jones <david.lloydjones at gmail.com>, ISOC 
> INTERNETPOLICY <internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org>
>
>
>
>
> On 31/05/22 22:43, David Lloyd-Jones via InternetPolicy wrote:
>> Parminder writes, with his usual degree of acuity and discrimination, 
>> " Big Tech now accounts for 57 percent of global internet traffic"
>>
>> https://techmonitor.ai/technology/networks/big-tech-accounts-for-over-half-of-global-internet-traffic,," 
>>
>> This is nothing but telephone companies looking for handouts.
>
> David, Since you name me, and with apparent sarcasm, I must say that I 
> am not quite sure what you are alluding to... Now if net neutrality 
> (NN) violations is *telcos looking for handouts* (as the successor 
> title to the thread that was originated by me as "Big tech now 
> accounts for 57% of global Internet traffic"), let me share it with 
> you that we (me/ my organization/ our networks) have been strongly 
> fighting for enforcement of NN since the 2000s. This is documented 
> history. We have been at it even when many organizations like the EFF 
> were still not sure if there should be regulation to nforce NN. 
> Perhaps even ISOC. We have held numerous advocacy events, including at 
> the IGF , this is an article for enforcing NN 
> <https://itforchange.net/sites/default/files/367/Internet_mall-EPW_0.pdf>that 
> appeared in India's top academic journal in 2010, and there have been 
> numerous op-eds after that. We played a considerably important role in 
> the eventual NN rules in India....
>
> I had forwarded this above article about big tech's control over more 
> than half the global internet traffic NOT to press for telco's rights 
> to seek rents from big tech or others - -that is anathema for me. It 
> was to highlight the kind of control big tech increasingly has, not 
> just over the Internet, but  thereby also over more and more aspects 
> and elements of our lives and our socio-economic systems. (Have you 
> ever thought about it!)
>
> Now with this behind us ..
>
> While people have a right to their views, and emphasizing issues they 
> wish to, I remain highly amused with how the debate turned completely 
> to be about the excesses of telcos -- who are a fast retreating and 
> increasingly inconsequential power, apart from being highly regulated 
> in public interest. (That in fact is the main reason that poor telcos' 
> get such falk, they are associated with governments, which is the 
> Interenty libertarian' real enemy.) Which, excuse me to say so, put 
> all together looks like a desperate collective effort not to look at 
> and talk about the real elephant in the room - the Big Tech. If the 
> statistics of 57 % internet flows being in the hands of 5 US 
> corporations does not shock people into their senses, and they still 
> want to focus on telcos, who whatever they may wish arent getting 
> anywhere with demands for more rents, there must be *something 
> fundamentally amiss and askew*.
>
> People here -- and one wonders why -- still want to tilt at the 
> windmills of the telcos, when right behind them the Big Tech devil is 
> fast devouring the world, or, using a different way to make the point, 
> chaining it to be under its command. People in the streets, almost all 
> media, and most politicians, are worried like hell about this. Opeds 
> upon opeds and legislative proposals upon proposals are pouring out. 
> And here we sit among a smug community, which earned its much-vaunted 
> spurs valiantly fighting 'for the Internet' in the 1990s and part of 
> 2000s, and now even got powerful and resourceful institutions like the 
> ISOC, and very-valauble representation in policy making as 'technical 
> community', but which now wants to entirely rest on its laurels. For 
> that, if they have to re-imagine to completely distort the reality 
> around them, and blatantly refuse obvious facts, they will fully and 
> energetically do so. As we see done so woefully and regrettably in 
> this exchange, and mostly on this list, and as a staple by ISOC, and 
> so on.
>
> Were it just some harmless oldies having a good time with good 
> memories of their own golden times, that would be fine. But what has 
> unfortunately happened is that their 'historical good acts' of 
> contributing to and politically fighting for an epochal level 
> decentralization of 'network power' -- in a shift from the telco 
> centric communications to Internet based interactions, resulting in 
> continuing basic re-organisations in our socioeconomic systems, has 
> now been solidly, and in an extraordinarily successful manner, 
> captured and co-opted in defense of exactly what it was organized to 
> oppose. By this i mean *an  unacceptable concentration of network 
> power* (which consequently, in a digital context, has then led to 
> creation and then concentration of 'data/ AI power'). Many have simply 
> walked innocently into the Pied Piper like trap, which trap is of 
> course highly resourced -- politically, by the US establishment, and 
> economically by Big Tech. Some are just innocent about the *cheese 
> having been moved*, or too weak to deal with more complex realities. 
> That is the kinder interpretation of what is happening, Because, the 
> fact also is, many others have found deeply rewarding roles and 
> benefits in the process, and this part is less than innocent or mere 
> weakeness. I speak here of both persons and organizations like the 
> ISOC. They simply need to keep investing in what 'they are', and what 
> sustains them.
>
> But since every sin  -- especially collective, public ones -- need 
> whatever veneers of self justification that can be conjured up, this 
> has resulted in some remarkably funny and even hilarious discussions, 
> arguments, and positions. It it were just funny, I am not averse to 
> deriving some light-minded enjoyment out if it, but the fact is that 
> it is all extremely extremely dangerous to the world, especially for 
> the coming generations -- who would ask, *what were the people who 
> knew doing when Big Tech took over and screwed-up our hard earned 
> civilization*. It indeed completely passes me how  so many such 
> intelligent, and good, people refuse to see their role and 
> responsibility in this background, and are happy to do nothing but 
> keep talking about and extolling the virtues of some vintage Internet 
> they allegedly helped create and defend, to the determent of so much, 
> of the present, and the future. Have you guys ever tried to talk with 
> a more contemporary, and/ or disinterested, person on the streets! 
> Would be insightful, and useful, i say.
>
> No, this is not about telco versus internet -- it is about 
> concentrated versus distributed network-power. At some historical 
> point, long passed, this duality expressed primarily as being about 
> telco versus the Internet. Today it is about Big Tech versus a 
> distributed digital ecology, which, like NN was enforced by hard law, 
> *can only be ensured by new kinds of hard laws* (EU is making some 
> feeble and unconvincing efforts, with its Digital Markets Act, Data 
> Act, GAIA projects, some others are too). That my friends, is where 
> the cheese has now be moved to. Lets not fool ourselves.
>
> So please wake up, and see *where actual network-power currently is* 
> (today even more dangerous as it further yields data/ AI power), and 
> WHAT IS NEEDED TO BE DONE ABOUT IT .. Please give rest to Quixotic 
> imageries and battles.
>
> David, since you so are so affected by my acuity and discrimination, 
> just thought I'd indulge you more :) .No offense.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
>>
>> The fact is all of internet traffic, not any 67%, is carried by "Big 
>> Tech": the telephone companies. All of this is paid by us, the 
>> recipients, in our telephone bills.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To manage your Internet Society subscriptions or unsubscribe, log into your member profile athttps://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/Entity/MyProfile, go to the Preferences tab and edit your email consent and general channels. Changes may take up to 3 hours to take effect.
>> -
>> View the Internet Society Code of Conduct:https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20220605/a58f381c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Governance mailing list
Governance at lists.igcaucus.org
https://lists.igcaucus.org/mailman/listinfo/governance