What Net Neutrality is talking about is not creating a payTV format where you pay for channels(sites) more you pay the more you can access. Wikipedia Zero is different as its focus isnt on accessing the site its about making that access free from mobile/cell data charges in place where the primary net connection is via mobile/cell services.
What I'm reading is a conflagration between freely accessing Wikipedia as a site(or any other site) and getting that data free as in beer. Its like driving a car on the road net neutrality is being able to drive on the road without tolls and WP0 is about fuel economy of the vehicle you drive
On 27 November 2017 at 16:29, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
It is rather unfortunate that we went ahead with things like "Wikipedia Zero" without objection. It rather undermines our moral authority to demand net neutrality, and now that's really needed. Someone could easily say "But you support non-neutral schemes when it benefits you!", and not be far wrong.
Todd
On Nov 26, 2017 2:49 AM, "Vi to" vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
I have to rely upon my knowledge of plans in EU, I may be wrong with
other
"rich Countries", if so please make me aware of.
Time-based tariffs are in "rich countries" are almost out of business.
Also
data, cheaper data plans currently includes enough data to make surfing
WMF
sites impact very few upon overall consumption. How can you tell "who" is eligible for WP0? By "who" I mean which countries/places, telco users,
etc.
A line between "rich" and "poor" countries is "easy" to draw, others aren't.
Making zero-carrier a default for all of the World would make me drop my objections. But we firstly need to find a safe and cheap (in terms of efforts) way to stop abuses, though most of abuses come from Countries where data traffic is really expensive.
Finally a question: do we have reports about WP0? I mean, traffic, number of users served, pages delivered, costs?
Vito
2017-11-26 4:32 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com:
Hoi, While the USA is considered a developed country, the people in the USA
who
have least to spend are probably as deserving of zero rated Wikimedia service as many of the people who do get Wikipedia Zero elsewhere. The article indicates that our mission is to bring information to people
and
that is no different in the USA. With Wikipedia and its sister
projects
considered as a way to bring quality, neutral point of view
information,
it
would even serve as a means to combat the misinformation that will
benefit
from zero rating of information.
Zero rating is bad in so many ways but your argument does only say that
it
was originally intended for developed countries. When there is a
benefit
to
our readers I only see upsides in promoting the use of Wikimedia
content
in
this way and no reason not to have Wikimedia Zero in the USA. Thanks, GerardM
On 26 November 2017 at 03:56, Mz7 mz7.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
The relationship between net neutrality and the Wikimedia Foundation
has
been described as “complicated” – see [1]. Considering the that the Wikimedia Foundation has a zero-rating program of its own (see
[2][3]),
I’m
not exactly sure how much this would affect Wikimedia, whether
positively
or negatively. On the one hand, we could take advantage of the change
by
expanding Wikipedia Zero into the United States. On the other hand,
that’s
probably not a good idea because the program is designed to promote
access
to free knowledge in developing countries, where access to the
Internet
may
be prohibitively expensive. In a developed country such as the United States, that’s not really a prioritized issue.
Mz7
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/ 11/25/wikipedias-complicated-relationship-with-net-neutrality/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero [3] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mz7
On Nov 24, 2017, at 5:06 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi, With the demise of net neutrality in the USA, have their been
consideration
for the impact it may have for the services provided by the
Wikimedia
Foundation?
We are reliant on servers in the USA, as the quality of the service
in
the
USA is no longer a given, what are the risks? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe