Although it is concerning that Facebook could essential become 'the internet' for people in developing countries you can't sit in your nice, comfortable office and tell people that should be their main concern. When you don't have internet access and when you can't access essential services with as much efficiency as we can, privacy and monopolies aren't the main concern. Easy access to health information, banks, money, and business opportunities are the main concern. Long term thinking is hard to grasp when you are forced to focus on the short term. Long term thinking is a luxury a lot of people in developing countries can't afford.
Fair point about citizens in developing countries being forced to focus on the short-term. But does that mean it's right for Facebook to take advantage of them in a way that, in the long-term, is questionable at best?
This is about more than just providing heating oil or railroads... this is about their entire information infrastructure, and they're in no position to negotiate.
The alternative is to "get out of the way." Instead of allowing these countries to get to internet access in their own way, and at their own pace, internet.org will hamstring the efforts by providing this free crippled version that will permanently warp these users view of what the internet is and push out smaller local competition that provides real internet.
The very fact that it's called internet.org is obvious proof of the dishonesty at play.
Sometimes the right answer is to do nothing if you don't have anything good to contribute.
