[rubberstamp]

First of all, this is not "free internet" they are trying to provide. Second point - if they were trying to genuinely provide a free internet service, nothing is stoping them from doing it without all the legalise TOS that surrounds it at the moment. Third point - Free 200MB or 500MB data per month for each person is the best way to do it(no video streaming/big files download), if "helping" was the actual intention. If the only services that is accessible through it will be the ones approved by facebook, stop calling it "free internet".

Also the cost of providing the service is on the ISP/carrier that FB ties up with.

The key factor that is glossed over is:

> Though the programme is promoted by Facebook, its costs are borne by the mobile-telecoms operators.

I was all for facebook basics when I thought Facebook was paying for poor people to access at least some restricted internet access. But its actually the operators that are paying for this. Giving away free access to some sites in a walled garden, hoping those same users will pay to access other sites at some points.

So Facebook is just a beneficiary in all of this. Getting new users at no cost. Taking the credit for it, while operators are actually paying the bills.

[rubberstamp]

The poor also deserve privacy and actual internet instead of being snooped up on and fed by "internet for the poor".