[jags-v]

I do think that any attempt to provide access which is limited & curated should be shouted down , because it is totally disastrous in the long term. There are other business models which are currently in play , which can be considered, such as

- Aircel has free access at a speed of 64kbps (very slow) but still the user has access to the entirety of the internet , not a walled garden.

- There is a different model, where user view an ad on a per day basis and get a certain data limit in return. Mozilla has implemented this. This gives access to entirety of the internet.

[rspeer]

Man, I remember when 33.6kbps was perfectly acceptable for participating in sites like Slashdot.

I bet websites could provide appropriately low-bandwidth versions more easily than they could be vetted by Facebook's walled garden.

[jags-v]

yep. Most of the sites are heavy because of tracking & user analytics part of which make make a huge chunk of the data download( pixel tracking , etc.)