[izendejas]

I wish people understood you just can't go into a foreign country and do whatever the hell you want.

I think it comes down to how one measures progress. Sometimes you have to work with corrupt governments and monopolies because the alternative is really null. I'd much rather give a lot of people access to basic services than no access at all--in fact, one hypothesis is that people will eventually be able to afford standard internet service (censored or not).

Eventually, more informed citizens will demand better regulations and more accountability from said corrupt organizations. We can't do it for them, they need to do it but they must first be empowered. Hell, a lot of the people who will benefit could care less about net neutrality when they're starving and have very few opportunities!

It's the startup way--minus the complete disruption, isn't it? MVP, then iterate, iterate... A complete disruption is just laughably impractical.

Disclaimer: I used to work at Facebook, but these opinions are entirely my own.

[mpbm]

<I wish people understood you just can't go into a foreign country and do whatever the hell you want.>

I think the MNCs (multi-national corporations), particularly the tech MNC's, don't give a shit about countries. And why should they? The cyberspace domain doesn't consider things like borders or nationalities first-class citizens. They're just trivia.

On the internet, everyone is a few milliseconds away.

The awkward part is that most of the development of internet-based tech is happening in the West, so when it's offered to the world it looks an awful lot like Western governments intruding, since the MNC's default is their home country's laws.