[lilfrost]

They are providing people who do not have internet with internet. They are giving people a useful service they did not have before for free. They aren't making people use the service or pay anything for it. I don't see a negative.

[yarrel]

They are not providing the Internet to people who do not have the Internet. They are providing a couple of websites in a walled garden.

They are not giving people a useful service that they did not have before, they are giving people a deliberately broken and compromised system.

They are not giving it to people for free, they are making people pay with their data and security.

As for not forcing people to use it, there's a pretty strong push to get people to use it and a commercial monopoly in a given market is often a disincentive to new entrants.

Those are some of the negatives.

[thrownaway122]

This is not the internet. This is facebook $\pm$ other big company's sites.

The problem is that this will not be until the real internet arrives for poor people but instead. For millions, maybe billions (potentially for the majority of the world's population) the internet could forever be only facebook/yahoo/${big corps website}...