https://www.cnet.com/news/facebooks-self-flying-solar-powered-internet-broadcasting-airplane-has-a-successful-first-flight/
https://www.wired.com/2016/07/facebooks-giant-internet-beaming-drone-finally-takes-flight/
https://www.wired.com/2016/02/google-shot-laser-60-miles-just-send-copy-real-genius/
Some Questions.
1. Since both google and facebook are US based companies would the company's in the wifi barren places (thinking 2nd and 3rd world countries) follow local law or american law.
2. how do you think technology and industry would advance in these countries if everyone had access to the internet. Would we see a rapid jump towards modernization or would there be little change with the majority of the inhabitants still not having access despite its presence.
3. what impact would this have culturally with the people suddenly having access to the internet and through that the entire rest of the world?
4. what monetary reason would these companies have to provide such a service to small poor countries? Would the goverment pay or would the provider have something like add revenue?
5. I have mostly applied this to poorer countries but could this also revolutionize Americas internet system?
I would think that in order for facebook to establish these drones in a country it would need approval from the local government, which would imply that it would, at least to some extent b governed by the local laws.
ReplyDeleteI think that if we take Japan as an example, when it started looking at what other countries were doing, it turned from an economic backwater into what is now one of the most developed countries. if free wifi became a world wide thing I am confident that it would allow for great amounts of growth even if there is a limited ability to access it.
it could potentially wreck a lot of cultural practices, but it also could allow for cultures to come together in more ways, so it could go either way.
there would be much the same incentive that exists in developed countries, e.g. adds, collecting information, etc..
it would mean that people wouldn't need t pay for data, which would cause some changes for sure, bu more importantly, it would mean that people can be online all the time, which brings forth questions as to what would be done with the assumption that people are always online, we could see helmets with data streamed directly in, because there would be a connection always available. we could also see cars that rely on the web for information about the road, and that talk to other cars via a constant internet connection.
1. Because both companies are based in the US, the company's in the Wi-Fi barren places would have to follow local laws.
ReplyDelete2. If everyone had internet access, I think technology would increase drastically. One of the major components of marketing and communication is through internet. If everyone had access to the internet, there would a large increase in education and awareness around the world. Internet also serves as a resource, so in going world wide, resources as increased. However, just because resources are increased, this doesn't guarantee increase in accessibility. An issue I can foresee is political figures limiting citizens to what is accessed. This is already the case for several countries around the world. Knowledge accessible through internet is limited, websites are blocked, etc. Taking these into consideration, I believe there would still be a rapid jump towards modernization.
3. World Wide Wifi would increase the world's interconnectedness. Some areas are unknown due to lack of visibility in media. By increasing their ability to be visible, with no cost, would bring the world closer together. I mean, that is kind of what SWEET is, in a sense. We use articles on the internet to spark ideas, and share on this blog. Granted, we talk in person, but still. Wifi would possibly be shocking or overwhelming for people who have never used it, similar to that of modern day elders.
4. These companies might have the incentive to provide such a service to small poor countries for marketing purposes. I'm not entirely sure whether the government would pay or if there would be ad revenue, I imagine there to be a combination of both.
5. I think the impact would be substantially less, but I do not doubt that this could also revolutionize Americas internet system. There is always room for expansion and new technology. With world wide wi-fi, I can foresee the number of internet users in the US would near 100%.
1. Similar to a foreign company coming to the US, I believe these companies offering this service would first have to follow local laws. These companies may be able to lobby for changes to make sure they have protection when bringing this technology to said country. However, it would not be fair to expect a foreign country to do something we would not expect from ourselves.
ReplyDelete2. It would totally depend on the type of internet access that could be provided to them. You see a country like North Korea who has internet access, but they only have access to a certain amount of web pages. Which, of course, is all government approved and ran. With many of the poorer countries overran with corruption, would the government want to allow their people a way to communicate easier and see what is available in other parts of the world?
3. Well, I think similar to how we have seen the internet transform the world around us, it would do the same for others. People having access to information is a powerful thing, which is why I think a lot of countries run by corrupt governments would fight against this idea more than welcoming it in. Looking at how social media played a big part in the Arab Spring would scare anyone in absolute power. Or even more, the way things have played out in the US with BLM and other protests over the past few years using social media as a way to get a platform out to more people than ever before.
4. I don't see how the governments of a 2nd/3rd world country would have the resources to pay for this technology. If they could, they would not need an American company to come in to help them. The only reasonable way for these companies to turn a profit would be ad revenue, but then what are you advertising to people who are struggling put food on the table? I believe this endeavor would have to be more about helping people around the world connect, not make a profit.
5. I think the transformation in America will happen naturally. Our culture is always to want more and want it faster. Due to the markets, this will happen without any help from the government, or one particular company as, if it isn't Facebook, it will be Google, and if not Google it will be some unknown company who sees a demand and takes advantage of it.
Side note: Has anyone seen Parks and Recreation when Grizzyl brought free wifi and devices to the people of Pawnee, Indiana?
1. i think they would have to follow local law if that's where they want to be stationed, you can't go to a different country and try to uproot there techniques of working and development you are the one responsible for adapting to their laws and ways.
ReplyDelete2. i think it depends on the distribution and reach how they are presented to the people. How they are regulated my government will determine how many people have access to w.i.f.i. There certain tribes in 3rd world countries that absolutely have no idea of all the development that has happened and trying to get them acquainted to W.I.F.I will be difficult because it's such a drastic jump that most communities may choose to ignore.
3. It'll make people more aware of all that is going on worldwide and this can also spark sharing of ideas and new innovations and awareness for natural disasters will allow everyone the opportunity to be able to help.
4. i feel like it would end up being more of the government of the certain countries paying to be able to use this service, if it should boom but if its more of an individual thing people in 3rd world countries wouldn't see the need for it if they could use their money elsewhere.
5. yes i think this could also revolutionize America because they can work with people form other countries easily and integrate ideas which also works to the benefit of America.
1. As the countries do control their airspace, it seems clear to me that the wifi would operate under foreign laws. Further, I would point to China as an example of how a state can work with a U.S. company, primarily Yahoo in this case.
ReplyDelete2. People think differently when given access to new ideas, so I feel that there must be change in the areas newly exposed to WiFi and the Internet. However, the degree of change will be limited by the strength of the regional culture and the level of poverty. The regional culture will interact with the new technology, and a lot of how the technology is adopted by the people in the region will be dependent on their social mores. While WiFi might be available, the technology that allows the people to access the Internet might be outside the ability of the local people to purchase. Further, as the companies providing the Internet access are doing so as a business decision, they might choose not to bring the Internet to regions which would not yield much of a financial gain for them.
3. I think the impact depends on the strength of the culture and regulation. I think some cultures will struggle with sudden access to the Western-dominated Internet. Further, I think government plays a large part in how the public receives the Internet. One could point to China's adoption of the Internet which is nearly completely bereft of any mention of China's human rights record and criticisms of its government. China has been quite successful in controlling the information that Chinese citizens have access to.
4. Developing economies are ripe for exploitation. South Korea and Taiwan were sleepy little agrarian societies only 40 or so years ago. Now, both are high-tech, fast-paced countries which spend and buy. Companies with early entry into rapidly developing countries like Ethiopia, Uzbekistan, Burma and Papua New Guinea reap dividends.
5. I don't think that WiFi drones will revolutionize America's Internet system. Our Internet system is quite mature already, with multiple ways of connecting even in relatively rural areas. Even islands in the far-flung Aleutians can connect to the Internet at acceptable speeds. I don't see this new technology competing well with current technologies with established infrastructure.