[wsfii-discuss] Economic Sustainability ofCommunity Wireless(sorry had to resend due to incorrect hyperlink)

Fri Apr 6 08:14:01 UTC 2007

Ramon,

My thought was that you might have misunderstood what Ashram was saying
because it was not clear to me from his writing that was being Impolite
- it was an unclear statement - maybe he can clarify. 

We need that caution, I just don't want to jump into bed with the
corporations until I really know about who I am jumping into bed with.

Often when money is lacking the scarcity mindset proliferates. We have
to be careful that we are not creating a trap for ourselves on several
levels:
1. Create/fuel the poverty reality; 2. Put yourself in a vulnerable
situation so that when the opportunities do emerge the best decision is
not made and the result is a less than stellar outcome.

For me the issue is about changing our mindsets about money and about
how we communicate and network. The resources are there. 

Lets not delude ourselves though. The large corporations who control the
global media space are already looking to incorporate the spirit of
community wireless into their system so that they can coopt the change
towards a more grassroots approach to communications into something more
status quo friendly. 

We need to be clear that this is not how it is going to happen. 

Community Wireless is not just about wireless but about how we
communicate. Even deeper, it about how disruptive technologies are being
used to promote authentic community based sustainable development on
many different levels. This is why OVF feels the idea of discussing
sustainability and integration at the wsfiiafrica2007 summit is so
important. For the larger progressive movement to be sustainable, we
need to see that we are each playing an important role in the ecosystem
of human interactions that is moving humanity towards real sustainable
development.

Its possible that with the right approach an mutually beneficially
agreement can be worked out with corporations that get the idea that
business as usual corporate/commercial culture is not just working. It's
actively killing the spirit and diverse cultural and social richness of
humanity as well as devastating the ecological vitality and diversity of
the planet

A few corporate cultures are starting to get the message, but those who
practice more than greenwash are still like gems though in a sea of
corporate conformity and mainstream medacrity. That is where Ramon's
comments ring true. 

There's tendency to migrate to wherever the dollar bills are, without
thinking about whether they are selling their souls in the process of
becoming financially secure. We definitely should not sell out our
ideals and those of the movement in the process of getting a bit of cash
to expand the networks.

In seriously considering any work with corporations, a process of due
diligence is needed to filter out the chaff from the gems.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: wsfii-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org
[mailto:wsfii-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of Ramon Roca
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 11:43 PM
To: contact at apiap.org; Discuss list on the World Summit on Free
Information Infrastructure
Subject: Re: [wsfii-discuss] Economic Sustainability ofCommunity
Wireless(sorry had to resend due to incorrect hyperlink)

Ashram,

I might be in a "developed country", but still living in an area with no

broadband access, and my need is for *today* also.
To say that I don't love freedom sounds to me *very unpolite* from your 
part.
Be sure that business models of choice could make the difference between

building a developed country, or keep it with the permanent need of 
subsidization or being a food for parasites. We can be in a mistake 
while doing the choice, we are human being, but there is no mistake in 
that those two types of of business models exist, so i recommend you to 
take your time to analyze things carefully.
And by the way, you are talking about an angel or just your imagination?

Did that angel really help you?

En/na Assoc of Public ICT Tools Access Prov ha escrit:
> Ramon,
>      Your point clearly brings in the difference of approach in a 
> developing country & developed.
> Who won't love the FREEdom .  Today I do not have anything to choose 
> from, so well as might let me make choice.
> The community networks however we deny requires huge leadership  & a 
> large seed capital.  The cooperative movement is missing. In India the

> the last successful cooperative happened some 40 years ago.  & I 
> cannot keep waiting for it to revive . My need is for TODAY. 
>
> The Emerging economy actually needs the cutting technology the most 
> but don't have that  leadership.  Only Social entrepreneurship  can 
> succeed , with some profits instead of no profits to remain
independent.
>
> The comparison is like between a Walmart & E-bay.   They both may make

> many unhappy but at least have a choice.  & of course WSFII can show 
> case more model which have been successful & under what circumstances.

> Djursland was lucky to have Bjarke .  So either  we should  set up a 
> large scale Human clone facility .  or leave  it to free enterprise . 
> Just make all the secrets open. ( which any way we are doing ) . there

> will be little left in throttling an enterprise.
> The Enterprise pays for execution & not hot talk shop which are 
> indulging . ;-) .
>
> Thus I completely agree with you  but as I don't see an Angel around  
> &  I am reluctantly ready to settle with lesser evil. 
>
> Ashish
>
>
>    
>
> On 4/5/07, *Ramon Roca* <ramon.roca at guifi.net 
> <mailto:ramon.roca at guifi.net>> wrote:
>
>     En/na Assoc of Public ICT Tools Access Prov ha escrit:
>     >
>     >
>     > So if Voice is a killer app & if you can help bring a plan where
you
>     > can not only reduce your budget  & maybe as well Profit from
>     > Participation, like a FON http://www.fon.com/en/ . by investing
>     > nominal money.
>     Good news to see interest from IT companies in developing
technology
>     suitable for developing wireless communities/entrepreneurs.
>     Having said that, be careful with the examples mentioned and be
away
>     from any confusion. In this case, although there is an intensive
>     use of
>     the "community" aesthetics and philanthropist look, is a private
held
>     company, and in reality their attitude has been aggressive to any
>     other
>     community which is not them or denying any form of net neutrality:
>     Instead of helping communities or providing broadband access to
>     everyone, they are only interested in who already have broadband
>     access
>     and give it to them for free to resell to those who don't have,
>     forcing
>     to be a only provider.
>     Please note that their model is very much invasive (only works if
the
>     private company is dominant) and parasite (feeded by those who
>     already
>     have something to give away).
>
>     And since they started they operations, and is going to be 2 years
>     from
>     now, they have been very loyal to their principles, with no
exception,
>     and no changes, although have been several times warned about all
>     of this.
>
>     Just think twice, if that model works, we'll have just another
>     monopoly.
>     Don't listen just the nice words they say, please look to what
they do
>     and what's really behind.
>
>     I would not say that's any model of economic sustainability. There
>     is a
>     lots of other better examples.
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Association of Public ICT Tools Access Provider
> http://www.apiap.org
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>   

_______________________________________________
wsfii-discuss mailing list
wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss