So, a significant day for us at @medianama today. An especially difficult decision for me to make, since I've always felt a pull from a public interest perspective that information, in order to be effective and usable by a wider group, needs to be open, and accessible
1/
Our goal has always been to help bring about a deeper understanding of the forces shaping the Internet, especially in India, with the mission to foster an Internet that is open, fair, competitive and global.
Our work has provided insight that has helped shape tech policy,
2/
encouraged public participation in policy-making, provided policy & business decision makers with food for thought, been a source for papers, research reports & books, as well as helped journalists at other publications understand what’s important.
3/
Our work is driven by the pursuit of meaning,& our body-of-work approach,of staying with an issue,and not letting it fade after a single story,is testament to that. Our events, both physical & virtual, have been focused on enabling meaningful & audience-focused conversations.
/4
Over the past couple of years, activity in both tech policy & business in India have ramped up. I’ll be honest: just keeping pace with all that has been going on, has been a struggle for our small team. We need to grow, and to build our capacity to do more
5/
For that, we need your support and subscription to enable us.
If we’ve been of use to you – helped you understand an issue, raise a voice for something you believe in, been a source for an article, report, story, book or presentation you’ve prepared,
6/
or led to a phone call that’s made things better for you – in many cases, get a job (as many have told us in the past) – do subscribe to MediaNama.
MEITY, NIC & NeGD, in response to @OfficialSauravD RTI say they have no info on who created Aarogya Setu.
In this thread, I'll connect some dots:
1.Much of this info is in public domain. Then why no official documents? To protect those who built it? Or
(1/n)
to protect bureaucrats who authorised the building of this app by third party volunteers, possibly, without requisite paperwork? List of Aarogya Setu volunteers had been published on Github btw medianama.com/2020/05/223-aa…
(2/n)
2. Volunteers in govt tech: in Aadhaar, some of Nandan Nilekani's team were "volunteers", but via an official process. So much of tech+policy development done by (Nandan linked) iSpirt "volunteers" is officially (govt) undocumented or invisible. 3. Volunteers have a unique+
(3/n)
1. Govt is positioning this as a benefit. That's incorrect. FDI has been reduced from 100% to 26%. How do we know it was 100%? NewsCorp had bought VCCircle in 2015: medianama.com/2015/03/223-ne… They've now sold it at a loss to Mint, after the FDI policy was announced.
(2/n)
2. This move strengthens the traditional media lobby against digital companies. Traditional media co's had formed a digital lobby group in 2018. This is probably their doing: medianama.com/2018/10/223-on… (3/n)
The removal of Paytm and Paytm First Games from the Google Play Store covers two interesting #techpolicy issues:
1. Platform Power: Google and Apple have an operating system duopoly. Remember that you can't upload an app store app on the Google Play Store. Thus
(1/n)
They have the power of the default. It's also an app store duopoly. They leverage this duopoly to control entire ecosystems, and effectively control the app economy of a country. The TRAI Chairman @rssharma has spoken about "platform neutrality". Can they ban apps from
(2/n)
their platform, without repercussions? Of course they can, as a pvt platform. They don't want to enable realmoney gaming & gambling? That's their prerogative. But there's a challenge when apps don't have any other significant options.
Q's you have to ask about the IE story on Zenhua and Chinese profiling of significant Indian folks is: 1. is profiling illegal?
It isn't. Not even as per the personal data protection bill. Twitter does it. Facebook does it. LinkedIn does it. Political parties do it.
1/n
2. Is collecting public data off social media illegal?
It isn't. Much of ad industry is exactly that. Collect data, classify people, target them. But it is surveillance. SC said about Indian govts social media tender: blanket montioring of social media is mass surveillance.
2/n
3. Is identifying/documenting relationships between people using publicly available data illegal?
It isn't. Journalists do this for stories. LinkedIn does it, quite publicly. Social media = behavioral and relational info
3/n
Dunzo, one of India's most popular hyper-local delivery apps (funded by Google) said its user phone numbers and email addresses were breached in a #cybersecurity incident.
Here's what we know 👇
1. Attackers compromised servers of a third party that Dunzo works with, and accessed the Dunzo database through them.
2. Payment info (credit cards etc) was not compromised
3. Passwords were not compromised because Dunzo uses OTPs
What we don't know 👇
1. We don't know if email addresses of all users have been compromised, or only some.
2. Who the vendor is. Dunzo hasn't disclosed the name.
There remains a risk (if the vendor wasn't working exclusively with Dunzo) that other databases could have been compromised.
India has banned 59 Chinese apps. The list is below.
Thread with my comments on this follows 👇 (1/6)
1. This is the very first time, to my knowledge, that the Indian govt has actually ANNOUNCED a ban on apps under Section 69 of the IT Act. You know what's surprising? They don't NEED to announce it. Section 69 allows for secret govt blocking. (2/6)
Thus, this is a POLITICAL decision. It has been announced to send China a message. It should not be seen as anything but a political decision. No change in way these apps function over the past 3 months. If this is the right decision, why wasn't it taken a year ago? (3/6)