I am highly skeptical of this project; first, who is paying for all of this, and second, why does the content need to be "democratically/collectively chosen"?--which lines of thought and media are going to be excluded? Third, why the fuck would you trust anything that comes from the world bank? There's just something about this all that feels very Orwellian, including the line about "global citizens". Also, how can this possibly handle a global audience for games and movies? I could've bought it if it were books and articles--stuff that's usually under a megabyte--but video streaming and gaming? Either the internet really is that outdated or these people are severely overestimating what is possible.
Access to knowledge and information is a human right
I don't even... How does one's rights get violated by
virtue of existence? This is the political "original sin": "You're guilty, now give us money to amend for your sins!" I'm all up for providing the globe with access to knowledge, but there's something unusual going on with this project. I believe the following is what's causing the most amount of cognitive dissonance:
How Does it Work?
Outernet will utilize a constellation of low-cost, miniature satellites and existing infrastructure in geostationary orbit. In both cases, satellites receive content from the web through a network of ground stations which uplink content that the community has collectively requested.
No mention of where the cost stems from, no mention of how the "community" is going to "collectively request" material; I can only assume the payment will be taxation and the consensus of what material gets "uplinked" will be through a governing body. Either they don't care how it's funded and how it happens "so long as the dream comes true", or they're purposefully hiding it for who knows what reason.
