- KICTANet - KICTANet

Re: [kictanet] [who are the sponsors? Managing indoctrination risks...] CALL TO PARTICIPATE AT THE 4TH EDITION OF KENYA SCHOOL OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE (KESIG)
by Grace Bomu 04 Jul '19

04 Jul '19

Patrick, 1. You raise high level policy issues which I will share with colleagues in the global SIGs movement. Why do we use the word school? Why are we non-conforming to the traditional methods of accreditation for training? I think this comes from the (disruptive) history of internet policy making. 2. As regards the sources of funding, I totally get your fears. However, we live in this community where each of the stakeholders is differently abled. What we have is an understanding that KICTANet's role is to convene meetings while the funders is to resource. I can assure you that there is independence between the funders and content of the meetings. Indeed, the KeSIG and KIGF strive for inclusive and meaningful views from all stakeholder groups, including those that do not contribute resources. Contribution in terms of policy ideas is just as highly regarded. 3. Our programme is based on Diplo Foundation's taxonomy of internet governance issues with local adaptation. Please check out An Introduction to Internet Governance by Jovan Kurbalija. If you read the 2016 KeSIG report, you will also find the rationale for starting KeSIG- we had a lot of people interested in internet governance who needed to learn the basics- what is the internet, its history, Kenya's role in global policy making, the actors etc. 4. Yes to all that. KICTANet as a network is about 10 years old but KICTANet as an organisation is barely 3 years old. The current steering team is doing great work in setting up the organisational structures with the assistance of donors. Please check each KICTANet report for the specific donors. As someone who has worked in this team, I am struck by the strategy to get local companies to also support policy making work. Although so far we have only received project based grants, I am sure that future teams will be able to get more core support from these companies. After all, this is our country and world to build. 5. absolutely. Please check KICTANet website for publications. You will note that they are all enabled by the generosity of our partners. I am also glad to note that the new kids of KICTANet are adopting video and other more interesting methods to curate our experiences. PS: The new kids introduced the idea of video while volunteering in the committees. They are also very active and more comfortable with discussing policy on social media as opposed to here. 6 &6. I am aware that the current team has been planning/looking for resources for a community summit for the KICTANet community to meet and discuss among others: organisational structure, succession and sustainability. Look out for this. I welcome you to think of other models for financial resource mobilisation. Should KICTANet community membership be subscription based? What then do we do with members who have other resources eg critical analysis? We also need policy makers because they need to hear ideas as they develop even before they are formally presented to them as policy proposals. Remember the diversity of stakeholders is what makes KICTANet what it is. 7. We do have a lot of students at KICTANet, thanks to the many lecturers who send them our way. Other students find their way from these calls we make here. But our diversity is not limited to students. We also have artistes (credit to them for videos), self taught programmers, designers and other new age professionals. Please please come to KeSIG and see KICTANet in action. I am sure you will appreciate some of the inner workings more. All the issues you raise are valid. But I also find that you are coming from a sort of outsider perspective. This is by no means a disadvantage. On the contrary, it would be great if you could contribute some time towards the backend and bring your fresh ideas to work. So again, I invite you to join one of the working groups or committees and share ideas for ongoing programmes. But I warn you, it takes a lot of hours and dedication to execute a programme. Infact, this is the reason I could not answer you sooner. I hope this sheds more light on your questions. Warmly, On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 09:02, Patrick A. M. Maina <pmaina2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you Grace for the constructive and calm response. > > The idea of offering training on policy is a good one - in principle - > because, if properly implemented, it can help promote broader, > intellectually diverse and meaningful engagement on important policy issues. > > My *good-faith concerns* are with the approach taken by certain > initiatives - perhaps with "SIG" as an example. Let me offer some > constructive suggestions to help build on the underlying idea and improve > it (as well as ideas for broader improvements to KICTANet's governance > framework): > > *1. Using the word "school" to market and EVENT can convey deceptive > intent:* The word "school" has certain connotations (and its use may have > legal implications); it creates certain automatic impressions, assumptions > and expectations in peoples minds. Using the word to lends an aura of *pedagogical > robustness* and *institutional credibility* to what appears to be > essentially a partisan event/forum. This can be interpreted as deceptive > advertising and might also be in conflict with education laws / regulations > (lawyers can advise). > > Is it really necessary to rely on deception to attract participants? Why > go to such lengths? The choice of deceptive branding (coupled with > historical support from scandal ridden corporations) can send legitimate > signals that the intention is to brainwash / indoctrinate participants - > especially in the context of policy agendas. > > Unless I'm missing something... Could you please clarify the historical > rationale for calling it a "school" and whether, in view of the above > considerations, it would make sense to drop the word "school" and just call > it what it really is: a potentially partisan discussion forum? > > Participants should be given a written *conflict of interest advisory* > prior to the event so that they can contextualize the content's point of > view (if there have not been any robust quality controls). This helps > promote transparency. > > *2. The source of funding matters: * > > Examples: > *a.* Consider the debate of whether religious institutions, the supposed > custodians of our "core values", should accept contributions from dubious > sources. Accepting the funds compromises the perceived moral authority of > the institution thus destroying its credibility. It is also a form of moral > laundering. Civil Society / Non-profits also face these challenges. They > rely on donations to survive - but what happens when there is a conflict of > values e.g. in cases where the donor is a known lawbreaker who pursues > profit with disregard for ethics and against public-interest values? > > *b.* There is a saying: "whoever pays the piper calls the tune": It is > fair to question the ethics of civil society / non-profits accepting > funding from companies that are notorious for deceptive and illegal > activities - to the extent that even governments have labelled some as > "digital gangsters". These companies are known for aggressively seeking to > corrupt/influence policy and regulations all over the world to legitimize > their harmful and exploitative practices. The companies are also known for > purposefully applying unethical brainwashing techniques on mass scale to > achieve their selfish ends. What is the perception created (and what are > the risks) when such brands sponsor internet governance training? > > So unless we are saying it is OK for, say, as an illustrative example - > NACADA (National Agency for the Campaign against Drug Abuse) to accept > funding and partnership from Chang'aa dealers and Colombian drug lords to > help deliver training on how to influence policies on illegal drugs... see > what I mean? > > *3. Training Content, Pedagogical Quality and Delivery matters:* A > training course on policy matters should be robustly and professionally > developed (not just random calls for content), put through quality > assurance controls (e.g. peer, industry and public reviews), followed by > accreditation by credible institutions. It should also be delivered by > qualified and credible instructors. > > To maximize its reach (and transparency), the course should delivered (or > posted) online (videos + presentations + reference lists + graphics etc) on > a freely accessible website/platform that allows learners to make public > reviews and/or debates on the content. This user feedback can then feed > into cycles of transparent and professional content improvement. > > This is different from simply publishing a post-event report (perhaps > intended for donors so that more funding can be obtained?). > > *4. Transparency matters: *KICTANet being a multi-stakeholder forum that > advocates for good governance on ICT related issues, should strive to live > its own values. Besides being seen to be open to good-faith criticism, > diversity of thought and freedom of expression, there should be visible > efforts to demonstrate transparency, accountability and democratic ideals > within its governance framework. This includes publishing annual plans, > budgets (anticipated sources of funds and planned expenditure), annual > audited accounts, and annual independent audit of governance structures. > > *5. Accountability matters:* It appears that KICTANet routinely receives > funding from various sources. Where can we find KICTANet's audited transparency > reports? The best practice for Non-profits is to publish audited > Transparency Reports that show the sources and use funds. This helps > identify potential conflicts of interest where there is risk of > compromising values or neutrality. It also helps address corruption risks > (e.g. turning public-interest initiatives into personal cash cows or > officials being bribed to push hidden agendas that corrupt what would > otherwise be good initiatives). > > *6. Conflict of interest matters:* To avoid perceptions that a > multi-stakeholder organization has been hijacked by duplicitous agendas, or > perceptions that officials may be using an organization (or its brand) to > enrich themselves with sponsorship and donor funding, there need to be > conflict of interest audits of the organization, its officials and its > initiatives. No institution (whether public, private or non-profit) is > immune to corruption - hence the need for institutionalized checks and > balances. Also publicity initiatives should be seen to focus more on the > message (or participants) and less on promoting the officials' personal > brands. > > *6. Sustainability matters: *Let us use technology to promote > re-usability and sustainability. Public-interest training courses should be > digitized and published online for anyone to access. > > One major challenge with donor-funded initiatives is that they are always > at risk of being turned into corruption cash cows - to the detriment of > intended objectives. This leads to deceptive exploitation of other people's > misfortunes - which is a cruel way of acquiring wealth. > > Other than lack of transparency and accountability, another sign of > possible corruption in the non-profit sector is failure to implement *fairly > obvious* sustainability measures (or ignoring advice to do so) - because, > obviously, if a problem is solved there will be no more funding. This is > why slums like Kibera / Mukuru etc never go away and why some NGOs are > happy to deliver tablets to mud-walled/tin-structure schools that don't > have desks or chairs or proper toilets or green playgrounds and have > underpaid teachers and malnourished pupils. > > *7. Democracy matters in multi-stakeholder forums:* Sometimes, when > officials serve for too long, they may perceive the organization as an > extension of themselves (or as personal property) and become very sensitive > to legitimate criticism - to the extent that they censor / clamp down on > debate or aggressively muzzle their critics (e.g. via personal attacks or > attempts to discredit the source). > > Usually this occurs there are no democratic governance structures or > continued efforts to promote diversity of interests as well as diversity of > thought within leadership. > > We need to start *honest conversations* about the need for *multi-stakeholder > governance* in KICTANet via democratic ethos where governance, officials > and roles are a fair representation of the *diversity *of > multi-stakeholder settings. New leaders come in with fresh ideas, fresh > strategies and new approaches. > > We also need to discuss the idea of student representation in the KICTANet > leadership/trusteeship (one from TVET and one from University) - as a way > of grooming future leaders - as well as representation from MSMEs that are > not affiliated or dependent on corporations. > > This will help the network grow to new heights and achieve even more. > > Thank you and I look forward to a fruitful, and issues-focused discussion. > Good day! > > Brgds, > Patrick. > > Patrick A. M. Maina > [Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous > Innovations] > > > On Wednesday, July 3, 2019, 7:42:23 PM GMT+3, Grace Bomu < > nmutungu(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > In case you missed the link. Here it is. > https://www.kictanet.or.ke/?page_id=40115 > You will find all the previous KeSIG reports. > > A brief background: Schools of internet governance (SIGs) are an offshoot > of Internet Governance Fora (IGF). Internet governance fora are national > and regional events that feed into the global UN hosted IGF. IGF is an > annual soft law making event. It is multi stakeholder in its organisation > and discussions. > > The Kenya School of Internet Governance (KeSIG) is being held prior to the > Kenya IGF. KeSIG runs from 29th -31st July while KIGF will be on 1st > August. Like the global events, KeSIG and KIGF are also multistakeholder, > bringing together the local community. While the event is sponsored by > multiple stakeholders, it is convened by KICTANet.Infact, I am sure you > will feature in the programme, should you have the time as you always bring > a fresh view to our debates here. Please also see previous emails calling > for volunteers to the KeSIG steering > <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/2019-June/034691.html>committee > and KIGF > <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/2019-June/034680.html>. > There is also a call for KIGF topics > <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/2019-July/034717.html>. > > Finally, we are very proud of Mwara, our Tech Policy Associate, whose > journey begun from being a fellow at KeSIG. She is now the administrative > lead in the 4th edition of the school. So KeSIG is also a training ground > for youth. > > Warm regards, > > > On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 19:20, Patrick A. M. Maina via kictanet < > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: > > Dear listers, > > When it comes to topics that can influence thought on policy issues, the > line between training and indoctrination or brainwash becomes very thin - > hence the need for vigilance, close scrutiny, transparency and *neutrality > assurance* of (all) policy-related training initiatives. > > Some of the companies known to sponsor such events worldwide are notorious > for aggressive lobbying on policy or governance issues, ostensibly: > > a. to try avoid impending regulation of their harmful/anti-social business > models (or to distort accountability and responsibility narratives); > > b to try gain unfair advantage over government policy (and/or procurement) > by corrupting rules, infiltrating and subverting public sector initiatives, > or by peddling influence; > > c. to institutionalize, launder and/or officially entrench their > socially/economically damaging profit models. > > A number of them have been accused by multiple governments, regulators, > civil society, journalists, intellectuals, internet users (via class action > lawsuits) and even their own former executives of using either unlawful or > dishonest / grossly unethical business practices in ruthless pursuit of > profit. Examples of these dubious practices include purposefully developing > harmful/addiction-forming radicalizing online products targeted at young > people, using deceptive tactics to grow or protect their businesses, > infiltrating and subverting public education systems, subverting economies > by capturing workers and learners attention, brazen disregard for people's > privacy, unethical exploitation of private info, brazenly breaking laws or > aggressively exploiting weak laws, exploiting public ignorance for profit > and using predatory commercial strategies that are harmful to the public. > > The same companies, despite having BILLIONS in revenue, *agressively > avoid* contributing their FAIR SHARE of taxes (sometimes to the extent of > operating illegally, with impunity, in poor countries) - thus unfairly > increasing the burden on governments and taxpayers to fund remediation for > the indirect damage that these rogue companies cause e.g. damage to public > health, subverting education, political instability, extremism and economic > sabotage. These indirect, hidden burdens (negative externalities) can be > socio-economically devastating - especially in developing economies, but > are seldom recognized, highlighted, mitigated or attributed to the > companies that are creating/amplifying them. The same companies then > chicanerously manipulate the civil society (e.g. via training & > sponsorship) to defend their commercial products as a "human right"! > > So depending on the sponsor(s), curriculum and governance framework, a > training initiative could either be seen as legitimate training or a kind > of backdoor indoctrination. > > This is why it is important to have full transparency and independent > vetting of such sensitive initiatives (including sponsors, curriculum, > tutors, accreditation etc). > > Also the use of the word "school" suggests an institution that has > undergone formal vetting and accreditation. Yet when I look at the website, > it ostensibly reads as if the "school" is an event. Questions: > > 1. Is it a school or is it an event? > > 2. Where is the school based? > > 3. Is it registered with relevant training oversight bodies? > > 4. Who are the lecturers and what are their credentials? > > 5. Who developed the coursework & what process was used? This is in view > of high risk of content subversion due to powerful business interests > having high conflicts of interest on policy and governance issues. > > 6. Is the school & coursework accredited? By which bodies? > > 7. Does it issue certificates? > > 8. How is the school/course funded? Does it have transparency reports? > Where can they be found? > > 9. Who are the sponsors of this event/course? > > 10. How is conflict of interest avoided (currently and in the past)? Who > audits & certifies neutrality? > > 11. By now such kinds of (potentially subjective) public-interest courses > should have been put somewhere online for free and open access. This also > allows for independent public scrutiny of the course content. How come this > more transparent (and more pro-internet) approach has not yet been taken > (despite big sponsors)? > > This is not to cast aspersions on this specific initiative but to point > out, in good faith and in public interest, possible areas of risks or > concern, so that they can be addressed or clarified. The issues above > generally apply to any initiative(s) purporting to train stakeholders on > policy and governance. > > Perhaps KICTANet officials can shed more light on the above issues please > or point us to online resources that have the answers for each question > above? > > Many thanks & have a blessed day. > > Patrick. > > Patrick A. M. Maina > [Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous > Innovations] > > On Wednesday, July 3, 2019, 12:24:28 PM GMT+3, mwara gichanga via kictanet > <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: > > > Dear Listers > > The internet has become a vital platform for social, economic and > political development in the world, and more increasing so here in Kenya. > These bring about a lot of national interests around internet governance > debates across all sectors . > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is pleased to welcome applications > from those individuals interested in internet Governance for the 4th > Edition of the Kenya School of Internet Governance (KeSIG). KeSIG takes > place prior to the Kenya IGF, with the aim of introducing beginners to > basic concepts in internet policy making. This is with the goal of creating > and increasing the available expertise for participation in local and > global internet governance processes. > > Learn more about KeSIG HERE <https://www.kictanet.or.ke/?page_id=40115> > > Whether you are a policy maker, a researcher, a regulator, an engineer, a > journalist, an entrepreneur or a human rights defender – if you are > interested and want to get involved in internet policy and governance , > KeSIG is designed perfectly for you! > > KeSIG will take place over a 3-day course from the 29th-31st July 2019, > with the deadline for submissions closing on 13th July 2019, and > announcement of selected participants following soon after. > > Kindly access application form HERE <https://forms.gle/vCncJuuGSnowFUhNA> > > 4TH EDITION OF KENYA SCHOOL OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE(KESIG) > > KICTANet welcomes applications for fellows for the 4th Edition of the > Kenya School of Internet Governance (KeSIG... > <https://forms.gle/vCncJuuGSnowFUhNA> > > > For any further information or clarification , kindly email > info(a)kictanet.or.ke or Mwara Gichanga mwaragichanga(a)kictanet.or.ke > > Warmly > > Mwara Gichanga > > Tech Policy Associate > > KICTANet > > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet > Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/ > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/pmaina2000%40yahoo.com > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet > Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/ > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/nmutungu%40gmail.com > > The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform > for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and > regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT > sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. > > KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors > online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, > share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do > not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. > > > > -- > Grace Mutung'u > Skype: gracebomu > @Bomu > PGP ID : 0x33A3450F > > -- Grace Mutung'u Skype: gracebomu @Bomu PGP ID : 0x33A3450F

1 0

Germany fines Facebook €2 million for violating hate speech law
by Alice Munyua 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Interesting what is happening in Europe. FB has just been fined in Germany for failure to comply with transparency requirements. ————————————- Germany fines Facebook €2 million for violating hate speech law -- By Janosch Delcker 7/2/19, 3:47 PM CET | View in your browser BERLIN — Germany has fined U.S. tech giant Facebook for violating the country’s law to combat hate speech online, officials said today. The Federal Office for Justice (BfJ,) a subdivision of the German justice ministry, announced that it had issued Facebook a fine of €2 million for failing to meet the requirements of Berlin’s Network Enforcement Act, a law against illegal content, in its transparency report for the first half of 2018. The fine is a small amount compared to Facebook’s first-quarter revenues of more than $15 billion. But it has symbolic weight, marking the first time that a European country has sanctioned an American social media giant for failing to be transparent about the way it handles hate speech. “In the penalty charge notice, the BfJ reprimands in particular that in the released report, the number of received complaints about unlawful content is incomplete,” the office said in its announcement, adding that this “is creating a distorted image in the public about the extent of unlawful content [on the platform] and the way the social network is dealing with it.” Facebook can still lodge an appeal to the fine, the BfJ said. Under the law, which is known as NetzDG and took effect on January 1, 2018, companies are required to publish a report twice a year in German regarding complaints they have received. The law is considered the most far-reaching effort by a Western democracy to control what appears on social media, demanding that social media giants promptly remove potentially illegal material or face fines of up to €50 million. “Digital platforms have a clear responsibility for the content that is posted on their sites,” Germany’s new Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht said in a written statement released shortly after the fine was announced. “What has to be clear is that Facebook’s so-called ‘community standards’ are not above German law.” Related stories on these topics: Cybercrime, Illegal content, Platforms (in Data and Digitization), Platforms (in Technology), Regulation (in Data and Digitization), Regulation (in Technology), Social Media, Germany (in Data and Digitization), Germany (in Technology), Facebook (in Data and Digitization), Facebook (in Technology) To update your POLITICO Pro notification preferences, visit www.politico.eu/notification ** Tell us what you think: Was this Pro content helpful? Yes | No ** View the Pro calendar at www.politico.eu/calendar. Submit an event here. This email alert has been sent for your exclusive use as a POLITICO Pro subscriber. Forwarding or reproducing the alert without the express, written permission of POLITICO Pro is a violation of the POLITICO Pro license agreement. This email was sent to obennett(a)mozilla.com Adjust your Pro subscription settings, or unsubscribe from all POLITICO SPRL emails POLITICO SPRL · Rue de la Loi 62 · Brussels1040 · Belgium

1 0

In America’s indictment of Huawei some conversations...
by Ali Hussein 02 Jul '19

02 Jul '19

Listers As an ICT Policy practitioner and avid follower of #GeoPolitics the #HuaweiDebacle has great interest to me. Recently our CS ICT, Joseph Mucheru tasked ATU to probe alleged security risks on Huawei and ZTE Equipment. In America’s indictment of Huawei Technologies some interesting conversations:- 1. The Global Cop routine is sort of wearing thin and portraying it not as a force for good but as a bully. 2. Are Chinese companies so dependent on America that a ban by America can kill them? The case of the almost collapse of ZTE Corporation is instructive.. Only a surprise last minute reprieve from #TheDonald saved it from total collapse. 3. Could Huawei Technologies survive a ban by America? Intel Corporation, Seagate Technology and Qualcomm are major suppliers to Huawei Technologies. How will this affect their ability to deliver cutting edge technology to their customers? This last point brings me to wonder how much of the Chinese Technology renaissance is dependent on America? Read on and follow the conversation on LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6496196045268090880 Ali Hussein Principal AHK & Associates +254 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit." ~ Aristotle Sent from my iPad

2 1

Re: [kictanet] Safaricom CEO Bob Collymore Passes on
by Barrack Otieno 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

Dear Listers, We have learnt with deep sorrow the passing on of Bob Collymore the Safaricom Chief Executive Officer in the morning of 1st July 2019. As stakeholders and members of the Kenyan ICT fraternity we have lost a great Champion. As the Kenya ICT Action Network, we condole with Bob's family as well as our friends and colleagues from Safaricom PLC, a key partner and member of the network. May Bobs soul rest in Peace. We will miss him. Best regards Barrack Otieno

4 3

Save the date: www.dnsforum.africa July 22-24, Gaborone, Botswana
by Barrack Otieno 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

Listers, Please note that the Africa DNS Forum 2019 will take place from July 22-24, 2019 in Gaborone (Botswana) . For more information , kindly visit www.dnsforum.africa. If you require a VISA kindly ensure that you register online on or before 10th July 2019. Best Regards -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A

1 0

Financial transactions should be private by default
by Alice Munyua 01 Jul '19

01 Jul '19

> > > > > > > > Hey, > > 🍕🥓🍩 = 💸 > > What if all your guilty pleasures were on display for the whole world to see? If you use Venmo, a popular app that lets people send and collect money, there's a good chance they already are. > > Venmo's settings are public by default, so millions of transactions are available for anyone on the web to find. > > Everyone knowing who you shared pizza with last week might seem innocuous enough, but with millions of transactions publicly available there is a huge risk that this data could be used for nefarious purposes. Venmo has transformed the way Americans settle personal debts, and with as many as an estimated 10 million monthly users, how it handles privacy could be the standard for other financial apps.1 > > Sign our petition to tell Venmo that financial transactions should be private. > > Last year, researcher and Mozilla Fellow Hang Do Thi Duc exposed the serious implications of Venmo's settings by uncovering how countless Venmo users' drug habits, junk food vices, personal finances, and fights with significant others are available for all to see.2 > > Under pressure from the slew of news covering Do Thi Duc's work and a Mozilla campaign calling for the company to change its public by default setting, Venmo made a few small changes and restricted the rate at which information could be pulled from its public database of transactions (called an API).3 This change means that sensitive data about your transactions can still be extracted exactly the same way, it will just take a bit longer.4 > > This is not a fix. The privacy of Venmo users remains at risk. Last week, news surfaced that one researcher was able to collect data on 7 MILLION new transactions.5 With this renewed focus again exposing Venmo's terrible privacy practices, we have the opportunity to push the company to finally fix the problem and make privacy its default setting. > > Will you join 25,000 privacy advocates who have already signed our petition telling Venmo to make financial transactions private? Click here to add your name. > > Thank you for helping hold Venmo accountable, > The Mozilla Team > > References: > > Kaya Yurieff, "A researcher studied a year of public Venmo transactions. Here's what she learned," CNN Money, July 17, 2018. > Olivia Solon, "Venmo: how the payment app exposes our private lives," The Guardian, July 17, 2018. > Sarah Perez, "Mozilla pushes PayPal to make Venmo transactions private by default," TechCrunch > Dell Cameron, "Millions of Transactions Scraped in Latest Demonstration of Venmo's Absurd Privacy Policy," Gizmodo, June 17, 2019. > Ibid. > > > > > > Connect with us > > > > Thanks for reading! > You're receiving this email because we think you’re neat, AND you subscribed to hear from us. If our emails aren’t sparking joy, we’ll understand if you unsubscribe. > > You can also update your email preferences at any time. > > > > Donate to Mozilla | Download Firefox > > 331 E. Evelyn Avenue Mountain View CA 94041 > Legal • Privacy

2 1

[ideas] Is there a way we can use our skills/talents to try and help turn our local politics into something more healthy and inclusive?
by Patrick A. M. Maina 29 Jun '19

29 Jun '19

Dear listers, Is there a way we can use our skills/talents to try and help turn our local politics into something more healthy and inclusive? Somalia's 20+ years of lawlessness is a grim reminder that toxic politics can backfire massively in an unpredictable and uncontrollable way that does not yield any winners over very long periods of time. There is no human society that is immune to the dangers of toxic politics, therefore it is important for stakeholders (be they professionals, business people, politicians and/or intellectuals) to voice their good-faith concerns against toxic politics, ideally in good time - when there is still a good chance for the country/leaders to change course, because ultimately we all get to bear the heavy socioeconomic costs associated with political uncertainty and volatility. To quote UNDP (see link #1): "Societies whose political institutions are more inclusive and participatory tend to be more peaceful and resilient, just as societies practicing exclusion tend to be more vulnerable to fragility and conflict." As long as leadership and/or resource/opportunity allocation is associated with ethnic identity, and/or an exclusive mindset, there will always be discontent among the have-nots, which leads to aggressive political competition as different ethnic communities clamor for their "turn to eat". It is therefore in our best interest, as a country that desires stability and prosperity, to push towards inclusive and participatory frameworks of governance (see link #2). Let me open the floor with some ideas / suggestions based on the above-mentioned themes. Hoping we can have a non-partisan idea-focused discussion in the spirit of searching for creative solutions to a shared problem. IDEAS / SUGGESTIONS:-------------------------------- 1. Our country needs moments of guaranteed pause in our politics where everyone (including media) gets to take a break from elective politics and focus on development: doing things that create opportunities and prosperity for all. What if election laws were amended to make campaigning illegal unless it occurs within 18 months prior to an election? 2. What if promises for maendeleo (development) were limited to election time only - and required in writing (lodged at the registrar), with measurable pledges and indicators (e.g. x number of jobs annually) such that the promises form a performance contract between the (winning) politician and voters across the whole country? 3. What if politicians agreed that failure to achieve x% of the committed pledges/targets, without credible extenuating circumstances, would be deemed a fair and reasonable ground for impeachment/recall. This would help minimizefalse/unrealistic promises and help reshape the perceptions of leadership from the more toxic "opportunity to rule", into the healthier opportunity to serve the country. 4. What if politician salaries were pegged to the median salary in the country - and any extra perks (e.g. performance bonus) to be linked, via a tiered system, to the delivery of agreed socio-economic performance targets and paid lumpsum at the end of the political term? This would incentivize a growth mindset and also minimize the perception that politics is a shortcut to easy wealth (meaning politics would attract people who truly want to make a difference; stakes would be lower during elections and we would have more of in-touch leadership styles). 5. What if political leaders and senior administrators were offered actual housing (instead of a monetary allowance) in median level neighborhoods (e.g. Eastlands) - to avoid their developing the out-of-touch elitism that seems to comes with moving to places like Karen or Muthaiga? What if government only offered them cover limited to public health services (I've seen this being discussed in the news)? Perhaps our country will be transformed much faster if our leaders lived among the median demographics and had a personal stake in improving the median standards of living? 6. What if political campaigns were about winning support for a written socio-political strategy and plan; i.e. a competition of ideas - instead of personalities? What if elections were about perceived merits of ideas, implementation strategies or preferred economic direction that the country should take - instead of identities and/or unrealistic promises? 7. All Kenyans have common problems that they would like to hear politicians talking about all the time such as JOBS CREATION and ABUNDANT OPPORTUNITIES for ENTREPRENEURSHIP. I think ICT, manufacturing and agriculture are high-potential drivers where quick results can be attained. How can we encourage politicians to focus on these issues within a nationally inclusive framework? 8. Can/should advertisers influence the News Media to stop fanning divisive narratives, mediocrity, ethnic chauvenism, identity politics and other banal inanities - and focus instead on responsibly shaping the national agenda towards issues that bring growth and prosperity? Can media self-regulate and refocus the Kenyan masses towards sustainable agendas (like entrepreneurship and excellence)? If our media moguls are in doubt about the business case of responsible journalism, I would urge them to study how Somalia's media industry has been performing over the last ~28 years. I think if the clock was pulled back, Somalia's media would think very carefully about the narratives that they want to shape their national discourse. Short term profits can come with a heavy long-term cost. Please consider this. 9. Serializing national goals to maximize focus, prioritize and leverage the domino effect of cumulative wins: Do we really have the capacity to make massively bold and audacious goals that are to be implemented concurrently or are we setting ourselves - and our leaders - up for failure by overreaching far beyond our realistic capabilities and stretching ourselves way too thin? Our economic/policy advisors need to accept the reality - that we are a poor, debt ridden country with crippling levels of corruption, institutionalized mediocrity, short sighted orientation and greater levels of incompetence than competence; a country that seems to be always tittering on the edge of a precipitous political/economic cliff - thus urgently in need of credible stabilizing plans and strategies. I would like to propose the idea of a serial, bite-sized approach to strategic national initiatives, where the main goals (which can still be big and audacious) are smartly serialized for domino effect and pursued, with laser focus, one at a time. For example we can have the entire nation's development agenda focus on creating jobs and opportunities - and nothing else - for the first 5 years, then in the subsequent 5 years the focus can change to boosting growth and efficiency, say via infrastructure upgrades/enhancements. This makes it easy for political manifestos to be guided by realistic 20-30 year economic master-plans (that already have national concensus), rather than arbitrary perceptions about what is popular at election time. It can also help decouple the economy from political transition cycles which would attract high quality FDI. Attempting very wide scope goals in parallel significantly increases costs - without giving the economy time to catch up and create domino effects; it compounds complexity - yet we have limited capacity to manage significant complexity; it increases the likelihood of mega corruption due to greater ambiguity + an overstretched Monitoring and Evaluation framework; it consumes a counterproductive amount of leadership bandwidth - such that unexpected events become more of a challenge than would otherwise be; and it magnifies risk of failing to attain ALL the audacious goals to near certainty levels. CONCLUSION: If we serialize our national goals, we will avoid biting more than we can chew and stretching our resources (or bandwidth) too thin. Being focused will minimize the risk of goal-capture by corruption cartels. By prioritizing wealth creation initiatives, we will give our economy a chance to develop domino effects - building a viable case for increasing capacity via infrastructure enhancements. A period of guaranteed pause in politics will allow the country to focus on development. Elections should be about issues - rather than identity. Performance-linked manifestos will encourage politicians to make realistic promises that they intend (and are able) to keep and be held accountable for their attainment. Media is key to ending negative/exclusive ethnicity as it can shape the national discourse towards less toxic narratives. Research suggests that inclusive, participatory governance models are superior to exclusive ones. Inclusivity creates the right socio-political conditions for sustainable stability and prosperity. Welcoming your thoughts / more ideas on the same. My only request, please, is that we try to have a non-partisan, intellectually honest exchange of creative ideas. Good evening. Brgds,Patrick. Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] Links / References: 1. Inclusive political processes https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/2030-agenda-for-sustainable-devel… 2. Sustainability and Public Participation: Toward an Inclusive Model of Democracy on JSTOR https://www.jstor.org/stable/25610875?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

2 2

Fwd: [At-Large] GDPR A Year Later in European Jurisdictions
by Barrack Otieno 26 Jun '19

26 Jun '19

Might be of interest. Regards ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Carlton Samuels* <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 Subject: [At-Large] GDPR A Year Later in European Jurisdictions To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, " lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" < lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, CPWG <cpwg(a)icann.org> The Eurobarometer 487a report offers insight on citizen awareness of the GDPR, individuals’ rights under it, their perception of their ability to control their personal data and their sense of and understanding of the enforcement mechanisms and actors. Read it here: http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/ index.cfm/ResultDoc/download/DocumentKy/86886 Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A

1 0

Data Visualization through the Use of Excel
by Tracy Nyatoro Weru 26 Jun '19

26 Jun '19

@LabAfrica,Strathmore university in partnership with Sunesis Consulting Limited is organizing a 3-day training course on Excel as a Business Intelligence Tool (Dashboard Reporting). The program will take place @iLabAfrica on 17th - 19th July 2019 at 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. This is a 3-day training that aims at providing business personnel with skills to transform data into decisions using a cost effective tool. The training course is open to all personnel in business related fields who want to leverage on the power of Excel as a Business Intelligence tool. We would be honored to have you participate in this training. If you have further queries, please do not hesitate to contact the event coordinator Getrude on her email address: ggichuhi(a)strathmore.edu <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/1?ta…> The course will help you to: - Explore top 15 advanced data analysis functions that will save your report generation turn-around time! - Move from static, dull reports to interactive and insightful dashboards -learn to apply form controls, slicers, pick lists, and camera tool to create interaction - Show top performers using formulas and YoY% by a click of a mouse - Achieve more with advanced analytical charts -Pareto chart, Scrolling charts, Gauge Charts - Easily spot trends and patterns in your data by using icon sets, traffic lights, Sparklines and Custom Number formats - Creating a dashboard in Excel step-by-step Suitability: - This course is definitely NOT for you if locking cells ($ sign), VLOOKUP & PivotTables are news to you! - You need to have been a regular user of Excel (at least 40% usage in a week), and are comfortable with creating simple lookup formulas and charts, as well as customizing them. - *This course is not suitable for Absolute Beginners in Microsoft Excel.* If you are a beginner, we recommend that you start with less advanced Excel courses. You send an email to Getrude on ggichuhi(a)strathmore.edu <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/2?ta…> with your inquiry. Fee information: Ksh 66,500 which covers the training fee, lunch and refreshments for the three days, as well as the certificate.. -- *Kind Regards,* Tracy Weru Program Manager @iLabAfrica Research Centre Email: tweru(a)strathmore.edu <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/3?ta…> Direct Line: +254 (0) 703 034 621 Ext: 2621 Cell: +254 (0) 724239020 Enquiries: +254 (0) 703-034000/200/300 www.strathmore.edu <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/4?ta…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/5?ta…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/6?ta…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/7?ta…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/8?ta…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/9?ta…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/10?t…> <https://link.aeusercontent.com/mt/lt/D355BBBAC67B2DCE36571561528960260/11?t…> -- *Note: *All emails sent from Strathmore University are subject to Strathmore’s Email Terms & Conditions. Please click here <http://www.strathmore.edu/en/email-policy> to read the policy. * * "Visit our Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/StrathmoreUniversity>Page and Twitter <https://twitter.com/StrathU>Account".

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [Fair Competition Laws will Promote Innovation and Reduce Unfair Market Practices - the bill is not targeting a particular company or product] Safaricom to be compelled to split m-pesa business in new bill
by Patrick A. M. Maina 25 Jun '19

25 Jun '19

Hi Ali, Here we go again... My comment was fair because your points appear to be contradicting themselves - which suggests a limited understanding, either of the overall topic or of the point(s) that you are making. If this is not an accurate assessment, I invite you please to rephrase and present your ideas more congruently to avoid being misundersood. Taking note of past interactions, I am detecting a pattern where you repeatedly claim, without substantiating, to be offended or attacked by intellectually fair comments (e.g. when sincerely called out for contradicting your own points or for demolishing your own arguments) and that makes it quite challenging to debate with you with intellectual candor. Your decision to draw conclusions about a particular entity based on ONE WORD on the subject line does not make sense to me because my plain language *insertions* and use of plural terms in the message body (including the section you quoted) clearly suggests a general discussion. Latching onto one word or phrase while completely ignoring the overall context is not an intellectually honest way to debate. So Ali, the onus is still on you to offer a more substantive substantiation as to why you chose to associate one specific entity with what is clearly a general paragraph, and which you excerpted from what is clearly a general discussion. Debating experts generally advise that participants who take diversionery paths instead of focusing on robust, congruent ideas have no intention to engage in genuine debate but just want create certain perceptions for the moderator/observers or create a dramatic distraction so that important ideas are hidden (muzzled) by the noise. Rather than prevail with the strength of their ideas, intellectually dishonest (or unskilled) debaters try to "win" by muzzling or supressing opposing ideas. This is a troubling pattern that I am detecting in your debating style Ali. Productive mature debating is a skill that can be learned. To learn more about how to have an intellectually honest debate, please read the following articles as a starting point, and then search online for more. https://hbr.org/2019/01/how-to-debate-ideas-productively-at-work https://shane.substack.com/p/how-to-stop-being-intellectually Hope that helps. :-) Please let us be open to diverse opinions, fresh ideas and new ways of thinking. Suppressing ideas when discussing public-interest policy issues is counterproductive because it leads to sub-optimal outcomes. Try not to take an intellectual challenge as a personal affront, or use victimhood as a tactic, otherwise you will miss valuable opportunities to engage in, and learn from, high-quality intellectually honest debates on complex, public-interest topics. Enjoy your day. Brgds,Patrick. Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] On Tuesday, June 25, 2019, 8:37:45 AM GMT+3, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: Patrick Do you always have to turn a conversation into a personal affront/attack? My limited understanding of State Capture? I will not deign to respond to personal attacks because in my responding I will be making an assumption that you are an expert in the subject of State Capture. Let me instead respond to your question below:- "Perhaps Ali, you can shed more light as to why the name of a particular company - and not any other(s) - came into your mind after reading my general comments about ruthless anti-competitive, anti-poor practices by monopolistic entities. Is there something you have observed or heard about their activities and/or practices?" Simple Patrick. The title of this email thread specifically mentions Safaricom and so the assumption is understandable that you are singling them out. Perhaps you care to respond to that instead of deflecting? I asked a specific question on this. Focus on that, perhaps? AliHussein Principal AHK & Associates Tel: +254 713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim 13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing, Chiromo Road, Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya. Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the organizations that I work with. On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 9:36 PM Patrick A. M. Maina <pmaina2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Greetings Ali, and many thanks for your thoughts. One key attribute of high value debates is the presence of two (or more) opposing perspectives because diversity of thought often leads to a multi-dimensional understanding of complex issues, which (if leveraged with good intentions) can lead to high quality inputs for policies, strategies, regulations and/or decisions. So I truly welcome and appreciate your counter-perspective and rebuttal efforts. :-) Let me start with an African saying made famous by Chinua Achebe: "An elderly person is always uneasy when dry bones are mentioned in a proverb." Perhaps Ali, you can shed more light as to why the name of a particular company - and not any other(s) - came into your mind after reading my general comments about ruthless anti-competitive, anti-poor practices by monopolistic entities. Is there something you have observed or heard about their activities and/or practices? Why would public-interest regulation be interpreted as targeting specific companies - unless it is some kind of admission or assertion that those companies could indeed be acting (or causing negative externalities) against public interest? Retrogressive externalities could be an unforeseen and/or unintentional by-product of a sub-optimized network-effects success model and poor economic master-planning (see links #1-7). Furthermore corporations, in different parts of the world, have also been known for purposeful malevolent activities when they fear of competition/disruption especially when operating within a weak / outdated institutional / antitrust framework. Specifics would need to be studied on a case by case basis. Have you considered the timing of the bill (in context of recent industry developments)? The proposed rules could actually *benefit* the very local corporate entities that would supposedly be motivated to resist them. In the global scale, our "tech giants" are like MSMEs and they get to be on the receiving end of mega-scale cross-border corporate tyranny. There is an interesting story of certain well known CEO's visit to Africa. A lot of people thought he was coming to look for investment opportunities and they cheerfully welcomed him (full VVIP+ treatment), took him on tours, demoed innovations, snapped selfies and eagerly answered his questions - hoping to dazzle, awe and impress him. Kumbe he was on a mission to gather economic intelligence - and he openly stated so (meaning you can't claim illegality) - leaving people to form their own self-deluded conclusions as to why he was doing it. Several years later, his company launches a product that will directly compete with ours at an unprecedented game-changing scale! There are so many stories like this in Africa, the script remains the same, only the actors, props and victims keep changing. It is quite embarrassing just how easy we make it for others to *repeatedly* plunder our ideas/insights or compete with us unfairly - to our own collective detriment - yet we always speak of a "knowledge economy" without taking time to understand what that *really* means. "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." - old proverb. Africa's centuries-old commitment to gullibility and ignorance is unparalleled and quite disturbing (see links #8-15). We are among the very few (if not the only) modern-day societies that never seem to learn from history. We welcome plunderers / economic spies with pomp, ceremony and color, and we happily give them everything they need to subjugate and impoverish us. Like little children, we accept sweet words as proof of benevolent intent and our shallow vanity makes us take pride that everyone is interested in learning from us (surely that means we are very important and smart - if others want to study us and everything we know, right?), yet we don't take as much - or more - interest in learning from them or asking ourselves uncomfortable questions, such as: "why is the student always teaching the teacher?"... and most worryingly, we see voices of reason, desperately scrambling to wake us up - as party-pooping troublemakers. Quite depressing, but I digress.. Ali, your argument on state capture suggests a limited understanding on how state capture comes about or what really it is (see links #8-15). Essentially you are contradicting yourself because it is good (uncorrupted) public-interest regulations, strong government institutions (not beholden to a few private interests) and a socio-political commitment to fair and sensible rules - motivated by public-interest - that minimize the risk of state capture. State capture is enabled by corruption, unchecked corporate power and corporate lobbying against public interest, which leads to regulatory (and market) failure e.g. due to bad laws that have loopholes purposefully designed in to them - or good laws getting blocked from enactment. I urge you to read more on the topic if you are interested in it (there are some good links below that you can start with) to gain a better understanding so you can offer more robust arguments/rebuttals without unwittingly demolishing or contradicting your main argument. Have a great evening. Brgd,Patrick Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] Links / References: 1. Understanding Network Effects https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_information-systems-a-managers-guide-to… 2. The Dangers of Platform Monopolies https://knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/the-dangers-of-platform-monop… 3. UNCTAD: Why competition and consumer protection matter https://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/why-competition-matters.aspx 4. Apr. 2016: MIT News: How network effects hurt economieshttp://news.mit.edu/2016/network-effects-hurt-economies-0406 5. Regulating Anticompetitive Behavior – Principles of Economics https://opentextbc.ca/principlesofeconomics/chapter/11-2-regulating-anticom… 6. Monopolies are Destroying our Economy (US centric - but contains valuable insights) https://intpolicydigest.org/2018/05/23/monopolies-are-destroying-our-econom… 7. Apr. 2019: IMF warns that tech giants stifle innovation and threaten stability https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/03/imf-warns-that-tech-giants… 8. 2017: UN Speakers Stress Need to Address Exploitation of Africa’s Resources, Urging Paradigm Shift, as Economic and Social Council Concludes Segment | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases https://www.un.org/press/en/2017/ecosoc6831.doc.htm 9. Why the richest continent is the poorest https://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/18/africa/looting-machine-tom-burgis-africa… 10. Culture and social environment in the pre-colonial era http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0041-476X200900… 11. Why no African country is truly free or independent - THE AFRICAN COURIER. Reporting Africa and its Diaspora! https://www.theafricancourier.de/opinion-analysis/neo-colonialism-in-africa… 12. Exploiting gullible people is a modern form of mininghttps://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/aug/07/exploiting-gulli… 13. Universities and the “democracy of the gullible” https://en.unesco.org/courier/2018-1/universities-and-democracy-gullible 14. The Age of Gullibility https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/one-among-many/201806/the-age-gulli… 15. The Science Of Gullibility: Why We Get Duped https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=99160094 16. Corporations and Regulators: The Game of Influence in Regulatory Capture https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257246830_Corporations_and_Regulat… 17. Corruption, Lobbying and State Capture https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304479012_Corruption_Lobbying_and_… 18. Rent-Seeking and Regulatory Capture https://www.e-education.psu.edu/ebf200/book/export/html/160 On Monday, June 24, 2019, 7:57:38 AM GMT+3, Ali Hussein <ali(a)hussein.me.ke> wrote: Patrick >From the context of this headline, I'm curious to see how Safaricom contributes to your quote below:- "...OK to drive mama mbogas (small vegetable sellers), youth-founded startups, indigenous innovators and other MSMEs out of business, by leveraging legal/regulatory loopholes that allow them to distort market forces using their mass-scale market power. " Whilst I generally agree with your thesis below I think it's fair that when we make such accusations in relation to a specific company we quote specific examples. I'm all for ensuring a level playing field across the board and contend that this is a collective effort of Good Citizenry by corporates (which by the way is good for business long term) and robust but fair policies and regulation by government. The world is full of examples where breaking up companies has never achieved the desired effect of creating a level playing field (Standard Oil is probably the best example. Years later these baby Standard Oils are mostly back together in the form of Exxon Mobil. And by the way, the breakup may have made the Rockefellers even more fabulously wealthy). Rather than breaking up companies, the world should address the elephant in the room. State Capture. Boeing is probably the most current example of how government regulation was completely corrupted by a company, resulting in a colossal loss of life. One of my best examples of how governments can reign in bad players is how the fear of breaking up Microsoft and other tech giants in the 90s contributed to the rise of the current #BigTech companies. Maybe the cycle needs to be repeated? Let me reiterate. I'm in general agreement with your post, I'm just concerned we don't specifically target an organization without specific evidence to back it up. Regards AliHussein Principal AHK & Associates Tel: +254 713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim 13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing, Chiromo Road, Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya. Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the organizations that I work with. On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 1:14 AM Patrick A. M. Maina via kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Fair competition laws are long overdue and should be very welcome because, if properly formulated and implemented, such laws will rapidly stimulate economic growth and create millions of new jobs. An objective observer will agree that there is something fundamentally wrong about billion-dollar-revenue companies operating in poverty-ridden low-income countries that find it OK to drive mama mbogas (small vegetable sellers), youth-founded startups, indigenous innovators and other MSMEs out of business, by leveraging legal/regulatory loopholes that allow them to distort market forces using their mass-scale market power. Instead of celebrating a few concentrated pockets of super-profits - we should be concerned as to why such "stellar" performance does not match the overall sector's competitive landscape (especially if everyone else in the sector is making losses) - as well as, the general state of the rest of the economy. Hopefully the relevant parties in legislature will do the right thing for opportunities-starved wananchi and for the struggling economy by passing fair competition laws (I am also hoping that wananchi, politicians, public interest NGOs and activists will add weight to such beneficial initiatives as/when necessary). There is still room for more to be done, however, especially in the six areas below (which if addressed, will create an environment that is even more conducive for prosperity and growth): 1. Contextualized Intellectual Property Protection: This area needs urgent attention to address rampant theft of IP due to obsolete, non-contextualized laws that favor corporate tyranny and plunder. Compelling data-based evidence (see link #1-2) shows that a laissez faire attitude to IP is a top contributor to poverty and low quality FDI in low income countries. Wealthy nations zealously defend their indigenous IP as a critical economic resource that is part of their national security (equivalent importance to oil, mining and financial sectors). Did you know that the top 10 most valuable companies in the world are IP-based (see link #3) and none of them is in oil / gas /precious stones or minerals? Extraction is no longer the secret to prosperity (in fact it only attracts chaos instead nowadays)! Did you know that Apple, the world's most valuable company overall, does not own a single factory (see link #4)? Apple is an IP and distribution company (not a manufacturer) - it is in the business of selling ideas! This should be very interesting for Africa, the fact that high value ICT corporations can be based on ideas, IP and distribution networks alone. Wake up brothers and sisters. We don't have to build physical factories to plug into the global ecosystem. We just need a good framework for monetizing great ideas! Even if we are to choose the harder 19th/20th Century path of traditional own-factory manufacturing (instead of the easier and more profitable logistics-driven 21st Century alternative) path, a conducive IP protection framework still remains an essential must-have prerequisite. Global clients will need strong credible guarantees that there wont be leakage of their designs / prototypes / proprietary tooling etc. 2. Preventing Deceptive PR and Marketing Practices: Weak regulation/enforcement encourages corporations to engage in deceptive PR campaigns (e.g. fake partnership offers or deceptive innovation "competitions" / "boot-camps" / "demo-day" events whose purpose is to facilitate the theft/plunder of IP. We also have anti-poor / anti-socialcompanies which brazenly deceive the public by masquerading as pro-poor / pro-social via dishonest marketing and CSR.). 3. Fast-tracked MSME friendly dispute resolution: Judiciary should consider a dedicated court to handle and fast-track commercial disputes that involve MSMEs v/s large corporations with affirmative action in favor of MSMEs (e.g. state provides litigation assistance and cushions the MSME from legal fees). Currently corporations use their resource-power to bully and steal from MSMEs because the current legal framework has loopholes which allows corporations to subvert justice (e.g. companies steal BILLIONS by delaying MSME invoices to accumulate debt then they declare bankruptcy. This is theft - plain and simple - but the law does not treat it as such. Other corporations use legal technicalities to unjustly drag court proceeding for years - hoping that litigants will run out of resources or give up even if they have a strong case. These kind of dispute resolution loopholes cause great harm to MSMEs. 4. Anti-Price Gouging regulations: Companies that provide essential services to the public (e.g communication / data / e-money) should not price them exorbitantly in order to exploit the must-have nature of the product. This should especially apply when there is limited / ineffective competition or indicators of cartel-like collusion within an industry. Dominant / monopolistic entities that offer essential services to the public should be compelled to publish their audited pricing methodologies every month in a way that shows the profit margin percentage for each product line (after factoring in scale and piggybacking advantages). 5. Anti-predation, anti-usury laws: I believe there are ongoing efforts in this area. The public should not be enticed into odious debt or induced to take on debt that they cannot manage; and the CRB should not be used as a financial weapon for oppressing the poor or entrenching poverty. Maintaining a record for 5 years after someone has cleared a loan is disproportionately punitive and shows a lack empathy with the ordinary mwananchi's economic struggles. CRB rules are anti-poor and punish people for lack of opportunity and a poor education - i.e. things that are not wholly of their own making, in favor of predatory corporations. The financial sector needs more empathy and less greed. By punitively and unreasonably denying people access to opportunities, they unwittingly limit their own growth potential. 6. Regulating non-profit foundations associated with for-profit companies: to limit conflicts of interest. Many (if not all) of these companies are covert vehicles for corruption, lobbying and influence peddling. They subvert agendas in sectors like education, finance, agriculture and health with the goal of creating new markets for affiliated corporations, winning government tenders or creating rent seeking avenues contrary to public interest. Ultimately the country loses because the net effect is wealth extraction. The left hand gives with a big show, and pompous ceremony where everyone is invited, but then, once the lights and cameras go off, the right hand quietly takes it all back, and then takes a lot more (leading to a net-loss). Economic analysts should start conducting net-effect analysis of charitable/donor activities to confirm the growing sense of awareness across Africa that something is not right with the charity/donor model. How can we receive so much "assistance" and yet we never seem to take off? How can countries that literally know everything important that happens within our territory (even before it happens) be completely inept and clueless when it comes to preventing proceeds of corruption from being laundered in their countries? Their economies benefit greatly from our fatuous practices.. could it be that some of them actually want us to stay corrupt? Food for thought. Modern day monopolies do not have to overtly abuse their dominance in order to damage the economy. Any mass-scale business model that is based on network effects is inherently anti-competitive because it locks-in millions of customers to one brand and its associated platforms or products - thereby severely limiting choice, stifling competition and blocking startups with better solutions from gaining market traction due to gatekeeper-effect (which prevents the rise of new ICT-related industries). This has a cascading effect of blocking TRILLIONS in high quality FDI that would have eventually come in via Venture Capital; it also limits the ability of the economy to create an export market - to beef up foreign reserves; limits the number of high-value formal jobs; reduces opportunities to lower government's reliance on debt for budget support; and suppresses the growth of a healthy middle class that is essential for economic and political stability. Anti-competitive practices also contribute to increased economic hardships for citizens (by limiting opportunities to a few connected individuals) and prevent governments from fulfilling their campaign promises to the people (thereby stirring dissent and political volatility risks). Products from dominant companies are priced using anti-poor (zero empathy) methodologies which makes them disproportionately expensive to the poor who comprise the majority (and who often have to make food v/s airtime decisions on a daily basis). The same companies offer exponentially better value for money to the rich (less than 1% of the population) to whom the discount has minimal life impact and who can afford to pay a premium anyway! Yet these companies brand themselves as pro-poor and pro-wananchi (which is evidence of a loophole in advertising regulations that allows for deceptive PR practices). Having concentrated points of failure in critical applications, like Mobile Money, puts our increasingly digital economy at significant risk. There needs to be innovations that decentralize mobile money and disrupt the current rent-seeking / price gouging model which offers ridiculous and unjust margins to companies that are already wealthy anyway. Money is not a product - even in digital form. Exchange of digital cash should be 100% free, with no rent-seeking intermediaries taking an undeserved "private tax" cut off every transaction; money should serve its proper purpose as an economic store of value and trade enabler. With the right framework, such socially beneficial innovations will have room to emerge. Economies grow when innovative MSMEs are given room to bloom, grow and thrive without being crushed by anti-competitive dinosaurs who themselves had benefited from state protection and preferential regulation when they were startups e.g. telecomms operators initially benefited legal limits on the number of competing mobile operator licenses - which gave them breathing room to reach scale and discover a working business model. Dominant corporations have highly competent teams that (ought to) understand the cyclical nature of markets and innovation. They are therefore not sincere when they play "victim" to block public-interest regulation that would be exceedingly beneficial to the overall economy. A big THANK YOU to all government stakeholders who are committed to doing the right (and smart) things for the economy and for wananchi in general. You are the true heroes that our country needs and your efforts are truly appreciated! Brgds,Patrick. Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] References / Links: 1. Nunnenkamp P, Spatz J; 2004: Intellectual Property Rights and Foreign Direct Investment: A Disaggregated Analysis https://www.jstor.org/stable/40283951?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents 2. Contribution of IP in growth of FDI's in India https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fa4da9e0-029d-4f0a-9f61-bf42… 3. The World's Most Valuable Brands https://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/ 4. Apple's Supply Chain From the Factory Floor to Retail Stores http://s354933259.onlinehome.us/mhi-blog/apples-supply-chain-factory-floor-… On Saturday, June 22, 2019, 5:08:51 PM GMT+3, Mwendwa Kivuva via kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: The Kenya Information and Communications (Amendment) Bill 2019, which is sponsored by Gem MP Elisha Odhiambo, is seeking to compel mobile phone companies to form separate arms to manage any other business they engage in outside telecommunications services. They will also be required to "legally split or separate the telecommunciations business from such other business. Besides separating the revenue streams, telcos will also be required to compensate consumers for dropped calls at the rate of Sh10 for every call dropped for up to three dropped calls a day. https://www.businessdailyafrica.com/news/MPesa-Airtel-Money-set-for-split/5… _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/ Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/pmaina2000%40yahoo.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/ Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

1 0