Technology has never been this political in India - MediaNama
Good read, and a cautionary tale. Happy Holidays! http://www.medianama.com/2016/12/223-year-end-rant-2016-technology-has-never... Year end rant 2016: Technology has never been this political in India Nikhil Pahwa•December 23, 2016 There’s something deeply worrying with where we’re going with digital, when the founder of India’s (self-proclaimed) largest fintech company stands up on a stage and, in a manner that resembles a rallying cry and all the passion that comes with it, calls it his company’s “pious mission” to make India cashless. The religiosity of that phrase – “pious” – invariably invokes thoughts of “white man’s burden”, imperialism and conversion that comes with it. Let’s call it “digital man’s burden”, for the lack of a better phrase. What we’ve seen over the last few of years is this concerted push to convert people to digital: the visible aspect of it has been incentives: cashbacks, cheaper products, cheaper cab rides, free calling. The growth in commerce leads to growth in content, leads to growth in usage of the Internet. It’s all good, because at least for the time being, it gives consumers choice. The growth that is now coming in, and is set to come in, is not through incentives but enforcement: people aren’t being given a choice. We’re seeing this “digital conversion” manifest itself in two ways, both related: firstly, the way Aadhaar is being made mandatory despite how its execution is impacting the poor, in violation of Supreme Court orders. Second, is the way delegitimisation of 86% of the currency in circulation is forcing people to switch to digital currency, despite it being more expensive for citizens, and our infrastructure being incapable of dealing with it. There’s a remarkable lack of empathy – from both the state and the opportunistic founders of companies, or their religious leaders seeding this “pious mission” – when the pain it causes people is being looked at as an “inconvenience”, a period of disruption. There is this bizarre, tech-startup mindset, that the government (or the RBI. Is there a difference?) is being agile with its notifications: that it’s put a plan out there, and based on quick feedback, is iterating. Unfortunately for them, economies aren’t software or products. People don’t starve when Facebook doesn’t upgrade its newsfeed. That entire move-fast-and-break-things philosophy cannot apply to the real world, when it’s people that can get hurt, and lives that get impacted. People have died. We’ve gone from technology giving people choice to technology robbing people of choice: the way technology is being implemented by our government today is an attack on freedom and choice. * Have you heard this phrase “digital colonisation”? The other side of this crusade is this demand for protection against competition for the same businesses, and it has come from the same sources: the fear of digital colonisation in case of Net Neutrality (not a rationale I was comfortable with, by the way), digital colonisation in Ola versus Uber, and in case of Software Patents. There aren’t many places where the phrase “digital colonisation” turns up online in the Indian context, but if you’re in conversation with an iSpirt executive, the phrase invariably does come up, and it goes something like this: In a few years, our authentication will be using fingerprints on Google (Android) and Apple, and to retain India’s sovereignty, we have to ensure that that authentication is ours. Colonisation is an emotional subject for us in this country, but when you point out that Google and Apple authentication are choices (not mandatory) and the citizen has little protection against the might of the sovereign state (as evidenced by demonetization, by the way), none against the theft or misuse of data, there isn’t a cogent response. The protectionist angle also came up when it was used to seek government support, as Flipkart’s Sachin Bansal said: “I think what we need to do is what at some level China did: [tell foreign players that] we need your capital, but we don’t need your companies”. Ola’s Bhavish Aggarwal followed it up by asking for protection against “capital dumping”. Both these companies benefited from having raised more capital than others, and did their own capital dumping, allowing their competition to bleed. Now that both are faced with competition which deeper pockets, they want protection. Lets not forget that Flipkart wanted FDI in inventory based ecommerce until they became a marketplace. Now they speak against it, in order to prevent Amazon from bringing its core business to India. There’s a reason why Paytm founder Vijay Shekhar Sharma can say that “The Uber of India is Uber. The Google of India is Google. I can sign it on a wall that the PayPal of India will not be PayPal.” It’s because the company, which has a Payments Banks license, has a regulatory moat which not only protects it from Paypal, but also most of local competition. Payments Banks have another regulatory advantage: they can integrate UPI for payments while wallets are barred. They can raise money while wallets (for the time being), can’t. Their regulatory future is certain, while that of wallets is not. Of course, this is possibly not of their choosing, but they’re making the most of this opportunity. * Technology has never been this political in India before, and the dog-eat-dog competition in tech becomes a battle between a beast and a pup when politics enters it. In an interview a year ago, Nandan Nilekani said, India is going through a period of disruption, and “it is up to individual players to take advantage”. There is a window of a digital opportunity in India right now, to make multi-billion dollar businesses. When that opportunity goes to a chosen few who appear on stage on “Startup India, Standup India”, it’s reminiscent of when Russia privatised its factories, and the oligarchs took ownership of key industries to and built multi-billion dollar businesses out of it. At a private meeting in Bangalore in earlier this year, a key member of a think tank shouted me down when I raised the issues of lack of privacy protection in the (then draft) Aadhaar Bill: “You can’t do anything about the Act. It will be passed before you know it, and nobody will be able to do anything about it.” A couple of weeks later, that’s what happened. They knew. It’s discomfiting how close the technology industry and government have gotten this year. Lets take iSpirt as an example: unlike most organisations, iSpirt benefits from proximity to TRAI Chairman RS Sharma – the Chairman served along with many iSpirt volunteers in Aadhaar, including Nandan Nilekani. They got early access to Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was pitched to for support for Indian product startup shortly after he became IT Minister in 2014, and Jayant Sinha, current Minister of State for Civil Aviation (previously, Finance), appears to be a regular at iSpirt events. They get meetings at the PMO. Flipkart’s payments application was the first to use IndiaStack, which has been set up by iSpirt, and is being used by the National Payments Council of India for enabling UPI payments, but in a manner that is closed to others. As a think tank, iSpirt is doing an exceptional job of pitching to the government and non-government bodies such as the NPCI, which impacts payments. * It was something to celebrate when this government came into power, because it promised support for growth and “Digital India”. What I’m worried about is that the direction being chosen doesn’t appear to have been decided in a manner that is open and participatory, and there’s a distinct attempt to ignore concerns of those who represent how it impacts people. That the government speaks against a right as fundamental as privacy, to protect a project that is a privacy nightmare, is worrying. That people are dying in queues, or are being deprived of their pensions because of authentication failure, is distressing. These are not inconveniences. We’re heading down the wrong path if we’re compromising on rights in exchange for the growth. This is a country low on resources, high on demand, always jostling for space. Life here is often like trying to get into a train at Mumbai’s Dadar Station at peak times: you get sucked in and have no control over whether you’ll get in. Unfortunately, I’m idealistic, and I want there to be openness in the way that technology gets deployed; not in a manner that it is an attack on choice. There are questions to be asked about how policy is being made, and who knows that it is going the way it is? Who’s defining the standards, the protocols, and under what circumstances are these choices being made? How does it impact citizens and why are civil society concerns being ignored? We need more openness and transparency, especially because – to invoke another religious metaphor – this push to become digital – has become a crusade. Lastly, I know that we, as journalists, aren’t doing a good enough job of asking these questions (and more), and this is our failure as well; we’re all jostling for space and struggling for survival too. * This is the last post on MediaNama this year. Here’s to more freedom in 2017. Regards, Nanjira. Sent on the move.
Nanjira Very interesting and eye opening read. I see various facets of this struggle:- 1. To protect local players against multinationals or foreign players. It is becoming increasingly clear that in the Era of Trump Protectionism is the new kid on the block. It is interesting that the countries who benefited the most from Globalization are the ones that are now becoming the biggest proponents of Protectionism - America, China, India, Britain - even as they talk up 'Free Trade' at the WTO. WHAT ARE POOR AFRICAN NATIONS TO MAKE OF THIS? 2. The government's push towards 'digitization' sometimes without regard to the citizenry's choice. This is where commerce and human rights mingle. Local example is this:- when the government tells you that it is now super convenient to renew your driving license, apply for PIN, pay your taxes online etc we here in Nairobi applaud and call out in celebration that the digital government has finally arrived. That the convenience is welcome and that we now don't need to deal with petty corruption. Great! How about the guy in Lamu, or Pokot, or Wajir? Where Connectivity reminds me of the Dial-up era when you had to dial up your computer, go have a coffee, visit the small boys (or girls) room then come back to your desk to see if you have now been connected...Before you even start loading the web pages..it can be a tortuous exercise. This still happens in parts of Kenya today. What then happens? Are we not disenfranchising a lot of Kenyans? The price of progress. Let's not even start talking about elections... 3. A concerted assault on privacy and freedom and denial of service. This then is the paradox we live in today. We will be judged by future generations on how we navigated this hyper changing world without compromising the ideals that make us human. Progress need not be at the expense of loss of choice and self-determination; commerce need not be at the expense of human rights and efficient government need not be at the expense of loss of privacy and freedom. Happy Holidays everyone! Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Györgyi Sent from my iPad
On 23 Dec 2016, at 11:47 AM, Nanjira Sambuli via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Good read, and a cautionary tale. Happy Holidays!
http://www.medianama.com/2016/12/223-year-end-rant-2016-technology-has-never...
Year end rant 2016: Technology has never been this political in India Nikhil Pahwa•December 23, 2016
There’s something deeply worrying with where we’re going with digital, when the founder of India’s (self-proclaimed) largest fintech company stands up on a stage and, in a manner that resembles a rallying cry and all the passion that comes with it, calls it his company’s “pious mission” to make India cashless.
The religiosity of that phrase – “pious” – invariably invokes thoughts of “white man’s burden”, imperialism and conversion that comes with it. Let’s call it “digital man’s burden”, for the lack of a better phrase. What we’ve seen over the last few of years is this concerted push to convert people to digital: the visible aspect of it has been incentives: cashbacks, cheaper products, cheaper cab rides, free calling. The growth in commerce leads to growth in content, leads to growth in usage of the Internet. It’s all good, because at least for the time being, it gives consumers choice. The growth that is now coming in, and is set to come in, is not through incentives but enforcement: people aren’t being given a choice.
We’re seeing this “digital conversion” manifest itself in two ways, both related: firstly, the way Aadhaar is being made mandatory despite how its execution is impacting the poor, in violation of Supreme Court orders. Second, is the way delegitimisation of 86% of the currency in circulation is forcing people to switch to digital currency, despite it being more expensive for citizens, and our infrastructure being incapable of dealing with it. There’s a remarkable lack of empathy – from both the state and the opportunistic founders of companies, or their religious leaders seeding this “pious mission” – when the pain it causes people is being looked at as an “inconvenience”, a period of disruption. There is this bizarre, tech-startup mindset, that the government (or the RBI. Is there a difference?) is being agile with its notifications: that it’s put a plan out there, and based on quick feedback, is iterating. Unfortunately for them, economies aren’t software or products. People don’t starve when Facebook doesn’t upgrade its newsfeed. That entire move-fast-and-break-things philosophy cannot apply to the real world, when it’s people that can get hurt, and lives that get impacted. People have died.
We’ve gone from technology giving people choice to technology robbing people of choice: the way technology is being implemented by our government today is an attack on freedom and choice.
*
Have you heard this phrase “digital colonisation”? The other side of this crusade is this demand for protection against competition for the same businesses, and it has come from the same sources: the fear of digital colonisation in case of Net Neutrality (not a rationale I was comfortable with, by the way), digital colonisation in Ola versus Uber, and in case of Software Patents. There aren’t many places where the phrase “digital colonisation” turns up online in the Indian context, but if you’re in conversation with an iSpirt executive, the phrase invariably does come up, and it goes something like this: In a few years, our authentication will be using fingerprints on Google (Android) and Apple, and to retain India’s sovereignty, we have to ensure that that authentication is ours.
Colonisation is an emotional subject for us in this country, but when you point out that Google and Apple authentication are choices (not mandatory) and the citizen has little protection against the might of the sovereign state (as evidenced by demonetization, by the way), none against the theft or misuse of data, there isn’t a cogent response.
The protectionist angle also came up when it was used to seek government support, as Flipkart’s Sachin Bansal said: “I think what we need to do is what at some level China did: [tell foreign players that] we need your capital, but we don’t need your companies”. Ola’s Bhavish Aggarwal followed it up by asking for protection against “capital dumping”. Both these companies benefited from having raised more capital than others, and did their own capital dumping, allowing their competition to bleed. Now that both are faced with competition which deeper pockets, they want protection. Lets not forget that Flipkart wanted FDI in inventory based ecommerce until they became a marketplace. Now they speak against it, in order to prevent Amazon from bringing its core business to India. There’s a reason why Paytm founder Vijay Shekhar Sharma can say that “The Uber of India is Uber. The Google of India is Google. I can sign it on a wall that the PayPal of India will not be PayPal.” It’s because the company, which has a Payments Banks license, has a regulatory moat which not only protects it from Paypal, but also most of local competition. Payments Banks have another regulatory advantage: they can integrate UPI for payments while wallets are barred. They can raise money while wallets (for the time being), can’t. Their regulatory future is certain, while that of wallets is not. Of course, this is possibly not of their choosing, but they’re making the most of this opportunity.
*
Technology has never been this political in India before, and the dog-eat-dog competition in tech becomes a battle between a beast and a pup when politics enters it.
In an interview a year ago, Nandan Nilekani said, India is going through a period of disruption, and “it is up to individual players to take advantage”. There is a window of a digital opportunity in India right now, to make multi-billion dollar businesses. When that opportunity goes to a chosen few who appear on stage on “Startup India, Standup India”, it’s reminiscent of when Russia privatised its factories, and the oligarchs took ownership of key industries to and built multi-billion dollar businesses out of it.
At a private meeting in Bangalore in earlier this year, a key member of a think tank shouted me down when I raised the issues of lack of privacy protection in the (then draft) Aadhaar Bill: “You can’t do anything about the Act. It will be passed before you know it, and nobody will be able to do anything about it.” A couple of weeks later, that’s what happened. They knew.
It’s discomfiting how close the technology industry and government have gotten this year. Lets take iSpirt as an example: unlike most organisations, iSpirt benefits from proximity to TRAI Chairman RS Sharma – the Chairman served along with many iSpirt volunteers in Aadhaar, including Nandan Nilekani. They got early access to Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was pitched to for support for Indian product startup shortly after he became IT Minister in 2014, and Jayant Sinha, current Minister of State for Civil Aviation (previously, Finance), appears to be a regular at iSpirt events. They get meetings at the PMO. Flipkart’s payments application was the first to use IndiaStack, which has been set up by iSpirt, and is being used by the National Payments Council of India for enabling UPI payments, but in a manner that is closed to others. As a think tank, iSpirt is doing an exceptional job of pitching to the government and non-government bodies such as the NPCI, which impacts payments.
*
It was something to celebrate when this government came into power, because it promised support for growth and “Digital India”. What I’m worried about is that the direction being chosen doesn’t appear to have been decided in a manner that is open and participatory, and there’s a distinct attempt to ignore concerns of those who represent how it impacts people. That the government speaks against a right as fundamental as privacy, to protect a project that is a privacy nightmare, is worrying. That people are dying in queues, or are being deprived of their pensions because of authentication failure, is distressing. These are not inconveniences. We’re heading down the wrong path if we’re compromising on rights in exchange for the growth.
This is a country low on resources, high on demand, always jostling for space. Life here is often like trying to get into a train at Mumbai’s Dadar Station at peak times: you get sucked in and have no control over whether you’ll get in. Unfortunately, I’m idealistic, and I want there to be openness in the way that technology gets deployed; not in a manner that it is an attack on choice. There are questions to be asked about how policy is being made, and who knows that it is going the way it is? Who’s defining the standards, the protocols, and under what circumstances are these choices being made? How does it impact citizens and why are civil society concerns being ignored? We need more openness and transparency, especially because – to invoke another religious metaphor – this push to become digital – has become a crusade.
Lastly, I know that we, as journalists, aren’t doing a good enough job of asking these questions (and more), and this is our failure as well; we’re all jostling for space and struggling for survival too.
*
This is the last post on MediaNama this year. Here’s to more freedom in 2017.
Regards, Nanjira.
Sent on the move. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/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.
Blessed Christmas Season! There is no national sovereignty when your intelligence is designed by anyone out there in the name of innovation and rests where you do not know or access is not yours! In the knowledge (data) age, when your nationals generously adopt or are forced to adopt technologies that track them knowingly or otherwise, that is the next design of colonisation. Today many farms are barren or unproductive after years of being pumped with seeds, fertilisers and farm inputs that have been received generously yet have had progressive detrimental effects. The ICT space might as well be a mining zone with generous governments and blinded users. In the Internet Governance, China's model of control may soon become the norm if equity in the space doesn,t come sooner. Which certainly doesn't promote some of the key principles to the development of the internet as one global Very spot on article and yes, journalists are not asking the right questions, highlighting this and more so visioning the future. The question is why? Be blessed. Regards/Wangari --- Pray God Bless. 2013Wangari circa - "Being of the Light, We are Restored Through Faith in Mind, Body and Spirit; We Manifest The Kingdom of God on Earth". On Saturday, 24 December 2016, 4:15, Ali Hussein via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Nanjira Very interesting and eye opening read. I see various facets of this struggle:- 1. To protect local players against multinationals or foreign players. It is becoming increasingly clear that in the Era of Trump Protectionism is the new kid on the block. It is interesting that the countries who benefited the most from Globalization are the ones that are now becoming the biggest proponents of Protectionism - America, China, India, Britain - even as they talk up 'Free Trade' at the WTO. WHAT ARE POOR AFRICAN NATIONS TO MAKE OF THIS? 2. The government's push towards 'digitization' sometimes without regard to the citizenry's choice. This is where commerce and human rights mingle. Local example is this:- when the government tells you that it is now super convenient to renew your driving license, apply for PIN, pay your taxes online etc we here in Nairobi applaud and call out in celebration that the digital government has finally arrived. That the convenience is welcome and that we now don't need to deal with petty corruption. Great! How about the guy in Lamu, or Pokot, or Wajir? Where Connectivity reminds me of the Dial-up era when you had to dial up your computer, go have a coffee, visit the small boys (or girls) room then come back to your desk to see if you have now been connected...Before you even start loading the web pages..it can be a tortuous exercise. This still happens in parts of Kenya today. What then happens? Are we not disenfranchising a lot of Kenyans? The price of progress. Let's not even start talking about elections... 3. A concerted assault on privacy and freedom and denial of service. This then is the paradox we live in today. We will be judged by future generations on how we navigated this hyper changing world without compromising the ideals that make us human. Progress need not be at the expense of loss of choice and self-determination; commerce need not be at the expense of human rights and efficient government need not be at the expense of loss of privacy and freedom. Happy Holidays everyone! Ali HusseinPrincipalHussein & Associates+254 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassimSkype: abu-jomoLinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Györgyi Sent from my iPad On 23 Dec 2016, at 11:47 AM, Nanjira Sambuli via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: @media {#yiv3467689472 body {margin:2mm 9mm;}#yiv3467689472 .yiv3467689472original-url {display:none;}#yiv3467689472 #yiv3467689472article .yiv3467689472float.yiv3467689472left {float:left;}#yiv3467689472 #yiv3467689472article .yiv3467689472float.yiv3467689472right {float:right;}#yiv3467689472 #yiv3467689472article .yiv3467689472float {margin-top:0 !important;margin-bottom:0 !important;}}Year end rant 2016: Technology has never been this political in India - MediaNamaGood read, and a cautionary tale.Happy Holidays! http://www.medianama.com/2016/12/223-year-end-rant-2016-technology-has-never... Year end rant 2016: Technology has never been this political in India Nikhil Pahwa• December 23, 2016 There’s something deeply worrying with where we’re going with digital, when the founder of India’s (self-proclaimed) largest fintech company stands up on a stage and, in a manner that resembles a rallying cry and all the passion that comes with it, calls it his company’s “pious mission” to make India cashless.The religiosity of that phrase – “pious” – invariably invokes thoughts of “white man’s burden”, imperialism and conversion that comes with it. Let’s call it “digital man’s burden”, for the lack of a better phrase. What we’ve seen over the last few of years is this concerted push to convert people to digital: the visible aspect of it has been incentives: cashbacks, cheaper products, cheaper cab rides, free calling. The growth in commerce leads to growth in content, leads to growth in usage of the Internet. It’s all good, because at least for the time being, it gives consumers choice. The growth that is now coming in, and is set to come in, is not through incentives but enforcement: people aren’t being given a choice.We’re seeing this “digital conversion” manifest itself in two ways, both related: firstly, the way Aadhaar is being made mandatory despite how its execution is impacting the poor, in violation of Supreme Court orders. Second, is the way delegitimisation of 86% of the currency in circulation is forcing people to switch to digital currency, despite it being more expensive for citizens, and our infrastructure being incapable of dealing with it. There’s a remarkable lack of empathy – from both the state and the opportunistic founders of companies, or their religious leaders seeding this “pious mission” – when the pain it causes people is being looked at as an “inconvenience”, a period of disruption. There is this bizarre, tech-startup mindset, that the government (or the RBI. Is there a difference?) is being agile with its notifications: that it’s put a plan out there, and based on quick feedback, is iterating. Unfortunately for them, economies aren’t software or products. People don’t starve when Facebook doesn’t upgrade its newsfeed. That entire move-fast-and-break-things philosophy cannot apply to the real world, when it’s people that can get hurt, and lives that get impacted. People have died.We’ve gone from technology giving people choice to technology robbing people of choice: the way technology is being implemented by our government today is an attack on freedom and choice.*Have you heard this phrase “digital colonisation”? The other side of this crusade is this demand for protection against competition for the same businesses, and it has come from the same sources: the fear of digital colonisation in case of Net Neutrality (not a rationale I was comfortable with, by the way), digital colonisation in Ola versus Uber, and in case of Software Patents. There aren’t many places where the phrase “digital colonisation” turns up online in the Indian context, but if you’re in conversation with an iSpirt executive, the phrase invariably does come up, and it goes something like this: In a few years, our authentication will be using fingerprints on Google (Android) and Apple, and to retain India’s sovereignty, we have to ensure that that authentication is ours.Colonisation is an emotional subject for us in this country, but when you point out that Google and Apple authentication are choices (not mandatory) and the citizen has little protection against the might of the sovereign state (as evidenced by demonetization, by the way), none against the theft or misuse of data, there isn’t a cogent response.The protectionist angle also came up when it was used to seek government support, as Flipkart’s Sachin Bansal said: “I think what we need to do is what at some level China did: [tell foreign players that] we need your capital, but we don’t need your companies”. Ola’s Bhavish Aggarwal followed it up by asking for protection against “capital dumping”. Both these companies benefited from having raised more capital than others, and did their own capital dumping, allowing their competition to bleed. Now that both are faced with competition which deeper pockets, they want protection. Lets not forget that Flipkart wanted FDI in inventory based ecommerce until they became a marketplace. Now they speak against it, in order to prevent Amazon from bringing its core business to India. There’s a reason why Paytm founder Vijay Shekhar Sharma can say that “The Uber of India is Uber. The Google of India is Google. I can sign it on a wall that the PayPal of India will not be PayPal.” It’s because the company, which has a Payments Banks license, has a regulatory moat which not only protects it from Paypal, but also most of local competition. Payments Banks have another regulatory advantage: they can integrate UPI for payments while wallets are barred. They can raise money while wallets (for the time being), can’t. Their regulatory future is certain, while that of wallets is not. Of course, this is possibly not of their choosing, but they’re making the most of this opportunity.*Technology has never been this political in India before, and the dog-eat-dog competition in tech becomes a battle between a beast and a pup when politics enters it.In an interview a year ago, Nandan Nilekani said, India is going through a period of disruption, and “it is up to individual players to take advantage”. There is a window of a digital opportunity in India right now, to make multi-billion dollar businesses. When that opportunity goes to a chosen few who appear on stage on “Startup India, Standup India”, it’s reminiscent of when Russia privatised its factories, and the oligarchs took ownership of key industries to and built multi-billion dollar businesses out of it.At a private meeting in Bangalore in earlier this year, a key member of a think tank shouted me down when I raised the issues of lack of privacy protection in the (then draft) Aadhaar Bill: “You can’t do anything about the Act. It will be passed before you know it, and nobody will be able to do anything about it.” A couple of weeks later, that’s what happened. They knew.It’s discomfiting how close the technology industry and government have gotten this year. Lets take iSpirt as an example: unlike most organisations, iSpirt benefits from proximity to TRAI Chairman RS Sharma – the Chairman served along with many iSpirt volunteers in Aadhaar, including Nandan Nilekani. They got early access to Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was pitched to for support for Indian product startup shortly after he became IT Minister in 2014, and Jayant Sinha, current Minister of State for Civil Aviation (previously, Finance), appears to be a regular at iSpirt events. They get meetings at the PMO. Flipkart’s payments application was the first to use IndiaStack, which has been set up by iSpirt, and is being used by the National Payments Council of India for enabling UPI payments, but in a manner that is closed to others. As a think tank, iSpirt is doing an exceptional job of pitching to the government and non-government bodies such as the NPCI, which impacts payments.*It was something to celebrate when this government came into power, because it promised support for growth and “Digital India”. What I’m worried about is that the direction being chosen doesn’t appear to have been decided in a manner that is open and participatory, and there’s a distinct attempt to ignore concerns of those who represent how it impacts people. That the government speaks against a right as fundamental as privacy, to protect a project that is a privacy nightmare, is worrying. That people are dying in queues, or are being deprived of their pensions because of authentication failure, is distressing. These are not inconveniences. We’re heading down the wrong path if we’re compromising on rights in exchange for the growth.This is a country low on resources, high on demand, always jostling for space. Life here is often like trying to get into a train at Mumbai’s Dadar Station at peak times: you get sucked in and have no control over whether you’ll get in. Unfortunately, I’m idealistic, and I want there to be openness in the way that technology gets deployed; not in a manner that it is an attack on choice. There are questions to be asked about how policy is being made, and who knows that it is going the way it is? Who’s defining the standards, the protocols, and under what circumstances are these choices being made? How does it impact citizens and why are civil society concerns being ignored? We need more openness and transparency, especially because – to invoke another religious metaphor – this push to become digital – has become a crusade.Lastly, I know that we, as journalists, aren’t doing a good enough job of asking these questions (and more), and this is our failure as well; we’re all jostling for space and struggling for survival too.*This is the last post on MediaNama this year. Here’s to more freedom in 2017. Regards, Nanjira. Sent on the move. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/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. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wangarikabiru%40yahoo.... 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.
Fascinating piece! Portions that stood out for me: "We’ve gone from technology giving people choice to technology robbing people of choice: the way technology is being implemented by our government today is an attack on freedom and choice." *“You can’t do anything about the Act. It will be passed before you know it, and nobody will be able to do anything about it.” A couple of weeks later, that’s what happened.* *They knew**."* "What I’m worried about is that the direction being chosen doesn’t appear to have been decided in a manner that is open and participatory, and there’s a distinct attempt to ignore concerns of those who represent how it impacts people." "Lastly, I know that we, as journalists, aren’t doing a good enough job of asking these questions (and more), and this is our failure as well; we’re all jostling for space and struggling for survival too." Yes, food for thought as we break for the holidays. Merry Christmas everyone and a prosperous 2017. Regards, Mildred Achoch. Check out the Rock 'n' roll film festival, Kenya TV Channel! http://kenyarockfilmfestivaljournal.blogspot.com On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Nanjira Sambuli via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Good read, and a cautionary tale. Happy Holidays!
http://www.medianama.com/2016/12/223-year-end-rant-2016- technology-has-never-been-this-political-in-india/
Year end rant 2016: Technology has never been this political in India Nikhil Pahwa <http://www.medianama.com/author/nikhil/>•December 23, 2016
There’s something deeply worrying with where we’re going with digital, when the founder of India’s (self-proclaimed) largest fintech company stands up on a stage and, in a manner that resembles a rallying cry and all the passion that comes with it, calls it his company’s “pious mission” to make India cashless.
The religiosity of that phrase – “pious” – invariably invokes thoughts of “white man’s burden”, imperialism and conversion that comes with it. Let’s call it “digital man’s burden”, for the lack of a better phrase. What we’ve seen over the last few of years is this concerted push to convert people to digital: the visible aspect of it has been incentives: cashbacks, cheaper products, cheaper cab rides, free calling. The growth in commerce leads to growth in content, leads to growth in usage of the Internet. It’s all good, because at least for the time being, it gives consumers choice. The growth that is now coming in, and is set to come in, is not through incentives but enforcement: people aren’t being given a choice.
We’re seeing this “digital conversion” manifest itself in two ways, both related: firstly, the way Aadhaar is <http://indianexpress.com/article/education/iit-jee-2017-cbse-makes-aadhaar-card-compulsory/> being <https://thewire.in/84719/indian-railways-puts-aadhaar-mandatory/> made <https://thewire.in/75359/right-to-food-how-aadhaar-in-pds-is-denying-rights/> mandatory <http://scroll.in/article/817366/despite-the-supreme-court-you-need-aadhaar-to-get-a-loan-from-microfinance-companies> despite how its execution <http://scroll.in/article/709399/why-poor-people-in-delhi-are-desperate-to-get-their-babies-uniquely-identified> is impacting the poor <http://scroll.in/article/813132/rajasthans-living-dead-thousands-of-pensioners-without-aadhaar-or-bank-accounts-struck-off-lists>, in violation of Supreme Court orders. Second, is the way delegitimisation of 86% of the currency in circulation is forcing people to switch to digital currency, despite it being more expensive for citizens, and our infrastructure being incapable of dealing with it <http://www.medianama.com/2016/11/223-cashless-india/>. There’s a remarkable lack of empathy – from both the state and the opportunistic founders of companies, or their religious leaders <https://twitter.com/NandanNilekani> seeding this “pious mission” – when the pain it causes people is being looked at as an “inconvenience”, a period of disruption. There is this bizarre, tech-startup mindset, that the government (or the RBI. Is there a difference?) is being *agile* with its notifications: that it’s put a plan out there, and based on quick feedback, is iterating. Unfortunately for them, economies aren’t software or products. People don’t starve when Facebook doesn’t upgrade its newsfeed. That entire move-fast-and-break-things philosophy cannot apply to the real world, when it’s people that can get hurt, and lives that get impacted. People have died <http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-government-not-mourning-over-100-deaths-due-to-cash-crunch-says-opposition-2280902> .
We’ve gone from technology giving people choice to technology robbing people of choice: the way technology is being implemented by our government today is an attack on freedom and choice.
*
Have you heard this phrase “digital colonisation”? The other side of this crusade is this demand for protection against competition for the same businesses, and it has come from the same sources: the fear of digital colonisation in case of Net Neutrality <http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/aadhaar-bill-lpg-subsidy-mgnrega-paperless-govt-basis-of-a-revolution/> (not a rationale I was comfortable with, by the way), digital colonisation in Ola versus Uber <http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/53497351.cms>, and in case of Software Patents <http://pn.ispirt.in/patent-shift-hope-for-it-innovation-not-litigation/>. There aren’t many places where the phrase “digital colonisation” turns up online in the Indian context, but if you’re in conversation with an iSpirt executive, the phrase invariably does come up, and it goes something like this: In a few years, our authentication will be using fingerprints on Google (Android) and Apple, and to retain India’s sovereignty, we have to ensure that that authentication is ours.
Colonisation is an emotional subject for us in this country, but when you point out that Google and Apple authentication *are choices (not mandatory) and the citizen has little protection against the might of the sovereign state* (as evidenced by demonetization, by the way), none against the theft or misuse of data, there isn’t a cogent response.
The protectionist angle also came up when it was used to seek government support, as Flipkart’s Sachin Bansal said <http://qz.com/858002/flipkarts-sachin-bansal-and-olas-bhavish-aggarwal-want-india-to-become-like-protectionist-china/>: “I think what we need to do is what at some level China did: [tell foreign players that] we need your capital, but we don’t need your companies”. Ola’s Bhavish Aggarwal followed it up by asking for protection against “capital dumping”. Both these companies benefited from having raised more capital than others, and did their own capital dumping, allowing their competition to bleed. Now that both are faced with competition which deeper pockets, they want protection. Lets not forget that Flipkart wanted FDI in inventory based ecommerce until they became a marketplace. Now they speak against it, in order to prevent Amazon from bringing its core business to India. There’s a reason why Paytm founder Vijay Shekhar Sharma can say that <https://yourstory.com/2016/11/unstoppable-vijay-shekhar-sharma-paytm/> “The Uber of India is Uber. The Google of India is Google. I can sign it on a wall that the PayPal of India will not be PayPal.” It’s because the company, which has a Payments Banks license, has a regulatory moat which not only protects it from Paypal, but also most of local competition. Payments Banks have another regulatory advantage: they can integrate UPI for payments while wallets are barred <http://www.medianama.com/2016/05/223-india-wallets-upi-banks-ncpi-hota/>. They can raise money while wallets (for the time being), can’t <http://www.medianama.com/2016/10/223-wallets-shareholding-rbi/>. Their regulatory future is certain, while that of wallets is not <http://www.medianama.com/2016/10/223-review-mobile-wallet-guidelines-payments-banks-norms/>. Of course, this is possibly not of their choosing, but they’re making the most of this opportunity.
*
Technology has never been this political in India before, and the dog-eat-dog competition in tech becomes a battle between a beast and a pup when politics enters it.
In an interview a year ago, Nandan Nilekani said <http://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/interview-with-nandan-nilekani-cofounder-infosys/article7747561.ece>, India is going through a period of disruption, and “it is up to individual players to take advantage”. There is a window of a digital opportunity in India right now, to make multi-billion dollar businesses. When that opportunity goes to a chosen few who appear on stage on “Startup India, Standup India”, it’s reminiscent of when Russia privatised its factories, and the oligarchs took ownership of key industries <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2Cl8lSv9Is> to and built multi-billion dollar businesses out of it.
At a private meeting in Bangalore in earlier this year, a key member of a think tank shouted me down when I raised the issues of lack of privacy protection in the (then draft) Aadhaar Bill: *“You can’t do anything about the Act. It will be passed before you know it, and nobody will be able to do anything about it.” A couple of weeks later, that’s what happened. They knew.*
It’s discomfiting how close the technology industry and government have gotten this year. Lets take iSpirt as an example: unlike most organisations, iSpirt benefits from proximity to TRAI Chairman RS Sharma – the Chairman served along with many iSpirt volunteers in Aadhaar, including Nandan Nilekani. They got early access to Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was pitched to for support for Indian product startup shortly after he became IT Minister in 2014 <http://pn.ispirt.in/how-we-got-the-it-minister-excited-about-indian-product-startups-made-him-our-spokesperson-unleashtheenergy/>, and Jayant Sinha, current Minister of State for Civil Aviation (previously, Finance), appears to be <http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/jayant-sinha-we-need-a-strong-venture-capital-industry/article8656451.ece> a regular <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Nqv6DjTKKs> at iSpirt events. They get meetings at the PMO <http://pn.ispirt.in/ispirt-meeting-at-pmo-stay-in-india-checklist/>. Flipkart’s payments application was the first <https://twitter.com/binnybansal/status/801449459544506368?lang=en> to use IndiaStack, which has been set up by iSpirt <http://indiastack.org/about/>, and is being used by the National Payments Council of India for enabling UPI payments, but in a manner that is closed to others. As a think tank, iSpirt is doing an exceptional job of pitching to the government and non-government bodies such as the NPCI, which impacts payments.
*
It was something to celebrate when this government came into power, because it promised support for growth and “Digital India”. What I’m worried about is that the direction being chosen doesn’t appear to have been decided in a manner that is open and participatory, and there’s a distinct attempt to ignore concerns of those who represent how it impacts people. That the government speaks against a right as fundamental as privacy, to protect a project that is a privacy nightmare, is worrying. That people are dying in queues, or are being deprived of their pensions because of authentication failure, is distressing. These are not inconveniences. *We’re heading down the wrong path if we’re compromising on rights in exchange for the growth.*
This is a country low on resources, high on demand, always jostling for space. Life here is often like trying to get into a train at Mumbai’s Dadar Station at peak times: you get sucked in and have no control over whether you’ll get in. Unfortunately, I’m idealistic, and I want there to be openness in the way that technology gets deployed; not in a manner that it is an attack on choice. There are questions to be asked about how policy is being made, and who knows that it is going the way it is? Who’s defining the standards, the protocols, and under what circumstances are these choices being made? How does it impact citizens and why are civil society concerns being ignored? We need more openness and transparency, especially because – to invoke another religious metaphor – this push to become digital – has become a crusade.
Lastly, I know that we, as journalists, aren’t doing a good enough job of asking these questions (and more), and this is our failure as well; we’re all jostling for space and struggling for survival too.
*
This is the last post on MediaNama this year. Here’s to more freedom in 2017.
Regards, Nanjira.
Sent on the move.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/ mailman/options/kictanet/mildandred%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.
participants (4)
-
Ali Hussein -
Mildred Achoch -
Nanjira Sambuli -
WANGARI KABIRU