NGO Networks In Haiti Cause Problems For ISPs
angry tapir sends in an article from GoodGear Guide that begins: "While the communications networks that aid groups set up quickly following the earthquake in Haiti were surely critical to rescue efforts, the new networks have had some negative effects on the local ISP community. More than a month after the earthquake devastated the island nation, local ISPs are starting to grumble about being left out of business opportunities and about how some of the temporary equipment — using spectrum without proper authorization — is interfering with their own expensive networks, causing a degradation of their services."
goes un-complained about
www.RacquetUp.org - Helping Detroit Youth
Asking for handouts, asking for treatment of the symptoms rather than the illness. Hey, Haiti, you can be every bit as greedy and corrupt as the U.S. when you learn how to wipe your own asses. Until then, "do as we say, not as we do." And stop killing our ham radio operators, you goddamn savages.
If it weren't for the temporary networks interfering with my wireless I would have had first post
Link to incident you're talking about, please?
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
I didn't rtfa, so I don't know if this is analogous to donating clothes to poor countries, but in that case, the free clothes have devastated local clothes industry. There's some fundamental flaw in the system if giving people free stuff is bad for them...
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
I read an interesting book on the subject, by an African woman with first hand experience with aid (Dambisa Moyo: Dead Aid - Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa). It explains with how sending aid to poor countries often causes more problems then it solves. If you give something for free, you ruin the part of economy that provided the same thing for money. Then when the aid stops, there are no local producers to replace it. The countries become dependent on aid.
Of course this does not apply to emergency situations like the one in Haiti, where there was no local producer to produce enough food, shelter, water... But if there are local ISPs capable of providing internet access, then the NGOs should definitely use them, and not compete with them by maintaining their own network. That would give work to the local people, which in turn helps a bit in re-establishing the Haitian economy.
About technology and countertops: http://www.livingstonesurfaces.com/
That ends with "He had a hat!"
There is never a disaster big enough to stop capitalist exploitation.
Inveneo certainly does involve local service providers in their work. In fact, that is what they are all about. I recommend that you have a look at their interesting business model.
P.S. Their "How to Deploy Long-Distance WiFi in Haiti" is a very informative read for the radio geeks among us.
P.P.S. I am a former Inveneo employee.
Sounds similar to the situation soon after the invasion of Iraq. The call for the use of local workers for example.
Nothing is being "donated to the country". At least regarding "the internets".
NGOs that are there to provide aid got their own satellite and wireless links because none of the local IPSs were operational at the moment. Nothing is being donated (to Haiti) - it is for their own operational and personal use.
Later, since Haitian internet backbone is operational, the backhaul bandwidth was donated (to the NGOs) by two local ISPs - AccessHaiti and MultiLink.
So in fact, Haitian companies are donating the bandwidth to NGOs who are donating the humanitarian aid and services to Haiti.
But, now that the local small ISPs are coming back online, they (local ISPs) find that the NGOs are quite happy with their current setup and don't really need the local wireless services - but are willing to switch, they just need more time.
They are kinda busy doing something a little more important at the moment.
Being practically the only game in town (read: the only paying customers) - local ISPs would really like to sell them their services.
But, on top of that, the wireless relays the NGOs have set up for themselves are drowning out the wireless signal of the local ISPs.
So, basically...
1 - Local ISP companies are providing the bandwidth to the relief workers for free. Which will probably change in the future.
2 - NGOs have their own equipment for the use and distributing of that bandwidth - and they are providing the humanitarian aid for free. They are willing to pay for the bandwidth but are asking for more time to switch to the local providers as they are rather busy at the moment.
3 - Local small ISPs would like to sell THEIR bandwidth (that they will buy from the ISPs mentioned under 1) to the NGOs - but they lack the capacity to do that as their wireless networks are being drowned out by the signal of the NGO's equipment.
So... it is not the case of donated food drowning out the local production.
But it is going to be, one way or the other, for a while at least. Because the local ISPs want it that way.
Cause it will take time for the local customers to be able to match the NGO's ability to buy the services of the local ISPs.
Who will then fix their prices to match the paying capabilities of the NGOs - NOT the local population.
So... in the long run, the locals will have to pay more for less longer - because NGOs can pay more and thereby they set the prices.
But in the LONGER run, when NGOs leave, locals will be left with a working ISP structure, and some money will flow into the community.
So, not quite like donating food. Or clothes.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Now we can ship 100,000 Mexican workers to Haiti to rebuild everything. They will earn US government-subsidized wages while the Haitians--who need the money/work--relax and watch!
Oh... Sorry... That was Katrina/New Orleans.
-Todd
Omne ignotum pro magnifico.
I hate articles that use abbreviations but don't define them first!
What the hell does NGO stand for?
...we showed up with a pair of satellite dishes but all our network connections are wired. Additionally, we didn't feel we could or should rely on local ISPs for communications since we need those communications to be reliable and secure and sending a buncha people down there with no way to talk across the pond to home station didn't seem like the smartest move I've heard of.
So now the ISPs want the NGOs to shut off all the expensive hardware folks shipped down there and use local resources?
In the interest of full disclosure we do work for a GO, just not the one in Haiti.
we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin
I know that's considered blasphemy on /. But I think it's an excellent question. If giving food and other commodities away for free hurts other for-profit industries, I don't see why a much larger free software movement wouldn't disrupt the mainstream software industry in the same way. If OpenOffice, GIMP, et. al. ever rose to the same level (quality-wise and acceptance-wise) as Office and Photoshop, it's going to be a sad time for all those programmers and developers working at MS and Adobe who get handed a pink slip.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I think there are two factors at work.
First, of course, being that the local ISP wants aid organizations to use them because it's profitable. That part appears to be greedy, vying for profits from someone who is trying to help your country out.
Second, and just as important, is that the aid organization is preventing the ISP from engaging in their normal business, by using equipment that interferes with the ISP's assigned and licensed frequencies. This is not greed on the part of the ISP, but simply a desire to get their business back to normal. Granted food, water, and medical supplies are much higher up on the list than restoring local Internet access, and aid organizations need to be able to coordinate their efforts, but at some point the aid organizations have to allow local businesses to resume operations, and communications are a vital key to that.
I don't have an easy solution. If the aid organization only has equipment that stomps all over the local gear, the aid organization still needs communication. But then so do the locals.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
By the way, NGO = Non-Governmental Organization
Pertinent info!!
This is the fundamental reason why we don't dump all of our uneaten food into starving countries. Doing so strongly devalues the local farmer's products and makes it difficult for them to buy seed and fertilizer for the next year.
We do dump food.
In the 80's, Regan re-instituted all the price controls and tariffs on sugar. Poorer countries which relied on the US for sugar sales suddenly found a giant chunk of their exports gone, and farmers switched to growing different crops.
What did we do then? Provided "assistance" food to those countries- the same crops that farmers were growing.
I'm not sure that we still "provide" food "assistance", but I know the sugar tariff remains (which protects around a thousand corporate sugar cane growers), as do hundreds of other tariffs that protect very small farming interests and hurt worldwide access to our markets.
Guess how High Fructose Corn Syrup became the predominant sweetener, by the way? Yep, the price controls from the 80's made it a much cheaper alternative because the government wasn't artificially propping up the price. Our national diet, fucked for the sake of ~1000 sugarcane farmers.
Please help metamoderate.
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20090109
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
Witness the corporate theft of Haiti. Aided by the humanitarian NGO's, funded by "charitible" donations from the MegaBanks and agribusiness, etc.
The military of the US comes in and does the "muscle". Marines work for Monsanto and GoldmanSachs. They will shoot YOU on sight, if told.
This is how it's done boys.
Why Is The US Military Occupying Four Airports In Haiti?
Phyllis Bennis said in Huffington post that "the reality is, on the ground, U.S. military forces take charge, as the United Nations is pushed aside."
http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/01/why-is-the-us-military-occupying-four-airports-in-haiti/
US Troops Pouring; Haitians Fleeing, UN Rescuers "Going Home"
General Douglas Fraser, the head of US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), said Thursday that over 2,676 US troops were currently operating on the ground in Haiti to boost the still struggling aid effort in the aftermath of a killer quake. He said that number was expected to swell to 4,600 by the weekend, and that another 10,445 (!) were currently afloat aboard vessels offshore.
(This is roughy 33% of the US troop strength in Afghanistan)
http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/01/us-troops-pouring-haitians-fleeing-un-rescuers-going-home/
Haitians dying by the thousands as US escalates military intervention
With the Haitian catastrophe now in its 10th day, it is becoming increasingly clear that the response of the Obama administration and the Pentagon, which have made military occupation of the Caribbean nation its first objective, has deepened the immense suffering of millions of injured, homeless and hungry people.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jan2010/hait-j22.shtml
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell