Slashdot Mirror


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."

6 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. Flawed system. by migla · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Flawed system. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's some fundamental flaw in the system if giving people free stuff is bad for them...

      It creates dependency. My wife hand feeds our seven year old son. Now when he wants something done he goes to her and takes up her time. Additionally he doesn't learn how to do things himself.

    2. Re:Flawed system. by outsider007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The aid groups are not 'donating internets' as a relief measure, they just need the networks to be up to run their operation.
      The networks are temporary and it doesn't sound like the NGOs have a problem working with local ISPs so no big deal.
      I guess the story is about greedy ISPs but hey, these guys have been through hell too and they have a right to want things to get back to normal.

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    3. Re:Flawed system. by FishTankX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      It's extremely difficult to compete with free or very, very cheap. In the corporate world, if this is done it's called 'dumping'. In the world food aid world, it's only done if the demand for food far outstrips supplies and doing so would not impact food prices significantly.

      Thus, why the west can live in food glut conditions while many africans are malnourished. Suddenly feeding them all for free would collapse the mainstay of their internal economy.

      Tricky, isn't it?

    4. Re:Flawed system. by oldhack · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tell that no-good bum to get a job.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    5. Re:Flawed system. by sn00ker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I guess the story is about greedy ISPs

      What's greedy about it? A fundamental principle of international aid (and given that within the past six weeks I've been in the Solomon Islands, and on stand-by to go to Haiti, the Cook Islands and Tonga, to help with disaster relief I think I've got some clue on the topic) is that you try and spend aid money in the affected community. The people who live there and the businesses that operate there must remain viable once the relief effort is over, and that means keeping businesses alive until the locals are in a position to earn and spend money themselves.

      Donating services is nice if the locals cannot immediately furnish your requirements, but as soon as there's local capability available for utilisation it is a failure of the aid system if that capability goes unused. It is not a good use of aid money to use donated services in place of local ones when carrying out relief work.

      --
      "God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly