Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Government Technology

India Pushes Back Against Tech 'Colonization' by Internet Giants (nytimes.com) 176

In India, American companies dominate the internet. Facebook's WhatsApp is the most popular app on phones. Virtually every smartphone runs on Google's Android system. YouTube is the favorite video platform and Amazon is the No. 2 online retailer. For some Indian political leaders, it is as if their nation --which was ruled by Britain for a century until 1947 -- is being conquered by colonial powers all over again. And they are determined to stop it. From a report: "As a country, we have to all grow up and say that, you know, enough of this," Vinit Goenka, a railways official who works on technology policy for India's governing Bharatiya Janata Party, said at a conference last week. In recent months, regulators and ministers across India's government have declared their intention to impose tough new rules on the technology industry. Collectively, the regulations would end the free rein that American tech giants have long enjoyed in this country of 1.3 billion people, which is the world's fastest-growing market for new internet users. The proposals include European-style limits on what big internet companies can do with users' personal data, a requirement that tech firms store certain sensitive data about Indians only within the country, and restrictions on the ability of foreign-owned e-commerce companies to undercut local businesses on price. Matthew Prince, CEO of Cloudflare, commented on the story, saying, "India is currently the most important country in term of defining the future of Internet policy. It sits at the fulcrum between the United States and China. As it goes, so goes the world."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

India Pushes Back Against Tech 'Colonization' by Internet Giants

Comments Filter:
  • IBM in India (Score:5, Interesting)

    by that this is not und ( 1026860 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @12:04AM (#57244618)

    In the 1960's, IBM chose to leave the market in India because of how the government tried to force them to do business.

    • Doesn't surprise me - I can easily imagine the local officials saying 'hey, it's not like they are going to walk away from a 750 million customer country!'

      Yes, they would.

      Those curious about government attempts would do well to research the US government's purchasing requirement to only buy computers/periphersls that use ASCII character representation. The US gov't thought they could change 'Big Blue', but they were wrong...

      • Linux on system-z uses ASCII, not EBCDIC.

      • Doesn't surprise me - I can easily imagine the local officials saying 'hey, it's not like they are going to walk away from a 750 million customer country!'

        Yes, they would.

        Those curious about government attempts would do well to research the US government's purchasing requirement to only buy computers/periphersls that use ASCII character representation. The US gov't thought they could change 'Big Blue', but they were wrong...

        The US government is still there, but "Big Blue" has had to try to remake itself.

        And

        • You are absolutely right. Look at CEOs of Microsoft, Google and many others. All Indian Americans, all signalling American inclusiveness to Indians. India's openness to reliance on US tech is hugely valuable.

          • An important detail: they are all people who left India to be successful. Sure, they're keen on locating proles there to do the heavy lifting. They're not staying there and working as management under the Indian government's regime.

            They understand India and the Indian market better than westerners would.

        • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          Not all people are customers. Being a starving peasant living in poverty does not make you a customer.

          All this points to the same fucking thing, US intelligence agencies just had to play idiot fuckwit games and now no one trusts US corporations and major countries are striving to force localised development.

          The big winner going forward FOSS because it gives a major head start to independent technology production.

          I see a major global fracturing taking place, between the haves and the have nots. Those who

    • by Anonymous Coward

      And then in less than 25 years IBM became totally irrelevant. Good job.

      • Yes, and for the same reason, they tried to force their customers to do business the way they wanted because, hey, you can't get around us.

        Li'l hint to all corporations and governments that are likewise arrogant: Yes, we can get around you. One way or another.

        • IBM did succeed in defining most of what mainstream PC technology grew into.

          Okay, they pushed hard for Microchannel, which didn't stay in the mainstream hardware. PCI isn't IBM's thing. But the whole x86 architecture, the hardware/software stack, is something that IBM started.

          We all, even Apple these days, have hardware that lives in IBM's shadow.

          • x86 was 'off the shelf' when IBM selected it for the first PC. They licensed PC-DOS from Gates.

            The only thing they built was the bios, which Compaq reverse engineered for us.

          • by kenh ( 9056 )

            Wow, you have a limited understanding of IBMs offerings & technology.

            Maybe take a moment and look into a little thing IBM made real popular in the 1970s - virtual machines, particularly their VM and later MVS operating systems (through all their various forms). IBM was making computers for decades before they dropped Microchannel on the PC industry - and for the record, microchannel was successful in the non-PC AIX workstation market for a while.

            • MCA was successful with AIX but it failed miserably in the PC market due to licensing and a similar EISA bus being introduced by competition that wasn't weighed down with patents and licensing fees.

              IBM tried to regain control over the PC market but failed, simply because by the time they tried, they were about as well liked as MS is today, seen as an overbearing control freak trying to dictate what you can and cannot do with the systems they sell you.

    • All it says is they're considering making some rules, it doesn't actually say anything about forcing the Indian people to choose locally-owned apps.

    • Re:IBM in India (Score:5, Informative)

      by PolygamousRanchKid ( 1290638 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @04:07AM (#57245192)

      In the 1960's, IBM chose to leave the market in India because of how the government tried to force them to do business.

      . . . and today, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] :

      "Since 2006, IBM has been the multinational with the largest number of employees in India. IBM is very secretive about the geographic distribution of its employees. By most estimates, it has close to a third of its 430,000 employees (~ 100,000) in India, and it likely has more employees there than in the US."

      Indian Business Machines, indeed.

  • and restrictions on the ability of foreign-owned e-commerce companies to undercut local businesses on price.

    What is the incentive for Indian companies to lower prices?

    • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      No exchange rate and no need to send profits out of India. Tax considerations.
      • That's how they'll make more money, not how to incentivize them to lower prices. Competition is key to lowering prices but it doesn't need to come from abroad as the parent comment suggests.

        • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          "Tax" considerations will do.
          Call it a new basic customs duty on imported tech. Then all the extra parts that go with the tech get a tax. Battery, headset, chargers.
          That extra price makes all domestic products look great. The repatriation strategy can also get looked at for Indian tax liabilities.
  • Inevitable, and only reasonable that instead of foreign conglomerates exploiting their markets through colonialism, that it be replaced by indigenous exploitation of their own people through corruption. :-) See "India Continues To Rank Among Most Corrupt Countries In The World" ( https://www.forbes.com/sites/r... [forbes.com] ).
  • Start passing out the MIGA hats!
    • Start passing out the MIGA hats!

      Too late. India is already run by a demagogue worse than Trump.

      Modi helped to instigate, and did nothing to stop, the 2002 Gujarat Riots [wikipedia.org] that killed 2000 people.

  • Silly Indians... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 03, 2018 @12:40AM (#57244732)

    "For some Indian political leaders, it is as if their nation -- which was ruled by Britain for a century until 1947 -- is being conquered by colonial powers all over again. And they are determined to stop it."

    How about this: we will keep our tech sites (and our technology) and you can keep your H-1Bs. Sound fair?

    Globalization is a two-way street, bitches.

    • Re:Silly Indians... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @12:57AM (#57244782) Journal

      How about this: we will keep our tech sites (and our technology) and you can keep your H-1Bs. Sound fair?

      Are you certain that your "tech sites" could function without the H1-Bs?

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Likely yes, hiring locals instead of foreign temps who work for peanuts.

      • Are you certain that your "tech sites" could function without the H1-Bs?

        They could probably function better. Of course, some of the larger companies might have to substantially change the way they do business, but that would result either in them creating more jobs for citizens, or in them going out of business and letting someone else do that.

      • Are you certain that your "tech sites" could function without the H1-Bs?

        At first, not. But if cuts are forced, companies would have to remove some of the bloated and excessive layers of CSS and JS libraries to make their sites maintainable with less staff.

        There's a lot of fat that can be trimmed. Craigslist runs just fine, and fast, without eye-candy and UI toys. If the H1-B's were cut back, the PHB's would just have to learn to say "no" to me-to gimmicks. (Craigslist is perhaps an extreme case, but som

        • At first, not. But if cuts are forced, companies would have to remove some of the bloated and excessive layers of CSS and JS libraries to make their sites maintainable with less staff.

          I have to say, blaming H1-B workers for the excessive layers of CSS and Javascript is a novel viewpoint.

    • by kenh ( 9056 )

      They are equating e-commerce sites with colonization - the comparison is asinine. If Amazon can sell curry to Indians cheaper than native Indian e-commerce sites can sell it, the issue isn't Amazon, it's the Indian culture and business practices that make their costs higher. What these politicians are saying is rather than change their practices and customs, they want Indian citizens to pay a premium and support local businesses... This is something many nations struggle with, it is not a uniquely Indian is

    • "As a country, we have to all grow up and say that, you know, enough of this" you and u.s. both, friends. i already said i don't want youtube red, dammit!
  • Please Visit, do me the needful when it comes to regulation!

  • Why different? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by aglider ( 2435074 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @12:53AM (#57244772) Homepage

    > it is as if their nation --which was ruled by Britain for a century until 1947 -- is being conquered by colonial powers all over again.

    How can they dream to be different from almost all other countries?
    If you skip the self colonized USA and Cina, everyone else is colonized by the tech giants.

    Can they afford the difference?

  • by Voyager529 ( 1363959 ) <voyager529@yahoo. c o m> on Monday September 03, 2018 @01:08AM (#57244812)

    I mean, maybe there's a smidge of a thing somwhere in here...but let's be real: it's not like India is incapable of rolling their own alternatives. In aggregate, they've got enough programming talent, and it's not like WhatsApp is some unicorn of an app that has impossible-to-replicate requirements. If India wanted to make a legit alternative to Android, WhatsApp, and Youtube, they are not lacking in the human or technical resources to do it within a very short period of time. It might take a little bit for the network effect to kick in, but if North Korea can roll their own Linux distro, it is well within the realm of India to provide competitive applications.

    • by Visarga ( 1071662 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @02:08AM (#57244920)
      > it's not like India is incapable of rolling their own alternatives

      Then there is the teeny weeny problem of convincing the masses to switch to the new Indian alternative apps, that come bundled with government surveillance. Who would do that? It's safer to be spied upon by multinationals than your own govt.
    • by kenh ( 9056 )

      The regulations are about prices on e-commerce sites - think Amazon, Bangood, etc., not YouTube.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    They are born in filth and die filth.

    India, a nation of street shitters [planetcustodian.com].

  • they are not shy about doing what it takes to get market share. People may even be assassinated if they are perceived to be too big of an obstacle in the expansion of American markets and the establishment of American corporation dominance.

    Just look at these things played out in south and latin America during the 20th century. India is an even bigger and more desirable market.

  • translation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Escogido ( 884359 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @01:59AM (#57244900)

    "Indians use these services, but profits from these services go overseas. And I just happen to have some wealthy local friends who would like a slice of this pie. And, being a politician, I am playing a patriotism card for them, to pave the way for the popular movement to support local product-to-be."

    Nothing wrong or even unusual about it though; it's about as ethical (or unethical, depending on one's PoV) as the "eat locally grown food" slogan. In theory, if they are capable of creating an alternative to (at least some subset of) Google services, some new competition is always good for the market and so good for everyone. But what usually happens is they start applying external pressure by putting services in unequal conditions by subsidizing locals or even doing darker things like throttling traffic at state level or limiting their capability to earn revenue through regulatory measures. Eh, I'm not a globalization fan either, so whatever.

    • Agreed. I find it funny they're complaining about services they didn't invent or startup, and then complain that they're not sufficiently to India's benefit. Being technical and being creative are two different things, so perhaps they should focus more on developing and providing their own vision.

  • ... Why as a Chinese or Indian person should I use American companies that provide no benefit over domestic institutions?

    They've compromised principles of freedom of speech... kowtowed to the censorship of Tienanmen Square etc... why would I bother with the American version when the domestic version is the same thing?

    They hollowed out a lot of the American infrastructure, outsourced like crazy, adopted a lowest common denominator policy regarding how they conduct freedom of speech...

    And what did they get fo

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • As to laughable... if both treat the same person the same... then they're the same.

        If google lets teh chinese government spy on their people through the google service then why use google?

        • Because it's a better product. The whole reason Google is considering adapting to Chinese censorship is because they know that they have the best product but can't "sell it" without Chinese government approval. The real problem is that Google would be relieving social pressure on the Chinese government to change its information policies.

          • Doesn't matter. Because even if you are better, they're going to start censoring your platform to promote theirs.

            What has cooperation gotten you?

            You had to give up IP.
            You had to train you competition.
            You had to compromise your product.
            You had to compromise your principles.

            And in return, they'll take everything they took from you, build your replacement, and ban your product from market.

            It was folly.

            • You're talking about outsourcing manufacturing of a product or product line to Chinese companies, not adapting a service to meet Chinese government requirements. What IP will Google give up in this process? What training will they provide? The answer is none.

              The only part of your argument that applies to this situation is the one about Google compromising on their principles and I already agreed with you there.

              • No, I'm talking about both and more. As to IP transfers, that is a well established and much complained about feature. Many companies have complained about it from not just the US but also from Europe. As to training, that is a requirement for outsourcing. How do you outsource if you don't train your outsourced firm? Your statement is at best irrational.

                To this you conclude "none"... I'm not going to argue with someone that points at the Sun in the sky and claims it isn't there.

                Good day, sir.
                http://heeeresw [ytmnd.com]

      • Actually, considering the fact that an american business would force both american (can't say n****) and local (can't insult the ruler) restrictions, while a local would only force local restrictions, it is possible that a local business would allow more freedom of speech.

  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday September 03, 2018 @03:05AM (#57245040)

    If you don't want to buy from abroad, it's time to make your own.

    But when I look at the quality we usually get from our outsourced "partners"... I have a hunch I know why you don't.

  • Colonialism is an emergent property of power:

    https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]

  • "Indians use these services, but profits from these services go overseas."

    and with the profits of those services they pay the wages of the programmers, which are most likely... in India.

  • Supporting home team good spirit but might not be the smart bet. Create an environment to compete and develop tech capabilities. Plenty of Indians contributing to the tech as staff and increasingly execs just in overseas companies where investors more confident in parking capital. Impatient populist politics have a fair risk of underperforming yet may still pass.
  • I mean Indian is one of the few countries in the world that doesn't allow double citizenship... how are they going to being back all the brains that left to work for these American companies? Certainly not with these big empty words.

In the long run, every program becomes rococco, and then rubble. -- Alan Perlis

Working...