Six years before India shook the global internet by banning TikTok and 58 other Chinese apps, Nikhil Pahwa was trying to convince his country to care about tech policy. It was October 2014, and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was selling India’s leaders and public on a vision of a free, Facebook-centric internet that would bring hundreds of millions of people online. Pahwa, the founding editor of the media and technology blog MediaNama, wasn’t buying it. “What Zuckerberg means by internet for all is essentially Facebook for all,” he warned.
小号九年前由印度震撼全球互联网之前禁止的TikTok和其他58个中国应用，尼基尔Pahwa试图说服他的国家去关心技术政策。 2014年10月，Facebook首席执行官马克·扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)向印度的领导人和公众出售产品，其愿景是建立一个以Facebook为中心的免费互联网，该互联网将使亿万人民在线上。 媒体和技术博客MediaNama的创始编辑Pahwa没有购买它。 他警告说： “扎克伯格在互联网上对所有人的意义实质上就是对所有人的Facebook。”
Facebook’s Internet.org — later renamed Free Basics — would violate the principle of net neutrality, Pahwa argued, by allowing free access to a set of sites handpicked by Facebook itself, a practice known as “zero-rating.” While India had yet to adopt net neutrality, Pahwa’s critique soon caught on amid a growing sense that Facebook was treating India like a sort of digital colony. He spearheaded a movement called Save the Internet that ultimately succeeded in mobilizing the public, passing net neutrality, and booting out Free Basics for good. While Facebook continued the project in other countries, it never fully recovered.
Pahwa认为，Facebook的Internet.org(后来更名为Free Basics)违反了网络中立原则，它允许免费访问Facebook本身挑选的一组网站，这种做法被称为“ 零评分” 。 尽管印度尚未采取网络中立的态度，但随着人们越来越意识到Facebook将印度视为一种数字殖民地，Pahwa的批评很快就流行起来。 他率先发起了一项名为“拯救互联网”的运动，该运动最终成功动员了公众，传递了网络中立性并永久启动了Free Basics 。 尽管Facebook在其他国家/地区继续进行该项目，但从未完全恢复 。
In the wake of that victory, the Indian internet has boomed, with cheap data rates from India’s own Reliance Jio telecom helping to bring hundreds of millions online, making India the world’s second-largest internet market. Tech policy, once a niche, has become central to the country’s politics. Yet it has also taken on an increasingly protectionist bent that Pahwa worries will undermine his goal of an open, global internet in which India can be a major player. Now, the country that Zuckerberg once saw as virgin territory for Facebook to colonize is at the forefront of a surge of digital nationalism around the world.
在取得这一胜利之后，印度互联网蓬勃发展， 印度自己的信实电信(Reliance Jio)电信以低廉的数据速率帮助使数亿人上线 ，使印度成为世界第二大互联网市场。 曾经是利基市场的技术政策已成为该国政治的核心。 然而，也越来越有保护主义的倾向，即帕瓦的担忧将破坏他建立一个开放的全球互联网的目标，印度将在其中发挥主要作用。 现在，扎克伯格曾经将其视为Facebook殖民地的原始领土的国家处于全球数字民族主义浪潮的最前沿。
Its ban of 59 Chinese apps in June was cited by President Trump as part of the justification for his own executive orders targeting TikTok and WeChat. Now Reliance, India’s most valuable company, is reportedly in talks to take an ownership stake in TikTok’s India business that could pave the way for it to continue operating there, mirroring the Microsoft talks in the U.S.
特朗普总统在6月份禁止使用59种中国应用程序，这是其针对TikTok和微信自己的行政命令的理由之一。 现在，据报道，印度最有价值的公司Reliance 正在商讨收购TikTok在印度的业务的股权，这可能为其继续在印度经营铺平了道路，这与微软在美国的谈判相仿。
Before that, India battled WhatsApp over data localization — the requirement that users’ data be stored in the country it’s collected, rather than sent back to Silicon Valley or elsewhere — and has pushed to ban end-to-end encryption, a fight that other countries have also taken up. India has also blocked Facebook’s efforts to build digital payments into WhatsApp, partly with the unspoken goal of preventing the company’s platforms from attaining the sort of dominance that WeChat enjoys in China. It has tightly regulated Amazon and its Walmart-owned rival Flipkart, and last month it launched an antitrust investigation into both.
在此之前，印度在数据本地化方面与WhatsApp进行了对抗-要求用户的数据存储在收集的国家/地区，而不是发送回硅谷或其他地方-并已禁止端到端加密，这是另一回事国家也已经采取了行动 。 印度还阻止了Facebook在WhatsApp中建立数字支付的努力，部分目的是防止该公司的平台无法获得微信在中国的主导地位。 它已经对亚马逊及其沃尔玛拥有的竞争对手Flipkart进行了严格的监管，并在上个月对两者进行了反托拉斯调查 。
Now Pahwa is watching, conflicted, as India becomes a leader in a way he didn’t quite envision — a leader not only in standing up to digital colonialism, as he advocated, but in asserting state sovereignty over the online world. Now he’s calling for India and other democratic governments around the world to work together to build a better internet, rather than building walls around their own national versions of it.
现在，Pahwa正在注视，产生冲突，因为印度以他未完全想象的方式成为领导人-不仅如他所主张的那样支持数字殖民主义，而且主张对网络世界享有国家主权的领导人。 现在，他呼吁印度和世界各地的其他民主政府共同努力，以建立更好的互联网，而不是在自己的国家版本周围建立隔离墙。
The vision of India’s internet that has coalesced in recent years is less about openness and more about control.
近年来合并的印度互联网愿景与开放性有关，而与控制无关。
“I think our movement has been a trigger for tech policy discussions to become mainstream,” Pahwa said via WhatsApp voice, when I asked him about the role his own reporting and advocacy played in the country’s evolution. “Tech discussions are primetime news now. I’m glad we’re having these conversations, and I’m glad there is consideration given to people who are not affiliated with any company but want the internet to be accessible and open for everyone.”
“当我问他自己的报告和倡导在国家发展过程中所起的作用时，帕瓦通过WhatsApp的声音说：“我认为我们的运动是促使技术政策讨论成为主流的触发因素。” “技术讨论现在是黄金时段的新闻。 我很高兴我们能进行这些对话，也很高兴有人考虑那些不隶属于任何公司但希望互联网对所有人开放并开放的人们。”
Yet the vision of India’s internet that has coalesced in recent years is less about openness and more about control, Pahwa said. That has led to much-needed ongoing scrutiny of powerful companies such as Amazon, Flipkart, Facebook, Google, and ByteDance, with antitrust and data localization regulations intended to prevent those overseas giants and regimes from exploiting the world’s second-largest internet market. But it has not been matched with a concern for protecting India’s internet users from their own government, a segment of which has come to view its citizens’ data as a national asset.
帕瓦说，然而，近年来整合在一起的印度互联网的愿景不是开放，而是控制。 这导致了对亚马逊，Flipkart，Facebook，Google和ByteDance等强大公司的迫切需要的持续审查，而反托拉斯法和数据本地化法规旨在防止这些海外巨头和政权利用全球第二大互联网市场。 但是，它并没有引起保护印度互联网用户免受其本国政府的关注，该政府的一部分人已将其公民数据视为一项国家资产 。
“What worries me,” Pahwa said, “is that there seems to be far more state control of the internet being exerted by the Indian government, to the point that freedoms are under serious threat.” He pointed to rules proposed this year that would force social media platforms such as WhatsApp and YouTube to hand over data on their users to the Indian government, curtailing online anonymity and likely ruling out end-to-end encryption.
帕瓦说：“令我担忧的是，印度政府似乎对国家施加了更多的国家对互联网的控制，以至于自由受到严重威胁。” 他指出了今年提出的规则，这些规则将迫使社交媒体平台(如WhatsApp和YouTube)将其用户的数据移交给印度政府，从而限制了在线匿名性，并可能排除了端到端加密。
India justified its ban on Chinese apps with concerns that the Chinese government could use them to surveil or manipulate Indian users, at a time when tensions between the countries are high. Those concerns are legitimate, Pahwa said. “China can’t have it both ways, where they are in a position to exert an inordinate amount of control over the internet in their own country — whether through censorship, taking data from businesses, or converting private companies into an extension of the state — and also try to dominate in markets where that kind of activity is not allowed.”
印度担心对中国应用程序的禁令是有道理的，因为担心在两国之间的紧张局势加剧之际，中国政府可能会使用它们来监视或操纵印度用户。 帕瓦说，这些担忧是合理的。 “中国不能同时拥有这两种方式，无论是通过审查，从企业获取数据还是将私有公司转变为国家的扩张，他们都可以对自己国家的互联网施加过分的控制权。 —并尝试在不允许进行此类活动的市场中占据主导地位。”
Yet as with the U.S. bans on TikTok and WeChat that followed, India’s ban — coming on the heels of a deadly melee between Indian and Chinese troops in the disputed Galwan Valley — seemed to be motivated more by politics than national security. “I think this is a case of the argument for data sovereignty coming to a fruition, or finding its expression, and being used by the hawks in India” to advance their own agenda, Pahwa said. “I think this is purely a political decision to do this, to push back in whatever little way India can.”
然而，正如随后美国对TikTok和微信的禁令一样，印度的禁令-在有争议的加尔万河谷的印度和中国军队之间进行致命的混战之后 -似乎更多是出于政治动机而非国家安全。 帕瓦说：“我认为这是关于数据主权取得成果或找到其表达方式，并被印度鹰派利用的论点。” “我认为，这样做纯粹是政治上的决定，以印度可以做的任何微小的努力。”
And while the Chinese government has been perhaps the greatest enemy of an open, global internet, there’s a whiff of hypocrisy in India’s government posturing against it while pursuing some policies that are eerily similar, Pahwa added. “It’s almost like India has China envy. While India was the first to ban all these Chinese apps, at the same time Indian bureaucrats seem to be really interested in moving closer to how China operates in its own jurisdiction.”
虽然中国政府可能一直是开放的全球互联网的最大敌人，但印度政府在推行一些极为相似的政策时却冒着虚伪的姿态摆出一副虚伪的姿态。 “这几乎就像印度令中国羡慕。 尽管印度是第一个禁止所有这些中国应用程序的国家，但与此同时，印度官僚们似乎真的有兴趣进一步接近中国在其管辖范围内的运作方式。”
As a case in point, India has become a world leader in another dubious category: internet shutdowns. They’ve ranged from the absurd — shutting down the internet in a particular area during school exams to thwart cheating — to the menacing: There was a monthslong blackout in the contested Kashmir region after Prime Minister Narendra Modi revoked its semi-autonomous status. That shutdown went down as the longest ever in a democratic country, and the internet remains restricted in the region even today.
例如，印度已成为另一个可疑类别的世界领导者：互联网关闭。 他们的范围从荒谬的-在学校考试中关闭特定区域的互联网到阻止作弊-到来势汹汹：在总理纳伦德拉·莫迪(Narendra Modi)撤销其半自治地位后，饱受争议的克什米尔地区出现了长达数月的停电。 这次关闭是有史以来民主国家中最长的一次关闭，即使在今天，该地区的互联网仍然受到限制。
Other countries are watching, Pahwa said, and responding to real problems created by dominant online platforms with policies that overreach or abandon the idea of a global internet. He pointed to Brazil’s proposed “fake news” law, which threatens anonymity and encryption, and the EU high court’s rejection of the “privacy shield” framework that allowed data to flow back and forth with the United States.
帕瓦说，其他国家也在观望，并通过超越或放弃全球互联网概念的政策来应对主流在线平台所造成的实际问题。 他指出了巴西拟议的“假新闻”法 ，该法威胁到匿名性和加密，并且欧盟高级法院拒绝了“隐私屏蔽”框架 ，该框架允许数据与美国之间来回流动。
“I think there is a split that we’re accelerating toward,” he said. “Just like the Chinese internet and Russian internet that are very distinct from the rest of the world, I think we’re going to see more of these blocs getting created, where jurisdictions are going to assert their sovereignty in the same manner the EU is doing when it comes to privacy.”
他说：“我认为我们正在加速分裂。” “就像中国互联网和俄罗斯互联网与世界其他地区截然不同一样，我认为我们将看到更多这样的集团被创造出来，这些地区将以与欧盟相同的方式来维护其主权。在隐私方面要做。”
Pahwa finds it understandable that jurisdictions are turning their backs on openness, even as he finds it frustrating. “When we don’t have norms for the protection of citizens of various countries, it’s difficult to argue against a state that says, ‘We don’t want cyberattacks,’ or ‘This is the only means we have to prevent another country from manipulating our elections.’ I don’t like the outcome of the actions that states are taking, but I don’t think they are without reason.”
帕瓦发现，尽管他感到沮丧，但司法管辖区却拒绝开放是可以理解的。 “当我们没有保护各国公民的规范时，很难与一个说'我们不想受到网络攻击'或'这是我们必须防止另一个国家操纵我们的选举。” 我不喜欢国家采取的行动的结果，但我不认为它们是没有道理的。”
In an ideal world, he said, India and other democratic countries would cooperate to establish norms around data privacy, net neutrality, and accountability for cyberattacks and platform manipulation. “That would at least allow the democratic part of the internet to remain connected,” Pahwa said, if not authoritarian countries such as China.
他说，在理想的世界中，印度和其他民主国家将合作建立围绕数据隐私，网络中立性以及网络攻击和平台操纵的责任制的规范。 帕瓦说：“这至少将使互联网的民主部分保持连接，”即使不是中国这样的专制国家。
As for the TikTok ban, Pahwa said he believes it’s reasonable as a temporary measure, as are restrictions on the participation of Chinese companies such as Huawei in 5G infrastructure. “In the longer run, I would say that we need to figure out ways in which Chinese apps can still remain operational across the world, but also be held accountable for their actions or the actions of the Chinese state.”
至于TikTok禁令，帕瓦表示，他认为这是一种临时措施，对华为等中国公司参与5G基础设施的限制也是合理的。 “从长远来看，我想说的是，我们需要弄清楚中国应用程序仍可在全球范围内运行的方式，同时还要对它们的行为或中国政府的行为负责。”
Six years ago, India was at risk of being consigned to its own, substandard version of the internet if the country didn’t stand up to Facebook. Gratifying as it has been to see his government take seriously the internet’s importance to its citizens, Pahwa now worries the country is at risk of ending up with its own, separate version of the internet after all. “I’m not interested in India having a different internet than the EU or the United States,” he said. “But that’s the direction it seems to be going.”
六年前，如果印度不反对Facebook，印度就有被委派到自己的，次标准版本的互联网的风险。 帕瓦(Pahwa)感到高兴的是，看到他的政府认真对待互联网对公民的重要性，他现在担心该国最终有可能拥有自己的独立互联网版本。 他说：“我对印度拥有不同于欧盟或美国的互联网不感兴趣。” “但这就是它的发展方向。”
扫一扫
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
