Connected Communities & Digital Futures

Learning from openness

David Ascher

India saw two quite different events unfolding in the two weeks of the Caravan (although it probably only noticed one).

The telecom regulator prohibited discriminatory tariffs for data, thereby making Facebook’s Free Basics unviable as is. This is part of a broader discussion around net neutrality and the Indian public is remarkably aware of the issues around fairness and access, as I found out when chatting with one of the design students at NID. This graphic designer was well aware of the issues around Free Basics and the challenge of subsidizing partial Internet access. For him, the notion and importance of the open Internet as an unlimited and deeply open space was as crisp as it is to me, someone who grew up with a very different Internet and in a very different place.

While these policy and business decisions were being made, NID saw a convening of a very diverse group of people, all keen to collaborate, to learn from one another and explore sometimes difficult topics and situations. I suspect it’ll take time for the results of this convening to emerge, as much will likely depend on how these collaborations continue, and on which ideas and projects born here find root, while others are allowed to wither. I came here to learn about India and from Indians (and others) about how the values of the open web may be relevant in a post-browser world, taking a non-western perspective as much as possible.

My first reflection is that, of course, India and Indians aren’t that different from Americans or Europeans - living in such a physically connected world, the memes, tropes and habits of one culture cheerfully blend and adapt to different geographies and cultures. The news stories about startups, large online companies, and executive shake-ups commingle with stories about pop stars, sexual assault scandals, and human interest stories about soldiers caught in avalanches and scared elephants running over vehicles. The structure of it all feels quite familiar, as do the vast majority of interactions with Indians at all layers of society. Even when language barriers make communication hard, drawings, gift exchanges and mutual smiles make the commonalities obvious. Good tea, also. The exceptions, however, are worth noting.

First, Indians seem to have a very specific, deliberate and thorough understanding of the issues around technological dependence, independence and interdependence. Since the national independence campaign, India has invested decades in building an independent industry in all sectors, from textile manufacturing to auto makers. Gandhi also emphasized the need for self- reliance, and there appears to be a cultural resistance against middlemen and intermediaries.

As India is a globally connected economy however, even this independence-centric industrial model requires connections with others. As an example, I met with some local entrepreneurs who are specialists in making wooden handles for striking tools (hammers, chisels, etc.). They were both proud of their local expertise and deeply aware of their part in the global supply chain, using a Swiss-designed, Chinese-made computer controlled lathe to cut both Indian and American lumber for export back to the West and assembly into consumer products. Pride of Indian craftsmanship and enterprise combined with a global role.

These connections between people, countries, and value exchange are relatively transparent when it comes to physical goods – you can see the trucks moving stuff. When it comes to digital goods and services, these connections are much more opaque. Especially given the widespread use of English, there are few obvious markers of origin on websites. Booking a flight on ClearTrip feels much like Travelocity, but the former is Indian. Zomato is just as effective as Yelp at finding a restaurant, but it, too, is Indian. Flipkart is a $15B e-commerce giant that is defending against an incursion from Amazon. Those are just a few examples I picked up after a few days of exposure. The global services that seem to be widely used (Gmail, WhatsApp) are, as in much of the world, considered infrastructure without much thought as to the country of origin.

It seems to me that digital India differs from many other countries in two specific ways: first, because of its technical education system, Indians are well aware of their contribution of talent to digital giants. Papers publish stories about recent graduates who get highly lucrative jobs at Microsoft; we learn that 75% of Oracle’s management team is from India. Engineers from Bangalore are clearly among the wealthier tourists in popular destinations, and being a software engineer is clearly a broadly appreciated path to success. In addition, the size of the Indian market means that companies can grow very large before they need to tackle international markets.

Much more locally, a reflection on the design students, NID has a stellar reputation worldwide. NID students are, by definition, exceptional – rumour has it that there are 2000 applicants for each available slot.

The conversations I’ve had with the students do nothing to dispel that reputation– they are all bright, engaging, curious, ambitious, thoughtful, and from what I can tell, talented. As graduates from a world-class design school, I am keen to see what work they’ll do to shape the world. They are younger than the Web, grew up with a smartphone mobile ecosystem, and are imbued with both a sense of place and heritage, and the cheerful ambition of youth. After only two weeks, I don’t have worthwhile predictions to make about the future of India, so I’ll instead comment on how I’d like to learn from this caravan experience, when thinking about the future of the open Internet and the critical issues it’s facing today. First, it’s never been clearer to me that the smart bet is on those who find ways to elicit collaborative projects by bringing in a diversity of minds, skills and experiences. It is hard to make this more complex chemistry work, but any other approach to envisioning or designing the future will either rely on the blind luck of genius or fall back on known patterns. I’m drawn to Jon Rogers’ quote: “Ignore notions of discipline. Bring people who want to collaborate.” As my high school math teacher would attest, I’ve always had a hard time with discipline. These days, I find that concept is often used to exclude, at a time when all of the interesting and important problems lie at the intersection of disciplines defined in a prior era and for a vastly different problem set.

The second point is a demographic one: many of my concerns around ensuring an inclusive Internet, working towards an Internet that represents the diversity of people around the world, that keeps people secure and respects their privacy, are concerns that come from a position of privilege. I’ve enjoyed and benefitted from an Internet with fairly few restrictions, and I worry that various concentrations of power will restrict that access and opportunity for others. But after these two weeks, I am more hopeful that, because the world is constantly being replenished with young people who, as a matter of course, understand the power of technology to shape their societies, they will just make it happen. In this way, the Internet is not special - it is just another facet of society that evolves as people get a chance to shape it.

Finally, it seems to me important to realize that big things start small, and even big ideas start small. This makes me confident that we need to find and refine ways of eliciting good conversations, nourishing them, and then watch them grow. And we need to do this all over the place, in many kinds of ways, with all kinds of people. In some ways we’re just starting this process of inviting more people to help shape our own thinking. I look forward to see what starts to emerge.