[kictanet] Payment Ecosystem
Ali Hussein
ali at hussein.me.ke
Thu May 2 10:47:50 EAT 2019
Eric
Interesting discussion. Do you have a link to the Mexican story? Would like
to read it before commenting further.
Regards
*Ali Hussein*
*Principal*
*AHK & Associates*
Tel: +254 713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
<http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing,
Chiromo Road, Westlands,
Nairobi, Kenya.
Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely
mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the
organizations that I work with.
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 2:48 PM Erick Mwangi via kictanet <
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
> So Whatsapp with Banxico in Mexico has established a QR-code based
> platform, in doing so, they have consolidated 80M Mexican users in
> collaboration with BBVA ( Mexicos leading bank). This ecosystem with
> Whatsapp will accelerate consumer experience for the unbanked in 2 fronts.
>
> 1. *#Financial*: money transfer, pay, save, borrow
> 2. *#Commerce*: search, shop, pay
>
> A unified view of the modern finance function as it should be. We have
> seen the evolution of 3 Fintech cycles, from from #fintechs to
> #Opendatastandards - Equity are head and shoulders above everyone else.
> Banks will continue to become invisible as products are unbundled and
> customer centric products & services are developed
>
> Whatsapp is the biggest e-commerce platform in Africa. I am not sure about
> Q-R codes, feels there is some friction there, but but whoever does this -
> will conquer the market
>
> #techfins - large tech players in the F.S space working on an ecosystem
> model will conquer..
>
> Eric
>
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2017, 08:25 Kevin Kamonye via kictanet, <
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>
>> Hello Collins,
>>
>> @kevin please dont talk about "evil blockchain" while trying to drive a
>>> point about why regulations need to be put in place.
>>
>>
>> Please. I did not say any such thing as evil blockchain. I would really
>> want to get into a healthy debate on this one but I do not want to digress
>> from the important subject matter. Kindly go through what I wrote on that
>> one once more.
>>
>> You just might end up proving why I insist its a very very bad idea for
>>> people to assume moral and intelligence authority on all matters ICT.
>>
>>
>> Is this the letter and spirit of the current draft bill? If it is then I
>> am not for it. Share the specific clauses in the current draft bill that
>> indicate this.
>>
>> I suspect evwn the good CS might not agree with some of the arguments
>>> you put forward on the matter.
>>
>>
>> Sure. The CS is someone with so much more experience than myself that I
>> would also expect him to be much more informed than I am. Also I though it
>> would be obvious but I guess I have to state very clearly that I do not in
>> any way claim to be speaking on his behalf.
>>
>> I was preparing to sit for my KCPE in the year that they founded
>> Wananchi. It is because of the work of such pioneers that I have the
>> opportunities that come my way. This is not something I take for granted
>> because I have traveled enough to see how much of an advantage we have here
>> in Kenya.
>>
>> If these same people that had "crazy" ideas and visions about setting up
>> their own Internet company way back then now tell me that they see that
>> this is the best way forward for the industry the least I can do is to
>> listen and then offer my opinion thereafter. And this is my point.
>>
>> As i said, if the premise is: "we are such a broad and interdisciplinary
>>> sector, what should we do / can we do about it to be able to articulate and
>>> influence policy?" I am happy to sit, listen and engage.
>>
>>
>> Am glad to say we are on the same page here.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>> On 21 December 2017 at 01:15, Collins Areba <arebacollins at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> @kevin please dont talk about "evil blockchain" while trying to drive a
>>> point about why regulations need to be put in place. You just might end up
>>> proving why I insist its a very very bad idea for people to assume moral
>>> and intelligence authority on all matters ICT.
>>>
>>> I suspect evwn the good CS might not agree with some of the arguments
>>> you put forward on the matter.
>>>
>>> As i said, if the premise is: "we are such a broad and interdisciplinary
>>> sector, what should we do / can we do about it to be able to articulate and
>>> influence policy?" I am happy to sit, listen and engage.
>>>
>>> Is that the premise of the current engagements?
>>>
>>> On 18 Dec 2017 17:23, "Kevin Kamonye via kictanet" <
>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Anyega,
>>>>
>>>> *If kids in their campus hostels and parent's basements are disrupting
>>>>> industries, don't you think ICT is one place where gatekeepers are not
>>>>> required? *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How many are able to create disruptive technologies? I have been in
>>>> the industry for some time and I personally haven't been able to. This is
>>>> why I said for every success story that you hear, there are many more who
>>>> are wallowing in obscurity.
>>>>
>>>> *As AI, Blockchain etc are new things, who has proved themselves so
>>>>> much to deem themselves gatekeepers to determine if others can do it or
>>>>> not? *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AI and especially Blockchain are to me the most perfect reasons why
>>>> regulation (that is done in good faith and through broad consultation) in
>>>> ICT will become a matter of great significance.
>>>>
>>>> I will start with Blockchain. It will not take anyone more than 30
>>>> minutes of research to see how this technology that was developed with very
>>>> innovative and honourable intentions has gone off the rails.
>>>>
>>>> Specifically, Bitcoin. This crypto has been hijacked by a core
>>>> developer team whose knowing actions or incompetence will cause significant
>>>> financial loses and grief as never before witnessed to very many people
>>>> here in Kenya and around the world. After this bubble crashes, very few of
>>>> them will be held accountable if any. PS: I am not saying that cryptos are
>>>> a bad thing and in fact am involved with a few that seem to be well
>>>> designed for their niche purpose, such as Monero
>>>> <https://www.monero.how/why-monero-vs-bitcoin>. But all the other
>>>> promising cryptos could also self-collapse if the relevant developer teams
>>>> do not work with experts from other fields who will bring in the needed
>>>> foundation for scaling into the realities of the global economy.
>>>>
>>>> Unlike the uncertainties around cryptos, AI is certainly very much
>>>> central to the future world. As such, it would be ideal that its
>>>> development is regulated so as to avoid situations where no controls are
>>>> put in place resulting in untamable technology that could be catastrophic.
>>>> We now have self-driving cars. Take a moment to think about that. And yes,
>>>> am talking about formerly Sci-Fi related stuff like HAL 9000
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000>.
>>>>
>>>> ICT can't work as the law profession because here experience may be
>>>>> good in terms of compliance with market, business models, but certainly not
>>>>> with what someone creates. If my small sister, barely in her teenagehood
>>>>> creates an app, who would have the right to tell her that she ins't
>>>>> qualified to do so? If its an app on say, Blockchain or A.I, who would even
>>>>> have the expertise to tell her she can't?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you want ICT to remain as one of the key but fringe sectors of the
>>>> world, then feel free to maintain this opinion. I personally see that the
>>>> one thing holding our industry back is a lack of trust by the general
>>>> public. And this is for good reason because there are some that use up a
>>>> lot of the good faith that they give to us. This will even get worse when,
>>>> and I will not tire of repeating this, the Bitcoin fraud hits hard.
>>>>
>>>> Expecting that we all have the individual capacity to self regulate is
>>>> not only naive but dangerous, that is unless you WannaCry :)
>>>>
>>>> With all due respect, i believe gatekeepers stifle innovation, And if
>>>>> Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, did not have to go through a gatekeeper no
>>>>> one else should have to,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> True.
>>>>
>>>> Also please note that this is what is called cherry picking. How many
>>>> Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerbergs do you know? (AND IF YOU WOULD please TAKE
>>>> SOME TIME TO READ ABOUT THESE TWO GUYS AND HOW HARD THEY HAVE WORKED SO
>>>> HARD IN THE PAST(?) TO STIFLE COMPETITION) But I digress.
>>>>
>>>> All the same this is why I said for every success story there are many
>>>> more wallowing in pain.
>>>>
>>>> In short what I am saying is that we cannot have our cake and eat it.
>>>> Let us at least have an unprejudiced discussion on this matter.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Kevin
>>>>
>>>> On 18 December 2017 at 15:41, anyega jefferson via kictanet <
>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Because they are very sharp people who have taken the time to
>>>>> understand what it takes to get things done, within the current
>>>>> environment. While the *ideal* situation would be for them to lobby
>>>>> for the rest of us while we go about our keyboard warrior campaigns, I
>>>>> would not hold it against them if they served their own interests first"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chief,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If kids in their campus hostels and parent's basements are disrupting
>>>>> industries, don't you think ICT is one place where gatekeepers are not
>>>>> required?
>>>>>
>>>>> As AI, Blockchain etc are new things, who has proved themselves so
>>>>> much to deem themselves gatekeepers to determine if others can do it or
>>>>> not?
>>>>>
>>>>> ICT can't work as the law profession because here experience may be
>>>>> good in terms of compliance with market, business models, but certainly not
>>>>> with what someone creates. If my small sister, barely in her teenagehood
>>>>> creates an app, who would have the right to tell her that she ins't
>>>>> qualified to do so? If its an app on say, Blockchain or A.I, who would even
>>>>> have the expertise to tell her she can't?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> With all due respect, i believe gatekeepers stifle innovation, And if
>>>>> Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, did not have to go through a gatekeeper no
>>>>> one else should have to,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Kevin Kamonye via kictanet <
>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Collins,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will direct my response to the community(myself included) through
>>>>>> your email, but I assure you that I hold no grudge to you or anyone else
>>>>>> individually.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *I do not even see what the problem here is, What is so hard in
>>>>>>> having a membership based organization (who's membership is open to all)
>>>>>>> regulating policy, where members then can openly discuss, define, and
>>>>>>> review*
>>>>>>> *..*..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the idealistic mentality that plagues this and every other
>>>>>> geek association that was ever formed on the planet Earth. We think we know
>>>>>> the easy path to solving every other problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Why should some people somewhere earn dollars to sit in expensive
>>>>>>> committees to come up with a classroom style definition of what an ICT
>>>>>>> professional is, and then spend even more money stopping people from
>>>>>>> exploiting their creativity. *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because they are very sharp people who have taken the time to
>>>>>> understand what it takes to get things done, within the current
>>>>>> environment. While the *ideal* situation would be for them to lobby
>>>>>> for the rest of us while we go about our keyboard warrior campaigns, I
>>>>>> would not hold it against them if they served their own interests first.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally recall notifying this community as regards the peaceful
>>>>>> awareness march some time last year about a colleague of mine who died in
>>>>>> Ethiopia, and more so about the others that are still rotting in remand
>>>>>> (not even jail), and how many of you showed up?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More importantly, having a unified framework that details how to seek
>>>>>> opportunities and from where would have avoided many such unfortunate
>>>>>> incidents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Bwana PS: I do not know what the motivations for this bill are, The
>>>>>>> only point of reference we have are the first one, I would still look at it
>>>>>>> suspiciously, especially the urgency with which it is being reintroduced,
>>>>>>> period! Why not present the gaps as they are and we just focus on filling
>>>>>>> the gaps. *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have direct access to the CS. And he is not just any other guy but
>>>>>> someone who has proven himself at all levels in the industry. And he is
>>>>>> taking his time to engage with us and almost begging us to organise
>>>>>> ourselves in such a manner that our opinions can be of some meaningful use
>>>>>> to both the industry at large and to ourselves individually.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The best that we can offer him is vague responses and maybe even some
>>>>>> hostility.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me break this one down, because this is what we need to "accept"
>>>>>> to understand. I say accept because I know we all have the capacity to do
>>>>>> so but we are applying some kind of myopia so that we can continue to vent
>>>>>> hot air from the cool shade of our comfort zones.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mucheru has given us a very crucial pointer of the who is who to him
>>>>>> as the holder of the office of CS ICT in the Republic of Kenya. KEPSA is
>>>>>> the body that the three arms of the GoK would work with as the legitimate
>>>>>> representatives of the private sector in Kenya.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As important as ICT is to the present and future of +254, we are not
>>>>>> any more special than the other sectors so as to warrant every other
>>>>>> grouping within the industry a direct vote when it comes to public
>>>>>> participation. It is therefore wise for us to be in very good books with
>>>>>> KEPSA and especially with our current
>>>>>> <https://kepsa.or.ke/sector-comittees/> reps. One thing I will point
>>>>>> out is that it is important for us to take note that Mr. Macharia comes
>>>>>> from the umbrella of KITOS and here is there vision
>>>>>> <http://kitos.or.ke/about-us/>. The word c*atalyst* should sound
>>>>>> very familiar to us so maybe we really really need to be nice to this man
>>>>>> if we are to remain relevant as KICTAnet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The way I see it, it was actually a good show of faith by KEPSA to
>>>>>> accommodate KICTAnet into their submissions because they really didn't have
>>>>>> and in any case there would have been no significant repercussions for them
>>>>>> in ignoring this toothless [insert whatever you imagine we are].
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *The one thing that differentiated how Britain's Industrial
>>>>>>> revolution was by magnitudes far more successful than France, is that one
>>>>>>> had an open policy to innovation, anyone could be listened to and the
>>>>>>> default challenge was always "Prove it", In the other, Before you showed up
>>>>>>> before schooled men & women, you had to prove you are qualified to even set
>>>>>>> foot on stage. Names like John Kay, Richard Arkwright, James Watt and
>>>>>>> Stephenson would not exist today, in a worldview that seeks to strangle
>>>>>>> innovation. *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a very good insight. To this I will respond as follows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The people who hold sway in our economy and therefore policy are
>>>>>> people who got there by being cautious to things they do not understand. I
>>>>>> think this is where the issue both is and also therein lies our opportunity
>>>>>> to get the change we want. For instance, many of you here might be the IT
>>>>>> person of someone who would never listen to anyone else about anything to
>>>>>> do with "computer" without consulting with you. I don't think I will need
>>>>>> to hammer this point any further..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For my part I will support this bill. I am one of those with tonnes
>>>>>> of experience but with little formal education. I have tried to go to Uni
>>>>>> and it was always painful to sit in those classes. What I will tell you is
>>>>>> that for every other success story you hear of drop outs that you hear,
>>>>>> there are 1000x more who are suffering the pain of being filtered out of
>>>>>> many opportunities even before they can get a chance of presenting these
>>>>>> skills that they hold.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It will be hard to get the exact right framework in place, but I am
>>>>>> willing to put in the work of starting this journey and hopefully create a
>>>>>> better future for many others that I can tell you will benefit from some
>>>>>> kind of recognition of the work they have put into developing their careers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18 December 2017 at 13:45, Collins Areba via kictanet <
>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do not even see what the problem here is, What is so hard in
>>>>>>> having a membership based organization (who's membership is open to all)
>>>>>>> regulating policy, where members then can openly discuss, define, and
>>>>>>> review :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a) What strengths we have as a nation on the ICT front,
>>>>>>> b) What opportunities exist and how we can leverage this for the
>>>>>>> greater good and
>>>>>>> c) How we should behave so our status professionally keeps rising.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why should some people somewhere earn dollars to sit in expensive
>>>>>>> committees to come up with a classroom style definition of what an ICT
>>>>>>> professional is, and then spend even more money stopping people from
>>>>>>> exploiting their creativity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Bwana PS:*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do not know what the motivations for this bill are, The only point
>>>>>>> of reference we have are the first one, I would still look at it
>>>>>>> suspiciously, especially the urgency with which it is being reintroduced,
>>>>>>> period!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why not present the gaps as they are and we just focus on filling
>>>>>>> the gaps.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The one thing that differentiated how Britain's Industrial
>>>>>>> revolution was by magnitudes far more successful than France, is that one
>>>>>>> had an open policy to innovation, anyone could be listened to and the
>>>>>>> default challenge was always "Prove it", In the other, Before you showed up
>>>>>>> before schooled men & women, you had to prove you are qualified to even set
>>>>>>> foot on stage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Names like John Kay, Richard Arkwright, James Watt and Stephenson
>>>>>>> would not exist today, in a worldview that seeks to strangle innovation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Collins Areba,
>>>>>>> Kilifi, Kenya.
>>>>>>> Tel: +*254 707 750 788 */ *0731750788*
>>>>>>> Twitter: @arebacollins.
>>>>>>> Skype: arebacollins
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Victor Kapiyo via kictanet <
>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jambo,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As we mull over this discussion, let us also consider how we
>>>>>>>> engage. Attached is a Kictanet brief for discussion that identifies some
>>>>>>>> key characteristics for inclusive cyber policy making that would be useful
>>>>>>>> moving forward.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Victor
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18 Dec 2017 10:16, "gertrude matata via kictanet" <
>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In support of self regulation, there are at least some
>>>>>>>>> traditional guidelines when coming up with new legislation:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Is there serious mischief clearly identified that the law
>>>>>>>>> should address.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. Who is best suited to cure the mischief
>>>>>>>>> 3.In prescribing a cure, consider whether the proposed cure is
>>>>>>>>> likely to create some other mischief ,if so
>>>>>>>>> 4. Consider which is the worse mischief , the current ill or the
>>>>>>>>> side effects of the cure.
>>>>>>>>> 5.Who would be qualified to cure is the authority or institution
>>>>>>>>> that is to be given the mandate to deal with the mischief.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So the pros and Cons of the Bill should be subjected to the test.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gertrude Matata
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> GERTRUDE MATATA CO. ADVOCATES
>>>>>>>>> COMMISSIONERS FOR OATHS NOTARY PUBLIC
>>>>>>>>> HILLSIDE APARTMENTS
>>>>>>>>> 4TH FLOOR, Apartments 11
>>>>>>>>> RAGATI ROAD,Opposite N.H.I.F
>>>>>>>>> NEAR CAPITOL HILL POLICE STATION
>>>>>>>>> P.O. Box 517-00517
>>>>>>>>> Nairobi
>>>>>>>>> Mobile:0722-374109/0729-556523,
>>>>>>>>> Wireless 020-2159837
>>>>>>>>> DISCLAIMER
>>>>>>>>> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
>>>>>>>>> intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
>>>>>>>>> views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
>>>>>>>>> necessarily represent those of GERTRUDE MATATA & CO. ADVOCATES.
>>>>>>>>> If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must
>>>>>>>>> neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to
>>>>>>>>> anyone.
>>>>>>>>> Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this
>>>>>>>>> email in error.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Call
>>>>>>>>> Send SMS
>>>>>>>>> Call from mobile
>>>>>>>>> Add to Skype
>>>>>>>>> You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, December 18, 2017, 11:19:05 AM GMT+3, Grace Mutung'u
>>>>>>>>> (Bomu) via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Replying to Julius Njiraini who has been posting one liners in
>>>>>>>>> support of the bill.....and also about this one organisation represents
>>>>>>>>> everyone....
>>>>>>>>> we are a diverse country with varying interests. And diversity is
>>>>>>>>> good as it helps us to get different points of view on the table. No one
>>>>>>>>> organisation has monopoly of views in ICT or any other sector.
>>>>>>>>> We must dissuade ourselves from the notion that people need the
>>>>>>>>> law or a new law to organise themselves. Humans are social and they
>>>>>>>>> organise naturally. KEPSA, KICTANet, ISACA and many others who engage on
>>>>>>>>> ICT policy exsist without a special law?
>>>>>>>>> I hope this debate can shift from forced association through ICT
>>>>>>>>> Practitioners Bill to identifying the problems and seeking solutions.
>>>>>>>>> In my view, one main challenge is that the Ministry could be more
>>>>>>>>> responsive to stakeholders who want to engage with it. And this should be
>>>>>>>>> any and all stakeholders who are interested be they organisations or
>>>>>>>>> individuals, all sectors- private, academia, techies and civil society.
>>>>>>>>> More openess than closeness please!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18 Dec 2017 02:02, "Ali Hussein via kictanet" <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> @Fiona
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I stand by my statement.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We DID NOT mandate KEPSA to speak on our behalf but we created an
>>>>>>>>> inclusive team. This was a partnership. Even the letter to parliament had
>>>>>>>>> all our logos. KEPSA, BAKE, KICTANET etc. And yes that team was
>>>>>>>>> specifically set up to kill the ICT Bill. That work was concluded. To hear
>>>>>>>>> of a revived initiative that purported to have a representative from
>>>>>>>>> KICTANet is really a surprise to us all.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If I recall the representatives from KICTANet were myself and
>>>>>>>>> Grace Bomu. John Walubengo was also part of the team in case one of us
>>>>>>>>> couldn’t attend the meetings. If there were any further initiatives on this
>>>>>>>>> bill the first time we heard about them was through the press.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To be clear. I stand by my statement. KEPSA doesn’t have the
>>>>>>>>> mandate to represent KICTANet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Ali Hussein*
>>>>>>>>> *Principal*
>>>>>>>>> *Hussein & Associates*
>>>>>>>>> +254 0713 601113
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @AliHKassim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Skype: abu-jomo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin. com/in/alihkassim
>>>>>>>>> <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an
>>>>>>>>> act but a habit." ~ Aristotle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17 Dec 2017, at 11:17 PM, Liz Orembo via kictanet <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the record KICTANet was opposed to the ICT practitioners
>>>>>>>>> bill. Please see the submission to parliament https://www.kictane
>>>>>>>>> t.or.ke/?page_id=28886 <https://www.kictanet.or.ke/?page_id=28886>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Ahmed Mohamed Maawy via kictanet
>>>>>>>>> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Listers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Allow me to add a comment or two. I believe we will start
>>>>>>>>> deviating from the main issue.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Firstly, I think we need to very much understand where the buck
>>>>>>>>> stops on each matter. As much as yes, Bwana Mucheru, you require the
>>>>>>>>> industry to take lead in defining frameworks, there also needs to be
>>>>>>>>> guidance from the top. KICTANET <https://www.kictanet.or.ke/> is
>>>>>>>>> (as on the website) a catalyst for reforms. Bwana Mucheru these reforms
>>>>>>>>> need to be worked on by the both of us. We need you to become a part of the
>>>>>>>>> process together with all of us. The whole point of having the MoICT and
>>>>>>>>> bodies like Kictanet (which are catalysts) is the fact that we need to work
>>>>>>>>> together. Silos don't solve a problem.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bwana Mucheru, also I may not recollect this list necessarily
>>>>>>>>> being hostile in the past. And as any of us, you have a right to make your
>>>>>>>>> comments heard, and also I believe we need to also have a feedback loop
>>>>>>>>> between all of us. I think through the KICTANET website it is evident
>>>>>>>>> KICTANET has been doing its job well. If there are ways KICTANET can
>>>>>>>>> improve, Bwana Mucheru, feel free to raise the suggestions. This country
>>>>>>>>> belongs to all of us Sir.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lastly, Bwana Mucheru, this list has too many members who are
>>>>>>>>> strategic to the development of our country. And all of us need to be
>>>>>>>>> engaged with you. I think it will not do all of us much justice if we see
>>>>>>>>> you refrain from commenting on it. Lets all work collectively.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Fiona Asonga via kictanet <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear Ali
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You were with us at KEPSA Offices when we asked that KICATNET
>>>>>>>>> nominate representatives to work with us on the ICT Practitioners Bill.
>>>>>>>>> Because we want to achieve more as an industry we ave continues to work
>>>>>>>>> with your representatives even on the Vision 2030 MTP III plan and other
>>>>>>>>> engagements we have had with the ministry of ICT. It is not about KICTANET
>>>>>>>>> being a member but being a partner and working with TESPOK, DRAKE, KITOS,
>>>>>>>>> BAKE, ICTAK and any other ICT association.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The document we circulated through KEPSA to the Ministry and
>>>>>>>>> parliament included KICATNET as part of KEPSA. You may need to reconsider
>>>>>>>>> your statement to CS Mucheru. Secondly, the KEPSA partnership with KICTANET
>>>>>>>>> is not compulsory. However, it is in the interest of achieving similar set
>>>>>>>>> goals for the ICT sector as a whole. KICATNET is free to pull out of it at
>>>>>>>>> any time just advise KEPSA secretariat on the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Together we can achieve more
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> *From: *"Ali Hussein via kictanet" <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> *To: *tespok at tespok.co.ke
>>>>>>>>> *Cc: *"Ali Hussein" <ali at hussein.me.ke>
>>>>>>>>> *Sent: *Sunday, December 17, 2017 3:11:02 PM
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [kictanet] ict practitioners bill is back
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear Bwana CS
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> KICTANet NEVER asked KEPSA to handle engagements on our behalf. We
>>>>>>>>> engaged KEPSA to work as a team. Period. Never, did we abdicate our
>>>>>>>>> responsibilities to KEPSA because we are not KEPSA members. If KEPSA gave
>>>>>>>>> you that belief then I'm afraid that you were misled. And KEPSA should
>>>>>>>>> apologise for misleading you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Ali Hussein*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Principal*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Hussein & Associates*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tel: +254 713 601113
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @AliHKassim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Skype: abu-jomo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alih kassim
>>>>>>>>> <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
>>>>>>>>> <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Chiromo Road, Westlands,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nairobi, Kenya.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are
>>>>>>>>> purely mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the
>>>>>>>>> organizations that I work with.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Joseph Mucheru via kictanet <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ali Hussein,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the reason I keep off this list. You are calling me a liar
>>>>>>>>> and yet your team asked KEPSA to handle the engagements in this matter.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With all respect going forward let's follow the agreed engagements
>>>>>>>>> between government and private sector.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ahsante Sana!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> JM
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17 Dec 2017 11:17, "Ali Hussein via kictanet" <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bwana CS
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With all due respect. You are a senior government official and
>>>>>>>>> shouldn’t peddle untruths.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> KICTANet HAS NEVER BEEN PART OF KEPSA.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We have collaborated only once on the ICT BIll. Most of us don’t
>>>>>>>>> believe KEPSA is representative of the wider ICT Industry.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We welcome dialogue with your ministry and KEPSA on this. We are
>>>>>>>>> happy to be included in the conversation. We however CANNOT endorse a
>>>>>>>>> dialogue and discussions we are not party to.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Ali Hussein*
>>>>>>>>> *Principal*
>>>>>>>>> *Hussein & Associates*
>>>>>>>>> +254 0713 601113
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @AliHKassim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Skype: abu-jomo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.c om/in/alihkassim
>>>>>>>>> <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an
>>>>>>>>> act but a habit." ~ Aristotle
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17 Dec 2017, at 9:04 AM, Julius Njiraini via kictanet <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Digital forensic expert is involved in investigation of fraud,
>>>>>>>>> abuse, embezzlement, larceny, conversion of any digital device, records and
>>>>>>>>> process. The report is supposed to be presented in courtroom and testify as
>>>>>>>>> expert witness. He is also supposed to corroborate evidence with other
>>>>>>>>> segment of crime scene using relevant laws including evidence act, criminal
>>>>>>>>> procedures code and cyber crime laws as best international laws in other
>>>>>>>>> countries
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2017 8:32 AM, "Julius Njiraini" <njiraini2001 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your enlightenment. Am just concerned about new
>>>>>>>>> emerging fields like information security and forensics which is mainly
>>>>>>>>> concerned with digital cyber crime and evidence presentation in courtroom.
>>>>>>>>> These is especially concerns for computer security and forensics
>>>>>>>>> professionals
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2017 6:12 AM, "Joseph Mucheru via kictanet" <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The absence of dialogue and relying on media reports is a recipe
>>>>>>>>> for discord. The current views, sentiments and concerns raised in the group
>>>>>>>>> are justified only because there is no dialogue. Kicktanet is part of
>>>>>>>>> KEPSA <https://kepsa.or.ke> who we are in constant dialogue even
>>>>>>>>> on this topic. Going forward, the need to dialogue through the agreed
>>>>>>>>> channels is key;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So let me try and give a position on where we are;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - I did state that we will need a Practitioners Bill and even
>>>>>>>>> clarified to media it would not be the current one
>>>>>>>>> - There is currently NO Bill in parliament. The last one
>>>>>>>>> lapsed and we would need to start afresh
>>>>>>>>> - The bill identified a need/gap in our sector that requires
>>>>>>>>> some action, especially since ICT is at the heart of the Governments
>>>>>>>>> development agenda
>>>>>>>>> - The Industry was opposed with the method/solutions proposed
>>>>>>>>> by the Bill but not the fact there is a gap
>>>>>>>>> - Other Industries have self regulating bodies and if our
>>>>>>>>> sector is to grow, we need to get organised and set this up. Why should
>>>>>>>>> government have to do it?
>>>>>>>>> - We are exporting our skills regionally and internationally
>>>>>>>>> and a need to standardise and demonstrate our skills is key. This is
>>>>>>>>> because we are not working in isolation, we are competing with other
>>>>>>>>> countries and Kenya must be able to demonstrate consistent and quality
>>>>>>>>> skills -- today we are blacklisted on various online jobs platforms because
>>>>>>>>> of a few bad apples, while we know we have some of the best talents, we are
>>>>>>>>> also losing tenders and business because we have not conformed to specific
>>>>>>>>> international standards and so the rating of our products/services falls
>>>>>>>>> short. (KBS is working on the standards)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And for the accusations...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - It was a private members bill and not sponsored by
>>>>>>>>> Government (We opposed it in its current form - you know that, otherwise
>>>>>>>>> google it).
>>>>>>>>> - Responding to questions from the sector does not amount to a
>>>>>>>>> "roadside decision", considering the level of engagement we have had on
>>>>>>>>> this issue
>>>>>>>>> - The Government is there to serve the people of Kenya and not
>>>>>>>>> just the sector in isolation
>>>>>>>>> - Skills Rating systems used by platforms such as Kuhastle.com,
>>>>>>>>> upwork.com., cloudfactory.com, monster.com..etc are examples
>>>>>>>>> of ways people are able to build and demonstrate skills both technical and
>>>>>>>>> otherwise
>>>>>>>>> - I have had engagements on this topic with KEPSA (ICT Sector
>>>>>>>>> Committee <https://kepsa.or.ke/sector-comittees/>) - Mike
>>>>>>>>> Macharia being the Chair
>>>>>>>>> - I saw in social media many of you opposed to ICTAK
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.ictak.or.ke/> being enjoined in the supreme court
>>>>>>>>> presidential petition, but none came out (Kicktanet included) to
>>>>>>>>> support/represent the sector, which was at the heart of the dispute. At the
>>>>>>>>> very least ICTAK <http://www.ictak.or.ke/> was willing to come
>>>>>>>>> forward.
>>>>>>>>> - Similar to the Law Society, The Supreme Court should have
>>>>>>>>> chosen the ICT experts from the ICT Industry body?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My advice would be for the sector to take the lead and suggest how
>>>>>>>>> this need/gap of* "SKILLS RATING" standards etc.. *can be
>>>>>>>>> addressed. We are on the same side. If industry does not take the lead,
>>>>>>>>> then Government will step in. As it stands, industry has various bodies and
>>>>>>>>> you need to agree on how to engage amongst yourselves. We are going to be
>>>>>>>>> successful and so let us push in the same direction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Finally, today the official engagement between government and the
>>>>>>>>> ICT sector is through KEPSA <https://kepsa.or.ke/> . (KICTAnet,
>>>>>>>>> TESPOK, KITOS etc.. are members and even when we engaged on the ICT
>>>>>>>>> Practitioners bill, the sector was represented by KEPSA, when we met MPs).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The last discussion on Tuesday 14th December 2017 between KEPSA
>>>>>>>>> and the Ministry covered the following topics;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. ICT Policy
>>>>>>>>> 2. Kick-off Industry meetings
>>>>>>>>> 3. Bills / Opinions - ICT Practitioners Bill
>>>>>>>>> 4. PDTP <http://icta.go.ke/digitalent/> + Ajira Digital
>>>>>>>>> <http://ajiradigital.go.ke/> (Jobs)
>>>>>>>>> 5. Flagship Projects
>>>>>>>>> 6. Constituency Development Hubs
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.ict.go.ke/constituency-to-get-an-innovation-hub/>
>>>>>>>>> 7. ICTA Engagement with Counties
>>>>>>>>> 8. Enterprise Kenya
>>>>>>>>> 9. Blockchain
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Andrew Alston via kictanet <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So – having seen an article in the standardmedia in which elements
>>>>>>>>> of what I stated below were quoted – and to which there seem to have been
>>>>>>>>> responses – I now need to comment further:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Article found at: https://www.standardmedia.co.k
>>>>>>>>> e/business/article/2001263257/ techies-oppose-move-to-introdu
>>>>>>>>> ce-new-ict-watchdog
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/business/article/2001263257/techies-oppose-move-to-introduce-new-ict-watchdog>
>>>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Mucheru, however, denies that the Bill will lock out experts
>>>>>>>>> without formal training insisting the reverse will be the case. “This Bill
>>>>>>>>> will benefit the people who have been working in technical capacity for
>>>>>>>>> years but have not acquired certificates,” he explained. “If they can
>>>>>>>>> demonstrate their proficiency to the Institute then they can get certified
>>>>>>>>> and widen the scope of jobs they can bid or apply for.” *
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So – I have a question – What will be the method of demonstrating
>>>>>>>>> proficiency and how will this be tested – and what will it cost – and how
>>>>>>>>> long will it take.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now – let me break the questions down a bit
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. The ICT field is vast – are you going to test proficiency
>>>>>>>>> in programming? In networking? In security? In database administration? In
>>>>>>>>> desktop support? In Linux? Freebsd? Microsoft? Solaris? AIX? What is the
>>>>>>>>> test going to be – and who is going to administer these tests
>>>>>>>>> 2. What makes an industry body more capable of testing
>>>>>>>>> proficiency than Cisco, Juniper, Huawei or any of the other vendors – the
>>>>>>>>> bill does **NOT** cater for industry standard certification
>>>>>>>>> outside of formal education – it simply is not in there – and if you are
>>>>>>>>> not going to accept these and are going to have this industry body
>>>>>>>>> determine proficiency – we need to know how this will be done and how the
>>>>>>>>> people testing proficiency will be qualified to do it – and in what fields
>>>>>>>>> they are qualified to test proficiency.
>>>>>>>>> 3. What is the cost of this testing of proficiency – does an
>>>>>>>>> individual who has certified as a CCIE at the cost of thousands – and in
>>>>>>>>> some cases tens of thousands – of dollars suddenly need to pay more to
>>>>>>>>> demonstrate something that he has clearly already demonstrated? Who will it
>>>>>>>>> be paid for? How will the money be utilized? Will this be included in the
>>>>>>>>> license fee for the first year? Or will this suddenly cost extra so
>>>>>>>>> someone can make some money?
>>>>>>>>> 4. How does does it take to “demonstrate proficiency” – and if
>>>>>>>>> I bring in someone from outside to train my staff in a new field of
>>>>>>>>> technology – is he going to be made to sit some kind of exam? Or pay some
>>>>>>>>> kind of fee before he can upskill Kenyans? Because – lets be real – that is
>>>>>>>>> not going to happen – it will be the death of bringing in people to impart
>>>>>>>>> knowledge.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let me be blunt – more than half the authors of the RFC’s within
>>>>>>>>> the IETF would not qualify under the bill as it stands – this means they
>>>>>>>>> would have to “demonstrate” their proficiency – despite the fact that they
>>>>>>>>> have their names on Internet standards – and if people expect these
>>>>>>>>> individuals to sit exams or prove to people that they know what they are
>>>>>>>>> doing – despite the knowledge having been clearly demonstrated (which is
>>>>>>>>> why they are being flown in in the first place, to train Kenyans in skills
>>>>>>>>> that are not available in the country so that those Kenyans can continue to
>>>>>>>>> further upskill and lift up the industry) – you can kiss goodbye to having
>>>>>>>>> cutting edge people coming into this country – it simply won’t happen – and
>>>>>>>>> it will be Kenya that loses out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then to comment on this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Mucheru adds that the Government has held several engagements
>>>>>>>>> with practitioners in the sector on the provisions of the Bill. *
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Correct – there was massive engagement – and the bill was largely
>>>>>>>>> defeated after the industry said it was broken – after people on this list
>>>>>>>>> said it was broken – after it was slammed left right and centre – so yes –
>>>>>>>>> there was engagement – but the article is wrong about the fact that the
>>>>>>>>> engagement agreed that this bill in its current form was a good idea or
>>>>>>>>> represented the correct solution.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *“There was consensus that we need to establish a professional
>>>>>>>>> body to regulate the industry,” he said. *
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have no problem with the concept of a professional body – I have
>>>>>>>>> major problems with forcing a situation where people who have potentially
>>>>>>>>> decades of experience have to suddenly “prove” their skills via some
>>>>>>>>> entirely undefined means at some undefined cost to a bunch of people who
>>>>>>>>> may or may not have anywhere close to the experience or knowledge of the
>>>>>>>>> person being tested. If we said that we had a professional body that people
>>>>>>>>> could register to – and they needed to be registered – and in the event of
>>>>>>>>> *substantiated* complaints the individual could be deregistered
>>>>>>>>> and blacklisted – I would have no problem. It is the arbitrary and
>>>>>>>>> unsubstantiated and undefined criteria for registration that I take
>>>>>>>>> exception to – and that I believe could result in expensive legal
>>>>>>>>> challenges.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please – do not get me wrong – I do not begrudge anyone who has a
>>>>>>>>> desire to genuinely root out the bad apples and clean up the industry and
>>>>>>>>> remove scam artists and fraudsters. I think that is a noble and pure
>>>>>>>>> objective that should be pursued. I however dispute the fact that this
>>>>>>>>> bill is the right way to go about it – and I dispute the fact that
>>>>>>>>> university degrees have anything to do with competence in this industry –
>>>>>>>>> particularly with the rate that technology evolves – because an individual
>>>>>>>>> doing a 3 year degree who is learning specific technologies in his first
>>>>>>>>> year – by the time he graduates – those technologies are history – and when
>>>>>>>>> he walks into the industry – he is having to self study it all again
>>>>>>>>> ANYWAY. Let me give you examples of technologies that did not exist a year
>>>>>>>>> ago in any real form:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Segment routing – the foundation of network routing going
>>>>>>>>> forward and the replacement to MPLS – how do I know this – because I’ve had
>>>>>>>>> my hands in crafting the specifications and doing a lot of the beta testing
>>>>>>>>> for it – so who is going to test proficiency here – it changes the game –
>>>>>>>>> and the only people qualified to teach it – or gauge the proficiency in it
>>>>>>>>> – do not themselves qualify under this bill to be registered.
>>>>>>>>> 2. Network telemetry processing – first introduced in limited
>>>>>>>>> form in Q3 2015 – and only now becoming main stream – but within a year of
>>>>>>>>> it being main stream – it will replace standard network monitoring entirely
>>>>>>>>> – who is going to teach that with a university degree?
>>>>>>>>> 3. Which university degree teaches BGP? BGP-LU? ISIS? Network
>>>>>>>>> segmentation? IPv6 addressing?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The list is endless – these are things that cannot be learnt
>>>>>>>>> through a degree – they are learnt through industry standard certification
>>>>>>>>> or self-skilling by reading documentation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, Mr Mucheru – please – do not read me wrong – I have tremendous
>>>>>>>>> respect for the regulator in this country – and it is testament to how well
>>>>>>>>> the Kenyan industry and the regulatory environment here works that today –
>>>>>>>>> Kenya has higher average mobile broadband speeds than either the US or
>>>>>>>>> South Africa or a lot of other places. It is testament to the regulatory
>>>>>>>>> environment here that we have the high-speed networks we do – and that the
>>>>>>>>> pricing is as low as it is – because the industry is competitive and open
>>>>>>>>> and innovative. This list of things the regulator has gotten right in this
>>>>>>>>> country is long - I do however plead with you, the bill as it stands would
>>>>>>>>> break the industry that all of us – yourself – myself – and so many others
>>>>>>>>> have worked so hard to build. I am NOT against a professional body – I am
>>>>>>>>> NOT against formalizing things – but I beg you – do not walk down the road
>>>>>>>>> of this current bill in its current form – it will be death to this
>>>>>>>>> industry in this country.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrew Alston
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *From: *Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.c om
>>>>>>>>> <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>>
>>>>>>>>> *Date: *Monday, 4 December 2017 at 01:24
>>>>>>>>> *To: *KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <
>>>>>>>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke >
>>>>>>>>> *Cc: *Liz Wanjiru <lizwanjiru at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *RE: [kictanet] ict practitioners bill is back
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have to say – personally I cannot think of a worse piece of
>>>>>>>>> legislation that I have seen in recent history.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let us look at the net effects of this and the problems with it:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Large companies bring in consultants or external people
>>>>>>>>> where necessary to supplement capacity, to train and upskill Kenyan staff
>>>>>>>>> etc, while those guys are here, even for a week or two, they are
>>>>>>>>> compensated, and my reading of this bill is – this would be illegal –
>>>>>>>>> because you’d have to get every consultant you bring in accredited and
>>>>>>>>> licensed first – which is impractical in the extreme
>>>>>>>>> 2. The list of highly skilled people with 20+ years experience
>>>>>>>>> who would not qualify for accreditation under this bill is extensive,
>>>>>>>>> globally and within Kenya – this bill completely stops any form of
>>>>>>>>> knowledge transfer from those individuals and in fact will force a
>>>>>>>>> situation where Kenyan’s who wish to learn from some of the biggest names
>>>>>>>>> in the industry would be forced to go internationally to get that
>>>>>>>>> knowledge, rather than bringing those people in to train locally
>>>>>>>>> 3. It forces Kenyans who have spent years learning and honing
>>>>>>>>> their skills without university qualifications out of work and could well
>>>>>>>>> result in large scale job losses looking at the number of highly skilled
>>>>>>>>> individuals I know of who are working without qualifications
>>>>>>>>> 4. It prevents private companies from making what are normal
>>>>>>>>> business decisions – who they hire and who they pay. That is problematic
>>>>>>>>> in the extreme – in any normal situation if a private company hires staff
>>>>>>>>> that don’t perform – those staff either get fired or the market rejects the
>>>>>>>>> company and the company disappears – standard market dynamics – in this
>>>>>>>>> case – if a company finds extremely talented people they may be forced into
>>>>>>>>> a position where they have to hire less skilled people because someone
>>>>>>>>> can’t meet some accreditation requirement.</
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/info%40alyhussein.com
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20190502/321935a2/attachment.htm>
More information about the KICTANet
mailing list