[quote=Satan]We only have Comcast in Hell.[/quote]
What a terrible fate. :scream:
"Pai Hole"
I already love this video too much.
I was loving the video until he struck Portugal as an example of a lack of net neutrality gone wrong. He didn't do his research (which is just going to the [URL=https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/923701871092441088]source tweet[/URL] and scrolling down until people start yelling in gibberish and waving portuguese flags around), which I find weird.
[URL=https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/]This is patently false.[/URL] The package bundles shown in the video are just discounted data caps for those applications, and while you could argue that places apps which aren't present in any bundle at a disadvantage, those bundles reflect what the market wants and consumes. Nobody is pissed off about this, and we, just like the US, enjoy our net neutrality very much. The "oh but that's Portugal, the US would never stand for this" joke lands a little off.
It's just a matter of time one of this guy's videos go viral. Quality stuff.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971286]I was loving the video until he struck Portugal as an example of a lack of net neutrality gone wrong. He didn't do his research (which is just going to the [URL=https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/923701871092441088]source tweet[/URL] and scrolling down until people start yelling in gibberish and waving portuguese flags around), which I find weird.
[URL=https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/]This is patently false.[/URL] The package bundles shown in the video are just discounted data caps for those applications, and while you could argue that places apps which aren't present in any bundle at a disadvantage, those bundles reflect what the market wants and consumes. Nobody is pissed off about this, and we, just like the US, enjoy our net neutrality very much. The "oh but that's Portugal, the US would never stand for this" joke lands a little off.[/QUOTE]
Isn't this basically just a spin on the dreaded "fast lanes", just with data volume instead of data speed? Seems like a system with all the same potential exploits.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971286]I was loving the video until he struck Portugal as an example of a lack of net neutrality gone wrong. He didn't do his research (which is just going to the [URL=https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/923701871092441088]source tweet[/URL] and scrolling down until people start yelling in gibberish and waving portuguese flags around), which I find weird.
[URL=https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/]This is patently false.[/URL] The package bundles shown in the video are just discounted data caps for those applications, and while you could argue that places apps which aren't present in any bundle at a disadvantage, those bundles reflect what the market wants and consumes. Nobody is pissed off about this, and we, just like the US, enjoy our net neutrality very much. The "oh but that's Portugal, the US would never stand for this" joke lands a little off.[/QUOTE]
It actually ends up helping quite a lot.
It's great for teens and well, other people, who use instagram and snapchat a lot.
Heck, for some people, they don't need any more than that.
I don't have any of that. I instead have a 3gb data pack which I never use to its fullest, while my parents have a 5gb pack.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971286]I was loving the video until he struck Portugal as an example of a lack of net neutrality gone wrong. He didn't do his research (which is just going to the [URL=https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/923701871092441088]source tweet[/URL] and scrolling down until people start yelling in gibberish and waving portuguese flags around), which I find weird.
[URL=https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/]This is patently false.[/URL] The package bundles shown in the video are just discounted data caps for those applications, and while you could argue that places apps which aren't present in any bundle at a disadvantage, those bundles reflect what the market wants and consumes. Nobody is pissed off about this, and we, just like the US, enjoy our net neutrality very much. The "oh but that's Portugal, the US would never stand for this" joke lands a little off.[/QUOTE]
Paying for additional usage of certain apps seems kinda dumb though; if they find that these packages are making them the most money and have no competition, would they not be incentivized to both lower the amount of data given in the base plan while increasing the cost of the app plan? It also could hurt startups, since new companies are then less likely to have the money to pony up to get on an ISP's bundle. Not to mention data caps being absolutely atrocious in the first place, but that's unrelated.
Perhaps it's helpful now, and perhaps what I'm thinking is a slippery slope, but the ability to do something like this can translate into something bad quickly.
[QUOTE=Mobon1;52971407]Paying for additional usage of certain apps seems kinda dumb though; if they find that these packages are making them the most money and have no competition, would they not be incentivized to both lower the amount of data given in the base plan while increasing the cost of the app plan? Not to mention data caps being absolutely atrocious in the first place.[/QUOTE]
You can still use the apps without paying for them. If you pick them, you'll use the app and not spend any data at all, which is kind of moot for anything other than video or music, seeing how not even I with 3gb of data ever spend it all on anything in there.
[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;52971368]Isn't this basically just a spin on the dreaded "fast lanes", just with data volume instead of data speed? Seems like a system with all the same potential exploits.[/QUOTE]
It is, it puts apps and services not included in the packages at a significant disadvantage. I bet the ones included had to pay a shitload. It may be on a mobile network, but the story about it not being a violation of net neutrality is utter bullshit. It may not violate the specific laws in place there, but it is still 100% against the concept of net neutrality.
By picking and choosing who gets to have faster, or in Portugal's case, unrestricted access will cause the exact same problems as an ISP that charges a company like Hulu or Netflix extra for faster speed. Hit your data cap for the month? Tough shit, you can't use apps that aren't included in the separate packages without getting throttled, or even charged out the ass for data overages. Those apps then see a significant reduction in usage if they're data intensive, and potentially die. What if Youtube has a dispute with the wireless provider? Wham, they're not included in the video package and Youtube loses users and money.
It goes in with data caps being arbitrary bullshit designed to suck more money out of people. Throttling everything during peak times to protect the network from being overstressed (which shouldn't be a problem anyway with all the fucking government money they get for infrastructure) is fine. Measuring how much exact data is transmitted to the user is an arbitrary charge forged out of pure greed. It costs ISPs pennies to transmit a gigabyte of data, slightly more for wireless because RF and microwave equipment is expensive as hell. But if you go over your data limit, you either are throttled for the REST OF THE MONTH, or you get charged like $5-10 per ONE GIGABYTE over the limit. That's like a 3000-5000% profit margin. Get rid of data caps and there will be zero need for charging for packages of unlimited data for specific apps. Wireless providers will absolutely not suffer at all, aside from losing some free money they'd otherwise not collect.
I still can't believe that people let fucking data caps slide though. But then again people let publishers release heavy microtransactions and pay-2-win in premium games for years until recently. Maybe there's hope that caps will be destroyed by public opinion. Also the Big Three of ISPs in the US need to be shattered really fucking badly, they're beginning to hold scary amounts of influence over our government.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971286]garbage[/QUOTE]
it's only net neutrality if you think that charging people differently and counting data caps differently based on what websites they use is net neutrality
(thats the opposite of net neutrality)
[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;52971368]Isn't this basically just a spin on the dreaded "fast lanes", just with data volume instead of data speed? Seems like a system with all the same potential exploits.[/QUOTE]
While it almost looks similar, I don't feel it's quite the same. There's no way for companies to buy into those plans (I think it's illegal thanks to the EU legislation), and you'll never be cut access if you run out of bytes in your data plan, you'll just be charged a generic data rate (which is generally much more expensive than what these plans offer). What these packs are are just higher caps on top of already very high caps that your data plan already has.
I'm really enjoying his uptick in regular content recently. That's not to say i don't love his long form videos too, but I'm enjoying seeing him in my sub box more. He's starting to gain more regular viewers as well which is great. It's probably better for his wallet too.
TONIGHTS THE NIGHT
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971443]While it almost looks similar, I don't feel it's quite the same. There's no way for companies to buy into those plans (I think it's illegal thanks to the EU legislation), and you'll never be cut access if you run out of bytes in your data plan, you'll just be charged a generic data rate (which is generally much more expensive than what these plans offer). What these packs are are just higher caps on top of already very high caps that your data plan already has.[/QUOTE]
Even if that's all true, I think that still leaves a lot of the same exploits:
- base volume can be decreased while current standards are sold as premium (the "speedbump" fear people have when it comes to fast lanes)
- base volume is frozen while the volume capacity growth we currently take for granted is being sold as premium (leading to the same gradient)
- competitors will not be included in premium packages, or won't be included in the whatever packages will inevitably turn out to be the popular ones that actually matter
- competitors will be included in premium packages, but at an unfavorable rate
- services that the ISP has their own hand will will be offered at a much more favorable rate or in much more favorable package
The way I'd want data to be treated is the same as water or energy. Doesn't matter what brand of washing machine is connected to the pipes, doesn't matter whether the computer I plug in is Apple or custom-built, I get charged at the same rate.
[QUOTE=JXZ;52971431]it's only net neutrality if you think that charging people differently and counting data caps differently based on what websites they use is net neutrality
(thats the opposite of net neutrality)[/QUOTE]
I think you're being too hardline about what this is. By subscribing to the lower-priced boosted data packages (which are compiled by studying what apps are being used the most, which I feel is an important point) I can get a higher bang for my buck than if I just bought a general data cap supplement, whose cost hasn't risen (and CAN'T rise, due to net neutrality laws) since these packages were introduced.
This isn't anti-consumer. This isn't AT&T throttling your youtube back to 1999 because you ran out of privileged bytes. This is subsidizing the market in regards to top app usage, by category, if your contract's caps aren't high enough for your usage. This affordable flexibility allows you to better mix-and-match their offerings, too.
I'd argue it's compatible with EU's net neutrality rules since Portugal's not the only one to do it, and Brussels keeps watch.
[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;52971551]Even if that's all true, I think that still leaves a lot of the same exploits:
- base volume can be decreased while current standards are sold as premium (the "speedbump" fear people have when it comes to fast lanes)
- base volume is frozen while the volume capacity growth we currently take for granted is being sold as premium (leading to the same gradient)
- competitors will not be included in premium packages, or won't be included in the whatever packages will inevitably turn out to be the popular ones that actually matter
- competitors will be included in premium packages, but at an unfavorable rate
- services that the ISP has their own hand will will be offered at a much more favorable rate or in much more favorable package
The way I'd want data to be treated is the same as water or energy. Doesn't matter what brand of washing machine is connected to the pipes, doesn't matter whether the computer I plug in is Apple or custom-built, I get charged at the same rate.[/QUOTE]
There is no speedbump whatsoever.
And the competitor thing ends up nulling itself out since as said, its based around the most used apps around. It isn't gonna favour "instagram competitor #4" because nobody uses it, safe for a couple of people.
It isn't around the ISP itself and its reach, its around what people actually use.
[i]So again, its based around the most popular apps around, hence why the addon packs are there in the first place designed for [b]really heavy users[/b] may I add, with no speed boost or nerf whatsoever.[/i]
Data caps are shit yes, but then again, I don't see how would you want an ISP to tax you over the services they provide to you, be it data, texting or calling.
[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;52971551]Even if that's all true, I think that still leaves a lot of the same exploits:
- base volume can be decreased while current standards are sold as premium (the "speedbump" fear people have when it comes to fast lanes)
- base volume is frozen while the volume capacity growth we currently take for granted is being sold as premium (leading to the same gradient)
- competitors will not be included in premium packages, or won't be included in the whatever packages will inevitably turn out to be the popular ones that actually matter
- competitors will be included in premium packages, but at an unfavorable rate
- services that the ISP has their own hand will will be offered at a much more favorable rate or in much more favorable package
The way I'd want data to be treated is the same as water or energy. Doesn't matter what brand of washing machine is connected to the pipes, doesn't matter whether the computer I plug in is Apple or custom-built, I get charged at the same rate.[/QUOTE]
Eh, somewhat. I don't think speedbumping is really a possibility here in Portugal.
Messing with the base volume is a really blatant anti-consumer move, the wrath of Brussels will be upon you, as well as the local government's, and it seems the EU [URL=http://berec.europa.eu/eng/netneutrality/zero_rating/]legislates zero-rating mostly by negative consumer impact[/URL]. It doesn't make financial sense for the carrier to try to fight the EU, in case they tried to max out profits by speedbumping everything.
You're right on the button when it comes to competition though, but it's a very grey area I think. It's hard to balance a fair market and consumer flexibility/happiness in a very tough market.
While sure, you're incentivizing the usage of zero-rated or discounted-rated apps, as it stands, it's a very consumer-friendly move. If people want higher general data caps, they can have it for the same price as always, but if they feel they need more twitch in their lives, they can have it for less.
:shrug:
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;52971631]There is no speedbump whatsoever.
And the competitor thing ends up nulling itself out since as said, its based around the most used apps around. It isn't gonna favour "instagram competitor #4" because nobody uses it, safe for a couple of people.
It isn't around the ISP itself and its reach, its around what people actually use.
[i]So again, its based around the most popular apps around, hence why the addon packs are there in the first place designed for [b]really heavy users[/b] may I add, with no speed boost or nerf whatsoever.[/i]
Data caps are shit yes, but then again, I don't see how would you want an ISP to tax you over the services they provide to you, be it data, texting or calling.[/QUOTE]
I'm getting a "Warcraft's diminishing xp returns to bonus xp for X time flip" vibes from this.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;52971631]There is no speedbump whatsoever.
And the competitor thing ends up nulling itself out since as said, its based around the most used apps around. It isn't gonna favour "instagram competitor #4" because nobody uses it, safe for a couple of people.
It isn't around the ISP itself and its reach, its around what people actually use.
[i]So again, its based around the most popular apps around, hence why the addon packs are there in the first place designed for [b]really heavy users[/b] may I add, with no speed boost or nerf whatsoever.[/i]
Data caps are shit yes, but then again, I don't see how would you want an ISP to tax you over the services they provide to you, be it data, texting or calling.[/QUOTE]
A fair amount of things don't just explode overnight, they need to build up their userbase. And it kind of deters potential users when they have to pay more for that service. So they stick with whatever is most popular.
Dat try-hard tease at the end, goddammit.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971656]Eh, somewhat. I don't think speedbumping is really a possibility here in Portugal.
Messing with the base volume is a really blatant anti-consumer move, the wrath of Brussels will be upon you, as well as the local government's, and it seems the EU [URL=http://berec.europa.eu/eng/netneutrality/zero_rating/]legislates zero-rating mostly by negative consumer impact[/URL]. It doesn't make financial sense for the carrier to try to fight the EU, in case they tried to max out profits by speedbumping everything.
You're right on the button when it comes to competition though, but it's a very grey area I think. It's hard to balance a fair market and consumer flexibility/happiness in a very tough market.
While sure, you're incentivizing the usage of zero-rated or discounted-rated apps, as it stands, it's a very consumer-friendly move. If people want higher general data caps, they can have it for the same price as always, but if they feel they need more twitch in their lives, they can have it for less.
:shrug:[/QUOTE]
This all falls apart when you remember that technology is always improving and ISP's can just put all their resources into improving service for premium users while leaving everybody else stagnant. In a world of net neutrality, any improvements ISP's make to their service would benefit the people who have the normal package. Without net neutrality, ISP's put all their resources into the premium package, and before you know it the end user with a normal package has data caps that are 10 years out of date for the same price. It's like how minimum wage is rising slower than inflation in the US.
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971286]I was loving the video until he struck Portugal as an example of a lack of net neutrality gone wrong. He didn't do his research (which is just going to the [URL=https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/923701871092441088]source tweet[/URL] and scrolling down until people start yelling in gibberish and waving portuguese flags around), which I find weird.
[URL=https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/]This is patently false.[/URL] The package bundles shown in the video are just discounted data caps for those applications, and while you could argue that places apps which aren't present in any bundle at a disadvantage, those bundles reflect what the market wants and consumes. Nobody is pissed off about this, and we, just like the US, enjoy our net neutrality very much. The "oh but that's Portugal, the US would never stand for this" joke lands a little off.[/QUOTE]
Discounted data caps per-option violates net neutrality. Why do you think it doesnt?
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971656]Eh, somewhat. I don't think speedbumping is really a possibility here in Portugal.
Messing with the base volume is a really blatant anti-consumer move, the wrath of Brussels will be upon you, as well as the local government's, and it seems the EU [URL=http://berec.europa.eu/eng/netneutrality/zero_rating/]legislates zero-rating mostly by negative consumer impact[/URL]. It doesn't make financial sense for the carrier to try to fight the EU, in case they tried to max out profits by speedbumping everything.
You're right on the button when it comes to competition though, but it's a very grey area I think. It's hard to balance a fair market and consumer flexibility/happiness in a very tough market.
While sure, you're incentivizing the usage of zero-rated or discounted-rated apps, as it stands, it's a very consumer-friendly move. If people want higher general data caps, they can have it for the same price as always, but if they feel they need more twitch in their lives, they can have it for less.
:shrug:[/QUOTE]
Found this quote from an article I read earlier that sums up why stuff like Portugal's plans are still bad, even when they look pro-consumer at the surface level.
[QUOTE]Most importantly, the entire thing is based on the idea that there isn’t enough bandwidth go go around. But think about it and you’ll find that this is a craftily constructed lie: if there’s enough bandwidth that carriers can offer the most traffic-intensive services without limit, then why are there caps in the first place? Answer: there is no reason, bandwidth caps are arbitrary!
ISPs have both the stick and the carrot, and they’re riding subscribers all the way to the bank.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52971443]While it almost looks similar, I don't feel it's quite the same. There's no way for companies to buy into those plans (I think it's illegal thanks to the EU legislation), and you'll never be cut access if you run out of bytes in your data plan, you'll just be charged a generic data rate (which is generally much more expensive than what these plans offer). What these packs are are just higher caps on top of already very high caps that your data plan already has.[/QUOTE]
Data caps are, themselves, an affront to the internet, and should be abolished. Having specific caps on specific bundles of services is a textbook example of what the ISPs want to do, and is probably how they will implement it at first.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;52971923]A fair amount of things don't just explode overnight, they need to build up their userbase. And it kind of deters potential users when they have to pay more for that service. So they stick with whatever is most popular.[/QUOTE]
They don't pay more for anything other than an optional pack that gives you near infinite data on the choosen apps.
You don't pay more on anything that isn't selected by those packs.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;52973113]They don't pay more for anything other than an optional pack that gives you near infinite data on the choosen apps.
You don't pay more on anything that isn't selected by those packs.[/QUOTE]
This is your mind on non-net-neutrality.
Make sure you don't become like this and normalize bullshit.
[QUOTE=Firo;52972816]Found this quote from an article I read earlier that sums up why stuff like Portugal's plans are still bad, even when they look pro-consumer at the surface level.[/QUOTE]
But there isn't enough bandwidth to go around? This is a mobile service, the towers have maximum bandwidth limits and have to deal with congestion. Data caps help to ensure that towers can serve every customer without being overloaded. If this was on a landline service, sure, bandwidth and congestion is so less of a problem there that pulling caps would be nothing else except evil, but right now I see a whole different situation from where I'm standing.
[editline]13th December 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;52972261]This all falls apart when you remember that technology is always improving and ISP's can just put all their resources into improving service for premium users while leaving everybody else stagnant. In a world of net neutrality, any improvements ISP's make to their service would benefit the people who have the normal package. Without net neutrality, ISP's put all their resources into the premium package, and before you know it the end user with a normal package has data caps that are 10 years out of date for the same price. It's like how minimum wage is rising slower than inflation in the US.[/QUOTE]
I'm gonna double down on saying that Portugal has, due to the EU, enshrined laws on net neutrality. If this even starts happening, the lawsuits will start coming in from consumer protection agencies (which are pretty strong in Europe), the government is gonna start snooping around and demanding answers, and the EU will go down on them. Oh, and of course, their competition would use the free PR to convince people to jump over to another carrier. It's a losing situation.
I don't see it at all comparable to what happened in the US with minimum wage. I simply don't see it happening with our current laws.
[editline]13th December 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mattk50;52972620]Discounted data caps per-option violates net neutrality. Why do you think it doesnt?[/QUOTE]
[URL=http://berec.europa.eu/eng/netneutrality/zero_rating/]Because I recognize, just like the EU, that zero-rating apps and packages can help consumers instead of being predatorial.[/URL] Net neutrality laws exist solely so that the consumer isn't harmed, and that's not at all what Portugal's situation is - if anything, some companies are affected by not being "the chosen" and are therefore put at a disadvantage, but the process through those apps are selected seems clear and transparent enough from where I'm standing. We need to be on the lookout if shady stuff starts happening, for sure, but right now nothing's really gone wild.
I'm currently on a package that zero-rates most of the apps I use, and that's the main reason I jumped from my previous carrier to my current carrier, since in all truth they all basically offer the exact same service.
There's a LOT of nuance people here aren't acknowledging, and a lot of hardline comments which ignore what the market really is, but that's alright and expected. Portugal never comes up on the news positively :P
Hit me up if I can clear out anything for you, I'll do so at the best of my ability.
I can't tell you how many times someone Pro-Repeal has told me "NET NEUTRALITY IS BAD FOR CAPITALISM! IT PREVENTS GROWTH" and failed to tell my why or how
[QUOTE=PacificV2;52973188]But there isn't enough bandwidth to go around? This is a mobile service, the towers have maximum bandwidth limits and have to deal with congestion. Data caps help to ensure that towers can serve every customer without being overloaded. If this was on a landline service, sure, bandwidth and congestion is so less of a problem there that pulling caps would be nothing else except evil, but right now I see a whole different situation from where I'm standing.[/QUOTE]
Bandwidth and congestion have little to do with data caps. I understand that they do help limit the heavier users, but if that was their purpose then why would anything apart from constant HD streaming or big downloads need to be capped? Facebook and Twitter browsing has no right to be on a zero-rate plan just to alleviate congestion. Providers can even implement better ways to handle congestion per-tower, but data caps are way easier, and way more profitable.
My point is, if you even have the option to pay extra for unlimited Facebook, then the base cap is far far too low. The only reason for having it that low is to milk as much from customers as possible with these "consumer-friendly packages".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
