Verizon sends service termination warning to a FiOS user that used ~7 TB of data for several consecu - Polidicks

50gb per day is much less than 7TB a month

[QUOTE=Brt5470;47629527]Maybe they run a offsite backup service and do video work? I run offsite backups with a cloud provider and I push about 50GB per day on it.[/QUOTE] If you were pushing 225GB (7000/31) per [B]day[/B] because you're doing video work, I'm pretty sure you should be on a business connection.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;47629416]I want to take a second to emphasize this statement right here. Verizon has actuarial tables of what an average consumer actually is. They know how much and how little Joe Q. Public will use his internet on a daily, monthly, and yearly basis. They can even extrapolate out for a few levels of outliers from Joe Q. Public. This guy was far and away exceeding any "reasonable" or "average" use. Even if he is not engaged in some illegal enterprise, he's using his internet in a way that is abusive of the terms offered. "Well the plain wording is unlimited so it must be unlimited!" That's the same type of obnoxious logic that permits people to carry briefcases in to All-You-Can-Eat buffets and stuff them full of rolls and salads, because [I]hey, the sign says all I can eat, not when I can eat it.[/I] The wording of the contract is what is pertinent to this case, not the fancy "on the tin" wording. Even the most straight laced company has been using stretchers and pigshine for decades to sell their product, and they've also been smacking down so-called clever people who think that by being whacky and super literal they can abuse the company's advertising for personal gain. It sounds "nice" to put it in terms of "Oh, he's only using 2% of his total potential maximum!" but even that's ridiculous. That's stoner logic of the extent, "Hey man, your body only takes up .05% of Earth, why don't you move somewhere else and let me have your house? There's lots of space out there man, don't be so attached to this neighborhood." It ignores the subtleties and nuances of fact that most average people consent to in arranging the world, in favor of some absurdist self-interest scheme.[/QUOTE] I find the comparison to all you can eat buffets flawed. The buffet isn't making available several different "speeds" of all you can eat, they are selling one tier. Let's say you were looking to rent a vehicle for 30 days to haul rocks. There's a four door car, a pickup, and a dump-truck available. If you picked the dump truck then, after carrying a full load were told "hey, that's excessive, most of our customers only toss a few rocks in, you're putting too much wear on the vehicle" wouldn't you be surprised? What is the point of them offering the dump-truck if you can't actually use it to its full potential? The "average" customer isn't going to be paying hundreds of dollars a month for super high speed internet, or at the very least they shouldn't be. Again, it just seems like a scam to get more money out of people who won't actually utilize those speeds. I mean, I would agree if this was your standard high-speed internet, but it isn't, it's $315 a month internet; Verzion should have expect people who are shelling out that much money to use a lot more than the average person who checks their email once a day or whatever.

$315/month doesn't give you the right to represent full percentage points of your city's collective residential bandwidth usage. If he was paying significantly into four figures a month we'd be having a different conversation. Why should Verizon a) expect, and b) accomodate someone who wants to use [B]7,000GB/month[/B] repeatedly on residential service and won't upgrade to a business package that's more suited to their needs?

[QUOTE=Brt5470;47629527]Maybe they run a offsite backup service and do video work? I run offsite backups with a cloud provider and I push about 50GB per day on it.[/QUOTE] I know people who do video work who routinely move over 500GB in a single day over their connection (combined up and down). Obviously not sustained, but there are plenty of legitimate reasons for using that much bandwidth. They are on business connections though because it's the only way to get enough upload (in their area at least). Then there's people living in apartments. 8 people sharing a connection can EASILY hit 10TB a month if they all are heavy streamers.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;47628126]sidenote: it is physically impossible to build an isp that can sustain every single client using 100% bandwidth 24/7 his usage was probably abnormally higher than his neighbors, and it was starting to effect their service[/QUOTE] then don't lie and market the service as unlimited and uncapped? if he was using it up 95% the whole while you could have a point but if he uses 4% and gets told off then fucking lol, that's indefensible and it's his fucking business what he does with his data volume if he pays over $300 for it

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47629656]$315/month doesn't give you the right to represent full percentage points of your city's collective residential bandwidth usage. If he was paying significantly into four figures a month we'd be having a different conversation. Why should Verizon a) expect, and b) accomodate someone who wants to use [B]7,000GB/month[/B] repeatedly on residential service and won't upgrade to a business package that's more suited to their needs?[/QUOTE] Verizon, in their communication, they said the user should consider switching to a business connection; that's $365 a month ([url]http://www.verizon.com/smallbusiness/fiosInternetOverview.jsp?smbReferenceValue=SMBFIOSInternetQuantumRef[/url]), no where close to four figures. Though, to be fair, their website lists residential as $285, not $315 ( [url]http://www.verizon.com/home/fios-fastest-internet/[/url] ).

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47629656]$315/month doesn't give you the right to represent full percentage points of your city's collective residential bandwidth usage. If he was paying significantly into four figures a month we'd be having a different conversation. Why should Verizon a) expect, and b) accomodate someone who wants to use [B]7,000GB/month[/B] repeatedly on residential service and won't upgrade to a business package that's more suited to their needs?[/QUOTE] But if Verizon cannot handle the city's collective residential bandwidth, should they be able to oversell the bandwidth that much? If their load cannot be handled by their equipment, they need to upgrade their equipment. Obscene user use or not.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47629656]$315/month doesn't give you the right to represent full percentage points of your city's collective residential bandwidth usage. If he was paying significantly into four figures a month we'd be having a different conversation. Why should Verizon a) expect, and b) accomodate someone who wants to use [B]7,000GB/month[/B] repeatedly on residential service and won't upgrade to a business package that's more suited to their needs?[/QUOTE] if your uncapped 500mb/s connection doesn't provide uncapped 500mb/s then it's not uncapped 500mb/s and they are selling a false promise, what's so fucking hard to understand here? [editline]30th April 2015[/editline] if they mentioned it's 500mb/s capped at 5TB a month and all would be dandy, but uncapped means uncapped and if they fail to advertise the service as that, they are fucking lying, there's no two ways around it

Plus nowhere in the letter from Verizon did it cite any reason in the TOS aside from usage. Maybe if they had given a better reason I'd support Verizon more.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;47629869]Verizon, in their communication, they said the user should consider switching to a business connection; that's $365 a month ([url]http://www.verizon.com/smallbusiness/fiosInternetOverview.jsp?smbReferenceValue=SMBFIOSInternetQuantumRef[/url]), no where close to four figures. Though, to be fair, their website lists residential as $285, not $315 ( [url]http://www.verizon.com/home/fios-fastest-internet/[/url] ).[/QUOTE] You're kind of missing my point. You're saying, "Verizon should've expected this guy to swamp his bandwidth, he's paying $315/month for it". As if that's any excuse. If he was paying 10x that amount, I'd argue that he can do what he damn well pleases with his fiber connection. But he's not, and he's paying for a consumer home plan, whether or not it's the most expensive consumer plan available. Verizon wants to move him to a business package, which is not substantially more expensive than what he's paying now, and that should make both sides happy (aside from our friend's bill getting jacked up by $50-100 by moving to the business package). That is different from a "fuck you, I'm paying a lot, I do what I want" scenario where Verizon should suck it up. I was not referring to the business service plans as costing four figures, I was referring to paying so much money you have the ability to make the service provider bend for you instead of you bending over and grabbing your ankles (which is the typical ISP consumer experience in the US).

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47629656]$315/month doesn't give you the right to represent full percentage points of your city's collective residential bandwidth usage. If he was paying significantly into four figures a month we'd be having a different conversation. Why should Verizon a) expect, and b) accomodate someone who wants to use [B]7,000GB/month[/B] repeatedly on residential service and won't upgrade to a business package that's more suited to their needs?[/QUOTE] Also, I can't edit my post because Cloudflare, but that's one really small city if 7TB is several percentage points of residential bandwidth usage. After all, 7TB is only about 117 copies of GTA V. So, if 11,584 other people only downloaded one copy of GTA V over the course of a month, that 7TB of usage from this one person would be less than 1% of overall residential usage. [editline]30th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47629924]You're kind of missing my point. You're saying, "Verizon should've expected this guy to swamp his bandwidth, he's paying $315/month for it". As if that's any excuse. If he was paying 10x that amount, I'd argue that he can do what he damn well pleases with his fiber connection. But he's not, and he's paying for a consumer home plan, whether or not it's the most expensive consumer plan available. Verizon wants to move him to a business package, which is not substantially more expensive than what he's paying now, and that should make both sides happy (aside from our friend's bill getting jacked up by $50-100 by moving to the business package). That is different from a "fuck you, I'm paying a lot, I do what I want" scenario where Verizon should suck it up. I was not referring to the business service plans as costing four figures, I was referring to paying so much money you have the ability to make the service provider bend for you instead of you bending over and grabbing your ankles (which is the typical ISP consumer experience in the US).[/QUOTE] My point is they are offering this really expensive, super high speed connection to residential users only to turn around and claim usage is "excessive" whenever someone actually makes any use of that speed. If I were to max out my connection for 30 days I could download ~780 GB and my ISP might rightfully call that excessive; with a 500 MB connection, that same amount would take about 45 minutes to download and that could easily be considered an inconsequential amount of data. From my point of view, they just want more money (shocking) and they are using their vague "excessive usage" clause, which they refuse to provide an actual value for, to legally justify ending this person's contract do it because (presumably) this person isn't violating anything else in their terms of service. [editline]30th April 2015[/editline] To be more clear, I simply think Verzion shouldn't be offering 500 MB speeds under the "residential" banner if reasonable usage of that speed is considered "excessive" because, to me, it seems like a way to make more money from the people who don't know any better and won't actually make use of those speeds.

This is what happens when you have a monopoly. If it happened to me i would just switch provider. I could probably keep switching every month for 2 years, before i run out of providers to choose from.

Guys, I know Verizon is pretty damn evil but they most likely aren't the ones you should be giving the stink-eye right now.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;47628311]my rock collection was perfectly enough to provide unlimited rocks at 10 dollars a month for every user but once someone(and here's the important bit, [B]1 [/B]person, not everyone) tries paying that same 10 dollars and getting a whole lot more rocks, it isn't sustainable without changing something[/QUOTE] Do you not understand that unlimited in this case would mean infinite? As in not finite.

back in the bad old days of shitty uk adsl the isp i was with pulled some similar shit and terminated my and quite a few other "unlimited" users service, you shouldnt advertise a service as unlimited if you cant back it up, FUP/AUP or not theres always going to be someone who uses more than deemed acceptable and you just look bad if you start kicking them off. ISP's in the UK learnt this years ago and most are budget capped services because your average user uses fuck all data. i found an article about the isp that terminated my service, its pretty laughable now i probably stream more than what they were complaining about per month to my tablet [url]http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/1964-plusnet-takes-action-over-heaviest-users.html[/url]

[QUOTE=FunnyStarRunner;47628034]What could you possibly being doing that requires 7TB of data a month.[/QUOTE] Download porn. ALL the porn. Some people have multiple fetishes, he has all of them.

[QUOTE=Levelog;47628306]IIRC the cost of data is $.003/gb in a worst-case scenario for an ISP. That's $21 a month. He's paying far far more than that.[/QUOTE] The typical cost for transit is about $3-10/TB when you work it out from the 95th mbps equivalent - though its worth keeping in mind that the ISP may also have free peering agreements, though those are less common in the USA than in Europe.

My server's monthly transfer amount is like 3 - 4 TB Good thing that there's no verizon in poland :v:

I see no reason Verizon couldn't just add a reasonable cap in their plan info. Issues like these would not arise and people could choose plans accordingly. If it says unlimited 500mbps it should actually be unlimited. If it says 5tb/month 500mbps then everything would be fine, this guy would have gotten the business plan in the first place and this would have never happened.

If they call it unlimited it should be unlimited. Any sort of "fair use clause" should prohibit ISPs from being allowed to call it unlimited, because it isn't. It's not like someone using this much data is going to harm the network. There likely aren't even enough internet users in each neighbourhood that know [i]how[/i] to use that much data.

I'm still waiting to see [I]what[/I] exactly he is doing to push 7TB a month before I pass judgement on this.

[QUOTE=Lv100Garchomp;47633124]I'm still waiting to see [I]what[/I] exactly he is doing to push 7TB a month before I pass judgement on this.[/QUOTE] This is rather irrelevant since they're threatening him purely due to data usage, not what kind of data that is.

[QUOTE=Lv100Garchomp;47633124]I'm still waiting to see [I]what[/I] exactly he is doing to push 7TB a month before I pass judgement on this.[/QUOTE] With a connection that fast you could probably manage it with a lot of HD/4K video streaming, nightly offsite backups, etc.

So Verizon is selling the full speed of whatever regional router he is hooked up to instead of dividing the speed by the total number of users and you guys are saying that's perfectly fine?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;47632658]It's not like someone using this much data is going to harm the network. There likely aren't even enough internet users in each neighbourhood that know [i]how[/i] to use that much data.[/QUOTE] Obviously there are because Verizon's putting the clamps on him and telling him his usage needs to calm down (or he can move to a business plan that's better suited for his bandwidth requirements). [QUOTE=itisjuly;47633149]This is rather irrelevant since they're threatening him purely due to data usage, not what kind of data that is.[/QUOTE] It's rather relevant, because if he was using up 7TB because he was hosting his own web server, that's against the TOS. If it was rampant piracy, it's against the TOS. If he was sharing his connection with others, that's against the TOS. As far as the actual contents of a data packet, the "what" is less important than the "why"--if he's streaming a movie off Netflix, nobody cares, but if he's streaming movies from his huge NAS full of DVD rips to others, that's arguably piracy and definitely a TOS violation. We don't know what he's doing, but he lied very badly about it so he obviously doesn't want Verizon to know, either. [QUOTE=Zeke129;47633219]With a connection that fast you could probably manage it with a lot of HD/4K video streaming, nightly offsite backups, etc.[/QUOTE] What kind of setup are you running at home if you are pushing >150GB nightly backups, and why aren't you on a non-consumer plan if your needs are that unusual? This guy was using an average of 225GB per DAY. [URL="https://bgr.com/2013/09/26/netflix-4k-streaming/"]4K streaming needs about 15Mb/s according to Netflix.[/URL] If he was pulling a 4K stream at 15Mb/s, that's still only 162GB/day, and that's constant, uninterrupted streaming around the clock. It's not impossible for someone to use this much bandwidth, but I'm really having a hard time coming up with enough bandwidth-intensive things that he could be doing that aren't TOS violations of some kind or another.

If he violates the TOS that's why they should be putting an end to his connection. The fact he uses that much data on unlimited is not relevant because the company is lying by putting a cap on it. If they can prove with out a doubt that he violated the TOS only then his connection should be cut. Company's need less power people.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;47628311]my rock collection was perfectly enough to provide unlimited rocks at 10 dollars a month for every user but once someone(and here's the important bit, [B]1 [/B]person, not everyone) tries paying that same 10 dollars and getting a whole lot more rocks, it isn't sustainable without changing something[/QUOTE] that is obviously not the case if one person can disrupt your "unlimited" system. your analogy is probably the worst analogy I've read in 2015.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47633459]Obviously there are because Verizon's putting the clamps on him and telling him his usage needs to calm down (or he can move to a business plan that's better suited for his bandwidth requirements).[/quote] Does this business plan run on a different network? Otherwise no, it wouldn't be harming the network if they are suggesting he just switch packages... [QUOTE=Bruhmis;47633720] I don't think it's reasonable to expect verizon to spend upwards of $30,000 to accommodate this guy, nor do I think it's reasonable for them to tell everyone else in the area to fuck off and deal with slow internet because some cunt is downloading the complete series of seinfeld 400 times a day.[/QUOTE] I think it is fully reasonable to expect Verizon (whos expenses to income is around 10%) to accommodate any spending required to fulfill a contract with a customer. I also don't think he is harming the network as much as you think if switching to a business plan (which runs on same network) is all that is required for him to continue using his service as it was advertised.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;47629860]then don't lie and market the service as unlimited and uncapped? if he was using it up 95% the whole while you could have a point but if he uses 4% and gets told off then fucking lol, that's indefensible and it's his fucking business what he does with his data volume if he pays over $300 for it[/QUOTE] it probably has nothing to do with a data cap, it's probably more to do with the amount of bandwidth he's constantly using at any given time and the amount of saturation it's causing for the surrounding area. my neighbourhood has this problem, it's so over saturated by netflix people that my 100 MB/s speed drops below 10 mb/s every single day from 7 pm to 10 pm. my isp has to build a new node here to split the traffic and that's probably what verizon would have to do in this situation, except they'd be building a new node entirely for one person because their usage is so excessive that most people would be hard pressed to even use that much on purpose. I don't think it's reasonable to expect verizon to spend upwards of $30,000 to accommodate this guy, nor do I think it's reasonable for them to tell everyone else in the area to fuck off and deal with slow internet because some cunt is downloading the complete series of seinfeld 400 times a day.