Slashdot Mirror

Citations:

https://support.t-mobile.com/d...

Some T-Mobile data features have a 'threshold' on the amount of data you can use at full speed during a billing cycle. After you pass the threshold, you still have unlimited access to data, but the speed of data is reduced...If you have a plan that was available after March 24, 2013, data speed is reduced to (at most) 128 kbps when data usage exceeds the Data Speed Reduction Threshold for data features, Mobile Internet, and data-only plans.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
https://www.t-mobile.com/conte...

T-Mobile’s “optimization” consists entirely of throttling the video stream’s throughput down to 1.5Mbps.

The network limits the bandwidth available to detectable videos to a level currently at 1.5 Mbps and as a result, many video services will deliver videos at lower resolutions that will look good on mobile devices (DVD-quality, typically 480p or better) and that use less data.

I'm assuming all T-Mobile One video will be restricted to 480p because that's what it says on the fact sheet:

T-Mobile ONE includes unlimited video at standard definition—typically DVD quality (480p)—from any service.

And the fact sheet also says exactly what the $25 gets you:

Customers can get higher-definition video, up to 4k, for $25/month per line.

The logical conclusion is that the base T-Mobile One plan will throttle all video to 480p (in other words, 1.5Mbps), you can remove said throttle by paying an extra $25 per month, though your data will likely still be deprioritized when you hit the 26GB soft cap.

Citations:

https://support.t-mobile.com/d...

Some T-Mobile data features have a 'threshold' on the amount of data you can use at full speed during a billing cycle. After you pass the threshold, you still have unlimited access to data, but the speed of data is reduced...If you have a plan that was available after March 24, 2013, data speed is reduced to (at most) 128 kbps when data usage exceeds the Data Speed Reduction Threshold for data features, Mobile Internet, and data-only plans.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
https://www.t-mobile.com/conte...

T-Mobile’s “optimization” consists entirely of throttling the video stream’s throughput down to 1.5Mbps.

The network limits the bandwidth available to detectable videos to a level currently at 1.5 Mbps and as a result, many video services will deliver videos at lower resolutions that will look good on mobile devices (DVD-quality, typically 480p or better) and that use less data.

I'm assuming all T-Mobile One video will be restricted to 480p because that's what it says on the fact sheet:

T-Mobile ONE includes unlimited video at standard definition—typically DVD quality (480p)—from any service.

And the fact sheet also says exactly what the $25 gets you:

Customers can get higher-definition video, up to 4k, for $25/month per line.

The logical conclusion is that the base T-Mobile One plan will throttle all video to 480p (in other words, 1.5Mbps), you can remove said throttle by paying an extra $25 per month, though your data will likely still be deprioritized when you hit the 26GB soft cap.

T-Mobile has a $25/mo talk-and-text-only plan. They don't give two shits what kind of device you put the SIM in.

You don't need a plan, it sends you one SMS to activate the service (to confirm your number) but that's all..

Does the SMS have to go to the same device that is running WhatsApp? Or can I receive the SMS on my current flip phone, then buy a $110 Android phone from a prepaid carrier to use solely as the authentication key to start desktop WhatsApp, and key the confirmation code into the app? And even if so, Skype is still $110 cheaper.

In order to use whatsapp on the desktop, you need to have whatsapp running on your phone. You don't key in a code as it uses a qrl code instead to connect. However, if your phone isn't connected to whatsapp, neither is your computer.

A better alternative would be Google Hangouts, Viber or a number of other alternatives. http://alternativeto.net/software/skype/

If you can get your boss to use something like Jitsi, Tox or Linphone then you're good as all three are easy enough drop in replacements for skype and all are cross platform.

You don't need a plan, it sends you one SMS to activate the service (to confirm your number) but that's all..

Does the SMS have to go to the same device that is running WhatsApp? Or can I receive the SMS on my current flip phone, then buy a $110 Android phone from a prepaid carrier to use solely as the authentication key to start desktop WhatsApp, and key the confirmation code into the app? And even if so, Skype is still $110 cheaper.

https://www.att.com/maps/wirel...
https://www.t-mobile.com/cover...
https://vzwmap.verizonwireless...
https://coverage.sprint.com/IM...

What are you talking about? The only service with spotty coverage in PA is Sprint. Everyone else has coverage over most of the state, excepting the mountains in the north central portion of the state.

Show me an automated approval section, or alternatively a user-submitted list of services they would like on the unlimited channel, and you'll see me happily recede into the shadows.

You can find out how to request that a service be added to Binge-On here by clicking the link titled "Request a video streaming service to Binge On " and following the instructions in the resultant lightbox. I'll even save you the trouble of clicking; here's what it says:

Want to see your favorite video streaming service added to Binge On?

We want all of your favorite video streaming services to be included as a part of Binge On. If your go-to video streaming service isn’t part of the program yet, tweet us your favorite service @TMobile, along with the hashtag #BingeOn. If they meet our requirements, we’ll investigate the feasibility of adding them. No one pays to join and no money is exchanged. If you are a streaming service provider Click here, send us an email and we’ll get back to you to begin the process. For more information about technical criteria, Click here. T-Mobile will review all submissions to ensure identification of video stream and technical requirements, including optimization for mobile viewing. Only T-Mobile is committed to maximizing YOUR choice and providing access to as many great providers as possible.

It would appear that the list you are requesting is available by searching Twitter for the hashtag #BingeOn. Alternately, you can probably click the mailto: link provided and email them to request that list.

Just a quick browse through those search results reveals the following user requests: beIN Sports, Amazon Video (which is already participating), twitch.tv, Periscope, DiSH Network (interestingly, DirecTV participates), byutv, MSNBC, CNN, Watch ABC, and FOX NOW. That's 10, all requested in the past 10 days; the list, of course, goes on.

Show me an automated approval section, or alternatively a user-submitted list of services they would like on the unlimited channel, and you'll see me happily recede into the shadows.

You can find out how to request that a service be added to Binge-On here by clicking the link titled "Request a video streaming service to Binge On " and following the instructions in the resultant lightbox. I'll even save you the trouble of clicking; here's what it says:

Want to see your favorite video streaming service added to Binge On?

We want all of your favorite video streaming services to be included as a part of Binge On. If your go-to video streaming service isn’t part of the program yet, tweet us your favorite service @TMobile, along with the hashtag #BingeOn. If they meet our requirements, we’ll investigate the feasibility of adding them. No one pays to join and no money is exchanged. If you are a streaming service provider Click here, send us an email and we’ll get back to you to begin the process. For more information about technical criteria, Click here. T-Mobile will review all submissions to ensure identification of video stream and technical requirements, including optimization for mobile viewing. Only T-Mobile is committed to maximizing YOUR choice and providing access to as many great providers as possible.

It would appear that the list you are requesting is available by searching Twitter for the hashtag #BingeOn. Alternately, you can probably click the mailto: link provided and email them to request that list.

Just a quick browse through those search results reveals the following user requests: beIN Sports, Amazon Video (which is already participating), twitch.tv, Periscope, DiSH Network (interestingly, DirecTV participates), byutv, MSNBC, CNN, Watch ABC, and FOX NOW. That's 10, all requested in the past 10 days; the list, of course, goes on.

Show me an automated approval section, or alternatively a user-submitted list of services they would like on the unlimited channel, and you'll see me happily recede into the shadows.

You can find out how to request that a service be added to Binge-On here by clicking the link titled "Request a video streaming service to Binge On " and following the instructions in the resultant lightbox. I'll even save you the trouble of clicking; here's what it says:

Want to see your favorite video streaming service added to Binge On?

We want all of your favorite video streaming services to be included as a part of Binge On. If your go-to video streaming service isn’t part of the program yet, tweet us your favorite service @TMobile, along with the hashtag #BingeOn. If they meet our requirements, we’ll investigate the feasibility of adding them. No one pays to join and no money is exchanged. If you are a streaming service provider Click here, send us an email and we’ll get back to you to begin the process. For more information about technical criteria, Click here. T-Mobile will review all submissions to ensure identification of video stream and technical requirements, including optimization for mobile viewing. Only T-Mobile is committed to maximizing YOUR choice and providing access to as many great providers as possible.

It would appear that the list you are requesting is available by searching Twitter for the hashtag #BingeOn. Alternately, you can probably click the mailto: link provided and email them to request that list.

Just a quick browse through those search results reveals the following user requests: beIN Sports, Amazon Video (which is already participating), twitch.tv, Periscope, DiSH Network (interestingly, DirecTV participates), byutv, MSNBC, CNN, Watch ABC, and FOX NOW. That's 10, all requested in the past 10 days; the list, of course, goes on.

Oh My God, a PDF overview of a complicated technical system doesn't provide you immediately with enough information to be able to implement it. How could they DARE be so obtuse?

Okay then, link to the specific documentation! Show me where it's posted on the Internet! 'Cause I've looked for it, and found nothing.

The fact that that particular PDF overview doesn't explain in detail is not the problem; the problem is that there is nothing else provided.

Second, have you asked them if they have such a technical document?

Yes, I tried today. I called 1-800-tmobile, was put on hold for 15 minutes and was then told to send an email to bingeon@t-mobile.com. I did so, and got the following reply:

Video is the number one way people use wireless data and with Binge On we are setting video free! With Binge On, customers on eligible plans can stream video from some of the most popular streaming services without ever using their high-speed data! Our goal is to continue to add video streaming services over time from any compatible service.

 For a list of the current included services click http://t-mobile.com/bingeon

 This mailbox is not monitored by customer care. For account information please visit https://my.t-mobile.com/

 For additional questions or comments about our Binge On announcement, please reach out to TForce@T-Mobile.com.

 If you are a video streaming service provider looking to have your service added to Binge On our product team will follow up with you by email in the near future.

Binge On!

The Un-Carrier

This is an automated reply. Please do not respond directly to this e-mail message.

We'll see what happens next.

More to the point, though, do you really expect everyone on the Internet who serves video or audio to contact T-Mobile and ask? That's fucking stupid! T-mobile has neither the manpower nor the time to handle it manually for everyone like that; it's abundantly clear that they intend this to be for "some of the most popular streaming services" (that's a direct quote from the email above, by the way), leaving everything else as second-class.

Oh My God, a PDF overview of a complicated technical system doesn't provide you immediately with enough information to be able to implement it. How could they DARE be so obtuse?

Okay then, link to the specific documentation! Show me where it's posted on the Internet! 'Cause I've looked for it, and found nothing.

The fact that that particular PDF overview doesn't explain in detail is not the problem; the problem is that there is nothing else provided.

Second, have you asked them if they have such a technical document?

Yes, I tried today. I called 1-800-tmobile, was put on hold for 15 minutes and was then told to send an email to bingeon@t-mobile.com. I did so, and got the following reply:

Video is the number one way people use wireless data and with Binge On we are setting video free! With Binge On, customers on eligible plans can stream video from some of the most popular streaming services without ever using their high-speed data! Our goal is to continue to add video streaming services over time from any compatible service.

 For a list of the current included services click http://t-mobile.com/bingeon

 This mailbox is not monitored by customer care. For account information please visit https://my.t-mobile.com/

 For additional questions or comments about our Binge On announcement, please reach out to TForce@T-Mobile.com.

 If you are a video streaming service provider looking to have your service added to Binge On our product team will follow up with you by email in the near future.

Binge On!

The Un-Carrier

This is an automated reply. Please do not respond directly to this e-mail message.

We'll see what happens next.

More to the point, though, do you really expect everyone on the Internet who serves video or audio to contact T-Mobile and ask? That's fucking stupid! T-mobile has neither the manpower nor the time to handle it manually for everyone like that; it's abundantly clear that they intend this to be for "some of the most popular streaming services" (that's a direct quote from the email above, by the way), leaving everything else as second-class.

If T-Mobile is successful with this plan there is nothing to stop AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc from creating a similar service. AT&T and Verizon actually offer their own services

That's right. Were AT&T or Verizon to offer the same program as T-Mobile there would be nothing to stop them, because THEY TOO would not be violating net neutrality. It doesn't matter if they have their own services (I don't know what streaming video services AT&T or Verizon wireless provide, don't care, don't need to.) What matters is if they unfairly exclude content providers from their version of Binge On. If they provide a level playing field, there is equal opportunity for content providers to participate. But you cannot prove they would not have a level playing field, all you can do is fictionalize and demonize and make it up about a non-existing AT&T/Verizon program, just like you are making things up about Binge On and T-Mobile. OMG, a provider having to register with T-Mobile before T-Mobile will modify the streaming content for them is so, I mean, it's just, umm, a GOOD THING.

You have absolutely no interest in pondering what it means for a company to prefer specific web-services over others.

You still haven't comprehended that Binge On has nothing to do with web services, it's a video and audio streaming issue.

There is a very big restriction there. They have to apply.

Which isn't much of a restriction.

why have an application process involved at all?

BECAUSE THEY CANNOT SIMPLY ASSUME THAT A VIDEO SERVER WANTS TO PARTICIPATE IN BINGE ON, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A REQUEST TO BE PART OF THE PROGRAM. JFC, do you read nothing anyone says to you? Read the damn technical brief for goodness sake. Look at option 2 in particular. T-Mobile will OPTIMIZE YOUR VIDEO STREAM FOR YOU -- if you are a participating provider. How do they know if you are a participating provider WITHOUT YOU TELLING THEM YOU WANT TO BE? That's the "application" you keep whining about.

So NO, they cannot simply assume you as a content provider WANT to participate, so YOU HAVE TO TELL THEM. Is that really that hard to understand?

And NO, trying to force people who want to stream video while avoiding data limits to buy a "1Mbps unlimited" service is asinine, arrogant, and technically stupid. People do more than just stream videos with their phones, and forcing them into a pitiful slow data rate for ALL activities so they don't have to pay extra for video streaming is, as I said, arrogant, asinine, and technically moronic.

You have no argument against T-Mobile, and that's why you keep bringing up Comcast or Verizon or AT&T as proof why T-Mobile shouldn't be able to do what it is doing. You keep complaining how T-Mobile is prioritizing web sites when web traffic is not the issue. You keep claiming that T-Mobile is excluding content providers without a shred of evidence to back that up. The truth is, T-Mobile is NOT violating net neutrality with Binge On no matter what other vendors are doing, and hammering on them for their evil wrongdoings here is just trolling.

but I doubt T-Mobile's business partnerships department has the time to talk to me (or the millions upon millions of other non-commercial operators).

That you think there are millions upon millions of content providers who would want to qualify for Binge On shows how far out in left field you really are. And the fact that you are basing your rant against T-Mobile on "I doubt that" instead of "they won't let me" shows a lot, too.

If you go look at the requirements, you'll see:

As with the Music Freedom offering that came before it, T-Mobile wants to encourage as many content providers as possible to participate. In any event, there is no charge regardless of your choice.

No charge to the provider. All you have to do is coordinate your service with T-Mobile. Your customer gets cheaper service, you get a happier customer, and T-Mobile is able to better manage the limited 4G data service they provide. They also get to advertise you as a Binge On content provider. Win-win-win.

If you want to be a dick and screw your customer by first refusing to participate, and then trying to demand that he has to pay for every byte he gets, then why should he be your customer in the first place?

It appears from option 3 here that the content provider still could provide a https or otherwise encrypted feed and still qualify for the zero rating. T-mobile has to be able to detect the video feed, so perhaps such content needs to be served from a particular host, ip, port, etc. But it doesn't appear that they have to have visibility into the actual content.

But I was under the impression that any provider could opt in or out of the program once they met the technical criteria for the reduced bitrate streams.

First of all, that "technical criteria" is way too vague to be useful in actually implementing a Binge-On-compliant service. Second, it still requires that the content provider in question "partner" (i.e., create a business agreement) with T-Mobile. What they need is a specific set of technical requirements such that anyone running a web server can configure it in a certain way and the content will automatically qualify for the program, with no business agreement required.

They don't advertise it, but I believe there is a porn site that is part of Binge On

If you go to the Binge On page and click on the link "See list of all streaming services", scroll to the bottom of the pop up box and say you're over 18, they say that MiKandi and
Streamate. So they aren't advertising it, but they do mention it.

T-Mobile's Binge on does offer free streaming (both radio and tv) for qualified rate plans. But I was under the impression that any provider could opt in or out of the program once they met the technical criteria for the reduced bitrate streams. It saves the provider bandwidth to get the stream to T-mobile, and it saves t-mobile bandwidth to get it to the customer. There's no denying any service access to T-Mobile's customers, requiring bribe money to T-Mobile in order to be included in the service, nor prioritizing any service over another as far as I can tell (but could be wrong).

Is this any different really than Netflix's Open Connect for instance? It seems to be an advantage for everyone without being a detriment to anyone.

http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phones/lg-g5.html/

A little bit of Googling could have prevented you from publicly revealing you are a moron.

https://support.t-mobile.com/d...

Sure, the phone carrier will recompress the streams to whatever the local tower can handle.

In Binge On, the carrier doesn't necessarily "recompress". When the user requests video from a participating provider, T-Mobile applies a QoS throttle on the order of 1.5 Mbps, as described in its white paper. The video provider detects low throughput and switches to an appropriate stream. This bitrate is sufficient for standard-definition (360p or 480p), as shown by TXD2005 and TXD2009 encoding standards that specify close to 1 Mbps for a 90 minute movie on one CD.

I somewhat understand it is "nice" for you because you are a part of the situation.

Then you understand incorrectly; I have unlimited LTE data on two devices and uncapped internet at home. Zero-rating provides literally zero benefit to me.

You said that just telling the provider what you prefer to use, then the provider will lower the cost for you.

No, I said (and specifically relating to T-Mobile, as jbmartin6 had mentioned) to contact the streaming provider you prefer to use and pressure them to participate in T-Mobile's (free and open to any provider who wishes to sign up) Music Freedom program. Currently, there are 40 providers participating, not including personal servers registered by individual users, which are not listed there. Pandora is onle one of those services.

I didn't read the rest of that paragraph, as it is entirely based on a misunderstanding of what I wrote. Go back, re-read what I write, and try again.

You seem to argue based on your current satisfaction.

On the contrary; I'm arguing based on what I feel is fair to others as, as notes above, I have unlimited data, so this does not affect me. You, on the other hand, appear to be arguing based on ignorance and inability to understand the posts you are replying to. For example:

we SHOULD NOT allow things that can be abused

So: water (can be used to drown someone), air (can be used to propel projectiles at high velocities), wood planks (can be used as a weapon), democracy (as we've seen, can certainly be abused)... these are all things you say we should not allow?

Why would you allow them to happen if you already see or know that there can be a problems/abuses/issues in the future? Could you tell me why? A short-term satisfaction, and being screwed later?

How's my attachment to reality strike you as an argument? You know, anything can be abused, so, rather than banning things with legitimate uses, why not ban the illegitimate uses and things without legitimate uses instead? Otherwise, well... we'd be banning literally everything.

That's why prevention is preferred over looking for a solution especially when you already know what issues/problems would happen if allowed.

Give a company the chance to screw up before you punish them (and their customers). If, and only if, they screw up,: by all means, throw the book at them.Bar them from any future participation in whatever activity they were doing (in this case, zero-rating) and fine the living shit out of them. That is prevention; not just a fine, but completely barring them from participating if they screw it up. However, if they operate fairly (as T-Mobile currently does), it does nobody any good to stop them. And I'll point to water again: we know people can drown in it; yet banning it would be far worse for society than allowing it.

I wonder what's the cost for content providers to join Binge On? Unless it's onerous, I really can't see the censorship part of it.

Your choice of terminology reveals that you don't understand the issue:

That's perhaps true, however I'm comfortable being on the side of the argument that is not likening Binge On to "censorship".

Also, I should state that I'm really quite ambivalent about Binge On, and as a non-American, it has absolutely no impact on me.

in reality, there is no such thing as a "content provider" as a separate and distinct class on the Internet.

Ok, I can somewhat agree with that - I host "content" on my home PC httpd, so it is true that everyone is or can be, to some degree, a "provider".

T-Mobile should not be making a distinction between Netflix and the proverbial Icecast server in some random guy's basement!

Again, how is Icecast guy being negatively affected by Binge On?

With users being able to gorge themselves on "data-cap free" videos, isn't it also possible that Icecast Guy can have more potential listeners due to people being able to consume more content without overage fees?

In principle, all users are content providers.

And even though Binge On is apparently free for the content provider, it's still a problem because this pdf is the only thing I can easily find about how to join it, and although it's sorely lacking in detail, it's fairly clear that setting it up requires manual coordination with T-Mobile, which they obviously aren't going to be willing to do for anyone who isn't a fairly large company. Moreover, even if setting it up were as easy for the content provider as typing your domain name into a web form and clicking a "binge on me" button, that still would prove to be an unreasonable burden when every other ISP started doing the same thing and every random guy with an Icecast server had to spend huge quantities of time signing up with all the ISPs. Netflix can pay somebody to do that as a full-time job; normal people can't.

This makes me think of another issue: as a T-Mobile user, how do I enable Binge On zero-rating for video uploaded from my phone?

I can't speak to the implementation details, I have not read that pdf but trust you that it lacks details.

And should all ISPs start with a similar program, well, then the situation has changed and my opinion might change too.

As for uploading, why should they zero-rate uploading of data? Separate issue. Just because it's a free one-way ticket doesn't mean one is owed a free return trip.

The inability to do that violates the principle of net neutrality, too!

That I'm not sure about. As another commenter posted, this can be argued to be beneficial to T-Mobile's customers without setting up a fee structure for the ISP to charge both ends of the content-to-consumer link for access.

So I think it's probably a bit more of a grey area regarding Net Neutrality.

I wonder what's the cost for content providers to join Binge On? Unless it's onerous, I really can't see the censorship part of it.

Your choice of terminology reveals that you don't understand the issue: in reality, there is no such thing as a "content provider" as a separate and distinct class on the Internet. T-Mobile should not be making a distinction between Netflix and the proverbial Icecast server in some random guy's basement! In principle, all users are content providers.

And even though Binge On is apparently free for the content provider, it's still a problem because this pdf is the only thing I can easily find about how to join it, and although it's sorely lacking in detail, it's fairly clear that setting it up requires manual coordination with T-Mobile, which they obviously aren't going to be willing to do for anyone who isn't a fairly large company. Moreover, even if setting it up were as easy for the content provider as typing your domain name into a web form and clicking a "binge on me" button, that still would prove to be an unreasonable burden when every other ISP started doing the same thing and every random guy with an Icecast server had to spend huge quantities of time signing up with all the ISPs. Netflix can pay somebody to do that as a full-time job; normal people can't.

This makes me think of another issue: as a T-Mobile user, how do I enable Binge On zero-rating for video uploaded from my phone? The inability to do that violates the principle of net neutrality, too!

Isn't T-Mobile Binge On also doing the same thing - http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/...

Why are they allowed to do it?

A big part of the problem here is that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price, and when you do find someone that does, they often try to bog it down with fine print like this or just flat out cut you off if you use too much of your "unlimited" service.

http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-p...

For $95 a month T-mobile offers an unlimited high speed data. All of their other plans offer limited high speed data that slows down after you reach the limit.

If you have an unlimited plan and choose to use Binge-On they will give you two free movie rentals.

I don't get the complaint.

Binge On specifically says that certain providers don't count against your data cap at all, and others will be processed to use less data.

Quoted from http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/... :

Stream unlimited video FREE on your favorite streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, HBO, Sling, ESPN, Showtime, Starz and more without ever using your high-speed data.

  Plus, almost all other video streaming is optimized for mobile so you watch 3 times more video with your data plan.

So what's the headline here? 'Telco provides exactly the service they claim to provide'?

If they were downgrading video when Binge On was turned OFF, then THAT would be news.

That sounds plausible, but wouldn't that mean that T-Mobile would only provide unmetered access to services whose content was already hosted with T-Mobile to save on bandwidth? I assume that of all the content providers listed at http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/... not all of them have cached all of their content with T-Mobile. But if they're not caching their content with T-Mobile, then it costs T-Mobile the same to provide access to that content as it would to, say, a low-res version of Amazon Prime or Youtube.

I know your being somewhat sarcastic, but it technically should be possible.

Make sure you meet these requirements

And then email: Bingeon@t-mobile.com

All of this info is on this page (that isn't hidden) on their website.

I know your being somewhat sarcastic, but it technically should be possible.

Make sure you meet these requirements

And then email: Bingeon@t-mobile.com

All of this info is on this page (that isn't hidden) on their website.

I know your being somewhat sarcastic, but it technically should be possible.

Make sure you meet these requirements

And then email: Bingeon@t-mobile.com

All of this info is on this page (that isn't hidden) on their website.

There are no kickbacks or fees for providers to get on the list of approved requirements. Just some pretty straight-forward requirements around how to stream the data.

Mainly, you have to
1) Have a way to identify video and non-video data to t-mobile
2) Use a technology that will use variable bit-rates based on available bandwidth
3) Notify and work with t-mobile if you change the protocols to make sure the new protocols still meet the requirements before those changes go live.
4) only stream content you have the rights the stream

Otherwise, there is no cost to participate and everyone is welcome.

Source: http://www.t-mobile.com/conten...

Content providers are NOT subsidizing the bandwidth. T-Mobile will let any content provider participate, and they don't have to pay anything to get on the list of approved providers. The requirements are pretty straight forward:

1) You have to identify the data to T-Mobile as streaming video data.
2) You must use adaptive bitrate technology
3) If you make changes to your streaming methods you have to give T-Mobile a heads up before those changes go live to ensure you still meet the requirements.
4) You have to be able to tell T-Mobile when you are sending non-video content so they can count that against user data caps.
5) You can only stream content legally (proper licenses to content, etc.)
6) Don't violate their trademarks

You don't have to pay, and T-Mobile will work with you directly to ensure you can meet their requirements. Once you've been approved, you're all set. No other requirements and you don't have to pay them anything.

Source: http://www.t-mobile.com/conten...

That doesn't seem to be the case for Binge On, since T-Mo states their criterial in a public document:

http://www.t-mobile.com/conten...

In some ways, the way I read it is that T-Mo will effectively spend money (in terms of engineering resources/staffing) in working with a content provider to come up with a proper solution.

It sounds a lot like how some people have described our wired Internet infrastructure in large hubs works - frequently engineers from multiple providers would work together to come up with the optimal solution, sometimes with one provider loaning equipment to the provider connecting to them. At least - that's the way it worked until Verizon or Comcast started pulling their shenanigans. (There was a really good writeup 1-2 years ago shaming one of the providers that was trying to extort Netflix by intentionally not upgrading any link to one of Netflix's backbone providers, which would also punish anyone ELSE on the same provider. Verizon said it was too expensive, the backbone provider replied along the lines of, "bullshit, it requires $20k of equipment we're happy to provide ourselves that we have sitting on a shelf 10 feet away from where it needs to be, we just need permission to install it."

You can probably get your subsonic server through their process. They have five requirements, all reasonable:

1. Identifiable signatures as streaming video. This may preclude https.
2. Adaptive bitrate, so they can throttle/not the viewer transparently.
3. Advance warning of modifications to your system (that impact how the video streams) so they can ensure that it still meets criteria when it goes live.
4. Ability to ID non-video content
5. You having a lawful right to stream the video.

All in all, reasonable rules.

. Full rules

At least with their audio streaming counterpart, where they enroll specific services to not count against caps, there don't seem to have been any kickbacks or limits. They've been pretty good about bringing in a pretty wide list of services (they cite http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/... as their current list). I could certainly be wrong of course - but one other possibility is that, because T-mobile is in 4th place among the major providers, they're desperate to find anything to set them apart from Verizon/AT&T.

Put another way, because T-mobile is currently the upstart rather than one of the big incumbents, they're not in a strong position to try and play gatekeeper/tollkeeper the way Verizon/AT&T might. (Though if that changed, who knows - and this is why we need Net Neutrality regulations)

Why not post the actual requirements for content providers. http://www.t-mobile.com/conten...

I just did a web search for "unlimited data plan". Let's see what we find...

http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-p...
https://www.metropcs.com/cell-...
http://www.boostmobile.com/sho...
https://www.virginmobileusa.co...

Yep, every one of them describes the plan as "UNLIMITED" in big bold letters. Of course, it you search really carefully, you'll sometimes discover some tiny text at the bottom of the page explaining that "unlimited" doesn't actually mean unlimited at all. It's just what they call "false advertising".

T-Mobile offers this for data.

http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/...

And finally, as I originally said, most smartphones do have the ability to perform NAT,

That may be, I'm not arguing that.

and there is no valid technical reason to segregate phone and tethering traffic.

Tethering-enabled dumbphones.

I'll say it again, for the fourth time. Tethering-enabled dumb phones.

Android have the ability to segregate these two types of traffic, and again, it's not for a technical reason

Except that it is. Before Android supported NAT (and even now that it does as some, if not most, carriers use same network for all phones), it used the same method tethering-enabled dumb phones use. Oh and, for the 5th time, tethering-enabled dumb-phones. They still use the carrier-NATed APN.

but because Google pandered to carriers such as yours, which do not care at all about net neutrality

Oh, really? And they've thus far lived up to those words.

Yes, it was a real quote:
http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/i...
"I won't let a few thieves ruin things for anyone else."

And rightfully so. These people were NEVER SOLD unlimited tethering data. They WERE sold unlimited data for their phones, but not for tethering. They're bypassing tethering limits to get more data for themselves, which reduces the network for everyone else. It's not even victimless.

Here’s what’s happening: when customers buy our unlimited 4G LTE plan for their smartphones we include a fixed amount of LTE to be used for tethering (using the “Smartphone Mobile HotSpot” feature), at no extra cost, for the occasions when broadband may not be convenient or available. If customers hit that high-speed tethering limit, those tethering speeds slow down. If a customer needs more LTE tethering, they can add-on more. Simple.

However, these violators are going out of their way with all kinds of workarounds to steal more LTE tethered data.

Like I said in an earlier post: Since the customer was never sold unlimited tethered data, I don't see what the problem is? It's like going to an all you can eat restaurant and complaining that you can't take your leftovers home.

You realize that these are people are sold unlimited data for their phone itself, with metered tethering. The complaint is that they're bypassing the tethering limit, not that they're using unlimited data for the phone itself. Nowhere did T-Mobile ever sell them unlimited tethered data.

From the open letter itself:
http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/i...

Here’s what’s happening: when customers buy our unlimited 4G LTE plan for their smartphones we include a fixed amount of LTE to be used for tethering (using the “Smartphone Mobile HotSpot” feature), at no extra cost, for the occasions when broadband may not be convenient or available. If customers hit that high-speed tethering limit, those tethering speeds slow down. If a customer needs more LTE tethering, they can add-on more. Simple.

However, these violators are going out of their way with all kinds of workarounds to steal more LTE tethered data.

Since the customer was never sold unlimited tethered data, I don't see what the problem is? It's like going to an all you can eat restaurant and complaining that you can't take your leftovers home.

Hello fellow Gainesville T-Mobile customer! The home I moved into about 2 years ago had poor reception, but I was able to get a free repeater from T-Mobile. Just call 611 and ask about it.

This will help if you're able to get a consistent signal at least one bar somewhere in the residence. Of course your luck may be different getting a free repeater since it's at your girlfriend's apartment.

The building I work in has very thick walls so I'm in the same boat as you there, but I just rely on Google Voice over WiFi to get me through that.

What are you talking about? TMobile is the best at it- I get free unlimited data in Europe for fucks sake. Unlimited roaming data in over 120 countries. ANd I've used it in Spain and South Korea. Only place I wasn't given free data was Gibraltar.

http://www.t-mobile.com/option...

Sure, you can download as much as you want as long as you don't mind doing it at 10Kb/s after your data cap.

http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/n...

" itâ(TM)s also completely free for music streaming providers. No backroom deals. No paid prioritization. Just you and your music â' unleashed. "

I can only assume that T-mobile demanded that the FM radio be disabled, in order to get people to use up all their data listening to streaming music.

That must be it! Especially considering T-mobile doesn't count music streaming services as part of your data allotment.

http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/...

On a second thought, that reasoning makes no sense at all.....

T-Mobile offers music streaming without it impacting your data usage, "from your favorite music services like Pandora, iHeartRadio, iTunes Radio, Rhapsody, and more."

https://t-mobile.com/offer/fre...

So the profit incentive is not based on data usage, but in using music services (I'm assuming there's a kick back at some point from the service providers, otherwise the business model makes no sense).

TMobile provides free streaming to websites such as Pandora without counting that data as part of your data plan (see. This is being done for almost a year and no one is protesting.

Telecom is hugely profitable, mobile telecom even more so.

Could you provide some data to support that statement? Not that I think the roaming charges are reasonable (since they are completely disconnected from actual costs for the operators), but that would just mean that domestic charges should go up and international/roaming rates should go down.

Look for example at the Vodafone annual report (big PDF), income statement on page 96. On 38 bn UK pounds annual revenue, the made 5 bn loss (before taxes, not including the profitable sale of their stake in Verizon).

Or the T-mobile US numbers on 2014 (full year). Page 6: US$ 14 bn revenue; net income US$ 0.25 bn. That does not look like a hugely profitable business to me. Or the balance sheet on page 5: US$ 57 bn assets, and only US$ 16 bn of stockholder's equity; a ratio of 3.6:1, which I'd consider pretty large for a company that is not making a large profit and that has to deal with rapidly depreciating infrastructure.

Here's Verizon 2014 full year: US$ 127 bn revenue, US$ 12 bn net income. That looks more healthy. But look at the balance sheet: US$ 232 bn assets, and just US$ 14bn in equity (16:1 ratio). I would be very hesitant to invest in a company with such a balance sheet. To my surprise, the stock market thinks differently with a P/E of 21.

I'm not a finance expert, so if I misinterpret the numbers, please correct me.

I read it on an T-Mobile article while I researching this. It may have not been the same article I posted a link to.

Here is the current list:
http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/...

At the bottom:
Tell us how you like to jam.
If your go-to music streaming service isn’t part of the program, tweet us your favorite service @TMobile, along with the hashtag #MusicFreedom.

So maybe?