Slashdot Mirror
EFF: T-Mobile "Binge On" Is Just Throttling of All Data (eff.org)
onedobb writes: Tests confirm that when Binge On is enabled, T-Mobile throttles all HTML5 video streams to around 1.5Mps, even when the phone is capable of downloading at higher speeds, and regardless of whether or not the video provider enrolled in Binge On. This is the case whether the video is being streamed or being downloaded—which means that T-Mobile is artificially reducing the download speeds of customers with Binge On enabled, even if they're downloading the video to watch later. It also means that videos are being throttled even if they're being watched or downloaded to another device via a tethered connection.
Waah. I want unlimited data for FREE!!!
Want! WANT!!! WANT!!!!!
I don't manage carrier networks for a living, but if it's customary for mobile networks to throttle any sort of unlimited usage of their network, there clearly is something behind that. Everyone craps on AT&T for throttling unlimited data customers, but now it appears that TMobile engages in a similar practice with their unlimited video service. Something is happening behind the scenes at these networks on the technical side that's causing them to do this. Can we once and for all stop bitching about throttling?
It's obvious to me that they throttle tethers too, as it's listed as a perk for unlimited data users as to why they may want to Binge On (doesn't count against tethered data use, I can hotspot to my chromecast and drop cable).
As for throttling all video, even if it's being charged, that's quite shady IMO.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
If I lived in the US and had this company as my provider, I'd spend the few dollars a month to get a VPN to bypass the slowing down..
Not sure if that is possible for the Apple crowd though.
I just assume the other providers are either already doing the same thing or asking R & D to get on it.
"Whaa-aat? We can throttle the data?!
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
After media industry and Apple (media industry's idol, in case you didn't notice), everyone is jumping head-on into this business model.
The fine art is in convincing your gullible (would-be) customers that it is "good for ya". Only Apple has really managed that (if you discount these firms selling really expensive stuff to really rich people: those have been doing that for æons: DeBeer's anyone?). And of course those selling powdered rhino horns for potency and stuff like that.
T-Mobile seems to be failing at that. Why?
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/... :
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.
I seem to remember that a certain frequent contributor was venting his spleen about this just the other day, but, hey, I guess validation from the EFF is something, right?
T-Mobile uses Content-Type to detect Music.
T-Mobile uses filenames to detect Ookla Speedtest.
TFA says neither filename nor Content-Type is used to detect Video.
If not by header inspection, then how deep does the deep packet inspection go?
Thankfully TFA does mention hash tests confirm content is not modified.
Just let TMO explain that they're optimizing shareholder value. I think that's the expression.
Fiat Lux.
The total data rate for all customers combined is limited. This means that throttling the rate for some users will make it faster for everyone else.
It is better for everyone else if video download speed is limited to what is making sense. Let's just hope that they introduced transfer speed control to make sure that everyone gets enough data to watch the videos. People not getting more than they need is just added since it comes for free and helps others.
Nah. I don't either.
You're getting free downloads, and you are upset that they are slow? Turn it off, get them fast and use up your data allotment.
"....reducing the download speeds of customers with Binge On enabled, even if they're downloading the video to watch later."
What? That's outrageous! As everyone knows, downloading and streaming use completely different kinds of bandwidth! ...wait.
I work in marketing and advertising by turns these days (seems like every career trajectory eventually ends up somewhere in this playground, whether near top or bottom of the food chain), so I have to admit guilt here as well.
There is a tendency to operate with the goal of eliminating negative and limiting language because, surprise surprise, positive language tests out well in actual conversion numbers. But there is unquestionably an element of half-truth in it.
"slowed down and degraded to reduce data use" becomes "optimized for mobile"
"we've raised our prices" becomes "we've changed our plans to offer the best possible value to our customers"
"we've removed a bunch of features that raised costs for us" becomes "we've streamlined our service for ease of use"
"we've slashed our support staff" becomes "we're enabling you to find answers more quickly with our self-help area"
"we've eliminated our warranty" becomes "our product is so reliable that it's made warranties obsolete"
and so on.
It's not the actual policy that's the problem. It's that language is Orwellian. Bad becomes good. "Optimization" is supposed to be a good thing. But in this case, the customer's presumption that "optimized" equals "good for me" is actually not true; the word is being used in opposition to its conventional connotation.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
We really REALLY need to enact some laws against false advertising.
... And it costs me nothing to stream it to my phone. I don't care how they do it. It works great.
Move on to the next 'outrage'.
I typically rack up about 50GB/month on t-mo. I opted out of binge so I get full hd across the board.
I get unlimited data, a flagship phone, insurance, 5 GB hotspot, upgrade every 6 months to a new phone for $50 and after taxes and fees my bill is like $87 bucks a month.
If do I think it should be opt in or out via a text message or something and t-mo could do better here but ultimately for people on a strict budget this is probably a win for them. For those who it's not, it's a mild nuisance to go log onto the website and opt out. Also, you can opt in and out as much as you want so you could binge watch Making a Murderer on your phone and then opt out and start watching video in HD against your 2 or 5 or 10GB cap.. then opt back in and binge watch Jessica Jones.
It's not just the "unlimited" portion of the data that is slow though -- stuff that is subject to your monthly cap is also being throttled. Grow up and try reading TFA for a change, or at least TFS.
I did read TFA.
Look at the bar graph. Streaming a video, downloading a video file to the SD card, and downloading a video file with the headers changed to say it was not a video file were all throttled, and all got speed of 1.5Mbps. Downloading a large non-video file for comparison had a speed of 4.2 Mbps.
That 4.2 is slightly lower than the 5.5 achieved without "binge on" feature enabled... but if you look at the error bars, the difference doesn't indicate throttling; it's just normal variance (i.e., within margin of error).
That variance is interesting. Binge on has almost no variance in download speed, but "normal" has 50% (or for one test, even more) variation in speed (look at the error bars-- very tight with binge on; very large with "normal").
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
T-Mobile customer, not much choice considering their lower rates. TorGuard VPN app on my LG G4, no throttling here. Fuck them.
Just more marketing lies.
BingeOn doesn't use your data plan, it's unlimited, and you complain that it's limited to 1.5 Mbps? That seems like a good deal to me. But if you don't like it, you can opt out: nobody is forcing you to use it.
Meanwhile, any first tier university has 40 Gbps campuswide and 100 Gbps ports too.
Yes, 100,000 Mbps.
Suckers!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
They can't favour different providers with their throttling, so they need to do it indiscriminately.
assumptions at work.
"Here. I've optimized your car for you."
By social convention, people will assume this means that you have made their car run better. No, this is not spoken, but it is based on tacit agreement, a kind of social contract. We don't have to specify every last thing in detail; we can all agree that we know what we mean.
However, you could—certainly—mean that you have optimized their car for them to be more optimal with respect to environmental concerns. For example, you may have removed the engine. This would result in a perfectly optimal configuration for minimizing emissions and fossil fuel consumption.
But it would rightfully not be what someone expects when you said, "I've optimized your car for you." That would be a violation of the implicit social contract and social expectations.
But of course that is exactly the point of this story, and exactly where we are today. Which is why we *do* specify every last thing in detail (in interminable EULAs) and also why people feel as though the social contract is breaking down: because it is. But there are still remnants enough of it in place that people get upset when they feel as though it's been violated, and I can't say that I blame them.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Reading quickly through this thread, with all the comments about whiners wanting something for nothing, it seems to me that most are missing the real story here. The Binge-on plan is supposed to be about getting certain content without it counting against a data cap, that certain providers have worked out a deal with T-Mobile, allowing their streams to be “optimized” in exchange for users getting unlimited access. But it turns out that everyone‘s content is being treated the same: it’s all throttled. So what exactly is the point of having only some content providers participate? A select few companies have allowed their names to be used, and have theoretically signed on to the scheme, but those providers' data isn’t being treated any differently then anyone else’s, the data is ALL being throttled! Think about it, all video data on the internet is being treated the same, but only some companies are being given the opportunity to serve up unlimited amounts of video. Why? Why just them? I have read that other streaming providers can opt in for free, which if true just makes the unequal treatment worse. By default, T-Mobile is treating video data as if the provider has already agreed to the plan, but only a select few companies are reaping the benefits. From an engineering standpoint, participating companies are doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING differently than non-participating companies. WTF? Bottom line: ALL VIDEO CONTENT IS BEING THROTTLED, SO ALL VIDEO CONTENT PROVIDERS SHOULD REAP THE BENEFITS! Anything else is a flat out violation of net neutrality. And that’s the real story here.
If your provider is doing HTML5 over HTTPS, T-Mobile will never know the content.
Unless, of course, they've bundled some certs with your phone and MITM all your traffic, in which case you have a much, much bigger problem.
OOh.... that's very interesting. If I hadn't posted already, I'd mod you up.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
N/T
Except this bit of text to bypass the lameness filter.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere