Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Throttled Fire Department's 'Unlimited' Data During Calif. Wildfire (arstechnica.com)
Verizon Wireless's throttling of a fire department that uses its data services has been submitted as evidence in a lawsuit that seeks to reinstate federal net neutrality rules. From a report: "County Fire has experienced throttling by its ISP, Verizon," Santa Clara County Fire Chief Anthony Bowden wrote in a declaration. "This throttling has had a significant impact on our ability to provide emergency services. Verizon imposed these limitations despite being informed that throttling was actively impeding County Fire's ability to provide crisis-response and essential emergency services." Bowden's declaration was submitted in an addendum to a brief filed by 22 state attorneys general, the District of Columbia, Santa Clara County, Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, and the California Public Utilities Commission. The government agencies are seeking to overturn the recent repeal of net neutrality rules in a lawsuit they filed against the Federal Communications Commission in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
"The Internet has become an essential tool in providing fire and emergency response, particularly for events like large fires which require the rapid deployment and organization of thousands of personnel and hundreds of fire engines, aircraft, and bulldozers," Bowden wrote. Santa Clara Fire paid Verizon for "unlimited" data but suffered from heavy throttling until the department paid Verizon more, according to Bowden's declaration and emails between the fire department and Verizon that were submitted as evidence.
"The Internet has become an essential tool in providing fire and emergency response, particularly for events like large fires which require the rapid deployment and organization of thousands of personnel and hundreds of fire engines, aircraft, and bulldozers," Bowden wrote. Santa Clara Fire paid Verizon for "unlimited" data but suffered from heavy throttling until the department paid Verizon more, according to Bowden's declaration and emails between the fire department and Verizon that were submitted as evidence.
Did they have a business plan with a guarantee of service or a consumer plan?
Verizon imposed these limitations despite being informed that throttling was actively impeding County Fire's ability to provide crisis-response and essential emergency services.
The moment Verizon staff deliberately stepped over that line: it should have resulted in all their spectrum licenses and their FCC Telecoms license being placed in jeapordy. At the very least there should be a billion$ lawsuit for obstructing first responders.
I'm hoping firefighters throughout the US keep that in mind when a Verizon building catches fire. "WEll, you know, we do have to prioritize our resources. Can't fight every fire..."
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
That or they'll have died in forest fires.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Throttling after using a certain amount of data happened while net neutrality was in effect. This is a false correlation meant to get those who don't think to come running with torches and pitchforks.
s/Verizon building/Verizon executive's home/
No, that 's not mean and vindictive. Nothing prevents them switching to an alternative firefighting provider.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Looks to me like after they hit the 25GB cap, every single bit was delivered at the same (degraded) speed.
Weren't wireless carriers throttling 'unlimited' accounts before the net neutrality change? I thought they were unrelated.
love is just extroverted narcissism
The objection is to including the word "unlimited" in the headline as though that is a guarantee of speed. I get it, this is an important story and you also want to live in a world where cheap wireless broadband with no throttling is an inalienable right. But these are two different things. A less eye-catching headline might read "Verizon puts lives at risk by sticking to terms of service. "
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
A truly neutral network would not give firefighter traffic ANY priority over other traffic. To ask for such priority is to be a hypocrite. This request by the fire fighters, at best, is an COUNTER example of what "Network Neutrality" means.
Oh, and the issue of exceeding a data cap on your network plan is not the same as network neutrality.
I mean, they hit a cap and their service was degraded. This has literally nothing to do with net neutrality, and this is a big part of the reason that those of us who want NN have a bigger hill to climb. Other proponents of NN don't have a clue as to what they're actually fighting for.
I'm not arguing one way or another for what actually happened here, just pointing out that it's unrelated to NN.
Do you have ESP?
How about some truth in advertising?
Any service that is subject to data caps, throttling, etc. should not be called "unlimited".
Unlimited: not limited; unrestricted; unconfined. https://www.dictionary.com/bro...
My home internet is a paltry 20Mb DSL, but it is full speed 24x7. That's what I call "unlimited".
THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
>"Verizon Wireless's throttling of a fire department that uses its data services has been submitted as evidence in a lawsuit that seeks to reinstate federal net neutrality rules."
Um, this has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. It does have to do with the definition of "unlimited data", but they were not throttling based on where the data was going....
I volunteer as a first responder and we get priority access to the network in an emergency (https://www.firstnet.com/plans and https://www.firstnet.gov/) This includes "First Priority and Preemption - priority access to the domestic AT&T 4G LTE network" The real story should be asking why they don't have access to this program
The firefighters are to blame, if the facts reported in TFA are, indeed, facts:
The firefighters f-ed up. They knew — at least, on June 29th, what will automatically happen to their connection. That they didn't change their subscription by July 27, when the Mendocino fire started, is nobody else's fault but their own. Spending tens of thousands on all of that firefighting equipment, they can't spend extra $60 for the truly unlimited data-plan?
Maybe, they expected the company to give them freebies, the way smaller business may be bullied into giving. Didn't work...
What does any of this have to do with "net neutrality" remains a mystery...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Firefighter traffic is prioritizing tcp ip of a protocol, say for emergency service, over some dumb torrent download. *traffic type prioritization* has NEVER been about net neutrality. Why that crop up again and again I am beginning to suspect either people are dumb do not do research or are paid off. Look net neutrality is about not having traffic from amazon prime video throttled because verizon has a concurring service or they want amatzon to pay more, while they don't throttle say netflix *for the SAME protocol*. That is neutrality : neutrality toward the sending and receiving entity. Protocol can still be prioritized. To take your firefight example again, net neutrality is about not having BMW prioritized of a private person given priority over a volvo of another person. It has NEVER been about "not" prioritizing firefighter over private car. In fact from the start it was recognized that prioritizing protocol in a neutral manner (so ignoring who send/who receive) is fine.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
It's seven years after that article, dumbass. The present-day state budget is fine.
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
at that level of wealth they typically have their own private security, fire and health services. One of the problems with modern capitalism is that the ultra wealthy have built their own economy. It doesn't matter to them if the commons goes to hell anymore.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
You will get Unlimited Firefighting.... by one person with a watering can.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
Regardless of morality or ethics or terms of the contract, they undeniably LIMITED the bandwidth (they even call it that themselves). That is, they LIMITED the unlimited data. The contract may very well have said they could, but their marketing lies it's ass off. A reasonable person would call that plan LIMITED.
That's why professionals, when selecting a vendor plan for a mission critical service, are going to do their research and talk to an enterprise rep, and then pay for the level of service that meets their needs. Also, this has nothing to do with Net Neutrality. This kind of cap and throttle plan existed before NN, during it, and exists now.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
It's fascinating to see the vast majority of people siding with Verizon and blaming the Fire Department for poor planning. I would imagine a similar level of outrage would be directed at the fire department if it were found to be using public money on overpriced data plans that were sized for projected worst-case data consumption rather than actual month-on-month consumption - together with accusations that all the firefighters are doing is streaming Netflix, as people can't imagine any other legitimate need for the amount of data consumed. In a normal functioning society, I would expect the fire department to pay a competitive rate that reflects their standard consumption patterns in line with reasonable public expenditure, with the caveat that in the case this is exceeded for a legitimate public safety purpose (e.g. an emergency response), the amount overshot would be subject to its own costing mechanism and invoiced after the fact, rather than allowing a lapse in service to put lives at risk.
While I appreciate that Verizon does have these types of accounts available for emergency responders and public service providers, I find the attitude that it's ok to gouge them on pricing simply to toggle a throttle vs. no-throttle flag on their account absurd. On the other hand, I can't say I really understand the fire department's net neutrality position, either.