Slashdot Mirror
Fire Department Rejects Verizon's 'Customer Support Mistake' Excuse For Throttling (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A fire department whose data was throttled by Verizon Wireless while it was fighting California's largest-ever wildfire has rejected Verizon's claim that the throttling was just a customer service error and "has nothing to do with net neutrality." The throttling "has everything to do with net neutrality," a Santa Clara County official said. Verizon yesterday acknowledged that it shouldn't have continued throttling Santa Clara County Fire Department's "unlimited" data service while the department was battling the Mendocino Complex Fire. Verizon said the department had chosen an unlimited data plan that gets throttled to speeds of 200kbps or 600kbps after using 25GB a month but that Verizon failed to follow its policy of "remov[ing] data speed restrictions when contacted in emergency situations." "This was a customer support mistake" and not a net neutrality issue, Verizon said. "Verizon's throttling has everything to do with net neutrality -- it shows that the ISPs will act in their economic interests, even at the expense of public safety," County Counsel James Williams said on behalf of the county and fire department. "That is exactly what the Trump Administration's repeal of net neutrality allows and encourages."
I'm a net neutrality proponent and ... this doesn't seem to have anything to do with net neutrality.
Sure it does, or rather, the lack of net neutrality
Ok then - What exactly in the rules that were repealed, would have prevented what happened? Since obviously you have read them and are familiar with what was repealed, I mean it would be crazy to be upset about the loss of something you had never read and didn't even understand, right?
I'll respond to any post that actually provides a real answer. If I am silent, well, perhaps you should try to answer the question - what in the rules repealed would have prevented a cell provider from throttling cellular data services?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That would provide a perverse incentive to kill cops and take their recording hardware, since they possess the only copy. Also, it would make it difficult to impossible to prove if tampering had occurred, and provide time for that tampering to occur.
Not only should the video be uploaded in real time (if that consumes bandwidth, so be it -- that's the cost of operating in modern society), but it should be hashed and saved in multiple places such that if one of them is tampered with, it will clearly not match the other copies.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Second, every one needs to stop comparing the plan process the Fire department was paying for that one SIM card to their own data plans. Their monthly bill is probably in the thousands, if not tens of thousands and as such they have access to a whole bunch of tiers and plans that consumers do not have.
You are talking about what should be happening. Not what IS happening. Verizon provides emergency service personnel with relevant plans that have no throttling what so ever. The fire department however is subscribed to a $37.99/month consumer plan. Nothing in the thousands, and the plans available to emergency service operators don't cost thousands either.
Verizon came out and said they (Verizon) had misrepresented the terms of the data agreements
No they didn't. They said that the firedepartment didn't read the terms of the data agreements and were on the wrong plan. They have also said they have a standard practice to life any caps in emergency scenarios anyway but this didn't occur due to their own fault.
They actively came out and admitted they were wrong and what they did which was wrong, but you insist on making up some other bullshit story. Don't do that.