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Ok then - What exactly in the rules that were repealed, would have prevented what happened? Since obviously you have read them and are familiar with what was repealed, I mean it would be crazy to be upset about the loss of something you had never read and didn't even understand, right?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 If I am silent, well, perhaps you should try to answer the question - what in the rules repealed would have prevented a cell provider from throttling cellular data services?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
Proving once again that people have no clue what net neutrality really means.
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.
Or at any other time, really, not just while battling the fire -- unless Verizon is going to monitor the activity of the fire department and throttle their service whenever the department isn't fighting a fire...
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I run an IT Department for a City on the West Coast. Verizon has throttled "unlimited" plans for over a year now. It's a common pain. The biggest problem we're running into is dispatch. Old text based dispatch systems have been replaced with GIS based systems consuming significantly more bandwidth. Add citizens wanting dashcams and body cams and you're easily way over the 25Gb limit.
Historically, Verizon has been deeply embedded in our infrastructure due to our need for coverage, and Verizon had the best. Enter a new game change, AT&T and FirstNet (1N). ( https://www.firstnet.gov/ ) , AT&T has been pouring billions it infrastructure to support 1N. I predict within 18 months, Verizon not only will lose it's stranglehold on municipal communications, but virtually every municipality will jump to AT&T. Stories like this will only accelerate the change.
There are a LOT of rural fire districts across the US operating on a subscription basis. No pay in advance, no fire put out. It's been this way for a long time.
Everyone saying things like "what are the firefighters doing with data" needs to read over this paper. Also the book Geospatial Information Technology for Emergency Response for those who have access check libraries, others can use a preview to get some idea of the content.
Everything soldiers need from data applies here. Real-time collection of data about exactly where the firefighters are, what areas are burning, the status of efforts to extinguish fire, all must be transmitted. After processing on the office end, data sent back to responders in the field must pass through the same channel. This includes data about the direction and behavior of the fire in extreme granularity actionable from the ground, along with orders coordinating disparate units. If they use any sort of secured VOIP system then long range voice communications also use data. The old slashdot would understand all of this by default.
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.