no, "unlimited" means there is no limit. your assertion that it somehow means only that there is no company-imposed limit is just something you're making up based on context and assumption.
are you a total moron? it's a monthly time span, so yes there is absolutely a real physical limit to how much data can be downloaded. just because you are all too stupid to understand that "unlimited" is not possible and it's just a name of a plan, doesn't mean anyone defrauded you.
It's physically not possible, which means there is zero chance that the T&C's you agreed to prohibit them from limiting you. They can call a plan whatever they want.
Look. I have not read all the T&C's, but there is absolutely zero chance that the T&C's do not allow for less than optimal speeds, because it is physically not possible to guarantee full speed in unlimited capacity. So, what you all have your panties in a wad about is the name of the plan. If they named it the Pigs Will Fly plan, it's not fraud just because pigs don't end up flying.
1) The stats are only considering the number of subpop test takers out of all test takers. It does not say anything about those taking the course itself, as the test is often optional, and it certainly says nothing about the relative popularity of CS with the subpop. 2) Smaller schools will never offer AP CS courses. Never. The data is incredibly noisy as a result, and entire states might have zero participation from a given subpop mostly as a result of limited availability.
For example, I could get the increase celebrated in this story just by pushing teachers to require all AP CS students take the test.
This was my thought exactly. I thought it was odd that the title makes "Greenpeace" so prominent. Author (or editor) seems to think that adds credibility.
People who cannot think on a systemic level will never understand things like this. It is not an education thing; it is a problem solving thing. You either see the world as a set of systems, or you don't and can only focus on what is directly observable as consequence. You may be wasting your time.
It's pretty hilarious to watch you put me into boxes I don't belong. I could give two shits about NSA's databases and whether The Google is reading my email. I'm writing this from a Chromebook for chrissakes. I'm just pointing out that you are incredibly naive with regard to government abuses of power. But once you acknowledge that it does and will continue to happen, you still have the option of saying "who cares?"
> Any company willing to tell it's investors "screw you", because they are looking long-term instead of focusing only on quarterly gains, that's a company I'm willing to invest in.
They didn't have to tell investors "screw you". Their multiple is ridiculously high. Investors believe the story. This story is about some initial doubt that the long term investments pay off. Forgoing short term gain for long term benefit is a pretty typical thing (it's called CapEx), and investors get worried in times like the last 5 years when companies forgo CapEx in favor of share repurchasing and dividend increases, unless there truly is nothing better for the company to do with their cash.
Your caricature of "investors" shows a pretty naive view of what analysts and investors do. Of course they are not perfect, but outside of day traders, the kind of long term view that you imply can only be done if companies ignore investors, is very much what money managers, fund managers, analysts, and others look for. All you have left is mom and pop individual investors, who make up such a tiny percentage of the share count that companies don't care about their opinions (nor should they).
that's what happens when you don't let water cost what water costs. planting crops in arid regions wouldn't be viable if water were not subsidized. same with population explosion.
Don't forget how you can't change anything about how the system works in a way that reduces the work of any particular role in the organization, or the relevant union will get very angry.
> We don't pay for people to go to college in this country
Um, what? Assuming you are here in the US, then you are simply wrong. The government pays a very large percentage of the cost of public school tuition by subsidizing in various ways, and it pays a smaller but still substantial percentage of private school tuition by subsidizing in fewer various ways. So, pretty much just like K-12, except that percentage isn't 100%.
> On the other hand, the way H-1B visa program works is that it provides "apprenticeships" for foreigners, and they got back to their own country, taking their skills with them, start up their own businesses in their own countries, create job opportunities for their own people, not Americans
We did not invest in this person for 16 years in the public school system. This is better than an American leaving the US after her frist job and starting up the company you mention that employs foreigners. So honestly I do not get what you are whining about.
That's great, but you cannot ignore that it reduces the wage you can command on average in the market. Wages are prices controlled by supply and demand, and fewer opportunities are open to you because you have no degree. Yes, you can say those employers are ignorant, but it doesn't really matter.
Slashdot Mirror
i stopped restating my position many replies ago when i moved on to insulting you
no, "unlimited" means there is no limit. your assertion that it somehow means only that there is no company-imposed limit is just something you're making up based on context and assumption.
just calling a plan "unlimited" is not fraudulent.
the topic at hand is throttling, right? nobody is turning off service after x gigs are downloaded, right? so...
are you a total moron? it's a monthly time span, so yes there is absolutely a real physical limit to how much data can be downloaded. just because you are all too stupid to understand that "unlimited" is not possible and it's just a name of a plan, doesn't mean anyone defrauded you.
The real analogy would be to name a fitness program the "Immortal Plan" and then have a bunch of clowns complaining that it doesn't make you immortal
It's physically not possible, which means there is zero chance that the T&C's you agreed to prohibit them from limiting you. They can call a plan whatever they want.
Look. I have not read all the T&C's, but there is absolutely zero chance that the T&C's do not allow for less than optimal speeds, because it is physically not possible to guarantee full speed in unlimited capacity. So, what you all have your panties in a wad about is the name of the plan. If they named it the Pigs Will Fly plan, it's not fraud just because pigs don't end up flying.
god, who cares
Unlimited bandwidth is not possible. You can make it illegal all you want. It doesn't trump physics.
1) The stats are only considering the number of subpop test takers out of all test takers. It does not say anything about those taking the course itself, as the test is often optional, and it certainly says nothing about the relative popularity of CS with the subpop.
2) Smaller schools will never offer AP CS courses. Never. The data is incredibly noisy as a result, and entire states might have zero participation from a given subpop mostly as a result of limited availability.
For example, I could get the increase celebrated in this story just by pushing teachers to require all AP CS students take the test.
Why do you keep further explaining your viewpoint unsolicited? I am not interested. It comes off as highly defensive and whiny.
They offset it by buying magic unicorn credits
This was my thought exactly. I thought it was odd that the title makes "Greenpeace" so prominent. Author (or editor) seems to think that adds credibility.
People who cannot think on a systemic level will never understand things like this. It is not an education thing; it is a problem solving thing. You either see the world as a set of systems, or you don't and can only focus on what is directly observable as consequence. You may be wasting your time.
It's pretty hilarious to watch you put me into boxes I don't belong. I could give two shits about NSA's databases and whether The Google is reading my email. I'm writing this from a Chromebook for chrissakes. I'm just pointing out that you are incredibly naive with regard to government abuses of power. But once you acknowledge that it does and will continue to happen, you still have the option of saying "who cares?"
> monopoly
You mean a monopoly where competitors can't deliver that kind of value to customers? How terrible.
> Any company willing to tell it's investors "screw you", because they are looking long-term instead of focusing only on quarterly gains, that's a company I'm willing to invest in.
They didn't have to tell investors "screw you". Their multiple is ridiculously high. Investors believe the story. This story is about some initial doubt that the long term investments pay off. Forgoing short term gain for long term benefit is a pretty typical thing (it's called CapEx), and investors get worried in times like the last 5 years when companies forgo CapEx in favor of share repurchasing and dividend increases, unless there truly is nothing better for the company to do with their cash.
Your caricature of "investors" shows a pretty naive view of what analysts and investors do. Of course they are not perfect, but outside of day traders, the kind of long term view that you imply can only be done if companies ignore investors, is very much what money managers, fund managers, analysts, and others look for. All you have left is mom and pop individual investors, who make up such a tiny percentage of the share count that companies don't care about their opinions (nor should they).
that's what happens when you don't let water cost what water costs. planting crops in arid regions wouldn't be viable if water were not subsidized. same with population explosion.
Um... have you heard of personalized learning applications?
Don't forget how you can't change anything about how the system works in a way that reduces the work of any particular role in the organization, or the relevant union will get very angry.
> We don't pay for people to go to college in this country
Um, what? Assuming you are here in the US, then you are simply wrong. The government pays a very large percentage of the cost of public school tuition by subsidizing in various ways, and it pays a smaller but still substantial percentage of private school tuition by subsidizing in fewer various ways. So, pretty much just like K-12, except that percentage isn't 100%.
> On the other hand, the way H-1B visa program works is that it provides "apprenticeships" for foreigners, and they got back to their own country, taking their skills with them, start up their own businesses in their own countries, create job opportunities for their own people, not Americans
We did not invest in this person for 16 years in the public school system. This is better than an American leaving the US after her frist job and starting up the company you mention that employs foreigners. So honestly I do not get what you are whining about.
That's great, but you cannot ignore that it reduces the wage you can command on average in the market. Wages are prices controlled by supply and demand, and fewer opportunities are open to you because you have no degree. Yes, you can say those employers are ignorant, but it doesn't really matter.
if we both think the other is too dumb to process simple English, then perhaps we have come to mutual agreement that this is a waste of time