If you haven't seen emigrant bashing in the US, you need to get out more.
Dude, the only treatment that I see of US emigrants in the US is to act like they don't exist. It's also not like I don't have any exposure to the issue... my sister is an emigrant.
Um... I don't think that immigrants are at fault for really anything in the USA.
I actually believe in open borders between Mexico, USA, and Canada, much like Europe currently has.
But much like the Polish poster above, I'm quoting the hardline opinion... in American stereotypically immigrants are the problem, while apparently in Poland, it's the emigrants.
So, take your self-righteous condemnation of this stereotype and apply it to people for whom it actually applies, rather than people using it educationally in a discussion about stereotypes, where its application was completely justified and called for.
Interesting... I never thought about how emigrants could be viewed as the problem rather than immigrants (I live in the US, everything here is the immigrants faults:( ), but the idea of "you abandoned us!" Makes total sense.
That's a rather narrow field, and exactly how different can golf be than any other business? Shouldn't they just get a degree in business? Universities are supposed to be places where you study the fundamentals of something, which you can then apply, with experience, to many places or industries. The fundamentals of business are all the same; if you need industry-specific knowledge, you pick that up by actually working in that industry.
There isn't a whole lot different, and that's the whole point. Business degrees are largely cookie-cutter, they have almost all the same requirements, etc, except for a small selection of extra courses that are degree specific. One at my university was Business Computer Science, which was a business degree like all the others, except it also taught the basics of programming. In the same way, the PGM program was a business degree like all the others, except that you also played some golf for university credit.
So, to answer your question, YES, they did "just get a degree in business". Business degrees are generic and specific at the same time, but far more generic than an A&S, or Engineering degree.
As perhaps a better example, take the Math requirements for an Engineering degree program at a single university. How much variation do you expect to find? Now, take that Math requirement and turn it into a "business" requirement, and that's what a Business degree is.
Uhm... They don't disclose this except in the fine print- which is a bit of a no-no in most jurisdictions. You can't advertise "unlimited" and then basically take it away in the fine print.
If they throttled you to to something better than EDGE (Of which AT&T and T-Mobile BOTH throttle you to dialup speeds at best...) it wouldn't be so bad. The way it is, though, it's basically lying. You really, really should QUIT spreading mis-information like not being able to attain it (like you did in an earlier post) or this rubbish, like in this post.
I HAVE NEVER ARGUED THAT YOU CANNOT ATTAIN THE BANDWIDTH THROTTLING POINT.
Jesus fuck, people are so happy to straw man me because I'm defending the legal position of AT&T in this position. Look, I'm sorry that the bandwidth is being throttled, it's annoying, I get that, and I get that it's easy to hit the throttling.
The whole reason this came up is they throttle the connection too slow to be useful for anything.
If they picked a speed that allowed web browsing and email but didn't allow for Youtube or whatever, you'd have a point. But, that's not the case, and that's why people such as myself are angry about it. My plan is called 'unlimited' but if I hit their threshold I had better keep myself near a hotspot.
... you still have unlimited data, which is what they promised... the fact that they dropped your bandwidth to an "unusable" level is perhaps an upsetting way with how the service works, but was never a promise of the plan.
If you're upset, then vote with your wallet and get a new plan, or a new carrier.You're not going to get any sympathy when they stop performing some non-promised feature.
It's like, you're used to getting a happy ending with your massage, but suddenly they stopped giving you a happy ending. Well, they never promised the happy ending in the first place, so too bad.
My point is that art history is not a totally fluff program, like "golf management" (WTF?).
Another one of my posts addresses this. Professional Golf Management is a business degree. They take all the same general business courses that every business major has to take.
Fact is, that a person with a PGM bachelors is actually more prepared for a career than someone with an Art History bachelors.
I'm not arguing that the cap is unattainable. My point is that people are whining that it's not unlimited bandwidth, but the bandwidth is already limited to begin with, so people upset that they're throttling at a certain point are being fucking idiots. If they truly had unlimited bandwidth, then you could download the 3GB in 1 second... but they don't have unlimited bandwidth to begin with.
ALL INTERNET TRAFFIC IS THROTTLED.
If people don't understand that, then they need a shot of 100ccs of common sense.
Tim Minchin knocks this out of the park... alternative medicine, by its definition, has either been not proven to work , or proven not to work. Alternative medicine that has been proven to work is called... medicine..
Actually, acupuncture has been proven to be efficacious. However, even randomly performed acupuncture has been shown to perform as well as properly performed acupuncture.
As well, some homeopathic formulations have been shown to be efficacious. All of the zinc cold formulas have scientific studies showing that they're more effective than placebo, and yet are homeopathic... of course they're at only 10% and 100% dilutions, not the crazy dilutions that some other things are at. (How can they contain some of the original substance if they're homeopathic? It turns out that homeopathic treatments can contain any GRAS substance available, and zinc acetate is GRAS.)
Of course in the later case, the people selling cold treatments are more exploiting homeopathy to provide cheap treatments, rather than having to go through extensive drug trials... so, one could easily make the argument that they're actually only homeopathic in the legal sense...
Yeah, no kidding. No, art history doesn't offer you a direct career path, but neither does Philosophy...
You do realize that Philosophy is like the closest you coudl get to a "pre-law" degree, yes? Philosophy majors often go on to make really good lawyers, because they understand how to make an argument, how to break apart and understand arguments, and law, and also, according to a brochure I read on the topic at one point, they make good lawyers, because they are "belligerently argumentative."
I actually met two guys in college that were majoring in Professional Golf Management. What you might fail to realize, is that it is a business degree, and just as valid for future career options as any other business degree is. Namely, they have to take intro to accounting and all the other courses that every business major needs to take. They walk out far better prepared to manage a store than anyone graduating with an arts and science degree is.
Now, I'll leave it up to each individual reader to rate the value of a general business degree... but PGM isn't worth any less than any other business degree.
Since those "unlimited" plans are typically offered at a flat-rate, the period is unimportant. The undeniable limit is the available physical bandwidth. The period (eg: per month) is just how often you pay for access to that bandwidth. Changing the period changes nothing with regard to the bandwidth and/or download capability.
But the bandwidth itself is already limited to the carrying capacity of the channel... my whole point is that people are arguing for an unattainable standard from those providing the data plans, just because they can concoct an ambiguity in the language used in the advertising...
Here's a hint for everyone, if you've found an ambiguity in an advertisement, assume that the ambiguity will be decided in the way that is least desirable to you. It's only ever in boilerplate contracts where ambiguity is leveraged against the person making the statement. You can't twist and advertisement away from what the person meant... (truth in advertising is different, because it requires there to be no ambiguity that what they stated cannot in any reasonable way apply... this specific case, most definitely does not qualify.)
Yes, and a case in point that I noticed recently: One of the major insurance companies in the U.S., I don't remember which (shows how effective advertising is) advertised that the average person who switched to them saved $150. Then in a caveat at the end they admit that this is based on a survey of people who said they saved money by switching to this company. So in other words, they have completely thrown out anyone who switched and ended up paying more from the equation.
People usually don't switch to a new company unless they're going to save money anyways. So the average savings of anyone who switches to them is of course going to be a savings. In fact, every single company can list an average savings of people who switch to their companies, because (nearly) everyone who switches is saving money.
Screw throwing out data, they don't even need to throw out data... the data are already amenable to the statistics that they want to show.
Oh, and throtteling IS limiting...unlimited is by definition Without Limits (of any kind).
A function can be limited in the x-axis, but still be unlimited in the y-axis. This shouldn't be as hard to grasp as some people have been making it out to be.
And if you want to settle on "unlimited means absolutely no limits at all ever", then physical limitations of reality start making your "unlimited" option limited.
After all, the plan right from the start was limited to monthly periods. So, even if it were "all you can download, as fast as you can download", it would still be limited by "in the span of a month". So this whole argument that their unlimited plan is not allowed to have any limitations at all is ridiculous "entitlement"...
Not the way I read it. You want to sell me unlimited data, it'd better be unlimited. As in, no limits at all. Not "no limits on the amount". I'm talking "no limits on the amount, no limits on how you use it, no limits on how fast you can use it."
Otherwise, you'd better stop calling it unlimited.
I want to be able to access the internet as it will exist in 5 years, and if you can't provide it, then that's a limit, and by golly, I'm going to sue you for providing an unlimited plan that is limited by the rules of physics.
People need to get over this shit, the "unlimited" was always restricted to the amount of data that you can download, and I've known this for years. But so many people seem to be taking this approach of, "I can distort your words to mean something that you never promised, and since I never got it, I'm upset, and going to threaten to sue you!"
Advertising is misleading even when it's not deceptive. That's how advertising works. Drinking Dos Equis will not make you the most interesting man in the world, and you will not own a pet cougar as a result of drinking a specific brand of beer. Yet, their advertising sets viewers up for a false-correlation of "that guy drinks Dos Equis, that guy is awesome, therefore, if I drink Dos Equis, I will be awesome, too!"
No, when they advertise unlimited bandwidth, what they mean is that they don't put any limits on it. If they put limits on it then it's not unlimited. The overly pedantic definition you're using is of no value to anybody ever.
I think you'll find that the overly pedantic definition is useful to someone... advertisers.
As I explained elsewhere, advertising always uses the most pedantic definitions possible, stretching meaning to be misleading to customers, while still technically true, so that they're not hit by truth in advertising laws.
So, these pedantic definitions are quite valuable, and are consistently used all over advertising, which is why it is important for advertisement watchers to be aware and keep a skeptical (cynical?) eye on all advertising-speak.
So then don't call it unlimited? it's not that hard -_-
The bandwidth is not capped though, it's THROTTLED.
I agree that this is the definition AT&T wants to use, but it's not advertised as "uncapped," it's advertised as "unlimited." Throttling is limiting. I'm sure there are many synonymous ways you could define "bandwidth throttling" which doesn't include the word "limit," but by reducing the available bandwith, you are limiting. Something which is limited cannot be called unlimited.
When AT&T first started throttling, it was supposed to be the top 5% of users, who apparently consumed something like 90% of the overall data. Now this seems to have come to serve another purpose.
But the bandwidth has always been limited... you can't have unlimited bandwidth. Shall we say that I can't say "unlimited soup and salad" because eventually the restaurant closes, and you have to stop? Is it unjustified for a restaurant to say such as well, if they require that you can only order one plate at a time? "Because you cannot send me 1 billion plates of soup and salad at one time, your 'unlimited' deal is limited, therefore you're lying to us!"
As the person above you commented, it's about unlimited data, and indeed, your data is unlimited, because you can get as much data as you want, as long as you're willing to wait for it. I didn't think it were necessary to explain that bandwidth cannot physically be unlimited, so it shouldn't be necessary to mention... apparently, they built a better idiot though...
"shooting targets" might be a nice hobby, but it's not very practical.
The purpose of the item being sold does not have to be practical. Recurve bows and arrows have no "practical" use, and are only particularly useful for target practice. In fact, recurve bows are even less useful than hand guns for hunting.
As well, handguns have another perfectly legal reason for purchase and ownership: protection, and defense.
There is no way that gun manufacturers aren't aware of those statistics, yet they keep on allowing their products being sold in shops.
Being aware the statistics about misuse of your item does not mean that you are criminally liable. The manufacturers of oxycodone are certainly aware of the high rate of abuse of their drug, shall we hold them responsible criminally for the abuse of their drug?
With this jurisprudence, gun manufacturers are just as guilty. Either that, or someone got wrongly convicted here.
This jurisprudence is not precedent setting. Gun manufacturers are already, and have long been subject to the conditions under which this individual was charged.
There was sufficiently established evidence that this individual was selling a product that had no legal purpose. Guns have well recognized legal purposes. And weapons manufacturers are not concerned about this case... like I said, this case hinged on already well established legal precedents, and the gun manufacturer lawyers have long been aware of these details.
But then, as usual, anything legal happens, and slashdot armchair lay lawyers are ready to jump out of the woodwork with specious legal theories, and pretend like shit means more than it actually does.
*Big dopey grin from sales dweeb* While I walked away happily - I enjoy wasting salespeople's time when I have nothing better to do.
I had some phone sales rep yell at me for politely letting him go through his spiel before shooting him down. He basically asked me why I would listen to his whole spiel, and then he dramatically hung up on me.
As I was putting down the phone receiver, I was thinking to myself, "because you never gave me a chance to talk..."
So then don't call it unlimited? it's not that hard -_-
The bandwidth is not capped though, it's THROTTLED. So you still get "unlimited" bandwidth.
People need to remember that companies are going to sell you with the most non-obvious definitions available to them. How often do you hear "it's a steal at less than 14 thousand dollars!" Meanwhile it costs $13,999... sure it's true, but that doesn't make it misleading.
Cynics however are in the know, and we're constantly looking for how they could be using these words to their best benefit.
Other people just don't seem to get it, and no less always act surprised every time they get burned by assuming good faith in advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
Or are you asking whether or not the provided is in breach of the law because they're offering something so bad that their advertising is deceptive?
I see what you did there...
If you haven't seen emigrant bashing in the US, you need to get out more.
Dude, the only treatment that I see of US emigrants in the US is to act like they don't exist. It's also not like I don't have any exposure to the issue... my sister is an emigrant.
Um... I don't think that immigrants are at fault for really anything in the USA.
I actually believe in open borders between Mexico, USA, and Canada, much like Europe currently has.
But much like the Polish poster above, I'm quoting the hardline opinion... in American stereotypically immigrants are the problem, while apparently in Poland, it's the emigrants.
So, take your self-righteous condemnation of this stereotype and apply it to people for whom it actually applies, rather than people using it educationally in a discussion about stereotypes, where its application was completely justified and called for.
Might just be a typo in the grand parent's post.
That was my first thought, but he talked specifically about "traitors", which would certainly apply to emigrants, and not immigrants.
... Accuses everyone of being either a traitor (favourite target: emmigrants) ...
Interesting... I never thought about how emigrants could be viewed as the problem rather than immigrants (I live in the US, everything here is the immigrants faults :( ), but the idea of "you abandoned us!" Makes total sense.
Is Facebook avoiding this moral duty by farming it out abroad?
Is Facebook a corporation?
That's a rather narrow field, and exactly how different can golf be than any other business? Shouldn't they just get a degree in business? Universities are supposed to be places where you study the fundamentals of something, which you can then apply, with experience, to many places or industries. The fundamentals of business are all the same; if you need industry-specific knowledge, you pick that up by actually working in that industry.
There isn't a whole lot different, and that's the whole point. Business degrees are largely cookie-cutter, they have almost all the same requirements, etc, except for a small selection of extra courses that are degree specific. One at my university was Business Computer Science, which was a business degree like all the others, except it also taught the basics of programming. In the same way, the PGM program was a business degree like all the others, except that you also played some golf for university credit.
So, to answer your question, YES, they did "just get a degree in business". Business degrees are generic and specific at the same time, but far more generic than an A&S, or Engineering degree.
As perhaps a better example, take the Math requirements for an Engineering degree program at a single university. How much variation do you expect to find? Now, take that Math requirement and turn it into a "business" requirement, and that's what a Business degree is.
Uhm... They don't disclose this except in the fine print- which is a bit of a no-no in most jurisdictions. You can't advertise "unlimited" and then basically take it away in the fine print.
If they throttled you to to something better than EDGE (Of which AT&T and T-Mobile BOTH throttle you to dialup speeds at best...) it wouldn't be so bad. The way it is, though, it's basically lying. You really, really should QUIT spreading mis-information like not being able to attain it (like you did in an earlier post) or this rubbish, like in this post.
I HAVE NEVER ARGUED THAT YOU CANNOT ATTAIN THE BANDWIDTH THROTTLING POINT.
Jesus fuck, people are so happy to straw man me because I'm defending the legal position of AT&T in this position. Look, I'm sorry that the bandwidth is being throttled, it's annoying, I get that, and I get that it's easy to hit the throttling.
HOWEVER, they NEVER PROMISED UNLIMITED BANDWIDTH.
The whole reason this came up is they throttle the connection too slow to be useful for anything.
If they picked a speed that allowed web browsing and email but didn't allow for Youtube or whatever, you'd have a point. But, that's not the case, and that's why people such as myself are angry about it. My plan is called 'unlimited' but if I hit their threshold I had better keep myself near a hotspot.
... you still have unlimited data, which is what they promised... the fact that they dropped your bandwidth to an "unusable" level is perhaps an upsetting way with how the service works, but was never a promise of the plan.
If you're upset, then vote with your wallet and get a new plan, or a new carrier.You're not going to get any sympathy when they stop performing some non-promised feature.
It's like, you're used to getting a happy ending with your massage, but suddenly they stopped giving you a happy ending. Well, they never promised the happy ending in the first place, so too bad.
My point is that art history is not a totally fluff program, like "golf management" (WTF?).
Another one of my posts addresses this. Professional Golf Management is a business degree. They take all the same general business courses that every business major has to take.
Fact is, that a person with a PGM bachelors is actually more prepared for a career than someone with an Art History bachelors.
I'm not arguing that the cap is unattainable. My point is that people are whining that it's not unlimited bandwidth, but the bandwidth is already limited to begin with, so people upset that they're throttling at a certain point are being fucking idiots. If they truly had unlimited bandwidth, then you could download the 3GB in 1 second... but they don't have unlimited bandwidth to begin with.
ALL INTERNET TRAFFIC IS THROTTLED.
If people don't understand that, then they need a shot of 100ccs of common sense.
Tim Minchin knocks this out of the park ... alternative medicine, by its definition, has either been not proven to work , or proven not to work. Alternative medicine that has been proven to work is called ... medicine..
Actually, acupuncture has been proven to be efficacious. However, even randomly performed acupuncture has been shown to perform as well as properly performed acupuncture.
As well, some homeopathic formulations have been shown to be efficacious. All of the zinc cold formulas have scientific studies showing that they're more effective than placebo, and yet are homeopathic... of course they're at only 10% and 100% dilutions, not the crazy dilutions that some other things are at. (How can they contain some of the original substance if they're homeopathic? It turns out that homeopathic treatments can contain any GRAS substance available, and zinc acetate is GRAS.)
Of course in the later case, the people selling cold treatments are more exploiting homeopathy to provide cheap treatments, rather than having to go through extensive drug trials... so, one could easily make the argument that they're actually only homeopathic in the legal sense...
Yeah, no kidding. No, art history doesn't offer you a direct career path, but neither does Philosophy...
You do realize that Philosophy is like the closest you coudl get to a "pre-law" degree, yes? Philosophy majors often go on to make really good lawyers, because they understand how to make an argument, how to break apart and understand arguments, and law, and also, according to a brochure I read on the topic at one point, they make good lawyers, because they are "belligerently argumentative."
I actually met two guys in college that were majoring in Professional Golf Management. What you might fail to realize, is that it is a business degree, and just as valid for future career options as any other business degree is. Namely, they have to take intro to accounting and all the other courses that every business major needs to take. They walk out far better prepared to manage a store than anyone graduating with an arts and science degree is.
Now, I'll leave it up to each individual reader to rate the value of a general business degree... but PGM isn't worth any less than any other business degree.
Since those "unlimited" plans are typically offered at a flat-rate, the period is unimportant. The undeniable limit is the available physical bandwidth. The period (eg: per month) is just how often you pay for access to that bandwidth. Changing the period changes nothing with regard to the bandwidth and/or download capability.
But the bandwidth itself is already limited to the carrying capacity of the channel... my whole point is that people are arguing for an unattainable standard from those providing the data plans, just because they can concoct an ambiguity in the language used in the advertising...
Here's a hint for everyone, if you've found an ambiguity in an advertisement, assume that the ambiguity will be decided in the way that is least desirable to you. It's only ever in boilerplate contracts where ambiguity is leveraged against the person making the statement. You can't twist and advertisement away from what the person meant... (truth in advertising is different, because it requires there to be no ambiguity that what they stated cannot in any reasonable way apply... this specific case, most definitely does not qualify.)
Yes, and a case in point that I noticed recently: One of the major insurance companies in the U.S., I don't remember which (shows how effective advertising is) advertised that the average person who switched to them saved $150. Then in a caveat at the end they admit that this is based on a survey of people who said they saved money by switching to this company. So in other words, they have completely thrown out anyone who switched and ended up paying more from the equation.
People usually don't switch to a new company unless they're going to save money anyways. So the average savings of anyone who switches to them is of course going to be a savings. In fact, every single company can list an average savings of people who switch to their companies, because (nearly) everyone who switches is saving money.
Screw throwing out data, they don't even need to throw out data... the data are already amenable to the statistics that they want to show.
Oh, and throtteling IS limiting...unlimited is by definition Without Limits (of any kind).
A function can be limited in the x-axis, but still be unlimited in the y-axis. This shouldn't be as hard to grasp as some people have been making it out to be.
And if you want to settle on "unlimited means absolutely no limits at all ever", then physical limitations of reality start making your "unlimited" option limited.
After all, the plan right from the start was limited to monthly periods. So, even if it were "all you can download, as fast as you can download", it would still be limited by "in the span of a month". So this whole argument that their unlimited plan is not allowed to have any limitations at all is ridiculous "entitlement"...
Not the way I read it. You want to sell me unlimited data, it'd better be unlimited. As in, no limits at all. Not "no limits on the amount". I'm talking "no limits on the amount, no limits on how you use it, no limits on how fast you can use it."
Otherwise, you'd better stop calling it unlimited.
I want to be able to access the internet as it will exist in 5 years, and if you can't provide it, then that's a limit, and by golly, I'm going to sue you for providing an unlimited plan that is limited by the rules of physics.
People need to get over this shit, the "unlimited" was always restricted to the amount of data that you can download, and I've known this for years. But so many people seem to be taking this approach of, "I can distort your words to mean something that you never promised, and since I never got it, I'm upset, and going to threaten to sue you!"
Advertising is misleading even when it's not deceptive. That's how advertising works. Drinking Dos Equis will not make you the most interesting man in the world, and you will not own a pet cougar as a result of drinking a specific brand of beer. Yet, their advertising sets viewers up for a false-correlation of "that guy drinks Dos Equis, that guy is awesome, therefore, if I drink Dos Equis, I will be awesome, too!"
No, when they advertise unlimited bandwidth, what they mean is that they don't put any limits on it. If they put limits on it then it's not unlimited. The overly pedantic definition you're using is of no value to anybody ever.
I think you'll find that the overly pedantic definition is useful to someone... advertisers.
As I explained elsewhere, advertising always uses the most pedantic definitions possible, stretching meaning to be misleading to customers, while still technically true, so that they're not hit by truth in advertising laws.
So, these pedantic definitions are quite valuable, and are consistently used all over advertising, which is why it is important for advertisement watchers to be aware and keep a skeptical (cynical?) eye on all advertising-speak.
The bandwidth is not capped though, it's THROTTLED. So you still get "unlimited" bandwidth.
To be a bit pedantic, throttled is the exact opposite of unlimited bandwidth. What they are talking about of course is unlimited data.
I owe you an apology... apparently, there are people who need this explained to them... :(
So then don't call it unlimited? it's not that hard -_-
The bandwidth is not capped though, it's THROTTLED.
I agree that this is the definition AT&T wants to use, but it's not advertised as "uncapped," it's advertised as "unlimited." Throttling is limiting. I'm sure there are many synonymous ways you could define "bandwidth throttling" which doesn't include the word "limit," but by reducing the available bandwith, you are limiting. Something which is limited cannot be called unlimited.
When AT&T first started throttling, it was supposed to be the top 5% of users, who apparently consumed something like 90% of the overall data. Now this seems to have come to serve another purpose.
But the bandwidth has always been limited... you can't have unlimited bandwidth. Shall we say that I can't say "unlimited soup and salad" because eventually the restaurant closes, and you have to stop? Is it unjustified for a restaurant to say such as well, if they require that you can only order one plate at a time? "Because you cannot send me 1 billion plates of soup and salad at one time, your 'unlimited' deal is limited, therefore you're lying to us!"
As the person above you commented, it's about unlimited data, and indeed, your data is unlimited, because you can get as much data as you want, as long as you're willing to wait for it. I didn't think it were necessary to explain that bandwidth cannot physically be unlimited, so it shouldn't be necessary to mention... apparently, they built a better idiot though...
"shooting targets" might be a nice hobby, but it's not very practical.
The purpose of the item being sold does not have to be practical. Recurve bows and arrows have no "practical" use, and are only particularly useful for target practice. In fact, recurve bows are even less useful than hand guns for hunting.
As well, handguns have another perfectly legal reason for purchase and ownership: protection, and defense.
There is no way that gun manufacturers aren't aware of those statistics, yet they keep on allowing their products being sold in shops.
Being aware the statistics about misuse of your item does not mean that you are criminally liable. The manufacturers of oxycodone are certainly aware of the high rate of abuse of their drug, shall we hold them responsible criminally for the abuse of their drug?
With this jurisprudence, gun manufacturers are just as guilty. Either that, or someone got wrongly convicted here.
This jurisprudence is not precedent setting. Gun manufacturers are already, and have long been subject to the conditions under which this individual was charged.
There was sufficiently established evidence that this individual was selling a product that had no legal purpose. Guns have well recognized legal purposes. And weapons manufacturers are not concerned about this case... like I said, this case hinged on already well established legal precedents, and the gun manufacturer lawyers have long been aware of these details.
But then, as usual, anything legal happens, and slashdot armchair lay lawyers are ready to jump out of the woodwork with specious legal theories, and pretend like shit means more than it actually does.
The bandwidth is not capped though, it's THROTTLED. So you still get "unlimited" bandwidth.
To be a bit pedantic, throttled is the exact opposite of unlimited bandwidth. What they are talking about of course is unlimited data.
Indeed, but we all should know that unlimited bandwidth is physically impossible, anyways...
*Big dopey grin from sales dweeb* While I walked away happily - I enjoy wasting salespeople's time when I have nothing better to do.
I had some phone sales rep yell at me for politely letting him go through his spiel before shooting him down. He basically asked me why I would listen to his whole spiel, and then he dramatically hung up on me.
As I was putting down the phone receiver, I was thinking to myself, "because you never gave me a chance to talk..."
So then don't call it unlimited? it's not that hard -_-
The bandwidth is not capped though, it's THROTTLED. So you still get "unlimited" bandwidth.
People need to remember that companies are going to sell you with the most non-obvious definitions available to them. How often do you hear "it's a steal at less than 14 thousand dollars!" Meanwhile it costs $13,999... sure it's true, but that doesn't make it misleading.
Cynics however are in the know, and we're constantly looking for how they could be using these words to their best benefit.
Other people just don't seem to get it, and no less always act surprised every time they get burned by assuming good faith in advertising.