Important!!! Net Neutrality day in the U.S.

At least you’ve framed the argument better and I see your point but it’s still the wrong point.

You should know better if you’re really a network engineer or architect.

There is no 22 cap. You can download 40gb without extra charges if you want. Unlimited. You just might not get the same throughput.

 

Hard limits...no. But still not "Unlimited". It's really just a language use issue for me.

 

I'd hate to jump in but it just feels like your looking to argue about a very minor point that you're making way more dramatic than it needs to be. Am I the only one that feels like you're doing this to try and brag about how smart you are, or belittle someone else in the same industry to make yourself feel better? It's weird man, and kind of cringe-worthy.

 

Go back and do some reading, back in the dialup era there were court fights that defined 'unlimited' in the context of ISP advertising. Unlimited refers to no restrictions on when you can connect, or for how long. What you're looking for is handled under 'Data Caps' and 'bandwidth tiers'. You'll note they specify those details separately from the times you can connect. If your data stops completely when you hit a cap, THEN you can't call it unlimited 'cause now there are times you can't connect, but that is not what's happening. Been working in the ISP industry since the dialup era and I remember all this being fought over.

 

I think they need to revisit this as the days of "dialing up" to connect to the network are long gone. Your device can be connected without having the ability to transmit or receive any data beyond that needed to identify itself and authenticate. The cellular industry didn't really exist at that time in any meaningful manner. I guess you can't blame them for taking advantage of a ruling that happened before their industry existed.

 

Try to look at from the perspective of someone outside the industry to whom "unlimited" would not seem to be a word that needs to be parsed that deeply to understand in the context of an ad.
It's disingenuous.

 

No. I’m saying this because it’s true. Net neutrality as a subject is filled with false statements and bullshit. People protesting often don’t have a clue what they’re talking about. But public pressure could result in a really bad outcome.

 

Wrong. You have unlimited data. Not unlimited speed. It’s not complicated.

 

If you have to read footnotes or tiny print to get the details, it is not a clearly communicated concept. It might be for the tech savvy, but projecting your understanding onto the average consumer gives you a very skewed viewpoint.

 

It is unlimited. Your refusal to acknowledge that there is not a cap on data “quantity “ seems deliberate. I think you know you’re wrong about this. At some point the consumer has a responsibility to be at least a little educated about their purchases. Since there are really only 4 variables at play here (size, speed, coverage and cost) it ain’t that complicated.

I am no fan of how the telcos operate but even I can’t hammer them for this.

 

It ain’t just in the footnotes. And it ain’t complicated. Your argument is really about creating a nanny state.

 

Btw if my 80 something parents can comprehend it and one of them still struggles with a dvr im pretty sure it isn’t that complicated.

 

Well f#(k me to tears. Two very astute IT professionals cannot agree on the terms and terminology, and I'm looking for a nanny state? Step back, take a deep breath and try for some perspective dude.

 

There are plenty of other people that are not it pros that comprehend it. I’m shocked that a self described network Engineer takes this position. But hey- everyone has the right to claim ignorance and complain. Maybe they should call this #methree.

 

Whatever.