6 ms·

Telcos should focus on being dump pipes and leave the application layer to others. Going into messages or even content is nothing but a rent seeking attempt to

Telcos should focus on being dump pipes and leave the application layer to others. Going into messages or even content is nothing but a rent seeking attempt to exploit a missing net neutrality mandate.

lucb1e 7y ago
I don't really care who sets it up, but since everyone that is currently on facebook chat (be it Messenger or WhatsApp) is also a customer of some mobile carrier, having the carriers create an alternative is not a completely ridiculous idea when we want to make the chat infrastructure distributed/federated. I'd be happy to MMS my uncle if it didn't cost like two euros per 640x480 picture; RCS seems to be the way I'll be able to do that without going through Facebook.
- XMPPwocky 7y ago
  I mean, imagine a world where your ISP gives you an email address too- doesn't really make sense.
  - detaro 7y ago
    That was completely normal.
    - aaomidi 7y ago
      And still happens to this day.
    - lucb1e 7y ago
      I think that was the point: since it's normal that an ISP gives you an email address with webmail and some mega/gigabytes space, why not a messaging service supported by mobile carriers?
- anon4242 7y ago
  > I'd be happy to MMS my uncle if it didn't cost like two euros per 640x480 picture Wow, where are you living? I haven't paid to send an MMS in nearly ten years...
  - lucb1e 7y ago
    I've seen cheap contracts where SMS is unlimited, but never anything with unlimited MMS (Netherlands). I actually just checked what I currently pay for an MMS and youfone.nl doesn't even mention it in the price list. Since I have to ask, I guess I can't afford it :-)
    - anon4242 7y ago
      Oh :O, up here in the north (Sweden) you have to look pretty hard to find a plan without unlimited everything but data.
    - vxNsr 7y ago
      my understanding is that mms is part of data, that's how it works here in the US. RCS will also use data whenever it gets implemented.
  - leoedin 7y ago
    It's the same in the UK. My phone bill is normally £12 a month - recently it was maybe £1 more. I checked what had happened - I'd accidentally sent a single mms to someone by including a link to google maps in a text message which got expanded into an image. There's a reason WhatsApp is basically the only messaging people do here - carrier based messaging is an exploitative money trap.
gorgoiler 7y ago
Devil’s advocate: it’ll never change because where’s the money in being the provider of dumb pipes? More to the point, if you’re a publicly traded company with stock price and future earnings based off on this kind of rent seeking being priced into your valuation, and let’s also say you desperately wanted to do some the honorable thing and ramp operations down to dumb pipe level, how could the markets and shareholders ever let you do that? The Ma Bells of this world are in over their heads and it’s hard to see things change without state intervention (a politically sensitive topic over in the UK, but that could get pretty off topic.)
- Mirioron 7y ago
  >because where’s the money in being the provider of dumb pipes? In longevity. We will always need dumb pipe companies. If you can keep a decent reputation then perhaps it'll be easier to continue offering that service. You're less likely to get regulated and people will still use your services if a competitor appears. Steam is a good example on that front. If a company wants to make the maximum amount of profit then longevity is a must.
  - gorgoiler 7y ago
    My idea was more about how a change in expectations of the business models of the current providers would possibly have such a negative impact on future growth and revenue predictions, their stock price couldn’t handle a revelatory switch to just being dumb pipes. If society wants dumb pipe providers, we’ll have to radically alter the business ecology of the telecoms sector. Oh, to have a modestly profitable and much less ambitious dumb-pipe provider eat all their lunches!
- konschubert 7y ago
  That’s where regulation comes in. Companies, in particular companies that run infrastructure through public spaces, don’t exist in a vacuum.
  - unishark 7y ago
    neither do regulatory agencies, unfortunately. Which is why they are so good at making things worse rather than better.

lucb1e 7y ago

I don't really care who sets it up, but since everyone that is currently on facebook chat (be it Messenger or WhatsApp) is also a customer of some mobile carrier, having the carriers create an alternative is not a completely ridiculous idea when we want to make the chat infrastructure distributed/federated. I'd be happy to MMS my uncle if it didn't cost like two euros per 640x480 picture; RCS seems to be the way I'll be able to do that without going through Facebook.

XMPPwocky 7y ago
I mean, imagine a world where your ISP gives you an email address too- doesn't really make sense.
- detaro 7y ago
  That was completely normal.
  - aaomidi 7y ago
    And still happens to this day.
  - lucb1e 7y ago
    I think that was the point: since it's normal that an ISP gives you an email address with webmail and some mega/gigabytes space, why not a messaging service supported by mobile carriers?
anon4242 7y ago
> I'd be happy to MMS my uncle if it didn't cost like two euros per 640x480 picture Wow, where are you living? I haven't paid to send an MMS in nearly ten years...
- lucb1e 7y ago
  I've seen cheap contracts where SMS is unlimited, but never anything with unlimited MMS (Netherlands). I actually just checked what I currently pay for an MMS and youfone.nl doesn't even mention it in the price list. Since I have to ask, I guess I can't afford it :-)
  - anon4242 7y ago
    Oh :O, up here in the north (Sweden) you have to look pretty hard to find a plan without unlimited everything but data.
  - vxNsr 7y ago
    my understanding is that mms is part of data, that's how it works here in the US. RCS will also use data whenever it gets implemented.
- leoedin 7y ago
  It's the same in the UK. My phone bill is normally £12 a month - recently it was maybe £1 more. I checked what had happened - I'd accidentally sent a single mms to someone by including a link to google maps in a text message which got expanded into an image. There's a reason WhatsApp is basically the only messaging people do here - carrier based messaging is an exploitative money trap.

gorgoiler 7y ago

Devil’s advocate: it’ll never change because where’s the money in being the provider of dumb pipes? More to the point, if you’re a publicly traded company with stock price and future earnings based off on this kind of rent seeking being priced into your valuation, and let’s also say you desperately wanted to do some the honorable thing and ramp operations down to dumb pipe level, how could the markets and shareholders ever let you do that? The Ma Bells of this world are in over their heads and it’s hard to see things change without state intervention (a politically sensitive topic over in the UK, but that could get pretty off topic.)

Mirioron 7y ago
>because where’s the money in being the provider of dumb pipes? In longevity. We will always need dumb pipe companies. If you can keep a decent reputation then perhaps it'll be easier to continue offering that service. You're less likely to get regulated and people will still use your services if a competitor appears. Steam is a good example on that front. If a company wants to make the maximum amount of profit then longevity is a must.
- gorgoiler 7y ago
  My idea was more about how a change in expectations of the business models of the current providers would possibly have such a negative impact on future growth and revenue predictions, their stock price couldn’t handle a revelatory switch to just being dumb pipes. If society wants dumb pipe providers, we’ll have to radically alter the business ecology of the telecoms sector. Oh, to have a modestly profitable and much less ambitious dumb-pipe provider eat all their lunches!
konschubert 7y ago
That’s where regulation comes in. Companies, in particular companies that run infrastructure through public spaces, don’t exist in a vacuum.
- unishark 7y ago
  neither do regulatory agencies, unfortunately. Which is why they are so good at making things worse rather than better.