3 ms·

I like T-Mobile's zero-rating solution. Specific classes of data (sub-480p video) would be zero rated for all servers who filled out paperwork, no source-based

by HWR_14 5y ago

I like T-Mobile's zero-rating solution. Specific classes of data (sub-480p video) would be zero rated for all servers who filled out paperwork, no source-based discrimination. That made sense. Also, kinda obviously, government emergency services (911, weather alerts, etc) being zero-rated just make sense. I don't want zero rating to let FB subsidize plans that allow free access to FB. I think we can find some uses that avoid dystopia.

Bilal_io 5y ago
Well, I'd like my ISP to get their nose out of my traffic and stop sniffing like a coke addict. One of Net Neutrality arguments is that you sell me speed (and bandwidth where data caps apply, but shouldn't) and I can do whatever I want. It is I, that pays for the service, not Netflix nor Google or any platform, and if I want to watch YouTube in 4K because my speed allows me to, or if I want to turn my PC into a seeding machine for Linux iso images, I should be free to do so. So there is an argument for DNS-over-HTTPS there on top of the NN one.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  It doesn't stop you from watching in 4K video. It just provides another option. But critically, this is an option that you, the customer, negotiate with T-Mobile. You contract for X gigs plus unlimited sub-480p traffic. And tiered data (X gigs of high-speed, Y or infinite gigs of low speed) is really common in cellphone contracts. This is just making it clear you can get the low speed data without having to burn your high speed up first.
  - vel0city 5y ago
    > X gigs of high-speed, Y or infinite gigs of low speed But then why even bother with the paperwork to get approved to be a part of the program? Why doesn't T-Mo just ignore usage below some average throughput speed for any traffic?
    - HWR_14 5y ago
      A couple of reasons. One is that your paperwork guarantees you'll pay attention to their "throttle this down to sub-480p" request, which let them have their customers (who opted into it from t-mobile) not have to worry about how that apps streaming was free. That is, T-Mobile customers who turned that feature on could be presented whitelisted apps without needing to configure them. Two is that "free video streaming" sounds better when selling a service to their customers than "free Xmbps connections". Three is it allows a lot more freedom to T-mobile. They know they need to average X mbps so the stream doesn't jitter, but they can totally take advantage of an uncongested five minutes to let you download quickly to build your cache.
thomastjeffery 5y ago
...but then T-Mobile customers are stuck with 480p video unless they want to pay for an actually reasonable amount of bandwidth. On top of that, anyone hosting content who wants to be zero-rated has to make 480p copies of all their video, which may be common practice, but certainly isn't free. And what about content that isn't video on the first place? There are plenty of mobile games that require several gigabytes of download. No matter what it is for, zero-reading creates an artificial scarcity.
imtringued 5y ago
Mobile internet companies taught me to never use mobile internet unless absolutely necessary. Now I will never need more than a 1GB plan.

by HWR_14 5y ago

Bilal_io 5y ago

Well, I'd like my ISP to get their nose out of my traffic and stop sniffing like a coke addict. One of Net Neutrality arguments is that you sell me speed (and bandwidth where data caps apply, but shouldn't) and I can do whatever I want. It is I, that pays for the service, not Netflix nor Google or any platform, and if I want to watch YouTube in 4K because my speed allows me to, or if I want to turn my PC into a seeding machine for Linux iso images, I should be free to do so. So there is an argument for DNS-over-HTTPS there on top of the NN one.

HWR_14 5y ago
It doesn't stop you from watching in 4K video. It just provides another option. But critically, this is an option that you, the customer, negotiate with T-Mobile. You contract for X gigs plus unlimited sub-480p traffic. And tiered data (X gigs of high-speed, Y or infinite gigs of low speed) is really common in cellphone contracts. This is just making it clear you can get the low speed data without having to burn your high speed up first.
- vel0city 5y ago
  > X gigs of high-speed, Y or infinite gigs of low speed But then why even bother with the paperwork to get approved to be a part of the program? Why doesn't T-Mo just ignore usage below some average throughput speed for any traffic?
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    A couple of reasons. One is that your paperwork guarantees you'll pay attention to their "throttle this down to sub-480p" request, which let them have their customers (who opted into it from t-mobile) not have to worry about how that apps streaming was free. That is, T-Mobile customers who turned that feature on could be presented whitelisted apps without needing to configure them. Two is that "free video streaming" sounds better when selling a service to their customers than "free Xmbps connections". Three is it allows a lot more freedom to T-mobile. They know they need to average X mbps so the stream doesn't jitter, but they can totally take advantage of an uncongested five minutes to let you download quickly to build your cache.

thomastjeffery 5y ago

...but then T-Mobile customers are stuck with 480p video unless they want to pay for an actually reasonable amount of bandwidth. On top of that, anyone hosting content who wants to be zero-rated has to make 480p copies of all their video, which may be common practice, but certainly isn't free. And what about content that isn't video on the first place? There are plenty of mobile games that require several gigabytes of download. No matter what it is for, zero-reading creates an artificial scarcity.

imtringued 5y ago

Mobile internet companies taught me to never use mobile internet unless absolutely necessary. Now I will never need more than a 1GB plan.