3 ms·

EU looks into blocking of Internet calls

20 points by gibsonf1 18y ago

Hexstream 18y ago
Misleading title, I thought it meant that the EU is thinking about blocking Internet calls but they're just investigating whether companies do it.
- jodrellblank 18y ago
  You misreading it doesn't make it a misleading title. They are looking into "blocking of calls", not "blocking calls". Just because American-English has conditioned the world that "Off of" is the same as "Off" doesn't mean that "of" has no meaning. I don't know whether it's anticompetetive to block such calls, but it probably hinges on whether we take telephone to mean "a telephone (traditional)", "any device that looks and acts like a traditional telephone (e.g. USB skypephone)" or "any system that carries speech between some number of particular persons over some distance". Depending on which you choose, you get a different answer and interpretation. There was a local case recently where a ferry-bridge was classed as a bridge, because it's on a chain fixed between two points, and the local authority wanted it reclassified as a boat because it floats, so they could up the harbour taxes 40x. The counter argument was that it only floats between two points winching itself along a chain, what kind of useless "boat" is that? As I see it, it's clearly not a good fit for either definition, and thus the argument is completely pointless. This is similar - it's not at all a classic phonecall, so don't treat it like that. They're providing a data service and limiting the types of data that can be sent, that's what should be under investigation. It's a nontechnical restriction designed to bump up profits. Either limit the data rate or latency or max transfer allowance, or adjust your charges to be profitable with increased use, but stay out of what it's used for (legal concerns excepted).
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
mdasen 18y ago
As much as I hate carriers who block services, they have a point here. Wireless calls typically use 8kbps. Next-generation codecs cut that to 4-5kbps. Skype, well, is wasteful. With most people's internet connections, this doesn't matter. What's 20-60kbps? However, if everyone decided to use Skype on their wireless, we'd hit capacity problems fast. We'd also see the end of unlimited data. It would be metered in an official manner and it would come out to a rate more expensive than voice because it uses more network resources than voice. If a minute voice call uses 480kb and a minute Skype call uses 1200kb, you can bet that the Skype call will cost you double (or more). The fact is that wireless networks are able to optimize their voice services when it's voice. When it's data, it's just wasteful of bandwidth. That doesn't matter over your cable modem. It matters on a shared wireless link that works because it pushes the max on efficiency.

20 points by gibsonf1 18y ago

Misleading title, I thought it meant that the EU is thinking about blocking Internet calls but they're just investigating whether companies do it.

jodrellblank 18y ago
You misreading it doesn't make it a misleading title. They are looking into "blocking of calls", not "blocking calls". Just because American-English has conditioned the world that "Off of" is the same as "Off" doesn't mean that "of" has no meaning. I don't know whether it's anticompetetive to block such calls, but it probably hinges on whether we take telephone to mean "a telephone (traditional)", "any device that looks and acts like a traditional telephone (e.g. USB skypephone)" or "any system that carries speech between some number of particular persons over some distance". Depending on which you choose, you get a different answer and interpretation. There was a local case recently where a ferry-bridge was classed as a bridge, because it's on a chain fixed between two points, and the local authority wanted it reclassified as a boat because it floats, so they could up the harbour taxes 40x. The counter argument was that it only floats between two points winching itself along a chain, what kind of useless "boat" is that? As I see it, it's clearly not a good fit for either definition, and thus the argument is completely pointless. This is similar - it's not at all a classic phonecall, so don't treat it like that. They're providing a data service and limiting the types of data that can be sent, that's what should be under investigation. It's a nontechnical restriction designed to bump up profits. Either limit the data rate or latency or max transfer allowance, or adjust your charges to be profitable with increased use, but stay out of what it's used for (legal concerns excepted).

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

mdasen 18y ago

As much as I hate carriers who block services, they have a point here. Wireless calls typically use 8kbps. Next-generation codecs cut that to 4-5kbps. Skype, well, is wasteful. With most people's internet connections, this doesn't matter. What's 20-60kbps? However, if everyone decided to use Skype on their wireless, we'd hit capacity problems fast. We'd also see the end of unlimited data. It would be metered in an official manner and it would come out to a rate more expensive than voice because it uses more network resources than voice. If a minute voice call uses 480kb and a minute Skype call uses 1200kb, you can bet that the Skype call will cost you double (or more). The fact is that wireless networks are able to optimize their voice services when it's voice. When it's data, it's just wasteful of bandwidth. That doesn't matter over your cable modem. It matters on a shared wireless link that works because it pushes the max on efficiency.