4 ms·

Let's ban Google from advertising a "search" product while we're at it, as the product they actually provide is much more complex than the term does justice. L

by UVB-76 13y ago

Let's ban Google from advertising a "search" product while we're at it, as the product they actually provide is much more complex than the term does justice. Let's also ban them from advertising a "mail" service, because they should also have to specify the exact nature of the POP3/IMAP/SMTP service provided right there in the headline, along with all the fair use restrictions. This is asinine pedantry. Nobody is mistaking Google's residential and business Internet connection offerings. The terms and conditions are clearly stated, and it's fairly obvious to users if they are breaching the fair use policy.

res0nat0r 13y ago
I don't know why, but for some reason when ever this issue comes up, this site likes to go into full on ignorant mode and pretend we don't know what the difference between personal and business class is. Most people find bandwidth charges by the gigabyte distasteful, hence no payments based on that. Don't run a warez ftp site on your personal connection and you will be fine. Worried you might be hitting their upper limit of usage on what their definition of "personal use" is? Fine then just start out of the gate by paying more for business class. It is really straightforward.
- UVB-76 13y ago
  If the pedants had their way, service providers would be banned from providing contended Internet connections with fair usage policies, and everyone would have to shell out for uncontended services.
- Dylan16807 13y ago
  I know what "business" means. I know what "server" technically means, but Google is explicitly not using the technical definition of server. I'm not using an 'ignorant mode'. Google's TOS is thoroughly broken until they provide some definition of the word server.
  - res0nat0r 13y ago
    Google can't and won't use a technical definition of server. It would be impossible and easy to work around if they iterated out every thing they believe constitutes a "server". The law and language is purposefully vague and is left open to interpretation. Let's define server as something that is going to be using up enough traffic/bandwidth to get you noticed and degrades service for someone else on your network segment. That could be saturating your connection 24/7 on a network segment that is heavily utilized, or not even an issue if you live in Bumville, Nowhere. This is something which will never be technically spelled out because it is all about context.
    - Dylan16807 13y ago
      They could at least provide guidelines. Right now I seriously have no idea if a legal, non-commercial instance of apache averaging 50kbps and peaking at 5mbps is going to violate their rules or not. If they said it had to be enough bandwidth to affect others then I could breathe a sigh of relief that I'm fine.
      - res0nat0r 13y ago
        > If they said it had to be enough bandwidth to affect others then I could breathe a sigh of relief that I'm fine. How are you going to ensure you aren't bothering others? They aren't going to give you access to their NOC so you can view their TP99 performance and see if you are a culprit. This service could be not anything to worry about in network segment A, but a large issue in segment B. It can't be broadly defined as a simple flat metric and apply to every neighborhood in the country. If you are worried about the case above I think the choices would be: Buy a personal connection, run your service and worry about running afoul, don't run your service and be happy with a personal connection, run your service with a business account from the start and don't be worried.
        Dylan16807 13y ago
        Are you suggesting that they would lie to me or that they would be so incompetent that my apache instance using less bandwidth than streaming radio would affect my neighbor's gigabit line? I'm assuming some basic levels of competence and a reluctance to flat-out lie when I complain about a provision that can be used to boot people on a whim. I shouldn't need a business account unless I want a better service level or I'm running a business.

by UVB-76 13y ago

res0nat0r 13y ago

I don't know why, but for some reason when ever this issue comes up, this site likes to go into full on ignorant mode and pretend we don't know what the difference between personal and business class is. Most people find bandwidth charges by the gigabyte distasteful, hence no payments based on that. Don't run a warez ftp site on your personal connection and you will be fine. Worried you might be hitting their upper limit of usage on what their definition of "personal use" is? Fine then just start out of the gate by paying more for business class. It is really straightforward.

UVB-76 13y ago
If the pedants had their way, service providers would be banned from providing contended Internet connections with fair usage policies, and everyone would have to shell out for uncontended services.
Dylan16807 13y ago
I know what "business" means. I know what "server" technically means, but Google is explicitly not using the technical definition of server. I'm not using an 'ignorant mode'. Google's TOS is thoroughly broken until they provide some definition of the word server.
- res0nat0r 13y ago
  Google can't and won't use a technical definition of server. It would be impossible and easy to work around if they iterated out every thing they believe constitutes a "server". The law and language is purposefully vague and is left open to interpretation. Let's define server as something that is going to be using up enough traffic/bandwidth to get you noticed and degrades service for someone else on your network segment. That could be saturating your connection 24/7 on a network segment that is heavily utilized, or not even an issue if you live in Bumville, Nowhere. This is something which will never be technically spelled out because it is all about context.
  - Dylan16807 13y ago
    They could at least provide guidelines. Right now I seriously have no idea if a legal, non-commercial instance of apache averaging 50kbps and peaking at 5mbps is going to violate their rules or not. If they said it had to be enough bandwidth to affect others then I could breathe a sigh of relief that I'm fine.
    - res0nat0r 13y ago
      > If they said it had to be enough bandwidth to affect others then I could breathe a sigh of relief that I'm fine. How are you going to ensure you aren't bothering others? They aren't going to give you access to their NOC so you can view their TP99 performance and see if you are a culprit. This service could be not anything to worry about in network segment A, but a large issue in segment B. It can't be broadly defined as a simple flat metric and apply to every neighborhood in the country. If you are worried about the case above I think the choices would be: Buy a personal connection, run your service and worry about running afoul, don't run your service and be happy with a personal connection, run your service with a business account from the start and don't be worried.
      - Dylan16807 13y ago
        Are you suggesting that they would lie to me or that they would be so incompetent that my apache instance using less bandwidth than streaming radio would affect my neighbor's gigabit line? I'm assuming some basic levels of competence and a reluctance to flat-out lie when I complain about a provision that can be used to boot people on a whim. I shouldn't need a business account unless I want a better service level or I'm running a business.