dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5
share rss forum feed


sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX

1 edit
reply to JohnInSJ

Re: Bandwidth Limits/Congestion Management - All discussion here

said by JohnInSJ:

Because 5gb is pretty darn easy to use even at EVDO speeds, while 250gb is a lot more realistic, even at 12/2 speeds.

Plus, I and everyone else here knows full well what the comcast cap is. Seriously.
We are talking about advertising to the public, not what we know on DSLReports.

If the public would know what we know, the situation would be different.

I can reach the 250 GB cap using my connection 3.5 hrs a day at SIX megabit speed. I would say that is darn easy, too.

--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
It's right there in the AUP.

You check a box when you sign up for service that says

"I have reviewed the AUP and agree"

So, uh, again, where is the secret? They also don't advertise that you cannot run a server on the residential service. Is that a problem for you too?


sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
said by JohnInSJ:

It's right there in the AUP.

You check a box when you sign up for service that says

"I have reviewed the AUP and agree"

So, uh, again, where is the secret? They also don't advertise that you cannot run a server on the residential service. Is that a problem for you too?
Is the AUP presented in the advertisements ? No.

If you try to pick strawman arguments, I have a problem with rabbits running across fields toward north east on Fridays at 9 AM. I am sure you could paint that as me having an unsubstantiated gripe against CC advertisements.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

1 edit
I don't find it a strawman argument. Buyer beware, but we can disagree on this. The only people who would even understand what "your usage is soft-capped at 250GB a month" *means* already do know it, the other 99% would never hit that cap anyway.

I'm sure you disagree with that too


sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX

3 edits
said by JohnInSJ:

I don't find it a strawman argument. Buyer beware, but we can disagree on this. The only people who would even understand what "your usage is soft-capped at 250GB a month" *means* already do know it, the other 99% would never hit that cap anyway.

I'm sure you disagree with that too
You said that a list of providers ALL hide the caps in the AUP. I stated that one in the list did not.

You pointed that the caps were stated in the AUP that almost nobody reads and immediately shifted to an unrelated clause that would be easier to knock down than the original argument, weakening the stance of the interlocutor. Classic strawman argument.

To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

Now, let's use you 99%/1% argument on something else, like medication. Firm A markets drug A1. 99% of patients will not have ill effects, 1% might/will. Should the disclaimer be presented ONLY to doctors, since the public would not understand it 99% and only 1% might suffer ? I am sure the FDA would like to hear about that.
After all, if the patient signs / check the AUP all is just fine, no ?

That is what regulation does. It helps information and safety for ALL regarding the products they use/have purchased. I am sure many firms would maybe like regulations to be different, but it makes it better for us all.

--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
quote:
You said that a list of providers ALL hide the caps in the AUP
No, I said the CAP was IN the AUP, not HIDDEN THERE.

You agree to the AUP when you sign up. You say "Yes, I READ IT, I UNDERSTAND IT, I AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT."

It is common practice to put all manner of things in the AUP that are not mentioned in any advertisement.

Do you agree with that?


sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX

1 edit
said by JohnInSJ:

quote:
You said that a list of providers ALL hide the caps in the AUP
No, I said the CAP was IN the AUP, not HIDDEN THERE.

You agree to the AUP when you sign up. You say "Yes, I READ IT, I UNDERSTAND IT, I AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT."

It is common practice to put all manner of things in the AUP that are not mentioned in any advertisement.

Do you agree with that?
You actually said: "Comcast buries their cap in their AUP just like everyone else". So, yes, it IS in the AUP. Why did you use the word "buries" ? My English is weak, I understood that as an attempt to hide something, maybe because it could have an explosive result ?

Remember, the discussion was about the fact that not all the providers in the list you mentioned do not list the cap limit in the advertisements.

I do not like this common practice, especially when it concerns such important clauses that include termination of the account.

The fact that it is "common" does not make it right. The fact that one ISP is coming clean about it shows they believe it is important and they deserve praise for their honesty.

And we can discuss a bit about the AUP that you agree to. You do realize hat they say they could change without notice the AUP at any time ? That time could be in extreme cases the time in between you read it and you click on the checkbox. Do you still believe it is a valid agreement ?
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
said by sturmvogel:

Remember, the discussion was about the fact that not all the providers in the list you mentioned do not list the cap limit in the advertisements.
No, that's YOUR argument.
I'm trying to show you how that is an unrealistic, one would say naive belief, not supported at all in real life. Legally, they're covered*. That's real life.

*note that they legally had to disclose the cap, not advertise it. You would think they'd have been forced to advertise it since the lawyers were all warmed up on the runway and everything.
quote:
You do realize hat they say they could change without notice the AUP at any time?
Yes, because I read them. In fact, as a business user I read and signed a legally binding contract for three years of service. The contract had 1 sentence that said basically signing the contract means I read and agree to the AUP. Which I did.

The logic is simple. You're buying a service. Either buy it or don't.

I notice you still have yet to answer my simple yes/no question. I'd like you to try and answer that for me, please.


sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
Which one ?

"You agree to the AUP when you sign up. You say "Yes, I READ IT, I UNDERSTAND IT, I AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT."

Yes.

"It is common practice to put all manner of things in the AUP that are not mentioned in any advertisement."

It is common practice. I consider it dishonest if not clearly disclosed on advertisements on important clauses.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

1 edit

1 recommendation

Edit..

So, you agree but don't like it.

Cool. Change the laws and get back to me.


sturmvogel
Obama '08

join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX

1 recommendation

said by JohnInSJ:

Edit..

So, you agree but don't like it.

Cool. Change the laws and get back to me.
Will do.
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries.


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3

1 edit
said by sturmvogel:

said by JohnInSJ:

... Change the laws and get back to me.
Will do.
speaking of laws
We need to make a law that internet service be la cart (and that caps on hard wired connections be illegal

and while we're at it make it so that they can't require an SMC gateway to get statics (very narrow law but come on)