50 GB? That’s a couple iOS or other OS update, or just streaming video a lot. A quick check shows my house over 500GB last month.
It’s 30 mins at full speed.
It’s around 4.5 hours at full speed. Remember that internet speeds are in megabits, not megabytes to falsely increase the speed number as well.
Internet speeds being measured in bits instead of bytes is absolutely not to falsely represent Internet speeds, nor is there anything false about it. Measuring network transmission speeds in bits is an engineering custom used in telecommunications long before consumer internet existed.
From the linked press release:
Governor Kathy Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced an agreement with T-Mobile USA, Inc. (T-Mobile), requiring the company to improve and expand the home internet service it offers eligible New Yorkers under the New York Affordable Broadband Act (ABA).
As a result of OAG’s investigation, T-Mobile will remove the data caps associated with its ABA plans and deliver 25 Mbps download speeds to all ABA plan subscribers, unless network congestion requires temporary reductions. In addition, T-Mobile will offer ABA plans in all areas where it provides home internet service and make its ABA plan webpage discoverable by search engines.
WHERE’S THE MOTHERFUCKING PUNISHMENT?! All I see is where they’re making T-mobile pinky-promise to start following the law they’ve been breaking all this time, while being allowed to keep every single goddamn penny of their ill-gotten gains!
NO mention of prison time for executives.
NO mention of punitive fines.
NO mention even of restitution to wronged customers, which is less than the bare fucking minimum!!!
The only even slightly useful part of that press release is this at the bottom, because every New Yorker should be absolutely livid about this weak-ass corporatist shit:
Contact the Governor’s Press Office
Contact us by phone:
Albany: (518) 474-8418
New York City: (212) 681-4640Contact us by email:
Press.Office@exec.ny.govSomeone with a better memory or search engine capability can weigh in, but I’m pretty sure T-Mobile had a bunch of restrictions lifted for no reason that were imposed on them because they were illegally charging customers who switched plans or something.
I wonder if the low income people could get the maximum payout if they brought it to small claims?
Any punishment to the company will be paid by it’s customers anyway… For any large company fines and legal fees are calculated in as a cost of doing business. Prison for execs will just lead to fall guys getting the job while the real beneficiaries i.e. major stakeholders will pull the string from the shadows. If you want this to stop you have to go after them. Something like community service or % of their stock holdings going to the victims would be more effective imo.
Edit: You may not like what i’m saying but deep down you know i’m right.
Guess we shouldn’t ever punish them then.
Yeah, it makes no difference, the system is rigged, you have to go after the real beneficiaries.
work your job all day to help some ass hole boss get rich, come home to relax and your internet gets secretly slowed down - so your bosses kids can also own you online in literally any multiplayer FPS.
As a former subscriber to both T-Mobile’s fixed wireless home internet and their subsidiary Mint Mobile’s fixed wireless home internet, this explains a lot.
Jesus just 50GB a month? That wouldn’t last me a day …
4h at full speed. Uncapped is effectively an 8TB cap, so they delivered 0.6% of what they were supposed to.
My grandma has a plan like this and visiting her for less than a week detonates her (hidden) cap just from my phone backing up its apps.
My home internet sits at multiple TB a month despite backups etc. not even running through it since it syncs to my local nas on the same network.On 50GB you coulnd’t even install a large game.
T-Mobile: “Yeah. So? What are you gonna do about it? Uh huh. Nothing. That’s what I thought, bitch.”
Calling it affordable broadband while throttling people to 600 Kbps after 50 GB is like selling a discounted bus pass that turns into a pair of shoes after four rides. And hiding the plan from search engines? Apparently the cheapest way to provide low income internet is making sure nobody can find it.
Artificial static throughput caps on modern networks are asinine and archaic, especially on shared mediums.
Network providers should permit shared best effort throughput, with a sliding temporal window which keeps a tally of usage and feeds into a ratcheting deprioritisation of slot allocations. This would permit short bursts of maximum throughput, which is more efficient and frees the channel quicker, and slots longer transfers into the remaining default channel space.
Differentiate service based on the dimensions of the monitored and enforced windows, not an arbitrary static sphincter.
Yeah but how are we going to exploit the poors with a system that works?
Differentiate service based on the dimensions of the monitored and enforced windows, not an arbitrary static sphincter.
How would you explain that in a simple way people can understanding?
Basicslly the more data you use, the lower priority you are
So the person browsing the Web doesn’t get slowed down by the person redownloading their entire steam library, but if there’s bandwidth for everyone then they all go full speed
The downside is some heavier services need to be as fast as possible for good service, like video calls, while you’re not going to really notice if your game takes another 2 minutes to download (and this is the way stuff is prioritized now by default)
You could split the difference, but it doesn’t really fix the problem, it just fixes the data limiting nonsense. And we should just make that flatly illegal
Really, they should only be able to sell 50mb/s service if their network can provide that to all of their users on at any point in any average day.
So when GTA6 releases, maybe it’s a bit of a slow Internet day, but if they can’t provide what they promised every evening when everyone is streaming TV?
Then they need to start giving people some of their money back. That way they’ll make sure to upgrade their network proactively
Really, they should only be able to sell 50mb/s service if their network can provide that to all of their users on at any point in any average day.
All residential ISPs are over subscribed. If they could provide the full bandwidth to all of their customers simultaneously, then most of that bandwidth would go unused.
And also that would make residential connections expensive as hell and waste resources on every step on the network. I’m on a relatively small ISP but still have symmetric 1Gbps connection. If every customer even on this small ISP had their full bandwidth available to everything all the time they’d need at least several Tbps combined capacity which would take considerable chunk of all the capacity we have on the whole country to abroad just to serve few thousand houses.
Small data really fast, big data slow
As an example, the initial unconstrained window would be measured in minutes:
Small: 1 minute
Medium: 5 minutes
Large: 30 minutesThe sliding window and tally falloff could also vary. It would help the network providers better utilise and monitor their networks, and users can plan for big downloads by keeping their service quiet for a period before they begin.
Remember that T-Mobile officially supported Starlink. Thus, it is a technofascist company that openly supports genocide.
Remember that Starlink is used in Ukraine as well as on a lot of wildfire and earthquake sites. The deduction here is a bit too rushed.
the conclusion is the same: break up star link.
Seconding the other person. Musk sucks but Starlink is objectively a good thing.
Starlink ruins the night sky at scale, wastes a massive amount of resources to launch, and requires continuous replacement. In limited usage it is pretty good, but as the intended full replacement of glocbal networks as a whole that it was deaigned to be it is horrible.
It has its uses, but that doesn’t mean that the FCC should continue to give Musk’s company rural internet grants. Those should go to local fiber PUDs. Musk can fund it on his own.
It also means that you are supporting Musk when you use it, even if it’s the best option. It’s important to remember that.
