Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Saturday August 25 2018, @06:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the metaphorical-fire dept.

Verizon tries to douse criticism, touts "priority access" for first responders -- Firefighters don't like their mobile hotspots slowed to a "dial-up modem from 1995."

Verizon officials were contrite and apologetic during a California State Assembly committee hearing that was convened Friday to examine mobile Internet throttling experienced by firefighters during recent blazes. "We all make mistakes from time to time, the true measure of leadership is how soon we admit it, own it," Rudy Reyes told the Select Committee on Natural Disaster, Response, Recovery, and Rebuilding after reading from a statement that the company released hours earlier.

In that statement, Verizon said it would be introducing a "new plan" with truly unlimited data and "priority access" for first responders nationwide. "As of yesterday, we removed all speed cap restrictions for first responders on the West Coast and in Hawaii to support current firefighting and Hurricane Lane efforts," the company said. "Further, in the event of another disaster, Verizon will lift restrictions on public safety customers, providing full network access."

The executives spoke shortly after hearing from Santa Clara County Fire Chief Tony Bowden who said that his agency had experienced similar throttling in December 2017. The Santa Clara department had tried to address it with the Verizon accounts manager at the time.

See also: Verizon stops throttling more firefighters, plans unlimited data "with no caps"
California State Assembly plans hearing on Verizon throttling of firefighters' data

Previously on SN: Verizon Throttled Fire Department's "Unlimited" Data During California Wildfire


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday August 25 2018, @06:59PM (8 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 25 2018, @06:59PM (#726305) Journal

    If you aren't a douche, you never have to apologize for being a douche. Having data caps on ANY "unlimited" plan is a douche move. Build out the infrastructure, assholes! Build it out, and sell genuine "unlimited" data plans. You may offer less expensive plans, with caps. But that word "unlimited" should mean what it says.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 25 2018, @07:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 25 2018, @07:11PM (#726311)

    Or... If your (mobile data providers) plan is not really "unlimited", then don't call it "unlimited".

    If it is "full speed for first 20 gig, then throttled to 56k" then just be honest and call it a 20G/56k plan.

    Of course, "honesty" and "marketing" don't fit well together most days.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by RS3 on Saturday August 25 2018, @07:44PM (6 children)

    by RS3 (6367) on Saturday August 25 2018, @07:44PM (#726329)

    I'm in a heavy Verizon area and I'm pretty sure they have much more infrastructure / capacity available. They just want you to pay more. You know, like crippleware- you pay and it works better but it's the same .exe.

    I know this won't be popular with many here, but I think Internet usage is too important (becoming critical) and needs to be run more like a utility, not entertainment. But unlike most government-run things, it needs to be open to citizen watchdogs.

    • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday August 25 2018, @08:17PM (4 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday August 25 2018, @08:17PM (#726337) Homepage

      Absolutely.

      I'm in an urban area in a big city, closeby a major university. My phone reception sucks, and total dropouts are frequent. When I called my phone company to bitch and moan, they acknowledged that there was a "problem" with that area and that they would be willing (for free) to install a repeater in my home, with the stipulation that it always be connected to my internet connection. I told them to go fuck themselves, and when I have to make an important call I drive a mile away and take that call in the parking lot of some randomly-chosen business.

      • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Saturday August 25 2018, @09:00PM (2 children)

        by RS3 (6367) on Saturday August 25 2018, @09:00PM (#726350)

        For years I held off on getting a cell phone for that very reason. I wasn't aware that Internet connected repeaters were available. I was thinking of buying an RF one.

        Why don't you want an Internet-connected repeater?

        • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Sunday August 26 2018, @06:44AM (1 child)

          by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Sunday August 26 2018, @06:44AM (#726461)

          Just a guess, as I had not heard of such either, but maybe because it would burn through your home service plan? I somehow doubt it would be for a single number only.

          --
          Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
          • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Monday August 27 2018, @12:35AM

            by RS3 (6367) on Monday August 27 2018, @12:35AM (#726744)

            Too lazy to run the numbers, but generally digitized voice is not much load. They (AT&T, etc.) started doing it in the 1960s. Too lazy to look it up but I'm pretty sure they used a 64Kbit / second "pipe" for each voice line, so only 8KB / S data rate. Yes, it adds up but hopefully people don't talk 24/7!

            I was thinking (assuming) the aforementioned repeater was an RF repeater but needed an Internet connection, and EF is worried it's spying on him, and I don't blame him.

            That said there are lots of IP phone options- I know someone who bought a "Magic Jack" years ago and used it and liked it. I think he moved it to some kind of google IP virtual phone or something. There's good old Vonage, etc...

            Again, I haven't done a ton of research but here's one and I don't see an Ethernet / Internet connection: https://www.ebay.com/itm/850-1900MHz-2G-3G-4G-Cell-Phone-Signal-Booster-Mobile-Repeater-Kit-AT-T-Verizon-/153052585429 [ebay.com]

            I'm not sure if these pass GSM/CDMA/LTE data- some say "voice only". Maybe the one the EF's provider has does RF for voice, and Internet connection for data... at which point you'd use WiFi... More research needed...

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 26 2018, @02:05AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 26 2018, @02:05AM (#726419)

        You're still sounding stupid.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 25 2018, @10:37PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 25 2018, @10:37PM (#726380)

      They just want you to pay more

      I have been in the meetings. Yes. That is it.

      When AT&T was charging 30 a month for unlimited they wanted to charge 50 a month for 10MB. Their reasoning? "Our network is better" Yes, they are that clueless.

      The incumbents have already carved us up. 'net neutrality' is a farce the ISPs and the big site providers are playing us to make sure we do not properly fix the issue. Which is one of who owns the 'last mile' and who can connect to it. Solve that little gem and the whole issue goes away. Instead they want to insure they get 'free internet' and we pick up the tab on both ends.