It depends what the other streams on the users network are doing. If it's unthrottled FTP, you're right.
If it's other video or audio streams (with finite maximum bitrates), then you're mistaken.
All I'm saying is that there are cases (admittedly, few) where more bandwidth - even if you already have 50 Mbps - will indeed make Netflix stream better.
So I don't think it's unreasonable for VZ to train their low-level support people to suggest more bandwidth when customers say Netflix isn't streaming smoothly.
Yes, it can be (and probably is often) abused in a sleazy way.
But compared to the way VZ and others scheme and sleaze, this is so minor as to be almost acceptable. "Overblown."
[BTW, I've been doing network engineering since 1978.]
I'm usually among the last to defend VZ, but this is overblown.
More bandwidth is better, all else being equal.
Whether streaming will be "smoother" or not depends on what else is running on the connection - in some cases (admittedly not many), 75 Mbps will indeed be smoother than 50 Mbps.
But if the customer already has 50 Mbps and streaming video isn't smooth, it's reasonably possible they're one of the few who actually need more.
Yes, it's an exaggeration. But I just bought a new car last week - compared to the whoppers car dealers tell, VZ is not bad.
[BTW, knowing how much a "gigabyte" is won't help much here - data rates are measured in bits/second, not bytes/second.]
There's nothing wrong, and much right, with profit. Profit is the reward we earn for creating value and helping out other people in society. From that viewpoint there's no such thing as "too much" profit - more is always better.
But one could say the same of joy. But if your joy comes from torturing other people, then there's a problem.
It's the same with profit. It's a good thing in itself, but moral considerations must come first. Profit must be earned by moral means.
Unfortunately these half-joking answers are literally correct.
There's something deeply wrong with the morals taught in our higher education system.
MBAs are taught (against normal human instinct) that they have a moral obligation to maximise profits, even if by immoral means, as long as the method is technically legal.
Lawyers are taught that we live in a zero-sum society and one person's gain is necessarily another person's loss. (This is obviously untrue; we are richer than our troglodyte ancestors.) So they cause harm whenever they're allowed to, because they reason that this must benefit themselves or their clients.
Even journalists are taught that truth is socially constructed and that there are always exactly two sides to any story - no more and no less.
Yes, I'm painting caricatures, but they are based on life.
And of course some professionals have enough human decency and independence of thought to ignore what they're taught and do the right thing. But human nature is such that they're a minority - most drink the Kool-Aid.
I think what is missing is a sense of old-fashioned morality - caring about right and wrong - that became intellectually fashionable with the rise of the Progressives 130 years ago.
(BTW, those who fought the losing battle against this were called "mugwumps".)
The real problem seems to be Ancestry.com's managment technique.
Why are employees incented to throw away records? I'm guessing they're measured on how many "record sets" they process (which might be small or large) instead of how many sheets of paper, how many bytes of information they enter, etc.
So they try to get rid of the bigger records.
The problem is perverse incentives. Change that, and the problem will go away.
(Of course, these incentives might come from NARA - if so, they're the ones who need to change them.)
Never attribute to greed that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
I strongly suspect Nintendo management has no idea what is going on here. They probably just told their legal department to "protect our rights" and the lawyers go off and do this.
Why? Because they can.
Their reasoning is simple - the law lets us do this, doing it is "protecting our rights", and we've been told to "product our rights", so do it.
Lawyers are not business people. They don't think about what's good for the company or for profits. They just think "if the law lets me screw up other people, I should do so". Because to a lawyer life is a zero-sum game. And the law lets them.
We need some outrage about the obvious illiteracy of these student "leaders".
How did these people even graduate from high school, let alone get admitted to college, let alone (ya, I know I said that already) get elected to student government?
I see their Facebook post has corrected "addition" to "edition" (!), but as of this writing there is still:
* "The removal ... was called in order to" A removal "was called"? What?
* "The Record you're our students as well! & the..." Where exactly did that sentence end? And is "The Record" singular or plural here?
* "proves that us limiting your distribution, is not right." "us"? And where did that comma come from?
* "both sides of concerns" "of concerns"?
* "we will continue on reaching out" "on reaching out"??
* "meeting where a medium can be reached" What kind of medium would that be? The sort who talks to the dead?
* "students pertaining the issue" Is there a missing word here?
* "Communication is the most important tool of all"
Well, it's pretty damn important, I'll agree.
Anybody can make a typo or post something quickly without careful review - but this is far beyond that. Virtually every single line has a blatant grammatical or usage error.
Whoever wrote this (and presumably whoever approved it) is functionally illiterate.
Even our trolls here on TechDirt have a better command of English than these morons.
On the post: Verizon Picks The Worst Possible Person To Try To Bullshit Into Unnecessary Upgrade
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overblown
I just don't think it rises to the level of reproach it's getting.
We may not like it, but _most_ businesses do this kind of upselling.
I personally think it's unethical, and we don't do it in my company.
But it's not exceptional.
On the post: No One Can Bait A Cop Into Doing Something He Didn't Already Want To Do, So Let's Stop Worrying About Activist Recorders
Re: Except that's not what's happening.
Look what just happened in Chicago.
On the post: Verizon Picks The Worst Possible Person To Try To Bullshit Into Unnecessary Upgrade
Re: Re: Re: Re: Overblown
If it's other video or audio streams (with finite maximum bitrates), then you're mistaken.
All I'm saying is that there are cases (admittedly, few) where more bandwidth - even if you already have 50 Mbps - will indeed make Netflix stream better.
So I don't think it's unreasonable for VZ to train their low-level support people to suggest more bandwidth when customers say Netflix isn't streaming smoothly.
Yes, it can be (and probably is often) abused in a sleazy way.
But compared to the way VZ and others scheme and sleaze, this is so minor as to be almost acceptable. "Overblown."
[BTW, I've been doing network engineering since 1978.]
On the post: Why Is Consumers' Research Pushing For Anti-Consumer Trade Deals, And Bad Intellectual Property Laws?
Re: Re: Re: "Value"
1 - "That car is a great value!". This just means it's perceived as cheap for what you get.
2 - "The value of the product to the buyer". This is the relevant meaning here. And it has nothing to do with scarcity, in anybody's model.
Value in this sense is the amount the buyer is willing to pay to get the thing.
For every product, there's a minimum price the seller is willing to let it go at (S), and a maximum price the buyer is willing to pay for it (B).
If S > B it doesn't make sense to trade - wealth would be lost.
If S < B it makes sense to trade; wealth would be created (in the amount B-S). This gain from trade is where ALL WEALTH COMES FROM.
Who gets how much of the created wealth is a matter of negotiation between the seller and buyer.
On the post: Verizon Picks The Worst Possible Person To Try To Bullshit Into Unnecessary Upgrade
Overblown
More bandwidth is better, all else being equal.
Whether streaming will be "smoother" or not depends on what else is running on the connection - in some cases (admittedly not many), 75 Mbps will indeed be smoother than 50 Mbps.
But if the customer already has 50 Mbps and streaming video isn't smooth, it's reasonably possible they're one of the few who actually need more.
Yes, it's an exaggeration. But I just bought a new car last week - compared to the whoppers car dealers tell, VZ is not bad.
[BTW, knowing how much a "gigabyte" is won't help much here - data rates are measured in bits/second, not bytes/second.]
On the post: No One Can Bait A Cop Into Doing Something He Didn't Already Want To Do, So Let's Stop Worrying About Activist Recorders
Police departments should used these videos for training
Do your job in a civilized manner, keep your cool, respect the rights of citizens.
Do that and you'll earn our respect. Maybe some slack, even.
On the post: No One Can Bait A Cop Into Doing Something He Didn't Already Want To Do, So Let's Stop Worrying About Activist Recorders
Re:
On the post: DailyDirt: Frankenstein Was The Doctor, Not The Monster...
Re:
On the post: Huge Win: Appeals Court Says NSA's Bulk Phone Records Collection Not Actually Authorized By PATRIOT Act
Re: Re: Re: right up to to The Supreme Court
This is the reason Supremes have the job for life - it makes them hard to blackmail.
On the post: Huge Win: Appeals Court Says NSA's Bulk Phone Records Collection Not Actually Authorized By PATRIOT Act
Re: right up to to The Supreme Court
They'll lose.
On the post: Judge Throws Out Lawsuit From Redditor Who Found An FBI Tracking Device On His Car
As a matter of law...
Can I sell it, give it away or destroy it?
Anybody know?
On the post: Team Prenda Has A Very Bad Day In Court... And You Can Watch It All
Life in prison
I'm not sure the chances are so low...
On the post: 1000-Year-Old Village Told To Stop Using Name Because Of Trademark Claim From Hotel Chain Founded There
Re: *any* domain name with "ebay" in the title
So eBay has a problem if you try to register for example:
BiscayneBay.org
ChesapeakeBay.com
etc?
Somehow I doubt it.
On the post: That 20 Mbps Broadband Line We Promised? It's Actually 300 Kbps. Enjoy!
Re: Re: OKAY, we get it: AT&T, Comcast, Verizon BAD -- Google good.
I think paid shills (some substantial proportion of ACs here) really think that people who disagree with them are other paid shills.
Because...why express an opinion if you're not paid for it?
On the post: EFF Helps Bust Bogus Patent That Was Being Used To Shake Down Podcasters
Re: Re: Re: Re: Law school / An MBA
There's nothing wrong, and much right, with profit. Profit is the reward we earn for creating value and helping out other people in society. From that viewpoint there's no such thing as "too much" profit - more is always better.
But one could say the same of joy. But if your joy comes from torturing other people, then there's a problem.
It's the same with profit. It's a good thing in itself, but moral considerations must come first. Profit must be earned by moral means.
On the post: EFF Helps Bust Bogus Patent That Was Being Used To Shake Down Podcasters
Re: Re: Law school / An MBA
There's something deeply wrong with the morals taught in our higher education system.
MBAs are taught (against normal human instinct) that they have a moral obligation to maximise profits, even if by immoral means, as long as the method is technically legal.
Lawyers are taught that we live in a zero-sum society and one person's gain is necessarily another person's loss. (This is obviously untrue; we are richer than our troglodyte ancestors.) So they cause harm whenever they're allowed to, because they reason that this must benefit themselves or their clients.
Even journalists are taught that truth is socially constructed and that there are always exactly two sides to any story - no more and no less.
Yes, I'm painting caricatures, but they are based on life.
And of course some professionals have enough human decency and independence of thought to ignore what they're taught and do the right thing. But human nature is such that they're a minority - most drink the Kool-Aid.
I think what is missing is a sense of old-fashioned morality - caring about right and wrong - that became intellectually fashionable with the rise of the Progressives 130 years ago.
(BTW, those who fought the losing battle against this were called "mugwumps".)
On the post: [Updated] Ancestry.com Employees Caught Throwing Away
Thousands OfRecords They Were Supposed To Be Archiving For The US GovernmentSounds like an incentive problem
Why are employees incented to throw away records? I'm guessing they're measured on how many "record sets" they process (which might be small or large) instead of how many sheets of paper, how many bytes of information they enter, etc.
So they try to get rid of the bigger records.
The problem is perverse incentives. Change that, and the problem will go away.
(Of course, these incentives might come from NARA - if so, they're the ones who need to change them.)
On the post: YouTuber Angry Joe Swears Off Nintendo Videos After The Company Claimed His Mario Party 10 Take
Re: Re: Re: Pure, endless greed
But you don't screw over your best and most enthusiastic customers. That is stupidity in action.
And it does not benefit anybody, except maybe the lawyers.
On the post: YouTuber Angry Joe Swears Off Nintendo Videos After The Company Claimed His Mario Party 10 Take
Re: Pure, endless greed
I strongly suspect Nintendo management has no idea what is going on here. They probably just told their legal department to "protect our rights" and the lawyers go off and do this.
Why? Because they can.
Their reasoning is simple - the law lets us do this, doing it is "protecting our rights", and we've been told to "product our rights", so do it.
Lawyers are not business people. They don't think about what's good for the company or for profits. They just think "if the law lets me screw up other people, I should do so". Because to a lawyer life is a zero-sum game. And the law lets them.
On the post: University Student Government Can't Take A Joke; Pulls Paper's Funding After 'Offensive' April Fool's Issue
The outrage should be about the illiteracy
We need some outrage about the obvious illiteracy of these student "leaders".
How did these people even graduate from high school, let alone get admitted to college, let alone (ya, I know I said that already) get elected to student government?
I see their Facebook post has corrected "addition" to "edition" (!), but as of this writing there is still:
* "The removal ... was called in order to" A removal "was called"? What?
* "The Record you're our students as well! & the..." Where exactly did that sentence end? And is "The Record" singular or plural here?
* "proves that us limiting your distribution, is not right." "us"? And where did that comma come from?
* "both sides of concerns" "of concerns"?
* "we will continue on reaching out" "on reaching out"??
* "meeting where a medium can be reached" What kind of medium would that be? The sort who talks to the dead?
* "students pertaining the issue" Is there a missing word here?
* "Communication is the most important tool of all"
Well, it's pretty damn important, I'll agree.
Anybody can make a typo or post something quickly without careful review - but this is far beyond that. Virtually every single line has a blatant grammatical or usage error.
Whoever wrote this (and presumably whoever approved it) is functionally illiterate.
Even our trolls here on TechDirt have a better command of English than these morons.
Is this typical of our college elite?
Next >>