Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the because-he-can dept.

Apple 572

g0dsp33d writes "Fake Steve Jobs, the alter-alias of Newsweek's Dan Lyons, is calling disgruntled AT&T users to protest comments from AT&T’s Ralph de la Vega that smart phone (specifically iPhone) usage is responsible for their network issues and his plan to end unlimited data plans. The post, dubbed 'Operation Chokehold,' wants AT&T customers to use as much data service as they can on Friday, December 18th at noon. While Fake Steve Jobs is notable for its satire, many Twitter and Facebook users seem to be rallying to its cry. It is unclear if there will be enough support to cause a DDOS."

cancel ×

572 comments

I read this as (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30458910)

"Internet braces for even higher levels of smug Apple douchebags"

Re:I read this as (0, Flamebait)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459126)

Well what are they going for? 19th is saturday, not friday. Maybe they should had check little facts like those before yelling everyone to join their clause.

Re:I read this as (3, Informative)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459456)

From the Fake Steve website : "On Friday, December 18, at noon Pacific time, we will attempt to overwhelm the AT&T data network and bring it to its knees." Also every other site has managed to correctly [tuaw.com] report [facebook.com] the date [gizmodo.com] . You might want to check little facts like that before assigning blame.

Re:I read this as (4, Funny)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459514)

You forgot to note that he said "join their clause", rather than "join their cause", thus making himself just as guilty of typo's as the submitter of the article. And at any rate, the 19th was a Friday last year. Close enough for Zune timestamps.

Re:I read this as (0, Offtopic)

svtdragon (917476) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459520)

Mod parent up. Informative.

Re:I read this as (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459180)

I agree. While I personally agree with Fake Steve Jobs in that the iPhone isn't the cause of AT&T's crap network, the lunacy that people defend the iPhone with is...well, it's baffling.

EVERY phone has issues, and the iPhone's issues are glaringly bad. It's a decent device that does its job well, but to claim that it is perfect is like saying 360's don't get teh red ring...

Re:I read this as (4, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459542)

Except the iPhone get blamed for the wrong things. Does it have problems, sure, but don't blame the phone for problems on the network. I'm on an iphone in Europe and 99% of the criticism out there doesn't apply to me because I'm on a decent network. Most of the "problems" are pretty minor though so why do people feel the need to talk thrash about the iPhone instead of just accepting they don't like some aspects of it and getting another damn phone ?

DDoS...... (4, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459394)

.... there's an app for that ;)

Re:I read this as (4, Interesting)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459440)

Um no, I use the unlimited data plan to afford it. it's $15.00 a month on my Nokia 5800 I use it for 90% email and 10% other. If they drop the unlimited plan then they will lose me as a customer.

The douchebags are the AT&T executives. I'm tired of them trying like hell to screw the customer.

sounds illegal (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30458930)

@FakeSteveJobs: hope you enjoy pound-me-in-the-ass #Gitmo North.

satire may be dead, but it's not illegal (1)

Gary W. Longsine (124661) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459486)

Even if satire isn't dead, reality is nipping at its heels.

stay classy (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30458936)

no seriously guys, make a stand against a corporation for throttling your connectivity but look the other way when some bailed out banks no-show the president who claims he's not in cahoots with fat cat bankers.
the fact we are distracted by our toys rather than actual news is frightening in this day and age.

Re:stay classy (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459228)

We are used to our politicians lying to us, but most people are still getting used to their Advertising Service Provider or Dropped Call Provider lying to them. ::shrug::

Re:stay classy (0, Offtopic)

tthomas48 (180798) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459340)

While I can't understand your statement due to the lack of subjects, verbs, and agreement, it appears to be tea party rhetoric which is not based upon the news.

Re:stay classy (0, Flamebait)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459442)

I hate to break it to you, but the highly vaunted "news" you speak about IS the distracting toy.

Should be (5, Insightful)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30458944)

This thing isn't only for iPhone users. It's for every user of the AT&T network with a 3G device. And if AT&T had trouble with casual usage, wait until a lot of users try to bring the network down.

Can't wait to hear how the whole thing went for both sides of this story.

At least you guys have a choice of providers. Here in Canada, we almost have government-backed monopolies with even higher monthly bills.

Re:Should be (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459036)

Don't worry we have cable companies for that.

Re:Should be (1)

dorque_wrench (1394209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459222)

All hail TWC!

Re:Should be (5, Funny)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459472)

I thought Time Warner was bad until they were bought up by Comcast in my area. Comcast reduced the amount of channels I get, raised the price of cable by about 30%, and raised the cost of internet services by about 40%. I would kill to have Time Warner again.

Re:Should be (5, Interesting)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459284)

Great. If this guy goes and speaks truth to power with a "digital flash mob", I can picture two outcomes. One: AT&T's digital network is brought to its knees, normal customers who are not part of the flash mob are pissed off, and AT&T issues a press release saying that unlimited data plans are obviously having a negative impact on the network and will therefore be terminated. Two: AT&T's network sees little or no disruption, and therefore they realize they have nothing to fear from angry customers. Unlimited data plans are terminated anyway.

Re:Should be (5, Insightful)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459378)

If they change the terms of the contract then those contracts are no longer valid, allowing customers to cancel them prematurely.

Given that those contracts are used to subsidize the cost of the phones, I don't think it's going to happen.

Re:Should be (2, Insightful)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459448)

Don't forget option 3:

AT&T's network is fucked over more than usual, and some people die because they couldn't make 911 calls. What, you thought taking down the data connection would have no effect on voice? HA!

Re:Should be (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459484)

Exactly. This smacks of someone getting very very angry and lashing out without giving any thought to what he's trying to accomplish, and how to achieve them. Sometimes an uncivil riot gets results. This isn't one of them. Stupid tactics, stupid strategy.

Re:Should be (4, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459386)

At least you guys have a choice of providers. Here in Canada, we almost have government-backed monopolies with even higher monthly bills.

What do you think we have here in the US? Three of the four big providers have very little difference between them. They all have the exact same price plan for minutes. The only difference is the extra features offered. T-Mobile is the only one that actually offers more minutes/cheaper plans.

They are all government-backed too. Think you or I could start a cell phone plan? Think again. The spectrum is auctioned off the highest bidder. For a few billion dollars the entrenched interests can just gobble it all up regardless of whether or not they need it or intend to deploy on it.

Re:Should be (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459480)

It's the same problem here with the spectrum... frankly, the airwaves should be controlled so it isn't total chaos, but it shouldn't be reserved to a handful of users (i.e. specific companies). We can manage to have multiple users of wireless networks living close together (apartments), wireless technology is now capable of jumping to free/less noisy ranges, split the bandwidth into multiple chunks, etc...

Why can't it work the same way for the other spectrums, and simply allow everyone to use other frequencies?

Re:Should be (1)

massysett (910130) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459552)

hree of the four big providers have very little difference between them. They all have the exact same price plan for minutes. The only difference is the extra features offered.

Tell that to the ATT iPhone customers who wish Verizon would get an iPhone because the ATT network is no good, or to the Verizon customers who think they don't have any good devices available, or to the Sprint customers who are enjoying 4G.

Re:Should be (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459422)

Here in Canada, we almost have government-backed monopolies with even higher monthly bills.

In Soviet Canada, YOU supply PROVIDERS!

(I wish I was joking... grumble mumble Telus grumble)

Friday, December 19? (3, Interesting)

Vrallis (33290) | more than 4 years ago | (#30458946)

Obviously they aren't doing it in 2009, since Friday is December 18th, so they're going to do this in 2014?

Re:Friday, December 19? (5, Informative)

jasonwc (939262) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459012)

The article says the 18th. The summary is incorrect - or the article has been edited:

"Subject: Operation Chokehold
On Friday, December 18, at noon Pacific time, we will attempt to overwhelm the AT&T data network and bring it to its knees. The goal is to have every iPhone user (or as many as we can) turn on a data intensive app and run that app for one solid hour. Send the message to AT&T that we are sick of their substandard network and sick of their abusive comments. THe idea is we’ll create a digital flash mob. We’re calling it in Operation Chokehold. Join us and speak truth to power!"

Re:Friday, December 19? 2014? nah... (0, Offtopic)

Gary W. Longsine (124661) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459532)

The world ends in 2012, when it runs up against the supernatural limits of the Aztec calendar. Everybody knows that by now.

Friday, December 19? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30458950)

Um... which is it? Friday or December 19?

What will change? (0, Offtopic)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30458952)

I already use my data connection at maximum quite often at lunch. It's called reading /. *waits for all the JS to download*

Re:What will change? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459098)

You mean render.

Re:What will change? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459398)

*sigh* Yes, yes, "Lo, why didst the Internete create unto itself that which ist not The LORD'S plaine ASCII files? Verily, this Script of Java doth bring mine moderne Victorian-era computational device to its knees!"

Re:What will change? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459512)

Sounds like you need a second urchin to shovel coal into the boiler of your data mill. Or a stout switch to motivate the first one. Don't worry about overdoing it, there are plenty of orphans who would be lucky to have the job.

Counter-Productive (5, Insightful)

Akido37 (1473009) | more than 4 years ago | (#30458954)

And if they can, AT&T will just say "I Told you So", and continue their plans to gouge iPhone users anyways.

The only way this can go well for AT&T customers is if a large, well-documented group gets together, attempts a DDOS, and fails. Then what can AT&T say? "Well it's not THOSE iPhone users, it's the ones who live in their parents' basements..."

Re:Counter-Productive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459120)

Maybe this is the plan, if a coordinated effort to bring down the networks fails then the point has been proven.

Re:Counter-Productive (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459130)

What time/day do we throw flaming trash cans through store windows?

Re:Counter-Productive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459366)

all day, every day!

Re:Counter-Productive (1)

nicodoggie (1228876) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459134)

Well, if that were the case, it's most likely that they feign a successful DDOS on the date itself then continue on with the "I Told You So"

Re:Counter-Productive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459490)

Except these ARE the ones who live in their parents' basements.. I doubt the highly-outgoing users will even hear about this.

Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service (-1, Offtopic)

ronfuller (716076) | more than 4 years ago | (#30458956)

if they want to disrupt service they have to get the dates right - friday and the 19th are two separate days

Re:Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459006)

Maybe they forgot to download a calendar app?

Re:Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service (3, Insightful)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459092)

...and "noon" should be tied to a timezone, otherwise it's several smaller spikes.

Re:Angry AT&T Customers May Disrupt Service (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459416)

There is a time zone. It's noon PST.

Pirates (2, Insightful)

Krneki (1192201) | more than 4 years ago | (#30458968)

At least for once the P2P users are not blamed for excessive network usage.

Of course when we pointed out that the pirates were only the first one to encounter network bandwidth limitations we were told to buzz off and the whole net neutrality debate was pointless too. :/

Typo! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30458992)

You guys put December 19th when its 18th... typo!

Thank heavens for poor service! (1)

Erik (4118) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459008)

Thankfully for AT&T, my phone gets utterly crap reception at work. I'll be lucky to have enough bandwidth to sent out a few text messages, let alone cause bandwidth problems for them.

Re:Thank heavens for poor service! (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459164)

Fellow /.s, don't be fooled. Parent's a four-digit; he wrote that on purpose.

Clogging the bandwidth (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459016)

Don't fall for the crap that network bandwidth is somehow limited because of usage problems. That's never been the issue with AT&T's network. The problem is simply that they don't have enough cell tower capacity to handle that many simultaneous users. This is why your phone service cuts out in very crowded areas.

So if a bunch of people simultaneously try to use the network, the cells will max out and a lot of people will be out of coverage, but the network as a whole will continue to run just fine.

Getting AT&T to increase cell density is a nice goal, but so is getting cells to remote areas. It's a matter of priorities, but a covered area that has insufficient capacity is better than an uncovered area with zero capacity.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth (2, Interesting)

TheSeventh (824276) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459158)

This is already happening anywhere you get a bunch of them in the same area, like a stadium or arena. At the University stadium here, a connection with an iPhone during the game was just about impossible, and they blamed it on the fact that they didn't know so many students would bring iPhones to school with them ?!

But they just put up a new tower about 5-6 miles away, so that should help . . .

I'm so glad I bought a g1 instead.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth (5, Interesting)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459220)

I just got back from a trip to India. In terms of mobiles, the US is lightyears behind them.

I went out to Sikkim for the first week, closer in geography to Colorado than NYC (or the rest of India). I don't think I ever lost cell reception once. We're talking about an area that is about as densely populated as farm towns in the Midwest. I was standing on top of a mountain and could get 4 networks. 4. Vodaphone, Airtel, Aircel and some other local one. I got better reception at the top of the mountain that I can get at my own house in a subdivision (I don't live in the sticks).

Not only that EVERYONE had a cell phone. Some of the monks, every farm we were on, etc. Everything was prepaid and the SIM cards 'never' expired (They had an expiration sometime in 2025). Meaning I could add $1-2 and it would never expire. Compare that to the US where if I want to get the cheap $10 prepaid plan I have 30 days to use that before it expires. Calls were around $.01/minute anywhere.

Then they had the 'data' plans. Stuff for $10-20 a month with unlimited 3G. I had an 'unlimited' GPRS plan that cost me $0.20 a day. Not only that I could turn it on and off at will. Going to not need it: *567#, going to use it: *567#. No locked in plans, no monthly fees, nothing.

It's depressing coming back to the US and realize how much we're getting screwed by the phone companies compared to else where.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth (4, Insightful)

g0dsp33d (849253) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459380)

I was standing on top of a mountain and could get 4 networks.

That is not necessarily a meaningful metric. Mountains tend to be the highest point in the area so you get bonus distance due to a clear line of sight.

Re:Clogging the bandwidth (1)

socrplayr813 (1372733) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459548)

It's not just that we're getting screwed (though we certainly are, to some extent). A lot of parts of the world don't have the extensive infrastructure the US has for wired phones, which sped their adoption of wireless technology. When enough of your population relies on a technology, progress comes faster. The US population has only recently started to shut off their wired phones and, for some groups, it could be decades before they give them up.

Not the best idea (5, Insightful)

ezberry (411384) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459024)

How could anyone really think this is a good idea? AT&T has effectively admitted that the data usage growth for smartphones is above the rate that their data network will be able to grow. Using more data intensive applications will only show them how correct they are ("Look how much data will be used in the future when more people are streaming data")

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

Sorry that this might not be anti-corporate enough, but Operation Chokehold really isn't a great idea.

Re:Not the best idea (1)

dorque_wrench (1394209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459114)

Sorry that this might not be anti-corporate enough, but Operation Chokehold really isn't a great idea.

Agreed. Besides, I'm pretty sure a large, well-documented, attempted DDOS just makes things easier for the requisite criminal charges and civil lawsuits...

Re:Not the best idea (0)

Brian Stretch (5304) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459402)

How could anyone really think this is a good idea? AT&T has effectively admitted that the data usage growth for smartphones is above the rate that their data network will be able to grow. Using more data intensive applications will only show them how correct they are ("Look how much data will be used in the future when more people are streaming data")

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

Sorry that this might not be anti-corporate enough, but Operation Chokehold really isn't a great idea.

What are you, a Communist? That's the same excuse we used to hear every time Reagan wanted to put pressure on the Soviets. Bring on the YouTube vids of Apple's 1984 ad on OC day! Bring the Evil Empire to its knees!

Umm, except that crushing AT&T's network would make iPhone's a wee bit useless... frack.

(satire, for the humor impaired...)

Re:Not the best idea (4, Insightful)

PKFC (580410) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459466)

If emergency calls cannot go through under "100%" usage of the tower, something is seriously wrong. There needs to be bandwidth provisioned and reserved for emergency calls for every tower and trunk.

If this does affect emergency calls, AT&T really does need to get their shit together. I assume there are laws in place to enforce the transmission of emergency calls. Hell AT&T gets a free stress test of their network which is something they should be doing anyway. Real world data of extreme usage. Study, learn and yes: build a better network because of it.

Re:Not the best idea (3, Informative)

chew8bitsperbyte (533087) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459522)

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

Data and voice operate independently of one another. While 3G/EDGE service may be disrupted it won't affect end-users' abilities to make calls over GPRS. And while it may further reinforce AT&T's point that their end-users gobble "too much" bandwidth, the publicity that it could generate would be a nice way of sticking it to yet another corporation that enjoys selling "limited-unlimited".

every day is a DOS day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459034)

"It is unclear if there will be enough support to cause a DDOS"

It think it is pretty clear it will be - normal usage days on the AT&T network overwhelm it.

I am getting rid of my iPhone when my contract is up if I can't get away from AT&T.

This is what you get (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459042)

When you just have to have the shiny toy that locks you in to a single network.

Might be time to look at a smartphone that works on competing networks without having to "jailbreak" them. Namely ALL the other ones.

(love it -- my captcha is "wireless")

Don't know which day? Friday or the 19th? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459046)

There's an app for that!

Angry Slashdotters May Disrupt Service (4, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459050)

www.fakesteve.net

Error 500 - Internal server error

An internal server error has occured!
Please try again later.

some of the usage is ridiculous (5, Interesting)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459066)

i have an iphone 3gs and i max out at 2GB per month if i stream pandora almost all day for a month. the 3% AT&T is talking about use 20GB or more and reading some forums people brag how they did it by jailbreaking and tethering or using some banned apps.

the unlimited data plan is if you follow the TOS. jailbreaking and tethering is against the TOS so expect almost everyone not to care when AT&T implements a 5GB or 10GB max data per month and charges you a lot of money for anything above that. my wife uses less than 100MB per month on her iphone and most people are less than 500MB per month

the only people the new charges will hurt are a small minority who aren't playing by the contract anyway

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459270)

I care if i don't exceed it the new cap. It is the principle, not the practice.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous (5, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459290)

i have an iphone 3gs and i max out at 2GB per month if i stream pandora almost all day for a month.

2*1024*1024*1024/(8*3600*30)*8 = 20Kbps. That's some darn good compression they're using.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous (3, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459306)

I agree, and yet I don't. Unlimited means unlimited, it doesn't mean "Within reason."

AT&T needs to get it's shit together.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous (1)

rockNme2349 (1414329) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459432)

Although, Unlimited does mean Unlimited, Unlimited* means Unlimited*. Read the fine print.

Re:some of the usage is ridiculous (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459474)

exactly - if they want a 5gb a month plan - then sell it as a 5gb a month plan not unlimited.

unlimited means without limit - a limit is a restriction - a cap is a restriction and there for a limit.

I really wish i had the resources to take them to court for fraud/false advertising/deceptive practices.

So... (4, Funny)

awyeah (70462) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459076)

So I can go ahead and expect to stop receiving e-mails on my BlackBerry on Friday? Great, yeah, sweet. Thanks guys!

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459182)

You don't like it, get a better network that can actually handle all of its users, well, using it.

CGI SCRIPT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459096)

Why not have a CGI script that outputs /dev/urandom that everyone on AT&T can load up?.
I dunno if that would be the best way to eat up ze bandwithz or even if that works.

Ping Flood (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459100)

why don't people figure out what at&t's data network ip range is and have a gigantic ping flood to that entire segment? huge packets to all the ip addys? get some proper skills instead of streaming pron...

Won't work (1)

fandingo (1541045) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459112)

This is why we can't have anything nice. Please stop acting like children.

There isn't any way that this could be productive.

This seems like someone ones misunderstanding of civil disobedience. The idea behind CD is to do something illegal (which this is not) and then be punished for it. Then, the public is so outraged at the punishment, and that causes a policy change. The public is not going to force ATT to change its policies to allow juvenile, hacker (that's what it will be called) behavior.

Re:Won't work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459354)

The public as a whole, no. The hordes who run the fuck away from AT&T when they don't hold up their end of the contract...?

iPhone idiots (1, Troll)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459156)

I hope it "suceeds."

Re:iPhone idiots (1)

BlindSpot (512363) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459204)

I hope it "suceeds."

Everybody sing along now: S-U-C-C-E-E-S! That's the way you spell success.

Re:iPhone idiots (1, Flamebait)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459316)

Well, the iPhone idiots accomplished something impossible: make AT&T look sane.

Way to prove AT&T's point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459176)

AT&T is claiming iPhone/etc users are using too much network bandwidth, so unlimited bandwidth plans need to end.

In response, iPhone/etc users will crash AT&T's network by using too much bandwidth.

Yeah, that'll work.

How mature. (2, Insightful)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459216)

You know, it's times like this that I'm glad I have Verizon.

Seriously, folks, this is like crazy Berkeley behavior. All you're going to do is make sure that every other AT&T customer - like the ones whose family members are sick in the hospital, or who just got in a massive wreck, or who just got carjacked, or maybe are waiting to hear from a family member overseas - can't get service. All so you can point out that AT&T has a grossly inadequate network, which is something that everyone knows already. The completely nontechnical people I know at work all complain about AT&T service even when they don't have 3G service at all. What's your point?

Re:How mature. (1)

Kyrene (624175) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459408)

I'm with you. If they don't like it, then switch service providers. I'm also a Verizon customer and never had a prob with them. Best coverage no matter where I travel.

Uh oh! (4, Insightful)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459232)

Pretend-inciting a virtual cyber riot? Why, that hypothetically violates some possible public safety laws! This guy had better watch out, he might go to meta-jail for his semi-crimes!

But seriously, AT&T is going to try to sue him. :(

Bait and swtich? (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459236)

Selling us all unlimited *contracts* that they know they cant deliver, then later switching it to limited while we are still stuck with the contract should be something the FCC should look into.

Missing Option (3, Insightful)

grolaw (670747) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459248)

I'm changing my plan to the lowest pricing structure possible. I am going to log every dropped call and file a FCC complaint as it will have "stolen" minutes from me.

I have two iPhones with 3000 min day & 3000 min night + rollover, unlimited texting and the required data plan.

I'll send letters off to the AT&T consumer oversight about the obvious overselling of the data//cell service by AT&T - much like the old airlines used to do with seats and overbooking - betting that the no-shows will prevent bumping. Here, we have virtual bumping from saturated networks.

Frankly, AT&T ought to be dissolved - the Corporate Death Penalty and give the shareholders not a dime. The company has, through several iterations, demonstrated its gross incompetence too many times to exist. It is a monopoly and all monopolies must die. Let's kill AT&T - screw the shareholders. Time for "too big to fail" to take a nosedive into history.

Liability for missed 911 call? (2, Interesting)

jestill (656510) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459252)

If this works and someone can not get through for a 911 call, is fake Steve Jobs going to real jail?

Re:Liability for missed 911 call? (1)

cruff (171569) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459534)

Presumably voice traffic has priority over the data traffic? Do the individual cell towers have enough smarts to be able to identify emergency call traffic?

Fastest way to solve it? (2, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459254)

Disconnect those users. The iPhone zealots have nowhere else to go. Telling them to go for the Droid is like telling a crack addict to drop their habit by smoking pot and slurping vodka. Take down a few thousand users, and the majority will quickly stop complaining.

Hey AT&T - upgrade your 3G network! (1)

ekimminau (775300) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459296)

I have had a Motorola KRZR for about 3 years with an "unlimited data plan" I paid an extra $10.00 a month for. I tehthered and constantly connected my company VPN for Lotus Notes email. When I switched to my iPhone I have to pay $20.00 a month more for "unlimited data" yet I couldn't tether (until I jailbrooke my iPhone). If AT&T honestly thinks that me switching from my Motorola to my iPhone increased my usage of their network, they are sadly mistaken. If anything I use it less because the tethering isn't as stable and I mark this up to their 3G network, not the phone. They need to upgrade their 3G network and I fully intend to max out my 3G connection driving around town during lunch on Friday. P.S. I love the Verizon map commercials. I wish they would double the number of times they show them every day.

Re:Hey AT&T - upgrade your 3G network! (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459530)

Yeah, it's ridiculous.

My current phone is 2.5 years old, and I want to upgrade, but I'd need to buy an unlocked phone I can simply swap SIMs with, otherwise they'll force me to "upgrade" my contract to something that costs about $30 more per month for less (caps, no tethering, etc., which are currently NOT specified in my contract).

Switching away from AT&T would result in similar prices.

Huh? (2, Interesting)

BlindSpot (512363) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459308)

Okay so let me get this straight... show a company you hate their product by creating more demand for it? Does nobody participating understand economics?!? Well don't be surprised when they jack up your rates again and cite "increased network demand" as the reason. Keep at it at you might get to have the same high rates we have here in Canada.

Cutoff sentence (2, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459330)

It is unclear if there will be enough support to cause a DDOS...

... or, if they're successful, whether AT&T wireless customers will notice anything has changed.

Minutes and Data (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459348)

ATT charges what is really huge amounts for the iPhone. They make the users buy a significant voice package, then add on the data. Even without many extras, these bills can approach $1000 per year.

Here is the thing with heavy data users. Some of them don't use a huge number of voice minutes, so it looks like we are paying the $1000 a year mostly for data. Additionally, many plans are unlimited minutes at off peak times, , sometimes with nominal charges. Given unlimited voice, unlimited data, especially at the less than 1/2 mb per second rates.

If they are saying the heavy users are the problem, and they want to move to limited data plan, then they should more honest about the basic plan. For instance, sell 100 minutes and 100 mb of data for the same price of the current low end plan. This will give an incentive for users to limit data usage in terms of a real savings. It is really disingenuous to charge for data usage, and then complain when users actually make use of the data. In the case of the iPhone, ATT could sell such a plan for $50, even throw in text messages, and probably solve all their problems. I would cut into revenue, but if ATT is not able to service the product, then they should not sell it.

Hah! Like I'd be able to tell the difference. (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459360)

That sounds like AT&T 3G service on ANY Friday afternoon around here. As well as Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. That's why I'm no longer an AT&T customer. Every weekday, I'd see data speeds start to fall off around mid-morning. By 10-10:30, 3G data service was virtually unusable and stayed like that for the rest of the day. I couldn't even keep a telnet session open reliably. (And, yes, I was paying damn good money for tethering using a non-iphone 3G smartphone.)

Why does everyone hate to pay for what they use? (1)

patrickthbold (1351131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459384)

As long as the price for byte was fair I would have no problem not having an unlimited plan. Based on the above post, maybe charging $10-$20 per GB downloaded might be fair. Everyone seems to want unlimited access, but the only people who benefit from that are a) the people who use a lot of bandwidth, and b) ATT who gets lots of money from low usage users.

Charges? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30459390)

What's the difference between this, and running a botnet?

Apple phans are no different from infected windows boxes, intellectually.

If this works, I doubt I'd want to be in this guys shoes. I don't know what kind of damages at&t would claim for an hours worth of lost services (huge).

More Ammo for Verizon (1)

allometry (840925) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459396)

We all know that Verizon likes to touch itself while poking fun at AT&T... Now they'll have even more enjoyment when the iPhone becomes available on the VZW network. "See, our network can handle pussy DDoD attempts, while AT&T's can't!"

I don't understand why AT&T VOICE sucks... (1)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459452)

Specifically, why it ends up so bad on dropping VOICE calls. Yes, data is a huge hog. But the bulk data can be prioritized much lower than voice.

I could see in Manhattan or San Francisco that the DATA service would suck: too many users, etc. But why should the voice channel suck so badly too?

To use as much bandwidth as possible? (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459454)

Well, sounds too difficult. Is there an app for it?

I Prefer (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459468)

Operation Cuckold.

DDOS, served! (2, Funny)

Caradoc (15903) | more than 4 years ago | (#30459540)

Slashdot has done to Fake Steve Jobs what Fake Steve Jobs was trying to do to AT&T.

Awesome.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...