Beta
×

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!

Verizon CEO Says "We Will Hunt Heavy Users Down"

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the from-his-secret-soundproofed-bunker dept.

The Internet 738

Zerocool3001 writes "In an interview with WSJ editor Alan Murray,Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg talks about how the FCC's broadband access studies are wrong (and the US is definitely 'number one, not even close'), how he had someone else stand in line for him Saturday to pick up his iPad, and how Verizon will soon hunt down, throttle and/or charge high-bandwidth users on its network."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Come to Verizon! (5, Insightful)

butterflysrage (1066514) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779192)

Pay out the nose for our high speed internet! but if you dare use that speed we will lock you up.

Re:Come to Verizon! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779306)

They'll get the Verizon guy, as well as his posse out for you.

http://nycom.com/images/network2.jpg [nycom.com]

And that map of the US with all that red? Those are targets.

Re:Come to Verizon! (5, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779310)

Queue the theme from Jaws: "We're going to need a bigger Internet"

Re:Come to Verizon! (5, Informative)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779328)

I use Verizon DSL.

The rate is reasonable ($15), and I've never been throttled, or received notice that I used too many gigabytes. (In theory I could download 233 gigabytes each month, if I bittorrented 24/7, which I usually do.)

Re:Come to Verizon! (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779512)

I dont' think I could ever do DSL. It's so 1998.

I can get 233gigabytes in a bit less than 2 days if I bittorrented 24/7... of course Comcast would call me up and complain once I hit 250.

Re:Come to Verizon! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779362)

what happens if everyone is a heavy user?

Re:Come to Verizon! (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779480)

What do you mean? They're already going after everyone. They raise fees whenever they can.

Re:Come to Verizon! (3, Insightful)

ircmaxell (1117387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779384)

Actually, that makes me wonder if Verizon would be liable for false advertising based on that... They offer you 15mbit internet, and then cap you at 1gb/month. Sure, they may say that in the fine print but would a good lawyer be able to get around that (basically saying that they implied unlimited transfer based on the main advertisement)? I mean I've never heard anyone say that there's a cap on it... Car companies aren't allowed to tell you that you'll get 400mpg, and then put in the fine print that it will only happen if you are coasting down a hill with the engine off. Making your product look better in advertising is nothing new, but doesn't this come down to blatant coercion?

Re:Come to Verizon! (1)

kent_eh (543303) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779468)

would a good lawyer be able to get around that

Depends.
Who can afford a more skilled lawyer (or team of lawyers), them or you?

Re:Come to Verizon! (3, Insightful)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779506)

They never said your connection had an unlimited number of bytes. They only advertised the speed you can expect to get, upto the advertised byte limit. (For Comcast it's 250 GB; don't know Verizon's limit.)

No doubt Verizon is also getting a lot of flack from their cable channels, about how users are downloading the shows instead of watching the channels.

Re:Come to Verizon! (5, Insightful)

ircmaxell (1117387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779684)

They never said your connection had an unlimited number of bytes.

True, but they never said that I should expect otherwise either (except deep into the fine print). It's all about what the average person expects, not what they find reasonable. If an ad said "This car gets 400mpg", the average person would expect it to mean 400mpg averaged over a tank not an instantaneous value at some point in time. I guess my question is if you said "This plan has 15mb/s" to the average person, would they expect that to be the peak instantaneous transfer rate, or would they expect it to be the average value over a period of time (that you could transfer approximately 4.8TB over the course of a month)? I would think the latter. Plus, if you look at datacenters and web hosts, they explicitly state that you get 200gb of transfer on a 100mbps link, or a 100mbps link billed at 98%, or a unlimited 100mbps link. If I just told you that you were purchasing a 100bmps link, which would you (the average person) infer from that? I would assume one of the latter two, since 200gb is a LOT more limiting than 100mbps (and hence would normally be the disclosed factor). And that's the whole point...

Re:Come to Verizon! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779400)

Summary and title are misleading; article refers to the smartphone data service explicitly, not DSL/FiOS internet users.

Re:Come to Verizon! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779538)

Mod parent up. Corporation bashing is fun and all, but get your goddamn bashing right.

Re:Come to Verizon! (5, Interesting)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779406)

Seidenberg talks about how the FCC's broadband access studies are wrong (and the US is definitely 'number one, not even close')

I think he meant to say "definitely not number one, not even close" as that would be true. What he actually said is malformed rubbish.
The US is well behind countries such as Japan and Korea, which have widespread high speed access, either uncapped or with caps far higher than levels in the US. The Nordic countries also generally have uncapped high speed services. If you pay for bandwidth, it's there without any monthly capacity limits. I have 100/10 fiber to the house in rural Finland, and there are no caps. On bandwidth tests, I get the speed I'm paying for - all the time.

Re:Come to Verizon! (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779500)

I read it as:

"number one? not even close"

In response to a question along the lines of:
"Is the US number one?"

Re:Come to Verizon! (1)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779670)

I have 100/10 fiber to the house in rural Finland

The US is certainly not known for its Geography skills, so I ahve to ask... But isn't Finland almost all rural? When I think of Finland I think of near endless steppes. Of course I also live in Portland Oregon, and of the 3 million in the state, almost 2 million live within 50 miles of Portland. The rest being very rural, if not government land, with the odd small city scattered about. So I understand having a dense population in a small part of an area, with a much larger area with a much smaller population.

Re:Come to Verizon! (5, Insightful)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779482)

He's laid more fiber from Washington to Boston than all of Europe. Hmmm. He's probably telling the truth. If Verizon has laid one mile of fiber somewhere between Washington and Boston, and they don't own a single foot of fiber in Europe, then he's technicaly telling the truth. Or, if we choose to look at that another way, European telcos have not put down any fiber between Washington and Boston - so Verizon has laid more fiber than all of Europe.

But, he's obviously trying to claim that Verizon owns more fiber between those two cities than all of the governments and telcos in Europe have ever put down, combined, in Europe. Which seems pretty preposterous. I'm willing to bet without even googling that is a lie.

BUT, from everything our European freinds write here and elsewhere, their service covers them EVERYWHERE. Gigabyte service even out in the boonies. Our boonies still depend on dial up phone modems.

The braggart loses, no matter how we slice and dice his comments.

and / or (0, Flamebait)

laughing rabbit (216615) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779196)

Throttle them around their necks if they don't have the funds to pay?

What Kind of Huntin' Are We Talkin' About Here? (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779200)

Verizon will soon hunt down

"The Most Dangerous Game hunt down" or the boring old e-mail notification? Because if it's the former, I might start seeding large sets of prime numbers labeled as "Natalie Portman sex tape" through my noisy neighbor's unsecured wifi network connected to his Verizon FIOS.

Re:What Kind of Huntin' Are We Talkin' About Here? (2, Interesting)

Achra (846023) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779274)

According to TFA, it is only smartphone heavy users which will be hunted down. I can keep leeching on my FIOS as hard as I like! Hah!

Re:What Kind of Huntin' Are We Talkin' About Here? (2, Interesting)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779432)

So they're going down the same road as AT&T ?

Re:What Kind of Huntin' Are We Talkin' About Here? (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779524)

you kidding? They were the ones that started this 5GB usage cap fiasco on smartphones. Meanwhile you're paying as much as a very cheap internet connection.

The rates for 5GB on a phone are basically atrocious.

Re:What Kind of Huntin' Are We Talkin' About Here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779518)

Verizon will soon hunt down

"The Most Dangerous Game hunt down" or the boring old e-mail notification? Because if it's the former, I might start seeding large sets of prime numbers labeled as "Natalie Portman sex tape" through my noisy neighbor's unsecured wifi network connected to his Verizon FIOS.

Why let your noisy neighbor have all the fun? Go buy yourself a pistol and a shotty, sign up for Verizon, and seed them yourself.

And KILLZEM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779208)

I rather think not, but it would be cool!!

Dishonest (5, Insightful)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779224)

If they don’t want people to use the bandwidth they’re given, they shouldn’t advertise that they offer that much bandwidth.

Unsurprising (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779490)

This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

Essentially, using what you legitimately pay for will be seen as a contract violation to them, when legally you are in the right. Sadly, almost all people don't have the funds to take them to court, so that is how they will get away with it.

Re:Dishonest (5, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779584)

Murray: You didn't stand in line on Saturday? [For an iPad]

Seidenberg: No, I had somebody else stand in line. (Laughter.) But we had people standing in line.

With that sense of entitlement, I'm not surprised he's so angry with heavy downloaders using their service to its fullest.

Re:Dishonest (2, Insightful)

Delwin (599872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779620)

Cox Communications is clear on their per-month usage caps so at least you know what you're buying.

He lays claim to having caps (2, Informative)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779686)

Bandwidth and usage are two different things.

So you have the ability to use up your allotment faster, big deal, if they have it in their contract that they may restrict your access if you exceed a published cap then I cannot see how anyone has a problem.

Before chiming back, "its not there", post it as well.

No, I am not with Verizon, then again I don't believe in paying any phone company that wants me on a contract.

Oh No, you're using the service you paid for! (5, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779228)

That is unacceptable!!

Now would you like to buy a bigger bandwidth package that we won't let you use? How about switching to FIOS, the best bandwidth in the country outside of a T3... that we still don't want you to use.

Re:Oh No, you're using the service you paid for! (3, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779532)

No no, they're hunting heavy users down, as in overweight. Just lose a few pounds and no problemo.

Re:Oh No, you're using the service you paid for! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779594)

No no, they're hunting down people who play Heavy on TF2. All the boolets consume too much bandwidth.

Re:Oh No, you're using the service you paid for! (1)

djtachyon (975314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779622)

ARGH!! Stop saying FIOS is the best bandwidth in the country. Have you heard of Optimum Online Ultra [optimum.com] ? 101Mbit down, 15 Mbit up. I'm pretty sure thats faster than FIOS 50Mbit down, 20 Mbit up. And Ultra is $100/mo compared to FIOS $140/mo.

Re:Oh No, you're using the service you paid for! (1)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779624)

I don't see why Internet should be any different from the Phone or Electricity?

Phone:
- I can pay $5 a month and 10 cents per call. If I make a ____load of calls, then I get a major bill.
- Or I can pay $20 a month and get unlimited usage.

Electricity:
- Same deal. The more I use, the more I pay.
- Or I can signup for unlimited usage and pay a flat ~$5000 per month fee.

Internet:
- Same deal. You can use up to 250 GB per month (comcast) and pay an additional 50 cents per gigabyte above that.
- Or you can get a dedicated line with unlimited bytes for ~$300.

Yaay (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779232)

Now that they are finished deploying fiber, they have to spend their time doing something, right?

I'm against big government just as much as anybody, but it's high time to realize that we can no longer trust our critical communications infrastructure to these clowns.

Communist! (5, Funny)

Benfea (1365845) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779438)

This CEO is smarter and harder working than you as evidenced by the fact that he makes more money than you. You think you know better than your betters? If there was anything wrong with what he said, the magic of the Free Market would have prevented him from saying it! If you want the nannystate to do everything for you, move to a communist country like Canada or Europe with all the other collectivist socialists!!!!!!11!1!1oneone [/conservative]

Re:Yaay (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779540)

Finished? Har har.

One of my friends continues to get those "coming soon" fliers, but they have yet to start working anywhere near him in the past year.

Re:Yaay (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779616)

If he hasn't gotten it yet, he likely won't. Verizon has canceled many of their previously planned FiOS deployments. The only ones they are still going to do are the ones they are contractually obligated to do (by franchise agreements with local governments).

By finished, I didn't mean "they've deployed FiOS to the entire country." I meant "They're not going to deploy any more FiOS."

Re:Yaay (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779650)

Then why the hell are they still sending those out to places that won't get it?

Are they /trying/ to look inept?

Yea. please tell me where are the (5, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779252)

morons who were arguing it was better to let companies 'regulate themselves' ?

now the people will be 'hunted down, throttled/charged' for the service they have ALREADY PAID FOR, in full.

Re:Yea. please tell me where are the (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779426)

I'm just waiting for the next shoe to drop and ISPs to charge website owners. If they want people to even *reach* their site and not a competitor's (so people who type in www.foo.com get shunted to www.bar.com), the website would have to pay a certain amount. Then more amounts for less throttling.

Then comes paying per site. If a customer wants to visit bing.com, they will have to pay the ISP for a "site connection fee".

Then come a lot of other fees, not to mention more intrusive inspection of communication. Someone logging onto their bank? Whups, that's a financial institutional access fee of $3 per time.

Cable Channels (1)

killmenow (184444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779590)

Then they will start bundling web sites and offer a standard tier, enhanced tier, digital plus package, HD package, sports package, etc.

Where have I seen this business model before?

Re:Yea. please tell me where are the (1)

llvllatrix (839969) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779440)

I'm an aforementioned moron. The argument is very simple; it's much more effective to let Verizon shoot itself in the foot than to pass a law with potentially harmful side effects.

Re:Yea. please tell me where are the (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779460)

Indeed, it's not up to "companies to regulate themselves," (nobody's ever argued that...) it's up to consumers to get their heads out of their asses and put companies like this out of business.

Re:Yea. please tell me where are the (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779554)

Yeah, because there are so many Internet providers the average customer can choose from.

And because of the field's amazingly low barrier to entry, anyone can start their own!

Re:Yea. please tell me where are the (3, Insightful)

Compholio (770966) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779536)

I'm an aforementioned moron. The argument is very simple; it's much more effective to let Verizon shoot itself in the foot than to pass a law with potentially harmful side effects.

That would only be true if there were economic incentive for Verizon to change its behavior. Verizon isn't actually shooting itself in the foot because the vast majority of people will continue to purchase service, only the minority of customers who actually attempt to use the service to the full extent will suffer.

Re:Yea. please tell me where are the (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779496)

We should all save our pennies and go buy their company out and free the network. Turn it into a co-op or something. I wonder how many people it'd take to make a substantial hostile takeover effort. Seems like a 1 billion dollar company could be taken control of by a million 'freedom fighters' at $500 each investment. Just have to take a bit over half to have control right? Maybe get a few companies, such as Google, to chip in on the effort and we could get that million number down to something a little more plausible. Get 250,000 to invest $1000 each and get some friendly companies to match our effort? I'd buy $1000 in stock in a chosen company to help force it to do what I wanted. More if it didn't have to be done all at once although it seems a sudden grab would work better than a gradual grab so we don't cause the value to go up.

A CEO not standing in line is news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779254)

Of course Seidenberg isn't gonna stand in line. Businessmen do this kind of thing all the time, and I can't fathom how that's news.

Re:A CEO not standing in line is news? (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779338)

Hell, I stood in line for Commander Taco, and all I got was this stupid T-shirt.

want more bandwidth? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779278)

then pay for it.

my gas, water, electric are metered.

so what if i pay by the gigabyte?

Re:want more bandwidth? (2, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779358)

Because that's not how it was sold to people.

If your water was sold to you "up to 10,000 gallons a month for only $39.95!" and you sign up for it... then on day #13 someone knocks on your door saying "uh, you've been taking some mighty long showers. we're going to have to charge you extra, even though you havn't come close to your 10,000 gallons yet", you might be pissed.

Re:want more bandwidth? (4, Interesting)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779364)

I'm actually with you on this. The cake^H^H^H^H flat-rate offerings are a lie. If they had reasonable per GB charges and easy ways to monitor them throughout the month, I see no reason not to go that route. A few bucks per GB in $0.01 increments would be fine with me.

Re:want more bandwidth? (5, Insightful)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779372)

then pay for it.

If you sell me an "up to" 1mbps connection, then I've paid for up to 1mbps. If you want to sell me a 250MB/mo connection, go right ahead and do that.

Don't sell me an "up to" 1mbps connection then come along and claim that its actually 250MB/mo and send your sockpuppets to demand that I pay more.

Re:want more bandwidth? (1)

edjs (1043612) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779544)

Don't sell me an "up to" 1mbps connection then come along and claim that its actually 250MB/mo and send your sockpuppets to demand that I pay more.

Does any ISP sell a residential "up to" X Mbps connection without also specifying a Y GB/month traffic limit nowadays?

Re:want more bandwidth? (5, Insightful)

mikkelm (1000451) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779444)

Product focus shifted from metered Internet connectivity to unmetered connectivity ten years ago. The ISPs are making a killing off of unmetered services; much more than they would with metered products. That means that your grandparents who check their inbox once a week pay just as much as the guy with the box running fifty consecutive torrents at all times. So what if you pay by the gigabyte? Then these ISPs would cease to generate profit.

This is it. (4, Interesting)

vivin (671928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779284)

This is it, people! The end of the internet as we own it! After the ruling yesterday anyway... oh and also that combined with the fact that earlier this year we took a step towards corporate personhood, allowing corporations to participate in the political and legal process.

Say goodbye to the free and open internet. Say hello to the tiered-pricing model, and the metered-usage model. These companies don't care about the users. They care about the bottom-line and profits. The free market won't help here, because obviously they're going to strong-arm any competition.

Welcome to the Digital dark age. The US, the pioneer of the internet, will end up as a backwater province of the intarwebs.

Maybe I'm being cynical and alarmist. Oh well.

Re:This is it. (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779672)

Maybe I'm being cynical and alarmist. Oh well.

Just because you sound alarms before the fire starts doesn't mean you are wrong.. Tho i disagree with the US being backwater, the entire internet will be a dark zone, just due to different forces ( some financial control, some government.. )

Don't hold your breath about the dark ages appearing tomorrow, but it will happen eventually.

Re:This is it. (1)

digitaldrunkenmonk (1778496) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779674)

I disagree with the court's decision, and I am completely for Net Nuetrality. Carriers should be just that, carriers, but that doesn't mean we would be able to carry on with limitless internet forever. The internet doesn't scale that way, and at this point is a hodge podge of random servers thousands of miles away from eachother. It costs money to ferry our data around, and as much as I love the way the internet is priced right now, it simply can't last.

So yeah, charging per gig or some other metered service is about the bottom line, but it's also about keeping the companies themselves alive. I don't want tiered service that favors one site or subset of sites over another (past infrastructure issues), but I can completely understand why a company might charge you extra for using their phone networks past the agreed upon limit, which is what this article is about.

He is (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779312)

really out of touch.

Yeah, we got more fibre laying around, but the consumer cost is higher, and the speed is lowest. And that's what the FCC is talking about. The speed the consumer has, not total fibre that's just lying around, or how much Verizon uses.

And then he compares it to cell phones. wtf?

why tagged cellular? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779314)

This is about Verizon Communications, not Verizon Wireless...

Throttle me? (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779320)

"Finally, if you're a high-bandwidth user of Verizon's smartphone data services, the company will soon hunt you down and throttle you."

This comes to mind:
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/3567/homeruchokingubartad.jpg [imageshack.us]

What a P/R master though! So customer friendly. And all this time, I thought when I buy "unlimited" service, I didn't expect unlimited bandwidth (physical impossibility) but I do expect unlimited access... how stupid of me.

Re:Throttle me? (4, Insightful)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779366)

When customers become "the enemy", the company needs to find something better to do with it's resources, IMHO.

Sprint (1)

CSHARP123 (904951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779322)

I use Sprint. With Sprint, if you are on 4G network, you can use Unlimited. I have 5gb limit on 3G networks. Where I Live, I get 4G connection. Just the way sprint is doing. I am renewing my contract with them.

Arbeit macht frei, eh Ivan? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779334)

Jews know a lot about being hunted down, throttled and charged. See ya, wouldn't want to be ya!

Hah (1, Funny)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779342)

Verizon: Do you hear me now, motherfuckers?

iPad (2, Insightful)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779346)

Owning the iPad seems to accrue more and more douchebag bonuspoints, these days.

pwnin' points (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779478)

Pwnin' an iPad: 1000 douchebag bonus points.

Pwnin' a PS3: 1,500 douchebag bonus points.

Pwnin' a Global Warming Politician: priceless.

For that heavy monthly flow, you want the SuperMaxiPad.

Anyone want to tell him China is a real country? (2, Interesting)

Mekkah (1651935) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779350)

"We're so far ahead of everyone else, it's "not even close."

Wiki article -- "List of countries by number of broadband Internet users" [wikipedia.org] (and yes I realize % wise, we have more, but if you look at it that way, South Korea and Canada have than us..

Although he is right on some of the issues, he is swinging and missing on some of the key issues. The FCC has to regulate somehow, if he as a better method that doesn't just poll in a way Verizon will come out #1 I'm sure they'd listen. But trying to regulate data usage isn't gonna fly for anyone Ivan. We've got to try to be better, so many people don't even have broadband...

Maybe he was talking about broadband speeds? (2, Informative)

thewils (463314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779546)

"We're so far ahead of everyone else, it's "not even close."

Oh wait... [worldpoliticsreview.com]

Wow (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779354)

I wonder if this guy realizes how much of a dickhead he sounds like.

'number one, not even close' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779380)

Of course, he means in terms of letting telecom companies get away with high price/low quality service that makes their bottom lines nice and big.

Time to get Conan the aggressive regulator in the public interest on their asses. Crush their profits, drive their executives before you, and hear the lamentations of their board members.

Wow (1, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779386)

Well, I was gonna get FIOS.

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779486)

TFA talks about smartphone users, not FIOS

Re:Wow (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779560)

You are right, I knee-jerked. I missed the bit about the smartphones and zeroed in on 'camp on the network'.

I apologize.

Re:Wow (1)

goldspider (445116) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779578)

for me it's either switch to FIOS or stick with Comcast. What an f'd up market.

Mod Parent Down! (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779646)

I wrote that post under the misunderstanding that he was talking about FIOS users. Please mod it down!

What's funny is just a day or two ago I was complaining about how Slashdot encourages knee-jerk reactions. I'm a hypocrite! :D

Just like insurance companies... (5, Insightful)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779390)

The basic story here is the same with insurance company representatives commenting about the state of US healthcare...

It's all about finding a very small selected slice of data that shows "We're #1 in the world!!!1!!ONE!", in this case about internet access (thanks to legacy phone modems), then pretend that misrepresented data represents the entire market.

But the bullshit only starts there - the REAL problem, it is asserted, are the people who "exploit" the service provided to them, in order to actually ask that full service advertised be provided to them. You know, like insurance customers who actually get sick and need financial support promised to them - those folks, and people who watch too many videos are the REAL problem with the system!

So, serving the interests of the real valued customer, the stockholder, they proclaim a holy jihad against the users of their service who don't give them good enough return in terms of contracted usage of service. Same scam, different sector.

Ryan Fenton

Re:Just like insurance companies... (1, Insightful)

radtea (464814) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779666)

So, serving the interests of the real valued customer, the stockholder, they proclaim a holy jihad against the users of their service who don't give them good enough return in terms of contracted usage of service.

But it's what "the market" wants!

Whenever I hear one of these wankers talking about "the market" I want to reach for my sidearm. They're just saying, "What I want matters. No one else counts for anything, and we'll do anything we damn well please and no one can stop us."

Hate (1)

mace9984 (1406805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779392)

I........HATE.........YOU........Verizon!!!!!! Google, please save us!

Truthiness? (1)

Chrisje (471362) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779404)

That guy's head is so far up his own ass that I dare say he hasn't seen the light of day since 1492. Perhaps the intelligence of his statements explains why Verizon is doing so *ahem* swell *cough* in the civilized world.

Europe and Asia are indeed ahead of the US in certain regards, this is measurable and also something I have simply noticed traveling in Europe, the US and the Middle East.

Lastly he seems to be a clean cut Republican / Tea Party demagogue. Calling such idiots "colourful" is not the adjective I'd pick.

Re:Truthiness? (1)

BigBlueOx (1201587) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779630)

Dr. Verizon wears his stupidity like a tiara; on his head, gleaming, for all to see.
Like you wear your bigotry.

Oh and gov involvment isn't all bad (1)

Mekkah (1651935) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779408)

Another thing I don't understand, why doesn't the government subsidize some of the initial costs of fiber or broadband deployment and give the initial company an exclusive say, 5 year monopoly on it then allow others to bid on it and promote options / competitiveness. But hey, that's just me thinking out loud..

Re:Oh and gov involvment isn't all bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779618)

Because they already tried that (minus the 5 year monopoly)
Most of the data lines in this country (be they copper or fiber), were federally subsidized.
We already paid for them once.

"Heavy Users"? (2, Informative)

digitaldrunkenmonk (1778496) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779414)

What the fuck does "heavy user" mean? Turns out the article mentions it.

He specified and said that the company would throttle the ones using smartphones past their bandwidth limit. Yeah, that's why I don't use a smartphone for that shit. It's spelled out in the contract for a reason. Turns out he's not making some ridiculous claim or stating that the company'll start throttling home based networks.

Crazy that.

Not # 1 (2, Interesting)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779424)

Even if you limit yourself to continent-sized federations, the Russian Federation is still 2 Mbit/s ahead (9.8 mbit/s) of the States of the Union (7.8 Mbit/s).

So that puts us at #2, just ahead of the EU (6.9 Mbps), Canada, Australia, China, and Brazil (2.5 Mbit/s).

It didnt take more than a day. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779430)

for these bastards to come up against their own users, after the court screwed up the internet in favor of comcast. arguably, it didnt even take a day. which further signifies that they were laying in wait to attack their own users in this fashion. after all, they have nothing to fear for, since they are monopolizing entire swaths of entire states without giving any choice to anyone.

enjoy 'deregulation'. a world in which the insignificant user has to fend for himself/herself against the megacorporation.

He has a point (1)

GottMitUns (1012191) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779434)

He has a point. Some of those broadband studies compare apples to oranges. Yea, Korean networks may be faster, but then US is not Korea. Different scale, different usage patterns etc. It's like comparing Ethernet wired building to satellite linked regional office network.

Download them all! (1)

hwk_br (570932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779442)

Download every version of Ubuntu (or your preferred legal DVD image), every day. Keep the client open a full day, remove the files and start over. Use your connections to the limit "helping others get free and open source software".

Conflicted (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779448)

On the one hand, he is touting the usage of things like smartphones and what not in comparison with Europe and hailing it as evidence of how great our system is.

On the other hand, in the very next breath is telling the same people how this must be stopped!

The funniest thing is, his remedy will result in exactly the same thing he ridicules about Europe (multiple phones).

I mean, am I the only one that see the huge incongruity in his statements?

ON a side note, most people don't have multiple phones, they have one phone with multiple SIM cards and swap them out as they go. Someone that ignorant about his own industry should be fired.

How he had someone else stand in line for him (4, Informative)

vivaoporto (1064484) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779458)

how he had someone else stand in line for him Saturday to pick up his iPad

First Murdock displays his love [slashdot.org] for it, now the CEO of Verizon not only says he wanted one, but send one of his minions to pick it up for him. If someone were trying to paint the iPad in a bad light, couldn't get it better than this.

Now what, someone using the iPad to kick puppies and stomp kittens?

And they told us consolodation was good... (5, Insightful)

GPLDAN (732269) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779466)

When the big guys (AT&T and Verizon) killed the Northpoints and the Rhythms of the world, because they froze them out of co-lo arrangements, and made access to CO's as difficult and as painful as possible, and used lobbyists to push for legal changes and litigated like hell.

And in 2005, when MCI and Verizon merged, and the NY PSC said "ok, well at least allow naked DSL to our citizens:, you know all Seidenberg did was extend and pretend, just wait out the 30-day memory of the American press and public, then just set about killing competition again. (Source: http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=165700989 [informationweek.com] )

Verizon and FIOS will give it to you sideways, and you will smile and like it. Because, you didn't do anything to fight the mergers, call your congressperson, get out there and stop market consolidation when it was clearly headed this way in 2005. Maybe you were too busy playing Everquest, but all I know is that the efforts I put to write letters were up against an onslaught of Verizon lobbyists and attorneys. And guess who won?

After health care, the teabaggers would go apeshit if the US-DOJ Antitrust stepped in and forced another set of breakups in telecom. But, in truth, it's what needs to happen to get back options as a consumer. Read it and weep.

This interview is hillarious! (2, Interesting)

RingDev (879105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779474)

n Japan, where everybody looks at Japan as being so far ahead, they may have faster speeds, but we have higher utilization of people using the Internet.

What we we utilizing these people that are using the internet for?

Assuming he meant to say "we have more people using the internet..." wouldn't that make sense, seeing as how we have almost triple their population?

Yes. Verizon has put more fiber in from Boston to Washington than all the Western European countries combined

Imagine that, Western European countries haven't put as much fiber in from Boston to Washington... who'da thunk it?

-Rick

Shouldn't the summary mention (1)

joeflies (529536) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779502)

that he's referring to smartphone data services? At least it would direct the discussion appropriately for the people who didn't read the article

Relates to Cell Phone Broadband Usage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779550)

When I read the article just now, I noticed something people are not realizing. They are wanting to shut down any cell phone broadband usage. I have a Verizon cell phone, rarely use the mobile web, tho I do have it available. I've been watching the plans due to the fact that my contract comes up in the next year. I find it strange that they offer phones with internet capability, but don't want you to use them......

(btw, first time posting, didn't want to bother with an account at this time.)

What he is saying about the US (1)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779552)

Essentially, what he is saying about the US is that the area we excel have absolutely nothing to do with the technology involved.

Smart Move (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779596)

They'd better start throttling their heavy users now, or they will face criticism later on once everyone figures out how bad it is for you. It will be like fast food all over again.

I lied to a Comcast rep (2, Interesting)

wift (164108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779608)

Interesting read. I still don't consider the US #1 in broadband. I do defend it when people compare it to the faster much smaller in terms of sq mileage and people countries. I'm sure Verizon goes many steps further to qualify their self claim of #1.

I had a Comcast rep come to my door just last week asking/begging me to come back to Comcast/xfinty. One of the many reasons why I switched was the cap Comcast was enforcing where I hadn't heard about Verizon's until now. My usage while not torrent heavy it is still active and I work from home 3 days a week so I would be concerned on any limitation. I have a 20/20 package and that seemed to floor him. "20 up?" he asked.

Unlimited data plans? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#31779634)

I guess aren't..

AT&T is not that bad after all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31779660)

hmf

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?