Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | reply to funchords
Re: Same reason the DMV gets away with some questions...
That is the speed of light in a vaccum(or air, I forget which), but in certain substances light CAN travel faster than that. |
|
Matt
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
| said by Lazlow  :That is the speed of light in a vaccum(or air, I forget which), but in certain substances light CAN travel faster than that. That is the speed of light in a vacuum and no, it can never travel faster than that. You may be thinking that in certain substances it slows down ... but never faster. |
|
StudioTech
Off The Air
join:2001-10-10
Edison, NJ
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :I believe even those arguing a literal interpretation of "unlimited" would say that someone consuming 400 gig in a month would be ridiculous to claim "but it said 'unlimited.'" That's why I believe the term is aimed at what the average person considers to be reasonable, and would experience. Those complaining are the outliers. There always will be outliers. Just like those who expect to get a dial tone even when the entire country picks up their handset at the same time. Mark 1998 - I believe even those arguing a literal interpretation of "unlimited" would say that someone consuming FOUR gig in a month would be ridiculous to claim "but it said 'unlimited.'" |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to grumpy3b
said by grumpy3b :they get away with it for the same reason the DMV in CA can have this question on the test: You can never drive faster than: A) 55MPH B) The posted speed limit C) Then is safe D) Some other inane answer... According to the DMV it is "Than is safe"...BUT, ultimately it depends on how you frame your logic...in theory B&C are the same answer because the posted speed limit is supposed to be the MAXIMUM safe speed we are allowed to drive. But, the DMV chooses to look at it the other way around using the "than is safe" as the answer. For many it's a chicken or egg question and answer. This reminds me of a question that was on a NYS Regent's Exam (A standard test that is given to High School Students) that asked "Which Planet is furthest from the Sun?" with both Neptune and Pluto as provided choices (This was years ago when Pluto was still classified as a Planet). They wanted Pluto as the correct answer and called Neptune as an incorrect answer even though at the time of the test (and for some time before and after) Pluto was inside Neptune's orbit. Thus they were penalizing those who (due to the the lack of a qualifier like "Planet's Orbit" or "Planet is Currently") provided the correct accurate answer since Neptune WAS furthest from the Sun when the question was posed. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
| reply to Matt
Matt
It took me a while to track this down.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive···of_light
That is when the speed of light exceeds C. |
|
MrSpock29
join:2008-02-09
Hammonton, NJ
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by Karl Bode :You're getting there! You're not speaking in recognizable English I'm just pointing out that, like speed limits, there is the literal interpretation and the commonly understood interpretation. It is my belief that "unlimited," to most people, means they'll never reach a limit based upon them being part of an average group with average usage patterns. Just like 45mph means that's the limit under normal conditions. I agree that it would shut some people up if they just printed an asterisk with footnote explaining the cap. But, I just don't think those people are anywhere near a small minority. So, there's no reason to. Mark Around here, speed limit signs say "Conditions Permitting". It still is not a good analogy. Also, we have driver ed classes and I think most people know how to read a speed limit sign. If Comcast starts holding classes on what "unlimited" really means, and how it means "average", then maybe you have an analogy.
However, you (or they) can't just change the definition of a word to make a point. The only meaning to "unlimited" is "no limits". |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
| said by MrSpock29 :... and I think most people know how to read a speed limit sign. That's my point. Most people know what "unlimited" means *within the context of their own use.* Just like speed limits imply "conditions apply," I believe providers use "unlimited" in the same sense. I mean, as far as I'm concerned, I get unlimited use every month. Just like I feel no need to test whether I can really drive 45 when the street is congested with rush-hour traffic, I see no reason to test how much broadband I can use without reaching a limit. I never give it a second thought in either case.
said by MrSpock29 :If Comcast starts holding classes on what "unlimited" really means, and how it means "average", They don't have to. The majority knows what it means. Or, better said, they never have a reason to question what it means because they are average.
The problem is that a minority of outliers want their predicament explained to those who don't have a predicament. It's just kvetching.
I think it would be more productive for DSLR to organize a "truth in labeling" movement. Lobby Congress to pass the equivalent of nutrition labeling for broadband. Standardized measurements and format of reporting so consumers can make better choices.
But instead, it's just how bad providers are, how bad government is, how everyone else should be unhappy like a few DSLR activists are.
There's nothing constructive in that.
Mark |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :I think the cap issue is similar. Most people interpret "unlimited" in terms of what's average for the average person. Not sharing files 24x7, running servers, etc. It doesn't matter what people interpret unlimited to mean, because unlimited has a very specific definition. And interpretations are very oft wrong.
That's the problem. Unlimited has a definition that is clear. What is happening is ISPs are trying to change what unlimited is and then complain when people take it at dictionary definition, face value. That's just plain dirty pool.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
1 edit | said by NetAdmin :It doesn't matter what people interpret unlimited to mean, I disagree. Advertising is defined as helping people hear what they want to hear. If I target advertising to majority usage patterns (what the average person deems "reasonable"), then "unlimited" is anything above that.
Even those who are upset because they fall outside the pattern of averages would admit that there has to be limits. Nothing is ever truly "unlimited." So, what they're really complaining about is that they fall outside the average. And, what they suggest is that those who don't care should.
To me, that's not logical. It doesn't seem like it will ever lead to anything. Telling people they should be unhappy about something they have no reason to be unhappy about.
Mark |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
| reply to NetAdmin
said by NetAdmin :It doesn't matter what people interpret unlimited to mean, because unlimited has a very specific definition. And interpretations are very oft wrong. We get it, we all get it. People of average intelligence get it. People of unlimited intelligence get it. We all do.
This is a question of whether there is a difference between limited and unlimited. It's a silly question.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
What you do at Christmas does not matter so much; What counts are the Christmas things you do all year through. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| said by funchords :This is a question of whether there is a difference between limited and unlimited. It's a silly question. I definitely agree with you on that point. I guess this is another one of those inane things in the business world that is obviously quite stupid and yet accepted despite its completely irrational nature. It definitely is prime material for a Dilbert strip.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by NetAdmin :It doesn't matter what people interpret unlimited to mean, I disagree. Advertising is defined as helping people hear what they want to hear. I see your point. Thing is that for people who are educated and were taught proper English and the proper meaning of words, this type of thing is infuriating. I understand that people hear what they want, but it is problematic when what people want to hear undermines a clear concept like "unlimited."
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
2 edits | said by NetAdmin :I understand that people hear what they want, but it is problematic when what people want to hear undermines a clear concept like "unlimited." I agree. It's just a matter of how large the group of people are who feel it's problematic. This seems like a bell curve. If 80% use 2-3 gig per month, and I advertise to that group (with an unstated 4 gig cap), I don't care about the 10% who will be affected by the cap. The 80% is the sweet spot.
I think the problem is that "unlimited" is interpreted in a literal, scientific way instead of advertising. Everyone knows there is a difference. It's just those whom a scientific definition works in their favor insist advertising should be scientific.
I was serious about what I said before. I think it would be more constructive for DSLR to lead an effort to enact a broadband equivalent of nutrition labeling. I don't see how these whine sessions lead to anything constructive.
For example, someone else's hubris over caps doesn't move me (when, for all intents and purposes, I have unlimited bandwidth). But, standardized measurements and reporting is consistent with a free marketplace (to help buyers make informed decisions). I could give 100% support to that.
Baby steps.
Mark |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :I think it would be more productive for DSLR to organize a "truth in labeling" movement. Lobby Congress to pass the equivalent of nutrition labeling for broadband. Standardized measurements and format of reporting so consumers can make better choices. But instead, it's just how bad providers are, how bad government is, how everyone else should be unhappy like a few DSLR activists are. There's nothing constructive in that. Mark Hey, it looks like you have no clue that unlimited = no limit and you're otherwise losing your argument. Isn't it time you trotted out the good ol' standby of yours that you have used (by my count) about 100 times or so, that magical section of the U.S. code that you interpret to mean that the federal government can spy on citizens without oversight or worrying about breaking any laws. That always seems to shut people up who disagree with you and you just go on imagining that it's because you're right. 
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
|
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
1 edit | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :Your complaint is like the kid who did 90 on the 40 mph surface street. He claimed it wasn't posted. I.e., unlimited. The flaw in your analogy is that the driver is responsible for knowing the content of the vehicle code; at least as applies to his driving. Most states are similar to California, which actually has several speed laws.
• Maximum Speed law Limit (Sect. 22349): 65 mph. unless post as 70 mph by CalTrans.
• Prima Facie Speed law Limits (Sect. 22352): No faster than is safe. 15 mph, or 25 mph, depending on conditions specified in the code.
• Basic Speed Law (Sect. 22350): 25 mph in residential areas, 15 mph in area of limited visibility. No greater than reasonable or prudent ...
No matter what, Prima Facie takes overall precedence; if it is foggy, whether the road is posted 75 mph, or not posted at all, any speed faster than that which takes you to the limit of visibility is unsafe.
There are also sections concerning the "Increase of Freeway and Local Speed Limits", one of which specifies locally established Prima Facie Speed Limits other than 15 mph and 25 mph.
If there is no posted limit, then assume Prima Facie Speed Limits; and, do not drive faster than conditions permit in any case Section 22351, titled, "Speed Law Violations", implies that the "Basic Speed Law" is taken as the overriding law.
How anything related to highway speed can be compared to "unlimited" escapes me, because the C.V.C. is pretty clear; in the absence of posted limits, there are still assumed limits. Speed is, simply put, not "unlimited".
As for Internet advertising, I have never personally seen an ISP add offering unqualified unlimited service (other than old, dated ads from the past, demonstrating that ISPs did, once, advertise so). All the actual ads I have seen in the wild have been qualified. It is not a mere game of semantics to qualify a word. And "unlimited access" != "unlimited bandwidth". My own ISP offers either "unlimited access" (for HSI) or "limited access" (for dial-up). Okay, they don't actually say, "limited access", rather they specify the actual limits in hours of connect time per month. In contrast with HSI allowing me to maintain a login session indefinitely ("unlimited access").
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
| reply to DustySilicon
said by DustySilicon :Karl says it very succinctly. He did, yes, but you did not. "Unlimted" != "unlimtited self-confidence".
"Unlimited" is an adjective, and by itself really isn't a useful word.
"Unlimited Internet", OTOH, is a useful combination, and can be assumed to imply that there are no limits to what you can get from the Internet.
"Unlimited access", is still another useful combination; but has to be taken in the context of "access to what".
You can't compose a sentence with just an adjective: What does "Mary hit the unlimited" mean?
However, the moment you apply an adjective to a noun, such as "unlimited Internet", you actually convey some meaning. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
| reply to grumpy3b
May I respectfully suggest that you read your California Vehicle Code? Specifically Section 22350, titled, "Basic Speed Law" (and now, I must go back and edit a prior post, for failure to actually open my C.V.C. to the relevant sections, for I have posted incorrect information).
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
| reply to grumpy3b
said by grumpy3b :they get away with it for the same reason the DMV in CA can have this question on the test: You can never drive faster than: A) 55MPH B) The posted speed limit C) Then is safe D) Some other inane answer... According to the DMV it is "Than is safe"...BUT, ultimately it depends on how you frame your logic... »www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22351.htm
I don't think your logic (or mine) has anything to do with it. It seems to say that either the Prima Facie Speed Limits (Section 22352, and 22357), or the Basic Speed Law (22350) take precedence, whichever is greater. And you will need "competent evidence" that your speed did not exceed the Basic Speed Law, in the case that you were in excess of the Prima Facie Speed Limits.
As I read Chapter 7, Article 1 of the California Vehicle Code, "C)" is the only correct answer possible. |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | reply to major marco
I'm all for this Idea.
Broadband must be marketed as the MAXIMUM DATA PER MONTH at the MOST LIMITED protocol. Easy to compare and hard to throttle.
Problem solved  |
|
hi there
@ecsis.net
| reply to grumpy3b
quote:
they get away with it for the same reason the DMV in CA can have this question on the test:
You can never drive faster than:
A) 55MPH
B) The posted speed limit
C) Then is safe
D) Some other inane answer...
According to the DMV it is "Than is safe"...BUT, ultimately it depends on how you frame your logic...in theory B&C are the same answer because the posted speed limit is supposed to be the MAXIMUM safe speed we are allowed to drive. But, the DMV chooses to look at it the other way around using the "than is safe" as the answer. For many it's a chicken or egg question and answer.
I suspect the same folks word the ads for the ISP's...intentionally worded to imply the widest possible interpretation and limits. Yet, later the specifics are in there...I simply do not see how they can consider a cap of any sort reasonable as cable & DSL speeds are increasing to scary fast speeds every day now.
But these things are why I have stuck by smaller independent ISP for both DSL and MBB...no caps, no limits. I do however use my MBB with a bit of care so they don't begin to get static from the actual provider. But I have my original paperwork for both services which indeed state unlimited use just don't be stupid and serve up (upload) 1TB of data every month. That is not vague at all.
No, posted speed-limit is pretty much "up-to" speed.
If your on a interstate speed limit 80MPH, heavy fog or rain causes everyone to slow down to 50MPH, should you still be going 80MPH? No. |
|
