yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[General Questions and Answers] GorillaPimp:
I wonder where the lines between illegal wiretapping and packet inspection are drawn.

On another note, I had my dolphin browser on my phone redirected to their ads because of the string I was using (iPad). They're doing a pretty shabby job of intercepting traffic accurately.

Vpn> I'd probably consider taxing them via exploiting data usage until I get them to sever the contract too.

All this is an effort to keep customers from using what they pay for, "unlimited" data.

We should probably answer back with a more serious response as a group, namely a coordinated effort to use every last byte of data transfer we're paying for each month. Frame the argument in terms consumers all understand. How much data/money are you wasting/giving away to Tmobile every month? You paid for it, be sure to use it! Tmo will love that.

Sent from Scott LaRock's TR808
[General Questions and Answers] lazaro17:
Agreed. I think if enough of us are verbal about their methods we might be able to get something resolved.

Any suggestions?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
[General Questions and Answers] catpunt:
you don't need a plugin to change the user agent on desktop chrome, you can do it from developer tools. this is how to do it on mac:

view->developer->developer tools->little settings icon on the bottom-right of the window->override user agent
[General Questions and Answers] shnn2011:
I understand that there many methods of changing the UserAgenyString, but the whole point is the poor consumer who has paid for service and is not tethering is getting screwed for using a third party browser which is by no means a violation of the service agreement. We need something simple. An app . . . Something that someone with limited knowledge can use to keep from being ripped off.

All this because the phone company is paranoid someone will hook up hardware that THEY PAID FOR to ANOTHER DEVICE THAT THEY OWN and UTILIZE THE BANDWIDTH THEY BOUGHT without paying an extra 15 dollars tax.

What is the 15 dollar tax for? Does T-mobile power your phones processor? If so why do you pay a power bill? Does T-mobile preform voodoo to enable the phone THAT YOU OWN to route packets? Nooooo ! ! !

Its like back in the old days when the phone company used to make you pay for the phones you use and fine you if you had additional or "unauthorized" handsets plugged in.

This move is flat out, FRIVOLOUS ! ! ! RIDICULOUS ! ! ! ASININE ! ! ! and TYRANIC ! ! !

We- as consumers must come up with methods to use our third party browsers . . . Without being accused of tethering and as a result blocked, blamed, and shamed by a company were paying for service.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
The easiest thing would e for the browser developers to fix the issue. As long as it reports as a desktop client then they will see it as such and assume you are breaking your TOS. If the browsers reported it properly then it would not be an issue.

In the end what I have a feeling will happen is that data plans will increase in cost and have built in tethering. Even if you dont use tethering.
[General Questions and Answers] shnn2011:
Many new mobile browsers are fullblown browsers and for this reason there are complications. I am told that even the full blown ICS browser is being blocked.

The browsers are reporting their User Agent String properly. T-mobile is interpreting the User Agent Strings with ignorance.

Prices should go down as technology progresses. I think that eventually providers will drop the frivolous taxing of tethering.
[General Questions and Answers] S1mSyo:
All this because the phone company is paranoid someone will hook up hardware that THEY PAID FOR to ANOTHER DEVICE THAT THEY OWN and UTILIZE THE BANDWIDTH THEY BOUGHT without paying an extra 15 dollars tax.

To true... ^^
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
No they are worried that you will hook up a device and use the bandwith for a device that it was not intended for. I see posts like this all the time and no one bothers to read the TOS when they sign the contract. The TOS states that all data is for the device on the contract and no other with out a tethering plan.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
How is this worrisome? Seems to me they're more worried about the extra bucks they could be leeching from you by arbitrarily categorizing tethering data differently from other data.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
Think about it for a min. Most people are on Limited data plans. Then they tether to say a laptop (cause they saw they could on sites like this.) The laptop eats their data away in the blink of an eye. When he bill comes in the people are pissed and call the company to complain. They spend hours on the phone yelling at someone and making threats for something that was their fault. Then just to shut them up a manager may remove the charges. All of this cost the company money. Not to mention puts the company employees in a tuff spot. Either keep the Cx happy and remove the charges with risk of losing their job, or deal with someone that is pissed off enough though they have no right to be.

I have been in just that position many times over the past few years. Now I tell everyone. If you want to tether then get a plan for it.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
You're either kidding or severely exaggerating (unless you're referring to one of those tiny, tiny plans, which are designed to try to make you go over and get charged overages anyway).

Computer browsers may use more data than mobile browsers, but not by that many orders of magnitude. The fact that some mobile browsers even identify themselves as computer browsers is testament to this.

If you're talking about people going haywire by tethering and downloading gigabytes, then 1) they kinda deserve it, but 2) [and much more importantly] they can do it on the phone anyway, as demonstrated by the guy who legitimately used 150GB in a month.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
There is no good reason to use 150gb on a phone.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
He did it because he was pissed off about the tethering policy and wanted to "teach AT&T a lesson", apparently.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
If people read the TOS then this would not be an issue.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
Actually, no. Lots of people are well-aware of tethering policies (it's been particularly publicized lately) and find them unfair. And yet, as long as they live in the US, they'll find themselves with a choice only between several big providers that do the same.

This is extra grounds for being pissed off.

(The notion of "why didn't you read everything" is a joke in the first place, aptly demonstrated by South Park's "Human Cent-iPad", but that's another story.)
[General Questions and Answers] shnn2011:
I believe that the TOS is inhumane and against good moral principal when somone is trying to make you pay twice for what you own . . . The customer is mislead and forced into conditions. Smaller companies which are for the customer, in many cases have been put out of business by the larger companies not in a fair competitive way, but by sleazy practices.

Thats like my plumber charging me an extra monthly fee for routing my waste down the drain.

The toilate and plumbing is mine. Why should i pay the plumber any more monthly, the rest is between me and the city or whoever else maintains the waste management.

Now in this case not only are you forced to pay the plumber, but the plumber is prefprming "voodoo" making you think your toilet and plumbing will be missing something and will not function without paying the tax.

Then you are forced into a contract and told there is an additional service for your toilet to flush properly . . .

T-mobile sells 2 to 5 gb per month for about 49 dollars depending on if your a business customer or regular consumer.

From my experience most people barely use over a gig.

T-mobile does not charge overages either, they just throttle you. From what I have seen the throttling is to about 119k, but can vary.
[General Questions and Answers] GorillaPimp:
TOS? You mean the thing that arbitrarily is changed by carriers with minimal notifications to consumers and even less notification that any change to it is a breach of contract and frees customers from being bound to their prior contract?

Corporate shills masquerading as thoughtful or serious consumers are a joke.

Tethering charges without use of any special Tmo software or hardware is theft and fraud. Imagine paying extra to use a fax machine or modem on your POTS lines. The carriers have no legitimate argument beyond charging those who use their custom hardware and software, which excludes 3rd party apps and built-in android features.

Sent from Scott LaRock's TR808
[General Questions and Answers] shnn2011:
If I could thank you a million times on the forum, for that statement, I would.
[General Questions and Answers] alessio9899:
have the same problem
[General Questions and Answers] polar2792:
Seriously, phone companies charge for tether for one thing and one thing alone...money! Glad I ain't with T-Mobile.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
Exactly. Why do people expect to tether other equipment and blow through amounts of data the system is not designed or intended for and they didn't sign as contract for?

I've been with T-Mobile 14 years and have never been misled or forced into anything.

Aka Verizon..

If you want to equate waste water with data, the plumber is out of the equation. He's a repairman. It's actually between you and the utility.

Ok, so your normal waste water usage - toilet, washing machine, etc. is fine with the utility and generates no extra charges or slow drainage. But suppose you want to empty a 10,000 gallon septic tank down your drain. Now your dumping is well beyond normal use, it strains the system and you have not paid for it. You didn't sign a contract allowing such use. Obviously, the utility should be able to charge you extra to avoid passing the cost of your excessive usage of the system on to other customers. Or at least slow your drain to relieve system strain.

Or to use clean water for an example, you shouldn't be charged more on your water bill if you hook up a hose a fill a large backyard pool?

Which is a better deal than many other carriers offer.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
Yeah, because using a computer browser is comparable to dumping 10,000 gallons down the drain, right?

Any truly big files you want to download with a computer, you can already do so on any modern smartphone. It's then a trivial task to transfer it. (Ref: that guy who downloaded 150GB without tethering.) The only thing anti-tethering clauses actually do is punish the person trying to use his data at normal levels.

That, and allowing his provider to levy an additional tax on the 5GB data he's already paid for.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
I understand what you're saying and I basically agree. Charging a tether fee BEFORE the data quota is exceeded is, at least in a way, kind of a rip-off. But what's a good fix? That's where things get complicated.

Bottom line...when get your service you agree to the TOS. Both parties - the provider and customer - must abide by the terms.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
Good fix? T-mobile had it for a while: just don't enforce the clause. (It's not like they're obligated to rip you off "or else".)

Otherwise, I'm not sure what you mean.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
I see people talking about being "ripped off" but you agreed to the TOS that states the data plan is to be used for the device ON the contract. So if anyone is being riped off it is the companies.

Bottom line is. That if you want to use a service provided by someone then you will play by their rules or you can go to another carrier, but they are all doing it. With the advancements being made in how much alot of people use their phones the companies are going to do what they have to to make the most money. A company that is out to make money. Not really a new IDEA.

As everyone likes doing comparisons. I saw a sign yesterday that made me think about this thread. The sign stated. "Gasoline from here is to be used in auto mobiles only. Any use other then stated can result in injury and/or fines and criminal charges."

Just like that sign. Yes you will be paying for it. As you dont pay for it in advance but only after it is used. You agreed that the data will be used as agreed to in the way that is stated in the TOS.

Plain and simple in Black and white. This would not be an issues if people spent more time reading what they are signing. Instead of complaining after the fact.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
If you mean "ripped off" in that they're not squeezing every last dime they possibly can out of you, then sure. But this isn't what we usually mean by being "ripped off". We usually mean "subject to excessive charges" or something like that.

Is this really comparable? The gas company seems to be warning the user about a law. They're not trying to fineprint a contract so that they can monitor your gas usage and charge you extra when you use it in anything else.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
I see it as comparable as the contract signed is law binding.

I mean we can debate this till the cows come home but in the end it is their company and they will run it how they see fit. If we dont like it then we are free to go else where for it.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
That's not a good fix. It's not a fix at all. There are costs - considerable costs - to providing wireless data. Those costs go up with the amount of data used. Providers must be able to recover those costs, plus a reasonable profit. If they can't they won't long be able to provide service, they'll go broke. Sprint is learning about that.

The fix - the real answer to the tethering problem - is finding the fairest way to charge for tethering. I'm not smart enough to give a definitive answer. Maybe tiered or per-GB pricing with no tether fee or an unlimited flat-fee plan for heavy users. I'm not sure what the best balance for both sides is. The market tends to eventually sort this stuff out.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
[General Questions and Answers] ideohazard:
Change services or not?

I signed up with EM+ (Talk/Text/Web) a couple years ago which theoretically gave me unlimited internet service. I recently lost my tethering capacity due to the new stricter enforcement. Now, I've read that the old "Unlimited" web is throttled after 5 GB (although I've also read 2 and 10 as well) and the new "5GB" internet plan is unlimited (just also throttled). These sound like exactly the same thing, except that the old plan didn't allow tethering but the new one does.

The question now, do I change to one of the "Value" plans and switch to a 5 GB plan putting me back on a 2 year contract, or should I just add tethering for $14.99 and keep the "unlimited" internet use without a contract?

This seems like a pretty unfair choice.

(my math assumes Unlimited talk and text plans)

Pay $15 more in exchange for:

Tethering

Continue my "no contract" service :)

- or -

Pay $10 less in exchange for:

Tethering (allowed with new 5 GB plan)

Agree to 24 month contract :mad:

I'm wondering if they're just using this scheme as a way to get everybody without a contract back on the hook again. The difference between $15 more and $10 less is $600 over 2 years.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
I went from EM+ to Value Plan. Saved money and the only reason I could think of to justify staying off-contract was to be free to change carriers. Been with T-Mobile 14 years and no interest in jumping ship.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
So you're saying.. that warning someone about an existing law1 with regards to your product is comparable to requiring that users be subject to a new profit-increasing law2 in order to use your product?

1 In a manner that's completely clear to every user.

2 In a manner that's unclear to most users

I find your comparison more than a little disingenuous.

The market will not sort this out. The carrier market is so distorted by the bundling of phones, with psychologically stimulating "subsidies" (which, coincidentally, also rip you off in the long-term, but no one actually does those calculations) that they stopped competing based on quality a long time ago.

If they actually were competing on quality, tethering restrictions would be one of the first things to go. Being allowed to do whatever you want with the data you have is such a pull.

Instead, people choose carriers based on what shiny phones they are bundled with. They are blindsighted by the "amazing" subsidies ("$300 off SOMGZ!!!!"), and don't even bother to read their contracts or do the math. They are then locked-in from going anywhere else with better service, until finally, two years later "SOMG I CAN UPGRADE FOR CHEAP PRIZ!!!!1" and the cycle begins all over again. Carriers know this; they've geared their psychological techniques perfectly to take advantage of our human retardedness.

(Which, coincidentally, is another reason I find zelendel's perplexity dumbfounding: the carriers designed the system so that no one would read the contracts; how is that so hard to realize?)

The only way to get them to change is to force them to actually compete on quality. And the only way to do that is the forbid the bundling + subsidizing of phones. That is not going to happen in the foreseeable future.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
@thebobp: Agree completely about so-called 'subsidized' phones. An evil practice. But the market will eventually sort out data charges, just like it did voice minutes.

But regarding tethering and data...I think you're confusing quality and quantity.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
If the market is so distorted that they're competing primarily on who can lock you in the best with their shiny phones, then everything else is reduced in importance.

So yes, both the quantity of the data, and the quality (whatever that means, but say it includes "not being burdened by arbitrary restrictions such as a stipulation against tethering").

Edit:

I don't even know what you're talking about. Voice is so overpriced because they bundle it. The same 900 minute plan offered for $60 at AT&T, prepaid providers such as straight talk offer for half the price. How you can claim the market has equilibrated is well-beyond me.
[General Questions and Answers] lazaro17:
So if the TOS states of using data just on that one device where's that put people with multiple devices who swap sim cards? Not only between phones but let's say putting your sim in a tablet.

What if laptops had sim cards? And instead of tethering I just removed my sim card and put it in my laptop.

I mean at this point tmobile still thinks I have a nexus one. Since I always buy an unlocked phone they never have a profile for the actual phone I own (galaxy nexus). So what device have I actually agreed on using data for ? The nexus one that's been sitting in my drawer for 6 months?

A friend of mine streams his cable to his laptop via a box. Are cable companies going to start charging extra for that too?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
[General Questions and Answers] ideohazard:
There are quite a number of them that already do.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
T-Mobile will probably never be that picky. One SIM, one device at a time - no problem with them. Verizon or AT&T might feel differently. If they can figure a way to detect it. Well, actually they can.

I'm sure they'd like to. If they can figure a way to detect it.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
Or they do what they did here. Thy removed all unlimited internet packages from our cable internet because people were using too much. Now the Max I can get is 300 GB a month
[General Questions and Answers] shnn2011:
With ALGOL due respect, that is outright asinine, if you pay for 5GB then your should be able to use it.

I agree that it may be wrong to break a data cap, but you payed for that amount of TCP/IP data.

Further, T-mobile is denying legitimate apps by being overly paranoid.

Once again, I mean no disrespect but I believe that you don't find the TOS misleading or unethical because either you are conditioned to think so, do not understand the issues, or have a business intrest in T-mobile.

If I pay for 5000 of gallons of waste a month, then as long as I don't go over its ok. My mom, dad, wife, or whoever else should be able to tether their being to my toilet.

P.C. Generated TCP/IP packets are no thicker than phone TCP/IP packets and will have no greater chance of clogging the pipes.

T-mobile seems to just want to sell you 5 GB and have you use 1 or two at most.

Even when you call the call center, they may try to sell you a higher data plan even although they know you never went over in the last year and that you will not use it.

This is actually in my opinion a form of extortion. Someone, put an app in your phone "tethering manager" to disable its functionality. They then require you to pay them to take the app off of your phone.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
I dont find it misleading at all as I read the fine print when I first signed up for my contract and knew just what I could and could not do.

These people are out to make money. You cant blame them for that. In the end all that matters to a business person is the bottom line. This is the way of business.
[General Questions and Answers] thebobp:
Of course a person who works with contracts would not find it "misleading". A lawyer would say the TOS was straightforward.

But, as you said yourself, a ton of people find it to be a wall of text. Most simply don't read it. Hiding something in fine print like that is de facto misleading, even if it's not de jure misleading.

Blame is beside the point here. Even if you don't blame a carrier for ripping you off, the fact still remains that they are ripping you off.
[General Questions and Answers] zelendel:
I dont work with contracts. I just make sure I read everything before I sign my name to something. Watched many people I know get trapped like that. I mean really if you take a bit and read it ahead of time you are good. IT goes along with modding your phone. Before you do something that could have "long term" effects, you do your research. most TOS are publicly available to look over before you ever do anything.

Maybe I just dont understand not doing your research before hand.

I am not gonna argue about it anymore. As we are just not gonna see eye to eye on it and in the end there is no solution to it other then either A. Accept it or B. Go to another carrier, which will do the same.
[General Questions and Answers] Crashdamage:
Agreed. And I can use it as long as I follow the rules. If I do, T-Mobile must uphold their end of the bargain and provide service.

The problem area is the methods used for detection and enforcement.

None of the above. If you think the TOS are unethical don't accept them. But lotsa luck finding phone service.

An oversimplifcation. The cost of transmitting wireless data is FAR higher and bandwidth and backhaul limitations means a FAR higher chance of clogged pipes.

That's not extortion, it's just sales, like trying to sell a bigger refrigerator than you need. It's up to the consumer to make smart decisions.

Registered Linux user #266531. Android user since v1.0.