If you own any kind of mobile device, you know that service providers are trying real hard to cap data usage even when you are fine paying their exorbitant prices, and basically claim that’s needed because it affects their infrastructure negatively. While some might actually think this makes sense, hard analysis says otherwise:
I won’t argue that data caps have no positive impact on wireless networks—they can prevent the most egregious overuse of what is a limited resource. But it’s a crude tool at best, targeting monthly averages with no regard for whether the network is congested at a particular time or place.
Recent actions and statements from carriers suggest this is the case: data caps are largely a profit play, not an efficient means of preventing network problems. After Sprint offered “double the high-speed data” on its network, 20GB per month for family plans, AT&T responded by doubling data, too, through shared plans of 30GB to 100GB a month. Verizon doubled its own customers’ data, while Sprint offered yet another doubling to stay ahead of AT&T and Verizon. Suddenly, network constraints had apparently disappeared.
Where did all this extra capacity come from? The carriers’ networks didn’t double in size overnight. The capacity was always there—carriers just weren’t allowing customers to use it until one decided to boost data and the others followed. Behavior like this helps explain why federal regulators have blocked mergers that would reduce the number of nationwide carriers from four to three.
Yeah, well, big government is in bed with these monopolies, and that’s why they do this sort of shit. These caps are not about protecting the network and assuring equal access, and have everything to do with profitability without having to be competitive. In short, monopolies, and then, the kind of monopolies a big fat cat can buy from government types always ready to sell the people out to line their own pockets.F rom the article:
It probably wouldn’t be smart for carriers to promise everyone limitless data, because there are real capacity constraints in wireless networks. But the specific limits imposed on consumers are chosen not to prevent congestion but to maximize profit.
I have nothing against profits. I just want you to make them because you are selling a great product people want and beat the competition fair and square. This always benefits the consumer. I have a huge problem when you want your profitability to come at the expense of the consumer, and then, because of some shitty monopoly you bought from politicians that love the idea they get to pick winners and losers. For a fee, of course.