Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:how about .... (Score 1) 131

by bickerdyke (#47825995) Attached to: Facebook Blamed For Driving Up Cellphone Bills, But It's Not Alone

OK, so what's the realistic way to use an app that uses more bandwidth than your plan includes?

If you want to use an app that plays video (and you want to use it outside of your wifi) you need a way to get those videos to your phone.

I basically agree with you on that here

The issue here is that most smart phone plans make you, the user, responsible for paying for the total amount of bandwidth consumed, but the phone and the apps don't give you a good mechanism to allow you to act on that responsibility in a meaningful way.

It's not that bad as decent mobile OS offers you options to a) see and meter the data volume used up per application and restrict network activities that are not triggered by actively using the app to a wifi environment ("background data") and even have a list what wifis aren't anything but tethering hooks for another mobile data access.

And as you mentioned, the other problem is feature creep. An app gets added a video play feature, and the data usage goes up. But it's still the app developers who have the right to decide what the "correct" scope of features for their app is. And asuming the developers aren't complete morons, tradeoffs in size, network usage, accessibility and such have been carefully considered and are outweighed by new benefits. (If not, the devs probably ARE morons, but everyone has toe right to make their own app worse than before.)

Comment: Re:how about .... (Score 1) 131

by bickerdyke (#47823729) Attached to: Facebook Blamed For Driving Up Cellphone Bills, But It's Not Alone

Absolutely right.

On the other hand, we still require these not-technologically inclined people to select and sign-up for a data-plan. The proper selection already requires them to be available to connect "seeing videos on cellphone" with "huge data volume required"

So if an app starts to play video, one should know that you're going towards your data limit at bullet-speed. And who else but user (and cellphone provider) know where that limit is? That information is not availble to the facebook app and so that descision has to be made by the user.

I know we can't and shouldn't expect that from facebook-app-user Joe Sixpack, but we already expected him to estimate his bandwidth and monthly data usage when signing up for a data plan. Sp you either can expect an informed descision about video loading or you need to start way earlier.

And for the sake of the argument imagine a good salesperson who is not intrested in just selling the most expensive option and asks "Are you planning to watch mobile video on your phone?". If the user answers "no" here and suddenly sees videos on ths phone, he should remember that his plan may be a bit too small for that.

Comment: Re:how about .... (Score 0) 131

by bickerdyke (#47823541) Attached to: Facebook Blamed For Driving Up Cellphone Bills, But It's Not Alone

Ok, so you're saying "never launch the Facebook app" is the only responsible choice?

If you have a limited data-plan, using apps that autoplay/preload huge amount of data is irresponsible.

The sane choice of course would be for the facebook app to limit mobile data usage by culling data-heavy features as video autoplay. At least in a market where most users have data caps on their mobile plans. Or have it optional. If it's opt-in or opt-out could still be determined by the current data-plan prices.

It's worth remembering that not using the facebook app is supposed to hit facebook harder than yourself.

facebook is no human right and neither are mobile videos. And if you use your phone to watch video streaming, you should have a data-plan that matches your online.usage.

Comment: Re:so what is the problem? (Score 2) 173

by bickerdyke (#47735489) Attached to: Google Wants To Test Driverless Cars In a Simulation

Please define "simulation".

You can't test some rare situations in real life because they are so rare.

For example car accidents. We're glad that they have been greatly reduced in real life and aren't predictable enough so that cars can be deliberatly sent into real life accidents. That's why we're running simulated accidents, crash tests. Of course not a computer simulation, it's still a simulation that neglects human factors. (evasion maneuvers might lead to other impact angles and speeds, passengers tensing and bracing for impact are simulated by limp dummys)

These "actual physical" simulations also only test what the test designers have accounted for. (It's just that hurling a large mass at a concrete wall isn't a highly dynamic system so it can be safely assumed that all important parametrs have been accounted for)

(Wow, i guess that's the first correct car anaolgy...)

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db