Remember the shitposting during the net neutrality thing about the internet being divvied up into slices and website...

A lot of phone plans offer optional packages for services to not be counted towards your mobile data limit.

It's (((their)) way of encouraging you to use normie services and not go off the reservation

Well I mean it's a great way to make some quick constant income.
Let them milk stupid people

>Up to 1.5Mbps
What? This is fucking terrible

Net neutrality and software copyrights can't coexist.
The copyrighted material gets transferred across the Web, it's already not net neutral because there's limited licensing involved.
That aside, what they're doing is telling their customers "hey we COULD offer a package at whatever speed the mast can manage that does not have a data limit whatsoever BUT we wanna make money so bend over".

>at speed up to 1.5Mbps
Bwahahahahaha.
That's the restricted speed I get for free for the rest of the month when I go over my data plan.
And people would pay for that?

Damn Vodafone is cucking consummers all over the world.

If you don't get the packages, you can just use any of these sites equally with the data you have.

If you get the package, you can use those listed sites without using up your existing data.

Video packages cost more because streaming video uses more data than fucking around on instagram. You obviously have a computer with internet access, so this should be obvious to you.

You literal fucking mongoloid.

Bloody hell, no wonder they can get away with this shit. Blokes like you actually defending companies that do this.

This is clearly packages for unlimited data options, VOLUNTARY and actually helpful to idiots constantly running over their data limit and paying $10-20 for each extra gig. This is the absolute opposite of everything you net neutrality faggots claimed not to mention being on one of the shittiest, least-used networks on the planet. You could've posted a Cricket ad and it would've been more relevant.

You are just too dumb to realise or read the fine print..
These are supplementary passes. You pay if you want to use these apps with no data usage. You can still use them as per normal under any plan they offer. This is essentially a promotional offer, not MUH NET NEUTRALITY

Because they need to know what your data is it's a violation.
In the Netherlands we had a company (I thought Telford) that wanted to offer free Spotify streaming (So Spotify data was not going off of your 'regualr' data)
Court ruled: NO, because net neutrality.
>They need to analyse your 'packages of data' i.e. every squirt of data your recieve they need to check to know what is what. Like I need to drop your underpants to see if you have a gun, but if you don't have one I see your dingleberry and who is to say I don't take a photo of a dingleberry I like or find funny or just use it for blackmail?.
>better one:
>Your mail service says that every bible you get shipped home is free shipping, you as a vultyfag thinks NICE. How they implement it is, they cut open all your packages to see if it's a bible.

this is going to make internet usage cheaper though, you don't need all those retarded netflix apps and shit, just get the cheap chat pass and stay in contact with friends

good, it shouldn't

You don't need the chat pass to stay in contact.
>arranging a bachelor party with 50+ group chats over 4 weeks including a lot of pictures was well within my cheap ass monthly 1500MB plan (whatsapp reduces photo sizes a lot).
BUT if you get the chatpass, They still get to check all your data because they need to know what data is the chatdata.

?
In dutch why it is not good:
rtlnieuws.nl/technieuws/bits-of-freedom-weer-naar-rechter-om-gratis-muziek-t-mobile
First it was forbidden in The Netherlands, then we got the EU-rules and now Bits of Freedom are trying to get our better rules back.

>2018
>having datacap

Attached: RickLaughing.png (295x256, 72K)

the whole net neutrality debate at it's core is fucking retarded. its not individuals vs ISPs, it's ISPs vs. content providers. google/youtube/facebook and the rest of them have made their billions off the backs of the ISPs. i don't particularly like the ISPs so i'm not defending them, its just obvious that the issue is "who gets to spend who's money for free?"

brutal

No really, it's the access.
There are alternatives to the popular services you mentioned, way to small (and maybe short lived) to even be considered by ISPs to put into a 'special package'.
Certain decentralised alternatives would be too much work to even filter out by ISPs unless some sort of protocol is agreed upon and that would probably defy the whole reason why the service was decentralised.