this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
709 points (99.9% liked)

Technology

59288 readers
4758 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Long-term carrier lock-in could soon be a thing of the past in America after the FCC proposed requiring telcos to unlock cellphones from their networks 60 days after activation.

FCC boss Jessica Rosenworcel put out that proposal on Thursday, saying it would encourage competition between carriers. If subscribers could simply walk off to another telco with their handsets after two months of use, networks would have to do a lot more competing, the FCC reasons.

"When you buy a phone, you should have the freedom to decide when to change service to the carrier you want and not have the device you own stuck by practices that prevent you from making that choice," Rosenworcel said.

Carrier-locked devices contain software mechanisms that prevent them from being used on other providers' networks. The practice has long been criticized for being anti-consumer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 176 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (52 children)

is that some american problem i'm too euro to understand? we got rid of this anticompetitive shit in early 10s

[–] nooneescapesthelaw@mander.xyz 3 points 4 months ago (7 children)

I don't really see why people are against it, personally I never buy locked devices but they are usually a chunk cheaper and there is always an option for a locked device.

If telecoms were making certain phones exclusively locked (as in not selling unlocked phones) it would be a problem. But rn it seems that it is an easy way to save money if you like a carrier.

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 4 months ago (3 children)

okay but you end up paying more - if it was just normal data plan and cost of phone it would be even, but there's also something paid to middleman that provides something that is effectively credit and extortion services like simlock and some legal thingies, it might have smaller downpayment but it's not this, see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory

this is on top of various security and privacy implications of using a phone which you can't legally reflash

[–] Bimbleby@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

In Denmark you get two options, you can buy an unlocked phone with cash. Or purchase a subscription with it, and the provider gives you some incentive for it. The subscription is locked for 6 months which is the max by law.

If I buy a phone with the subscription, the discount means you would usually pay 80% of the phones value.

That locks you to a subscription for 6 months that is usually more expensive than the other offers out there, but the difference doesn't make up for the reduced price of the phone over the 6 month period.

So you are actually saving money, as long as you remember to switch to a cheaper subscription after the 6 months pass. The telecom of course hopes you don't, and that's their incentive for taking a hit on profit in the short term. It buys them marketshare.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (49 replies)