AT&T Kills iPhone Plans For Deaf Thanks To Non-Deaf Douchebags


Recommended Posts

AT&T Kills iPhone Plans For Deaf Thanks To Non-Deaf Douchebags

We wouldn't usually call people douchebags lightly (ok we would), but when you complain that deaf people are getting special treatment when they're offered a $27.99 non-voice, data-only plan for their iPhone, you're one huge douchebag.

A Colorado AT&T store was offering said plan for the hearing-impaired--since they get very little use out of a voice plan--but got slapped down by AT&T Corporate Marketing because people were complaining. The upshot? No more data-only plan for the deaf community. If you think there's a problem here, call up AT&T tell them you really think there should be a data-only plan.

Source:gizmodo

Update: AT&T's officially bringing an iPhone data-only plan for the hearing-impaired. Gizmodo

It should be available for all, equality means equal across the board... It's not the people complaining about preferred rates that are douchebags, its AT&T

Indeed. There is absolutely no reason to limit such an option to hearing impaired only. AT&T just wants the extra money.

Lets complain about seniors who get discounts. F*** them, being all old and getting special treatment. :no:

Good thing AT&T is making an offical data only plan for the hearing-impaired

The only way ATT could implement a separate system for hearing / non-hearing/speaking people would be if there was a way for ATT to be able to determine data traffic is being used for TTD services. By doing that, it is probable that someone would sue them for invasion of privacy since the carrier has no legal authority to determine the cause or content of a transmission.

Not to mention that since TTD services are carried over voice-circuits (whether switched by digital or analog) in land-line implementations, why should mobile telephony operate any differently...?

So that store selling data-only plans was doing little to aid the deaf/mute customer, and may actually have been increasing the cost to said customer, particularly if the data alotment was exceeded- which is very easy to imagine if a lot of communications are made....

By the way- can you imagine a scenario where the deaf man's wife has to call for emergency services and the phone doesn't make or take voice calls?

oh, and: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/iphone/att-ipho...soon-328672.php- an update to the OP source's post (which the OP did link to)

att says data plan coming soon.

The only way ATT could implement a separate system for hearing / non-hearing/speaking people would be if there was a way for ATT to be able to determine data traffic is being used for TTD services. By doing that, it is probable that someone would sue them for invasion of privacy since the carrier has no legal authority to determine the cause or content of a transmission.

Not to mention that since TTD services are carried over voice-circuits (whether switched by digital or analog) in land-line implementations, why should mobile telephony operate any differently...?

So that store selling data-only plans was doing little to aid the deaf/mute customer, and may actually have been increasing the cost to said customer, particularly if the data alotment was exceeded- which is very easy to imagine if a lot of communications are made....

By the way- can you imagine a scenario where the deaf man's wife has to call for emergency services and the phone doesn't make or take voice calls?

oh, and: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/iphone/att-ipho...soon-328672.php- an update to the OP source's post.

att says data plan coming soon.

Any cell phone that can get reception can call 911 whether or not its on a plan/activated.

I am hearing impaired and I have a mobile phone. I have been using SMS more than voice calls. I believe phone data plans are different to here because I pay about 20c per message. I do use the internet on it but ossacionally.

So I say good on ATT. They are caring for the deaf people. Telstra should do the same for us.

Indeed. There is absolutely no reason to limit such an option to hearing impaired only. AT&T just wants the extra money.

Are you ****ing joking me? If they wanted extra money they would force them to pay for a full plan... I love how when companys do something nice nowadays all people do is bitch if it doesn't benefit them QQ more... get a life.

Sometimes you have a situation like this - where you abandon the business model, and forget about some marketing strategy and bottom line - and simply do whats right.

Thinking of all the things hearing-impaired people have to do without - this would be a nice luxury to have - making it available to anyone isnt a bad idea - but it does take away from the "niceness" - can you imagine some douchebag @ the counter @ the AT&T store standing behind the the hearing-impaired person going - "Hey I want that deal too - You have to give it to me - thats discrimination" -- I love it when people cry "thats discrimination !" makes me want to do or say that specific thing more and more

Are you ****ing joking me? If they wanted extra money they would force them to pay for a full plan... I love how when companys do something nice nowadays all people do is bitch if it doesn't benefit them QQ more... get a life.

Could you provide a valid point for forcing people to get a full service plan instead of offering a lower cost data only plan to everyone? Does your ISP force you to buy their cable and/or telephone service if you want high speed internet? Do car companies force you to buy their pricier fully loaded car with all the bells and whistles? No.

AT&T is offering this for the hearing impaired because it's common sense (probably because someone else pushed for it) but requiring a person to be hearing impaired for a service like this is not justifiable other than at the cost of their bottom dollar, which is why they don't want to open it up to everyone.

Get a life? Why don't you get a brain.

Edited by ANova
AT&T is offering this for the hearing impaired because it's common sense (probably because someone else pushed for it) but requiring a person to be hearing impaired for a service like this is not justifiable other than at the cost of their bottom dollar, which is why they don't want to open it up to everyone.

Get a life? Why don't you get a brain.

I agree...it's a service that should be available for all people hearing impaired or not.

Does your ISP force you to buy their cable and/or telephone service if you want high speed internet?
Yes.
Do car companies force you to buy their pricier fully loaded car with all the bells and whistles?
And pretty much, yes. (how many models do you see offering standard transmissions anymore?) Edited by shakey_snake
AT&T is offering this for the hearing impaired because it's common sense (probably because someone else pushed for it) but requiring a person to be hearing impaired for a service like this is not justifiable other than at the cost of their bottom dollar, which is why they don't want to open it up to everyone.

I completely disagree. I mean, I see your point. It is possible for any person to get a data only plan and it would work out fine for them, but why? Why would a non-deaf person really need a data only plan if they can hear and speak perfectly?

That's like demanding a miltary discout and you're not even in the military. That's like demanding a senior special and you're only 20. That's just being a douche for no justifiable reason. You have no disabilities, so just suck it up and fork out the money.

Edited by Ruiz
That's like demanding a miltary discout and you're not even in the military. That's like demanding a senior special and you're only 20. That's just being a douche for no justifiable reason. You have no disabilities, so just suck it up and fork out the money.
It's not the same what so ever. It means users who dont want to use the iPhone for the phone functionality can get it to use other services. It's not like people are asking for a disability discount when they arent disabled, they just want a plan that lets them pay for the service they want to use.
It should be available for all, equality means equal across the board... It's not the people complaining about preferred rates that are douchebags, its AT&T
Indeed. There is absolutely no reason to limit such an option to hearing impaired only. AT&T just wants the extra money.

What, so if you cant have it the hearing impaired people cant?

I thought people grew out of that mentality when they were kids, guess i was wrong.

I completely disagree. I mean, I see your point. It is possible for any person to get a data only plan and it would work out fine for them, but why? Why would a non-deaf person really need a data only plan if they can hear and speak perfectly?

That's like demanding a miltary discout and you're not even in the military. That's like demanding a senior special and you're only 20. That's just being a douche for no justifiable reason. You have no disabilities, so just suck it up and fork out the money.

Wow, that's some winner logic you got there.

Fork out the money? No thanks, I'll find something else.

What, so if you cant have it the hearing impaired people cant?

I thought people grew out of that mentality when they were kids, guess i was wrong.

Are you capable of even basic comprehension skills? When did I ever say such a thing? AT&T are the ones who decided to cut out the service rather than offer it to everyone.

Edited by ANova

Expressing an opinion is not whining.

Someone asking if they can get the same service another person gets, especially when it's something as trivial as phone and internet service, is not demanding or expressing the "if I can't have it no one can" mentality.

Please go enlighten yourself.

I too agree that it should be available to everybody, because if the plan doesn't have voice calls at all, it won't have voice calls even you are not hearing impaired. So it's not like you are taking advantage of anything other than the fact that you don't use voice.

If the complains were in those lines, then I don't think those complainers are douchebags. ATT are, for ditching the plan entirely!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
    • I had a feeling this was coming. Picked up my first Mac ever last Saturday. Glad I did.
    • In a major surprise there is actually some good deals for the first time in years. At least for me.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      419
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!