Nah, just read the article:

“There’s no evidence that any of these policies are only happening during network overload,” said Choffnes. “They’re throttling video traffic even when the network doesn’t need to. It happens 24/7, and in every region where we have tests.”

That's not QoS, that's greed.

Yes, it isn't particularly hard to figure out why they are throttling. Video services especially will take up all the bandwidth when they can and then annoy people when it inevitably gets downgraded again. For most people "speed" is "does my video load" and "does this file complete fast", not "4k everywhere". This should be fairly obvious for anyone who have even shared a connection with a couple of people. And unfortunately the Internet is lacking in support of adaptive anything.

4K video is about 25MBit. If I have a faster than 25Mbit internet connection I should be able to watch 4K video. This should be fairly obvious. Oversubscription is the responsibility of the ISP and it is not an excuse.

Not with wireless. That depends on geography, interference, temporary usage peaks etc. Much more variable, limited and costly than a "static" line.

Wireless is pretty cheap compared to wired, because you don’t need the wires and laying the wires is the expensive part.

If you can’t give people 25Mbit connections with your wireless technology, don’t sell them 25MBit connections.

But coincidentally typically the stuff where the ISPs have all these terribly difficult problems are the services that refuse to pay their extra fees. Kind of like what happens to restaurants that don’t pay the protection fee.

The article is about mobile carriers, not wisps. There is no point carrying on this "conversation".