For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
TELECOM Digest Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:25:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 167 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Tufts Warns Alumni on Breach / Computer Attack Exposed Names (M Solomon) Retailer Knew Last Fall About Security Breach (Monty Solomon) Battle Against Spam Shifts to Containment (Monty Solomon) New Technology Poses Peril: VOIP Not Handling Emergency (Jack Decker) Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses (Tom Lynn) Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses (shlichter1@aol.com) Re: Getting Serious About the War on Spam (John Schmerold) Re: Cell Phone Wearing Out? (Joseph) Re: Internet Pioneer: VoIP is NOT Telephony (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Can I Port 800 Number Without Old Carrier's Permission? (DevilsPGD) Re: Web Censors In China Find Success (Kaminsky) Re: Is RocketVoIP Deceiving Customers Regarding Unlimited (Tom Lynn) Re: Mitigating Identity Theft (mc) Re: Why Must a Cordless Phone be Away From Electronic Devices (Tony P.) Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse (Tony P.) Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse (mc) Re: Last Laugh! Passenger Found Dead Hour After Plane Lands (Tim) Re: Last Laugh! Passenger Found Dead Hour After Plane Lands (Joseph) Last Laugh! Honesty on the Internet (TELECOM Digest Editor) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 22:12:07 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Tufts Warns Alumni on Breach / Computer Attack Exposed Names Tufts warns alumni on breach Computer attack exposed names, numbers to theft By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff | April 12, 2005 For the second time in a month, a Boston-area college is warning thousands of alumni that their personal information may have been stolen from a computer system used for fund-raising. Tufts University last week began sending letters to 106,000 alumni, warning of 'abnormal activity' on a computer that contained names, addresses, phone numbers, and, in some cases, Social Security and credit card numbers. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/04/12/tufts_warns_alumni_on_breach/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 22:14:59 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Retailer Knew Last Fall about Security Breach Retailer knew last fall about security breach that recently roiled credit card companies By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff | April 15, 2005 A computer security breach at Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. that has recently roiled two major credit card companies actually occurred last fall. But Polo only made the problem public yesterday. http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2005/04/15/retailer_knew_last_fall_about_security_breach_that_recently_roiled_credit_card_companies/ Breach in security reaches 2d credit firm MasterCard, Visa refuse to identify retailer whose computer system was hit By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff | April 14, 2005 The scope of a computer system breach at a national retailer widened yesterday to involve the customers of a second major credit card firm, but those companies refused to divulge the name of the retailer. The existence of the security breach first surfaced this week when HSBC North America began notifying 180,000 of its GM MasterCard customers that their credit card information had potentially been compromised. HSBC, which issues the GM cards, urged each customer to replace their card as quickly as possible. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/04/14/breach_in_security_reaches_2d_credit_firm/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:41:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Battle Against Spam Shifts to Containment By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- There's a new strategy in the spam battle: Call it containment. Filters for blocking junk e-mail from inboxes have improved to the point that doing much more will needlessly kill legitimate e-mail, said Carl Hutzler, America Online Inc.'s anti-spam coordinator. So e-mail gatekeepers are shifting gears. Now they're getting more aggressive at keeping spam from leaving their systems in the first place. EarthLink Inc., for instance, is phasing in a requirement that customers' mail programs submit passwords before it will send out their e-mail. Like most Internet providers, EarthLink previously made sure only that a computer was associated with a legitimate account. Now that viruses can co-opt computers and use them to send spam, that's no longer secure enough. So Earthlink sent out new software, made automated tools available for download and walked customers through manually changing their mail settings when they called tech support for other reasons. A year into the initiative, EarthLink has 80 percent of its customers converted. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=48398343 ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld_on_request> Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:19:51 -0400 Subject: New Technology Poses 911 Peril VOIP Not Part of Emergency System My commentary follows the excerpts ... http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-12/1113646231312020.xml New technology poses 911 peril Voice over Internet Protocol lines not part of emergency system Saturday, April 16, 2005 BY ART AISNER News Staff Reporter Joe Lawrence had no idea what was causing the delay. His friend, who had turned ashen just minutes before while they sat together at a meeting at the VFW post in Ypsilanti, was now doubled over a chair having difficulty breathing. Panicked that it might be a heart attack or stroke in progress, Lawrence, an Ypsilanti attorney, called 911 from the organization's house phone. A police dispatcher responded, but crucial minutes passed as Lawrence and the dispatcher tried to determine the exact location because the phone line Lawrence used was no longer part of the 911 system. "If it wasn't the silliest thing, but the hang-up was I couldn't give them an exact address, and he was in trouble," said Lawrence, who ultimately had to run across Michigan Avenue to the Ypsilanti Fire Department before help arrived. After Lawrence complained to Ypsilanti Police Chief George Basar, authorities determined that the call went to a private line in the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Department instead of going to 911 dispatch. The reason? The VFW post was using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), a new technology that transmits phone calls through broadband Internet connections rather than traditional phone lines. As it turned out, Lawrence's friend recovered after being hospitalized for several days with an undetermined ailment. But, Basar said, the incident illustrates a serious flaw in the technology that more and more residents and businesses are using to save money on phone service. [.....] [Vonage Representative] Schulz said E-911 is still only built to work on local phone lines, but users in Rhode Island have had little trouble in the six months since Vonage offered it to subscribers there. Rhode Island is the only place where Vonage offers the service because the state owns the phone lines, she said. In other states, Michigan included, phone companies are barring access for competitive reasons, she charged. There's some truth to it, Stofega said. But ultimately, it's up to the providers to meet their customers' demands or either the market or the regulators will prevail. [COMMENT: Okay, if there is some truth to it, then why does almost everyone in the press play toady for the big phone companies and try to lay all the blame on the VoIP companies alone? It sure appears that the incumbents are making interconnection difficult solely for competitive reasons, and that where the incumbents don't control the 911 system (as in Rhode Island), VoIP companies find it is much easier to make the proper connections. I will just point out that if a life is ever lost because someone cannot reach 911, and it turns out that the incumbent phone company attempted to limit access to the 911 system for competitive reasons, and the matter goes to court in a civil trial, I don't think the big phone company involved will be able to evade responsibility for their part in creating the situation - the lawyers will surely dig much deeper into the mess than most reporters do. Please understand what I am saying here -- if an ILEC is making access to the 911 system difficult for VoIP providers because they think it gives them a competitive edge, they are creating a condition where someone might die, solely to enhance their bottom line. Since most ILEC's have much deeper pockets than VoIP providers (always a consideration in a lawsuit) and since there is a good probability that any jury of twelve people will include at least one or two that have had bad experiences with the phone company at some time in the past (even if they don't remember those experiences consciously), I think the ILEC's are playing with fire here. And as I say, lawyers are not going to make the sort of shallow investigations that most newspaper reporters do, nor are they going to buy into the ILEC-produced propaganda funneled through astroturf public interest groups. Now having said all that, the other side of the coin is that 911 access might in fact be available in Michigan. For example, John Lodden has informed me that his company (Telesthetic/Local Exchange Carriers of Michigan) has access to all the 911 centers in Michigan and could provide access to VoIP companies, however at present none of the large VoIP companies are utilizing that access (I hope I am saying that accurately -- I'm working from memory here and apologize to John if I'm mis-stating that in any way). I can understand that most VoIP companies would probably like some sort of nationwide standard for interconnection to 911 centers, and are hoping for some type of FCC action that will establish a nationwide standard, so they don't have to do something different in each of the 50 states, and that costs might be prohibitive if they have to use a different means of access in each of the states. Ultimately I think the FCC is probably going to have to mandate some sort of national standard for 911 interconnection that will force the ILEC's to open up their systems whether they want to or not. For those who whine that this unjustly takes what the phone companies have built, I again remind you that the foundation for 911 was built while the ILEC's were MONOPOLY providers that enjoyed government-protected profit margins (even today that's still essentially the case for some smaller ILEC's), and that in many cases the existing 911 system was foisted upon the public in a sweetheart deal between the ILEC's and local units of government, who loved the idea that they could force people to pay for the system via phone bills instead of doing it the proper way, which was to go to the voters and ask for funding via the normal tax mechanisms already in place. So now the 911 centers are stuck with technology that only works really well with the existing wireline network, and yet nobody in the press seems to want to blame the real culprits, which are the ILEC's that set up such technologically-mediocre systems, and their co-conspirators in local governments who saw an opportunity to bypass the voters in the decision making process. No, it's much easier to lay all the blame on the VoIP companies, which have only been in business for less than a couple of years (in most cases) and who had no say at all into how the existing 911 system was designed. It doesn't make sense to me, and my hope is that the FCC and the courts (should the matter ever wind up in the courts) will see the issue with much greater clarity than most of the toady reporters that have been writing these stories, apparently based solely on press releases and other ILEC propaganda.] Full story at: http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-12/1113646231312020.xml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here in Independence, where we are a little more backward in our telecom, it seems, the city has a phone in the telecom area which is specifically designated for the job of 'emergency, but not 911 equipped calls'. It is not some 'private line in a back office somewhere' as seems to be the case in Ypsilanti or Brooklyn, NY. The phone terminates in a place where experienced professionals can deal with the calls, even though said calls do not come through the equipment looking like 'regular' 911 calls. VOIP carriers _have to take the word of the various agencies_ that a call is being terminated where it can be best handled. Should the VOIP carriers have to personally audit each community to assure this? Vonage, at least, apparently tries to confirm these things *before* they send email to the subscriber telling them that 911 has been turned on. If you combine the often-times careless and casual, public- be-damned attitudes of our government employees with the propoganda coming out of Bell, you are bound to get these problems at times. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Lynn <tom@tomlynn.com> Subject: Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:31:21 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Pat, Check out http://popfile.sourceforge.net Popfile is an e-mail proxy that filters spam based on how you train it. It takes some initial effort to get it over the hump, but it achieves over 99% accuracy over the long term. I believe they also have an nntp proxy for filtering usenet, too. You won't be sorry. Tom Lynn On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:49:02 EDT, TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote: > Ordinarily either Lisa Minter or myself get in here and flush the spam > queue a few times daily. Then we go through the 'regular' file of > 'good' incoming mail and sort through it, since about 80-90 percent of > the stuff in the 'good' mail file is also spam which managed to not > trip the Spam Assassin rules. Then we move the 'good' stuff into a > protected area where it is stored until the next issue comes out. But > from the last issue of the Digest on Wednesday through the present > time, neither of us came in to do the usual flush, consequently there > were several hundred spams in the so- called 'good' file today. And in > the middle of them, here and there, the legitimate emails. Unfortunatly, > the good stuff got flushed with the volumes of spam today by accident. > What you see in this issue is _all we have left_ of the good stuff. > If you wrote to the Digest anytime since Wednesday night; you got an > autoack and _do not_ see your email in this issue, then please > resubmit it. > There *has to be* a better way of sorting out the spam. I have the > trigger set now at 2 (according to Spam Assassin, 5 is average for > most users), but I just do not feel I can go any lower than 2; there > is too much stuff otherwise hitting the spam bucket; I use the very > old 'mail' from 1993 with Unix here; I wish there were someway to > see entire screens full of stuff and be able to dismiss it with a > single keystroke instead of the 3-4 keystrokes needed at present. > Anyway, if your message from (probably during the day) Thursday is > not shown here, then sorry, I don't have it. Resubmit it please. > Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: shlichter1@aol.com <shlichter1@aol.com> Subject: Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses Date: 16 Apr 2005 07:42:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com That court in Virgina had the right idea, but I would have given him more then 8 years. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 10:54:34 -0500 From: John Schmerold <john@katy.com> Subject: Re: Getting Serious About the War on Spam No one likes spam, however, there are great solutions they are all available without cost due to the opensource movement. Looking at my own statistics, since 4/1, I've received 5,607 emails, of which 1,177 were forwarded to my inbox, of these 169 were SPAM. All of the 169 could have been eliminated if I chose to use TDMA which whitelists good senders. So, long story short, quit belly aching and do something about your spam problem. John Schmerold [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I cannot run a white list here unless I want to turn this Digest/newsgroup into a very exclusive place for _me and my friends_ . I like to get _legitimate_ mail from legitimate users. I do not like the idea of excluding new users just because they have not met some arbitrary standard on the messages I will accept. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Cell Phone Wearing Out? Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:55:56 -0700 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 15 Apr 2005 11:33:41 -0700, ron@oakes.net wrote: > One possibility is that the six-year-old phone is an analog (AMPS) > only phone. Six years ago, 1999, CDMA was just starting to roll out > and relatively few manufacturer had phones out (Qualcomm, Sony and > towards the end of the year Motorola and Samsung, IIRC). Right now > Verizon Wireless is in the process of reducing their analog coverage > to the minimum that they can get away with in preparation to shutting > down the analog system once they are allowed. I don't know about "just rolling out." CDMA was accepted as a standard in 1993 and went into operation in 1996. > Therefore, it is possible that the trouble making calls was that the > area being visited had poor analog coverage, but Choreboy's relative's > home area still as good analog coverage. > If this is case the technician still made an incorrect statement; > either due to ignorance, or because of some policy that blames analog > coverage woes on the phone rather than a business decision. > If the phone is an analog only phone, upgrading it will eventually > become a necessity as the FCC is eventually going to allow the > carriers to turn analog off. Analog is not scheduled to be turned off til 2008. It could possibly be that the vendor had a desire to make someone convert from an earlier digital standard (such as TDMA IS-136 that both AT&T Wireless and cingular wireless run but want people to convert to GSM so they can devote more of their network resources to GSM rather than the dead end technology of TDMA which will not have any further new development.) On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:36:21 -0500, GlowingBlueMist <ljm012@invalid.com> wrote: > If she likes her present phone and does not want to "upgrade" she > might want to consider purchasing a TracPhone or other type of prepaid > phone for traveling. The model I use will first try to make a digital > connection and then switch to analog if that is all that is available, > making it compatible with the older towers as well as the new ones. Newer TracFone (note the F) uses GSM so they do not have the fallback to analog AMPS. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Internet Pioneer: VoIP is NOT Telephony Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:55:20 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications Jack Decker wrote: > http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=354 > 4/15/2005 > Internet pioneer: VoIP is NOT telephony > -Posted by Russell Shaw @ 2:32 am > My colleague Renai LeMay at ZDNet Australia has just had the > professional privilege of hearing remarks by one of the technology > world's smartest men. > Vint Cerf. The Vint Cerf that developed the TCP/IP protocol that makes > the Internet work. And more than 30 years after that singular (hey, I > just realized how Cingular got its name) feat of innovation, there > Cerf was yesterday, addressing an Internet governance forum in Sydney. > Vint Cerf does not want VoIP to be regulated. His fear, though -- one > that I share, is because VoIP "looks like telephony," regulatory > bodies all over the world will knee-jerk assume that it needs to be > governed. > "My concern here is the fact that VoIP looks like, and sounds like > telephony," Cerf told the group. "This is horribly misleading. To leap > to that conclusion is extremely dangerous. VoIP is really just another > application on the Internet. Nothing special about it." Interestingly, the California PUC decided to abandon its attempts to regulate VoIP and voted to endorse whatever oversight the FCC chooses to exercise in this arena. Having said that, my view is that Cerf is correct only until a VoIP provider connects with the switched public telephone network, at which time it becomes telephony. Only where two VoIP users connect directly over the Internet is it not telephony. And, in that case they should not have 10-digit telephony numbers assigned under the North American Dialing Plan for the switched public telephone network. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How would you then deal with 'phone patches', the little devices which allow VHF/UHF radios to link into the public phone network? Should they also be subject to the rules of the public switched telephone network? PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net> Subject: Re: Can I Port an 800 Number Without the Old Carrier's Permission? Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 03:00:09 -0600 Organization: Disorganized In message <telecom24.164.13@telecom-digest.org> Tim@Backhome.org wrote: > Indeed it's all about ownership. > And, some folks who have transferred vanity numbers to Vonage might be > in for an unpleasant surprise when they try to transfer that number > from Vonage. Going from memory, Vonage won't port a tollfree number will they? Even if they do, my understanding is that tollfree numbers are pulled by the new telco, no action is required on the part of the losing telco, so if you do transfer away, unless Vonage actively fights you it shouldn't be a problem. Neither the FCC nor the CRTC takes kindly to a company blocking porting of tollfree numbers. Like a lot of husbands throughout history, Mr. Webster would sit down and try to talk to his wife. As soon as he'd say something though, she'd fire back with, "And just what the hell is THAT supposed to mean?" Thus, Webster's Dictionary was born. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Vonage will not port tollfree numbers *either way*, in or out. Vonage claims to own the tollfree numbers they offer out for assignment. Nor will they port numbers which started out with themselves. The only thing you can _possibly_ do is take back a number you ported in to them to start with. PAT] ------------------------------ From: <kaminsky@kaminsky.org> Subject: Re: Web Censors In China Find Success Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 11:48:46 -0500 >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder why it would not be feasible >> to route all our internet traffic _through China_ and have them >> adjust their filter mechanisms to censor out all spam. It would be a >> good way for Americans and Chinese people to work together on a very >> worthwhile, useful project. PAT] > Perhaps you are not seeing the same spam I am. Here in California, > we are inundated by Chinese spam. It's not just me - on my ISP's > internal anti-spam newsgroup, I have seen many complaints about > Chinese spam (and South Korean spam, too, for that matter). For > myself, I notice many messages from addresses in the "cn" domain > showing up with unreadable subjects in my greymail (the SpamAssassain > rejects). > On the other hand, we are also inundated with Chinese products. > I've given up shopping for toys for the grandchildren - everything > (and I do mean EVERYTHING) in the stores is made in China! It's > gotten to the point that the grocery stores are actually carrying > some garlic from China -- with Gilroy ("the garlic capital of the > world") only twenty miles away in the south end of Santa Clara > County. > Take care. > Mark [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know what I am reading some days when I take time to study that stuff. One oriental, eastern language and its script looks like another to me. F'r instance, I cannot tell the difference between Chinese (and its various dialects) and Japanese (and its various dialects) and Korean, although I know there are as many as there are variations on English with its American accents. But I see the little squiggles and markings and say "oh, it comes from _over there, somewhere_". So maybe I get Chinese spam as well, and just don't know which is which. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Lynn <tom@tomlynn.com> Subject: Re: Is RocketVoIP Deceiving Customers Regarding "Unlimited" VoIP Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:39:25 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Pat, Are you descended from Don Quixote? :-) On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:09:58 -0400, Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld_on_request> wrote: > A disturbing post just appeared on BroadbandReports.com -- I have > removed references to RocketVoIP from the Resources for Michigan > Telephone Users web site until and unless this issue is resolved. > "Hi all ... I have a problem with RocketVoip (www.rocketvoip.com) They > said their service is unlimited ($24.95) and suddenly they sent me an > email about a week ago, telling me that I'm not qualified as a > residential user and they asked me to switch to business plan. Please > read the attached email. ..." > http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,13170575 > How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: > http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html > If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This sounds a lot like our friend > Sprint's old "Friday Free" plan doesn't it? Remember that one? Sprint > tricked people into signing up for long distance by lying to them > saying their Friday traffic would always be free to _residential_ > customers. Soon thereafter we started hearing from folks who said > Sprint had written them a letter saying they were not a 'qualified' > residential account, so they would have to pay for their Friday > calls. Sprint signed the letters with some phone name (I forget off > hand what it was), and many folks, including myself tried time after > time to reach the person to ask him what it was about, and what made > persons 'qualified'. I don't think anyone ever did reach that person, > and as to be expected, no one in Sprint customer service ever had any > idea what it was about. > If the original writer wants to send along the email saying they were > not 'qualified', and assuming it has a good name on it, we will try > to reach that person and ask them what it is all about, and to explain > the qualifications required. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know about Don Quixote, but I do know that I was distantly related to Will Rogers. My paternal grandmother's mother, in other words my great-grandmother, had the maiden name of Rogers prior to her marriage to Mr. Martin. (My paternal grandmother's maiden name was 'Martin'). Anyway, great-grandmother Rogers-Martin was a cousin of Will's father, down in Oklahoma somewhere, so I guess that would make me a third or fourth cousin, once or twice (or even thrice) removed. My great-grandmother Rogers was born in Tulsa, Indian Territory about 1860, as was her daughter (my paternal grandmother Susie Martin in 1881, who then married Patrick Townson, my grandfather in 1915 (? I think). Now, the Townson side of the family, they were something else. Patrick Townson's father was Thomas Townson, who was killed at a picnic about 1910 when he attempted to break up a fight between two teenage boys who had been drinking at the picnic. (Where have we heard that before?) Thomas Townson's father was Edward Townsend who himself was a heavy drinker; he killed a man it was claimed in self defense about 1880 and wound up going to (and dying in) the penitentiary in Georgia for several years. It left his family in disgrace and they moved up to Oklahoma where great-grandfather Thomas, and his mother changed the spelling of their last name and began to raise their family anew, before he, himself was gunned down at the picnic when grandfather Patrick was just a teenager, about the same age Thomas had been when his own father shot and killed the man. Thomas Townson was a stage coach driver by occupation; he drove between Tulsa and Coffeyville; on the route that was the forerunner to today's Greyhound/Jefferson Lines Bus route. He married the woman who was the stagecoach ticket agent at Bartlesville, Indian Territory. Besides selling the stage coach tickets she also ran the telegraph machine and cooked the food for passengers and the drivers, when the stagecoach pulled in every afternoon at 2 PM. Her brother would come out and unhitch the horses and lead them to their water and food while she served the humans their dinner. When a fresh team of horses was hitched up, Tom would tell the passengers to finish their dinner so they could get back on the road. Anyway, he married that woman; before long they were the proud parents of baby Patrick, my grandfather. When Patrick was a teenager, he saw his own father get gunned down at the picnic. Much, much violence it seems from that side of the family. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mc <mc_no_spam@uga.edu> Subject: Re: Mitigating Identity Theft Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 10:46:15 -0400 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) Well said. I have felt for a long time that the term "identity theft" is Orwellian Newspeak, designed to spread fear and obscure the real situation. Someone who "steals my identity" is not (per se) stealing anything from me at all. He is impersonating me, and this is not a newly invented crime. > Fraudulent transactions have nothing to do with the legitimate account > holders. Criminals impersonate legitimate users to financial > institutions. That means that any solution can't involve the account > holders. That leaves only one reasonable answer: financial > institutions need to be liable for fraudulent transactions. Toucheé ... I think the Orwellian term is being spread by the financial institutions who want the impersonated people to feel that it's their fault. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: While it is true the crime is not your fault, you are required, under the law to attempt to mitigate the damage as much as possible. If something bad happens, you cannot just sit there and let it go on; that is where the 'fifty dollars or until we are notified' rule comes in. I don't think that is a bad rule, atually. Fifty dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to the damage that _could_ be caused, and if you are lucky, you can call on the phone before any damage is done at all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> Subject: Re: Why Must a Cordless Phone be Away From Electronic Devices? Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:37:38 -0400 In article <telecom24.158.11@telecom-digest.org>, Wesrock@aol.com says: > In a message dated Tue, 12 Apr 2005 02:02:56 -0400, curious@nospam.com > writes: >> I just got a 900 MHz DSS cordless phone, and I had the perfect spot >> for it, right on top of my tower computer case. But then I noticed >> that the manual says that the base unit must be placed away from all >> electronic equipment, including PCs, stereos, TVs, and microwaves. >> What is the reasoning for this? Could the magnetic fields generated >> by the speakers in the phone cause any problems? > It will do no harm to the computer. But the other electronic > equipment may interfere with the cordless phone transmission and > reception. > We had a 900 mHz cordless that sat right under a TV and had no > problem. But when it finally gave up the ghost we replaced it with > another cordless, which turned out to be 2.4 gHz. We then found out > that 2.4 gHz is much more seriously affected to the point that it was > unusable. We returned it, since that was exactly where we wanted the > cordless. > It is reported than 4.8 gHz is even more badly impaired by other > electronic equipment. In the case of a computer, even with the metal cases there are some serious harmonics radiating from the machine that could potentially interfere with the cordless phone. That being said, all consumer electronic devices are Part 15 devices: § 15.5 General conditions of operation. (b) Operation of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be accepted that may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station, by another intentional or unintentional radiator, by industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental radiator. In other words, consumer electronic gears is a magnet for interference. In your case though I bet the problems you're having with a 2.4GHz phone have more to do with the more likely 802.11 gear, and somewhat less likely from wireless devices and controllers. For example, my Pelican Spirit wireless game controller is absolutely worth crap around here. Too many wireless networks. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> Subject: Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:44:02 -0400 In article <telecom24.164.6@telecom-digest.org>, colin@sutton.wow.aust.com says: > The Sydney Morning Herald reports on a challenge between 93 year old > telegraph operator transmitting morse code to an 82 year old with a > manual typewriter, and youngsters sending a text message. The text > message was received 18 seconds after the message was already on > paper. > http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/04/14/1113251739401.html They've obviously not heard of T9 mode in text messaging. The biggest issue I have with texting is that the keypad is too damned small. ------------------------------ From: mc <mc_no_spam@uga.edu> Subject: Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 11:06:12 -0400 Organization: Speed Factory (http://www.speedfactory.net) > And telegraph operators can spell also. No silly abbreviations. U R SO RITE ! :) Seriously ... my high-school daughter tells me there is now a substantial problem with youngsters who supposedly can *only* write in text-message abbreviations or "l33tsp33k" and have developed some kind of mental block against producing plain English. She, a skilled writer, is annoyed with them, of course. Accompaying this is an inability to think about language. At one point she was trying to refer to the band "U2" but her interlocutor (in a chat room) could only see "U2" as "you too" and communication failed. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Passenger Found Dead Hour After Plane Lands Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 02:00:34 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Nice to see they're alert in Chicago. I guess they wanted to make sure > he had time to vote. > http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-dead14.html > www.suntimes.com > Passenger found dead hour after plane lands at O'Hare > A passenger was discovered dead aboard American Airlines Flight 154 from > Tokyo to Chicago on Wednesday afternoon, police said. > The man apparently suffered a heart attack and was found by a cleaning > crew about 5 p.m., an hour after the aircraft landed at O'Hare > Airport, said Chicago Police Officer Matt Jackson. Authorities were > notified and the man was pronounced dead at the scene, a detective > said. > An autopsy is set for today. > The name of the 66-year-old man, whose passport shows he was a U.S. > citizen, was not being released by authorities pending notification of > his family. The passenger had been scheduled to get on another flight > to Indianapolis, his final destination, said Tim Smith, American > Airlines spokesman. > After the plane had been moved from Terminal 5 to another terminal for > cleaning, a crew found the man in a bathroom, Smith said. > Lisa Donovan > Copyright 2005 The Sun-Times Company When I was in the airline biz, circa 1964-90, the flight attendants were required to check all the lavs and block them from further use during the final prep for landing check. The primary reason for that check is to assure that all passengers have returned to their seats and are buckled in for landing. The responsible flight attendants should be disciplined for irresponible failure to carry out a fundamental safety duty. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think they are still supposed to check the manifest on take off and landing and make sure it balances. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Passenger Found Dead Hour After Plane Lands Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:25:24 -0700 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:13:42 -0400, Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Nice to see they're alert in Chicago. I guess they wanted to make sure > he had time to vote. > http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-dead14.html Glad you found someone's death a bit of humor to turn your boring day into something special. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:08:22 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> Subject: Last Laugh! Honesty on the Internet Two editorial cartoons you may enjoy, and perhaps relate to personally. http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/honesty.html PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management (MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35 credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including data, video, and voice networks. The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum. Classes are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning. Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at 405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at http://www.mstm.okstate.edu ************************ In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V24 #167 ****************************** | |