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
Add this Digest to your personal
or  
TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:10:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 366 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Digital Service BurnLounge Makes Anyone a Retailer (Antony Bruno) Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? (DevilsPGD) Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? (Fred Atkinson) Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? (Robert Bonomi) Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? (John Levine) Re: Stock Market Ticker Tape Machines? (Robert Bonomi) Re: Western Union Private Line Voice Service - "Hot Line" (Robt Bonomi) Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 (Fred Atkinson) Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 (Robert Bonomi) Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 (Steve Sobol) Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 (Colin) Re: Appeals Court Revives Ruling on Intercepted Email (Barry Margolin) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Antony Bruno <newswire@telecom-digest.org> Subject: Digital Service BurnLounge Makes Anyone a Retailer Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 15:13:57 -0500 By Antony Bruno Startup digital music company BurnLounge wants to democratize the music retail business. The Web-based service provides the music library, e-commerce tools and business management software for virtually anyone to own and operate their own digital download store. The company's founders hope to recruit everyday music fans, allowing each to decide which acts they want to feature and promote, as a sort of digital guerrilla marketing play. "It's the reincarnation of the corner record store," BurnLounge president/COO and co-founder Ryan Dadd says. "This whole concept is about the next generation of retail. It's about marketing to affinity groups, to people with shared interests." BurnLounge is essentially a digital store franchise. Regardless of operator, each store has the same look and feel, and all carry the BurnLounge brand. All also have access to the same music library, pricing and transaction system, powered by partner Loudeye. What sets each BurnLounge store apart is the programming that the individual operator chooses. The service lets users decide which bands or songs to feature on the home page and each genre page, as well as create and promote customized playlists. It also provides a host of digital marketing tools. These include an instant messaging application that supports all popular IM communities (such as AOL, MSN Messenger and Yahoo; chat rooms; and message boards), DVD presentations, posters, letterheads, gift cards and a quarterly promotional magazine. GETTING PERSONAL "In the music business, we've always known that personal referrals and relationships lead to sales," says Stephen Murray, BurnLounge president of entertainment and co-founder. "The problem is there's been no way to quantifiably track that transaction." That, he promises, is possible with BurnLounge. The company hopes to capitalize on this by marketing the service to artists and their managers, fan clubs, street-team marketing groups, labels, music retailers and others with a large audience of music fans. Radio personality Rick Dees is one, and he is an investor in the company. BurnLounge offers these companies its top-level Music Mogul service, which allows them to set up their own digital music service as well as operate an online chain of stores. Music Mogul operators invite others to open franchises under their oversight via the Affiliate level of the service. These affiliate members then invite individuals to open their own personalized stores. The company's initial challenge is to convince users it is not a pyramid scheme. No investment is required for inventory, a typical feature of such pyramid programs. But there are costs involved -- from $30 per year to a $215 upfront setup fee and $15 per month -- all for access to various levels of music and team management software. "It's different than Amway because you don't have to buy the inventory, but it is multilevel marketing," says Mike McGuire, an analyst with Gartner G2. "But that can be a valuable tool. I think any product or service that's aimed at making the fan an artist's best salesperson is very important." DIGITAL COMPETITION BurnLounge also faces competition from such Internet communities as Yahoo. Unlike BurnLounge, Yahoo allows users to write album reviews in its blog service, with links directly back to the Yahoo Music Unlimited store. But BurnLounge compensates its users for sales made via their recommendations; Yahoo does not. "This whole class of products and services are really crucial to helping the industry make this transition into the digital media age," McGuire says. "These could become tools that help more consumers realize that (digital) can be a better way of getting and discovering music." BurnLounge plans to go live before the end of the year, after its has secured deals with all five major label groups; EMI Music has already signed on. The point, Murray says, is to create a market for lesser-known music by employing the community aspect of music discovery that the digital format allows. "Hardcore music fans, that is our core demographic," Murray says. "They love music so much, and the idea of being able to tell their friends about the music they think is good and be able to sell it to them as a side job is really cool to them. The concept about the name BurnLounge is that it's about starting a fire ... that spreads." Reuters/Billboard Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new articles daily. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD <spamsucks@crazyhat.net> Subject: Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 04:32:13 -0600 Organization: Disorganized In message <telecom24.365.7@telecom-digest.org> wylbur37 <wylbur37nospam@yahoo.com> wrote: > Recently, at a Radio Shack store at the telephone accessories section, > I noticed that telephone extension cords were available in lengths up > to 25 feet (but I didn't notice any that were longer). Is that > because 25 feet is the longest you can go before there's a significant > loss of signal strength? > And what about people who access the internet via 56K dial-up? For > them, how long can the extension cord be and still have "clean" > transmission for error-free downloads? I'm not sure what the official specs are, and I'm much too lazy to look 'em up, but my girlfriend has 2x50' cables connected back to back and I can get a stable 50Kb connection. In message <telecom24.365.7@telecom-digest.org> TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to wylbur37 <wylbur37nospam@yahoo.com>: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know what the rule is -- if > any -- regarding the length of cords, but I do not think it has to > do with any signal degradation; after all, you might be _miles_ from > the central office building, or in the case of a DSL connection, up > to several thousand feet. PAT] True -- However, that cable will typically be better quality copper then your average Radio Shack crap. That being said, 50'-100' isn't usually a problem. ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> Subject: Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 07:28:56 -0400 > Recently, at a Radio Shack store at the telephone accessories section, > I noticed that telephone extension cords were available in lengths up > to 25 feet (but I didn't notice any that were longer). Is that > because 25 feet is the longest you can go before there's a significant > loss of signal strength? > And what about people who access the internet via 56K dial-up? For > them, how long can the extension cord be and still have "clean" > transmission for error-free downloads? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know what the rule is -- if > any -- regarding the length of cords, but I do not think it has to > do with any signal degradation; after all, you might be _miles_ from > the central office building, or in the case of a DSL connection, up > to several thousand feet. PAT] I don't think there is any limit on how long the cord can be from a realistic standpoint. But with extension cords, there is a practical limit in that the darned things can be so long that they get tangled and are otherwise awkward and cumbersome. To that end, the longest cord I get is thirteen feet (a standard size that you can buy over the counter). Go with twenty-five feet (also a standard size you can buy over the counter) and you are always struggling with managing the cord. It's a pain in the neck. I have used a modular crimping tool to make ones longer much longer than that when someone was insistent about it. But why do that when you can just run standard telephone wire to an RJ-11 jack somewhere in the vicinity of where they want their phone located? I still discourage those excessively long telephone cords. As far as the wire from the C. O. is concerned, I believe there is a limit before the phone company makes it four wire most of the way to the premises. But I don't remember what that length is. I'd be willing to bet it is pretty long. Regards, Fred ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:48:47 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article <telecom24.365.7@telecom-digest.org>, wylbur37 <wylbur37nospam@yahoo.com> wrote: > Recently, at a Radio Shack store at the telephone accessories section, > I noticed that telephone extension cords were available in lengths up > to 25 feet (but I didn't notice any that were longer). Is that > because 25 feet is the longest you can go before there's a significant > loss of signal strength? The issue is not 'loss of signal strength', but 'pick-up of interference'. The 'pre-made' cords at Radio Shack, etc. are usually what is called 'satin' cord. Notably, all the conductors are laid out exactly parallel in the flat cord (same arrangement as 'ribbon' cable', just with a small number of conductors.) Such 'flat cable' is much more prone to pick up interference, etc, than is a 'twisted pair' cable. In twisted-pair cable, the position of the individual conductors changes 'frequently' (depending on the 'category' of cable, it may be centimeters to 10s of inches). This results in the different sections of the cable picking up the interference *differently*, and the signal pick-up in the different sections effectively cancel each other out -- with just the 'intended' signal going through. It isn't "perfect", but it is much *much* better than what happens with 'flat' cable. Note: Radio Shack, etc., also sells 'spools' (50', 100', maybe 250' and longer) of 'round' telephone cable -- which _is_ 'twisted pair' construction. You can easily build-you-own long extension from that. > And what about people who access the internet via 56K dial-up? For > them, how long can the extension cord be and still have "clean" > transmission for error-free downloads? The authoritative answer for that is "whatever works". *grin* Seriously, the phone cord _itself_ is a 'non issue'. It is "what else" that is in the vicinity, *generating* interference, that is the primary problem. There are *no* _official_ "rules" limiting length of extension cords -- and you can always buy a 'coupler' (sold at Radio Shack, etc.), to join 2 25' extensions, giving you a 50' reach, for example. Probably the primary reason you don't see cords longer than 25' for sale is that there would be a _very_small_ market for them. 10' and 15' cords out-sell the 25' ones by a *big* margin -- something like 25:1. I'd expect _at_least_ 10:1 to 15:1 for 25' vs 50'. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 2005 19:02:14 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Recently, at a Radio Shack store at the telephone accessories > section, I noticed that telephone extension cords were available in > lengths up to 25 feet (but I didn't notice any that were longer). > Is that because 25 feet is the longest you can go before there's a > significant loss of signal strength? I think the limit is about 18,000 feet. Then you might have trouble carrying DSL over it. Of course, a crummy extension cord with badly crimped connections that are coming apart can mess up your connection even if it's two inches long, but so long as it's well made, don't worry about it. R's, John ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Stock Market Ticker Tape Machines? Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:26:49 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article <telecom24.364.8@telecom-digest.org>, <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > I was wondering what kind of machine, if any, replaced the classic > glass-dome model and continued to produce a tape showing trades. The volume of data, and the required speed of transmission to stay more-or-less current with the actual market conditions outstripped the capability of 'tape' printers. Just as _telegram_ printing shifted to roll-feed wide paper, from the tape, what remained for dedicated mechanical printers did similarly. In the 60s, early-70s ... Bunker-Ramo came out with electronic quote display terminals, and practically owned the _broker_ market for a number of years. Telerate also came out with a CRT display supporting many, _many_ 'pages' of display data -- everything from news stories to lists of latest market prices -- either as groups displayed simultaneously on a single 'page', or single issues as a streaming 'ticker' across the bottom of the screen. ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Western Union Private Line Voice Service -- "Hot Line" Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 15:21:59 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article <telecom24.364.7@telecom-digest.org>, <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > In the mid 1960s Western Union introduced a private line voice service > called "Hot Line". In essence, a person lifting the receiver of one > telephone would cause a specified distant telephone to ring over a > private line. The connection was faster and cheaper than placing a > conventional long distance call over the Bell System. WU charged by 6 > second increments and at a lower rate; the Bell System at that time > had a 3 minute minimum. WU says their arrangement was cheaper when > more than 3 calls a day were made. > The connection between the two telephones was actually not a dedicated > private line, but shared use of the WU network via concentrators. If > a circuit was busy there were alternates. > See: > http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/21-2/p104.htm > The article said the service was popular among brokers between field > offices and the central office serving the stock exchange for calling > in stock orders. Such calls were normally brief. > Obviously this service had some limitations since it was telephone-set > to telephone-set. I don't think this could terminate in a PBX system > to allow shared use of the line by a whole organization which would > give more flexibility. Correct. It was a dedicated line/circuit. Either physical or 'virtual'. There was minimalist special-purpose 'central-office' equipment for those lines; two ports. When one port went off-hook, it send 'ring' down the other port. Then the 2nd port went off-hook, it was cross-connected to the first one. After both sides hung up, the system reset itself. > I don't know if WU permitted any kind of > multiple extension sets at the subscriber since a specialized telephone > set they provided was used. Pretty vanilla innards -- omitting the dial assembly was common. A limited (max 3?, 5?) number of extensions _were_ supported/allowed by specific arrangement. > For example, a secretary might want to > answer the boss's hot/line phone if he was out. > WU also reported customers wanted to get the service in more cities > than available. > None the less, it seemed like a pretty good idea for its time. > Would anyone know how successful this service was and how long it > lasted? "Ring down" circuits are not uncommon today, although they have been mostly replaced by ISDN -- which gives you call set-up/completion in less time than you can get the handset from cradle to your ear. At least in Chicago, the telco provided the dedicated circuits -- dry wire pairs (3002, 3008, types) -- and the customer provided the "C.O." gear, as well as the phones. ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 07:41:11 -0400 > PAT, > I had a similar problem before. A good lesson was learned by my kids > about downloading stuff from web pages. It took me days to clean the > mess up. > The procedure that worked the best for me was using as many "free" > spyware removes as possible: Spybot search and destroy and others. I > needed three (don't remember the other two) before I got the mess > cleaned up. I don't know if this will work for you or not, but it is > worth a try. > Good Luck, > Bill Spyware removal programs such as Adaware and Spybot Search and Destroy do a pretty good job if you run them from time to time. My brother's girlfriend has a daughter that is constantly downloading all kinds of junk off of the Internet. My brother cautioned her that she was garbaging the computer with all kinds of Spyware and viruses, but she didn't seem to care one way or the other. Teenagers can be like that. Finally, she had gathered so much stuff on it that my brother asked me to go over and try to fix it. When I arrived, there was so much junk on it that pop ups and other malicious wares kept jumping in front of me that I couldn't even make a boot disk so I could delete the partition to start again. We wandered next door to one of her neighbor's house. The neighbor allowed me to use his computer to make a boot disk. There was spyware on his computer, though not nearly as bad. I installed a copy of Adaware on his PC and wiped most of it out. Then I was able to make a boot disk and also downloaded onto the boot disk a piece of freeware called 'Delpart' that will wipe out any partition you care to blow away ('be careful how you use it', to steal a slogan from an old Hai Karate commercial). When I returned to the computer the teenage girl had trashed, I rebooted on the floppy and used Delpart to blow away her partition. The I created a clean one and reinstalled the OS. Of course, the teenage daughter lost all of her files. But she had been cautioned that that would happen at the rate she was going. I installed Adaware and Spybot Search and Destroy and showed my brother's girlfriend how to run them. It can be a real mess. Regards, Fred ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:07:39 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article <telecom24.364.14@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote: > In article <telecom0.0.1@telecom-digest.org>, > TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu> wrote: >> This is an appeal to any Windows Internet Explorer person in our >> readership who can help me: >> Wednesday night/Thursday morning someone stuck me with a virus and the >> end result was my Internet Explorer browser is gone. I cannot get the >> browser to come up at all; clicking on the icon makes it sit for a few >> seconds, then the screen flashes ONCE as though it was getting ready >> to deliver the browser, but no such luck. I have cleared out the virus >> but apparently a driver or two or a file is gone as well. >> Not only that but I cannot even get any pages which would come via >> that browser. Now my copy of Mozilla works just fine, its only that >> Internet Explorer 6.0 wont come up (or anything that depends on it, >> such as a link in email, etc.) >> Using Mozilla I went to a download site (supposedly 'free downloads') >> and paid for a password to download an entirely new copy of Internet >> Explorer 6.0 and Outlook Express. Downloaded it, but still nothing ... >> I am wondering if it is because my index page (I was using 'my yahoo' >> as my home or starting page) somehow got wiped out. >> The newly loaded thing produces the very same results: click on the >> icon, it goes away for a couple seconds, comes back flashing once then >> goes away. >> Can you tell me WHERE to install a new 'index' page ('Documents and >> Settings/Administrator/something? so I can try that method to clear >> this up? Or got any other ideas? And where would I go to make mail >> and all the other links default to mozilla rather than IE? >> Microsoft tech support cannot help me because I have an OEM serial >> number. So I am seeking tech support from the readership here. If >> someone will send me email who can help, I will supply that person >> with an 800 number to reach me at by phone so it will not cost them >> anything to call me, and I will be right at the affected computer to >> follow their instructions. Thanks very much! > The Microsoft-standard troubleshooting and repair script for all > problems: > 1) Exit the program and re-start it. > Did that fix the problem? (If yes, you're done.) > 2) Re-install the software, and re-start it. > Did that fix the problem? (If yes, you're done.) > 3) Re-install the operating system, re-start it. Re-install the > application and start it. Did that fix the problem? (If yes, > you're done.) > 4) Sorry. Must be a hardware problem. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know you meant to tell a funny story > but sorry, it was not all that funny. It *wasn't* intended as a 'funny'. It is, *UNFORTUNATELY*, _entirely_ serious. That _is_ the list of steps _Microsoft_technical_support_ recommends for all issues, where something "isn't working". (including the exact wording of item #4.) What =that= says about MS 'support', and/or the lack of ability to identify _what_ is wrong that causes the aberrant behavior, is left to the reader. > I have done numbers 1 and 2 above; am not inclined to do number 3, Microsoft tech support then closes the call. "Customer unwilling to take recommended actions." (I've been down that road with them.) > and it is _not_ number 4 since the hardware, which is in common to > both the Linux stuff inside the computer and the Windows 2000 stuff > is working fine. Microsoft tech support "knows more about things than you do" -- they are *always* right about such matters. Ask _them_ -- they *will* assure you of that fact. <wry grin> > The problem still exists and I am still struggling with it, however > there is one more piece of news in this process of elimination: > Although Internet Explorer will not start up when the > 'administrator' user is on line, I also created a user known as > 'ptownson' and IE works fine on that 'user' account; just not on the > administrator's account which is what I usually use. > The problem (for those of you who missed my special mailing on it, > is that (in the admin account) when I click on the icon for IE 6.0 > it stalls a few seconds, then _very briefly_ flashes up the browser > program with a blank 'home page' then after a second or less zaps it > away. If I wish to use the IE browser, I can go in through a 'back > door' such as any page which presents a bunch of files, for example > 'search' or 'desktop', move my mouse up to the address line and then > manually edit the destination line and get to my 'home page' or any > URL desired. But the clicker on my desktop will not work, nor will > any link to click on which relies on IE getting open. Mozilla, which > is another desktop icon works just fine, click on it, get my 'home > page' and go to wherever. Now, if I could set the various program > defaults so that Outlook Express for example and other programs > currently relying on IE to operate instead went to Mozilla to > operate, I suppose I could just write off IE entirely when using the > administrator account_ on my Windows 2000. By the way, when I use > >the 'ptownson' account on the same machine, everything works fine. > What am I overlooking in the admin account? %DIETY% only knows. MS-ware works by 'magic'. According to the Redmond Mantra, users never have any need to know what goes on 'beneath the covers', so there aren't any records (you know, 'log files' of what various things do, or 'what changed what', let alone what it was 'changed from' and 'changed to'. If everything is the way Microsoft 'intended it to be', the magic works; if something _isn't_ the way Microsoft requires, There is no provision for tracking down _what_ that 'something' is. The "official" fix is to "put everything back to the Microsoft intended it" -- which you accomplish by doing a 're-install'. It is 'something' related to that user profile. Data for which is scattered in several places. A bunch is in the registry. some may be under: C:\Documents and Settings/{userid}/Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft or C:\Documents and Settings/{userid}/Application Data\Microsoft and possibly several layers below either of those points. > What about read/write permissions on the 'home page'? It goes to > look for the home page, sees the permissions won't allow it to be > read, so it closes down and goes away? I would expect a 4.0.3 error 'access denied'. > What is the exact directory location in DOS where I can find that > file? The URL for the home page is, I *think*, in the registry. "somewhere". (if so, it will be there twice -- once under H_KEY_CURRENT_USER, and once in the administrator 'permanent' registry items. > Something like C:\documents and settings\administrator\something > else? Clues are welcome. Look at the special request message in the > special mailing Friday afternoon and see if you can help me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 09:24:17 -0700 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Using Mozilla I went to a download site (supposedly 'free downloads') > and paid for a password to download an entirely new copy of Internet > Explorer 6.0 and Outlook Express. Downloaded it, but still nothing ... > I am wondering if it is because my index page (I was using 'my yahoo' > as my home or starting page) somehow got wiped out. Uhhhh ... you wasted your money http://www.microsoft.com/ie/ IE 6 is available from this site, it's the actual software and it won't cost you a cent. > Can you tell me WHERE to install a new 'index' page ('Documents and > Settings/Administrator/something? so I can try that method to clear > this up? Or got any other ideas? And where would I go to make mail > and all the other links default to mozilla rather than IE? You can make web links default to Mozilla by clicking Tools|Options in Mozilla, clicking General, and looking for the option that makes Mozilla check whether it's the default browser. > Microsoft tech support cannot help me because I have an OEM serial > number. That's right, they don't support OEM copies of windows. The Original Equipment Manufacturer (the company that built your computer) does; call them. > So I am seeking tech support from the readership here. If > someone will send me email who can help, I will supply that person > with an 800 number to reach me at by phone so it will not cost them > anything to call me, and I will be right at the affected computer to > follow their instructions. Thanks very much! I'd try downloading IE6 from Microsoft first, but I'm wondering if something else isn't up with your computer ... Flatus Ohlfahrt wrote: > I think I would be inclined to try this one: Microsoft® Windows® > Malicious Software Removal Tool (KB890830) Here's a pointer to it: > http://tinyurl.com/4hvpc On my Windows XP laptop,Windows Automatic Update installs an updated copy of this program every month. Or you can go to windowsupdate.microsoft.com -- which you should be doing on a regular basis anyhow if your OS doesn't do automatic updates -- and apply the security fixes there. mc wrote: > What I'd suggest is going to Disk Cleanup and removing Temporary > Internet Files. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did that also ... it is incredible > how many files build up in the computer after just one or two days. > PAT] I just cleaned up a Temporary Internet Files directory yesterday, where the user had the cache set to almost 600 MB. Go to Tools|Internet Options in IE, look for the temporary file settings in the middle of the page, and click the Settings button - the default is probably to use quite a bit of space for temporary files and can safely be adjusted WAY down. Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Company website: http://JustThe.net/ Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/ E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 00:45:05 +1000 From: Colin <colin@sutton.wow.aust.com> Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With Internet Explorer IE 6.0 Colin wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: >> This is an appeal to any Windows Internet Explorer person in our >> readership who can help me: >> Wednesday night/Thursday morning someone stuck me with a virus and the >> end result was my Internet Explorer browser is gone. > Which virus? Usually a description of the virus will tell you which > files and registry settings it corrupted. > Regards, > Colin > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It was something to do with www.coolweb > and 180Search as I recall. I also {...] http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/adware.180search.html tells you what it did. Try the removal tool, or if you have already deleted files and the tool doesn't work see the registry settings to delete near the bottom of the page. IE is stuck for the 180ax 'helper object' you have probably already found and deleted ... Regards, Colin ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> Subject: Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail Organization: Symantec Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 16:56:30 -0400 In article <telecom24.365.3@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote: > Bradford Councilman is former vice president of Interloc Inc., a rare > book dealer in Greenfield that offered a free e-mail service to > customers. In 1998, Councilman allegedly began intercepting any > e-mails sent to his customers by the Internet retailer Amazon.com. > Councilman and his colleagues allegedly read the messages to see what > Amazon was offering his customers, so that he could make attractive > counter-offers. > A grand jury indicted Councilman in 2001 for violating the federal > wiretapping law. Councilman urged dismissal of the indictment, saying > that the wiretap law did not apply because the e-mail was intercepted > while it was stored in the memory of a computer, not when it was > traveling across a network. > A federal district court agreed and threw out the indictment. The US > Justice Department, which had brought the case against Councilman, > appealed the ruling. But a three-judge panel of the US Court of > Appeals in Boston also rejected the charges. Last year, the Justice > Department persuaded all seven appeals court judges to hear the case. It seems to me that they're using the wrong law. Doesn't the Electronic Communications Privacy Act have provisions prohibiting email providers from looking at customers' mail, except as needed to provide the service (e.g. server administrators sometimes have to look at mail to diagnose problems)? Why are they using the a wiretapping statute, when he didn't actually intercept anything on the wire? Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecomm- unications 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) RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308 and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest ************************************************************************* * 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 #366 ****************************** | |