From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 17 15:31:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2HKV0P01106; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:31:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:31:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403172031.i2HKV0P01106@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #127 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 127 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson One Cable Company to Rule Them All (Monty Solomon) Google Rolls Out Local Search System (Monty Solomon) FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television (Monty Solomon) Nokia Megapixel Phone (Monty Solomon) AOL to Launch Bill Payment Service (Monty Solomon) US Lawmakers Bicker Over Appealing Telephone Case (Monty Solomon) USDTV to Launch Low-Cost Wireless TV Service (Monty Solomon) Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls) (Withheld) Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls) (Sammy@nospam) Quick Question on Blocking Outgoing Calls (Joe Carlson) Re: Caller ID for PC (JDS) Vote Machine Salesman Will Deliver Ohio to Bush in November (grub) Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! (Justin Time) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Tony P.) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Hank Karl) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Paul VaderP Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Herb Stein) 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 is 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: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:53:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: One Cable Company to Rule Them All Comcast's bid to buy Disney raises a specter even scarier than the witch in Snow White: A Mickey Mouse Internet. Editor's note: Ninth in a series on the consolidation of power and ownership in the media landscape. By Farhad Manjoo March 17, 2004 | If you're looking for a perfect example of the limitless possibility of the Internet, the true, world-shrinking power of a fast, always-on network, you might find it at George's house. George is a British expat who lives in Philadelphia with his wife and kids and father. (We'll call him George, because, for reasons that will be explained, he doesn't want his real name published.) George loves America, but he also can't shake the feeling that he's not fully at home here; something about the place just doesn't click with him. "Very few Brits ever get totally assimilated into the American culture," he says. So at George's house, the Internet functions as a portal to a world left behind. George and his family watch the BBC News on the Web three times a day. George, who spent two decades in the British film industry, makes digital movies of his family, and he sends the movies over the Internet to the extended family back home; they, in turn, send films of the mother country. "We use the Net as a lifeline," George says. "For anybody for whom this isn't their native country, you'd understand." But Comcast, the company that provides George's high-speed Internet service, didn't understand. Last August, the company sent him a letter telling him to quit it -- he was using the Internet too much. The firm said he was violating Comcast's "acceptable use" policy, that he was somehow abusing his service. This surprised George, because as far as he knew he wasn't doing anything illegal or unseemly online -- "We're not using porn sites," he says -- and his contract with the firm didn't spell out any limits on his Internet use. When he called the company, it gave him the "runaround" -- nobody would tell George specifically what he should do to bring his use back in line with Comcast's policies, other than that, as a general matter, he ought to consider using the Internet much, much less. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/03/17/comcast/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:30:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Google Rolls Out Local Search System By MICHAEL LIEDTKE AP Business Writer SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Online search engine leader Google Inc. is introducing a new system designed to make it easier for people to find things closer to their homes, paving the way for the company to make more money selling ads to small businesses. The new algorithmic formulas, scheduled to begin working Wednesday, will allow Google to display more local information in response to search requests that include a ZIP code or a city's name. Google says these geographic queries are now more likely to generate phone numbers and specific addresses on its main results page. In many cases, Google also will display an icon of a compass that can be clicked upon to open another page containing a detailed map and directions to the location. Web surfers who want a broader selection of parochial information will be encouraged to visit a new gateway, http://local.google.com . - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40848750 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:52:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television Consumers Should Get Full Benefits of Hi-Res Devices Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will ask the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today to prevent satellite and cable television providers from intentionally reducing the quality of digital television signals on analog outputs, a practice known as "down-rezzing." Endorsed by the motion picture industry as a content-protection measure, the practice would force people who have invested in high-definition digital television equipment to accept inferior-quality content. http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/20040315_eff_pr.php EFF Reply Comments re the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SFNPRM) in the FCC's "Plug and Play" proceeding (CS Docket No. 97-80/PP Docket No. 00-67). In these reply comments, EFF urges the FCC to prohibit down-resolution, or down-rezzing, of component analog outputs for nonbroadcast programming carried on cable and satellite systems. http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/eff_fcc_comments.php ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:28:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia Megapixel Phone Sharpen and Smarten Your Image with the New Nokia Megapixel Phone HANOVER, Germany--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 17, 2004-- Stylish and slim Nokia 7610 combines robust imaging capabilities with multiple smartphone features On a makeshift catwalk, Nokia grabbed the spotlight at CeBIT 2004 with the introduction of the sleek Nokia 7610 imaging device, the company's first megapixel camera phone. Encased in fashionable dual-tone ruby and onyx-colored covers, the slim and stylish Nokia 7610 phone offers quick and convenient capturing, printing, storing and sending of photo-quality images and videos in addition to the benefits of the Series 60 Platform. The tri-band model is planned to be available during the second quarter of 2004 in two variants, GSM 900/1800/1900 and GSM 850/1800/1900. It is expected to retail for approximately EUR 500. Printing is a breeze for users of the Nokia 7610 imaging device - pictures can be turned into prints in just a few seconds via a Bluetooth connection to a compatible printer or by using a printer kiosk available in Nokia branded retail locations or other photo shops. Using the Kodak Pictures application on the phone, pictures can be uploaded to a virtual photo album on the web and shared online with others or ordered as prints via an online service. The Nokia 7610 phone offers a 65,000 color screen for viewing still images and video captured by the integrated camera and watching real-time video streaming using the built-in RealOne mobile player. The megapixel (1152 X 864) camera features a high-quality lens, 4x digital zoom, and a self-timer. The Nokia 7610 imaging device also allows users to capture images in low-light conditions. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40849048 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:47:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL to Launch Bill Payment Service By Kenneth Li NEW YORK, March 16 (Reuters) - In seeking a return to growth, America Online on Tuesday said it sees a check in the e-mail. AOL, the online unit owned by Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:TWX), said it plans to unveil a new service called AOL Bill Pay that lets its subscribers pay nearly all their bills directly through its proprietary e-mail service. The company struck a partnership with Yodlee, a technology company that helps aggregate bills from vendors as diverse as Verizon to American Express, to provide the guts of the service. But what it hopes will lure subscribers are the safety features built into its mailbox, where reminders and links to bills will be sent. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40840070 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:32:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: US Lawmakers Bicker Over Appealing Telephone Case WASHINGTON, March 16 (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers on Tuesday lined up on both sides of the question of whether the government should move to require local telephone carriers to share their networks with rivals at cut rates. A bipartisan group of about 120 members of the U.S. House of Representatives wrote to President George W. Bush asking that the administration leave unchallenged a court ruling that forced Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) and other local giants to share their networks at government-mandated prices. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40846212 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:35:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: USDTV to Launch Low-Cost Wireless TV Service By Kenneth Li and Franklin Paul NEW YORK, March 16 (Reuters) - Start-up company USDTV on Tuesday unveiled a digital television service being rolled out in various U.S. cities this year and sent via VHF/UHF antennas in a lower-cost alternative to cable and satellite television. Subscribers must buy a $99 set-top box from regional electronic chain stores and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE:WMT) outlets. They also have to pay a monthly fee of $19.95 -- compared with than cable and satellite service bills that range from about $30 to over $100 per month. The company has already launched the service in Salt Lake City, Utah, where it where it is based, with more than 25 channels and plans to debut in Albuquerque, New Mexico and Las Vegas, Nevada in the next 30 days. It plans to launch in 30 major markets by end-year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40845849 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:26:16 -0600 From: Withheld Subject: Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific) [Me again, PAT -- still anon please] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two questions: How much was the charge > to set it up and how much is the monthly fee? There was a $10 setup fee, and the service itself is $7.95/month. We'll see if that's what the bill reflects ... > Does *95 also allow for numbers/codes, etc previously blocked to be > removed from the list or re-authorized once again as needed? Yes. In fact, that's how I tested it -- I put in my own office number (which she would never have reason to call so it's no loss if it accidentally gets permanently blocked), then dialed it to see how the system blocked a call. After the test I unblocked the number. BTW you can still dial a blocked number, just enter the PIN after the recording plays and you'll be connected. > Another question of a more personal nature: How has the alzheimers > patient reacted to this change in service? We are taking several steps to deal with her situation, and one of these steps is that she has someone staying with her 4 hours a day M-F to take her shopping and to Dr. appointments, clean house, walk the dog, make lunch, etc. This seems to have stopped her calling the neighbors, since she's now getting personal attention on a daily basis. Call Control is a backup system, "symptomatic relief" as it were. We'll see what happens when she wants to go somewhere "after hours" (i.e. outside of 9am-1pm M-F) and can't get ahold of a family member on the first try. I'm sure we'll hear about it, because she won't be able to make heads nor tails out of the unintelligible recording from Call Control. The whole neighbor thing was really a wake-up call for the rest of the family; we've made a lot of changes in the relationship and she seems to be doing better at the moment. I'm still a bit disturbed about how things are proceeding, since we are infringing on her liberties without her permission. We intercept her mail, block her phone calls, confiscate her car keys, control her diet, and so on. We never asked for permission to do any of this, we just stepped in and usurped her life. On the other hand, she's now living in a clean house (HER house!), eating a balanced diet, and taking her medications appropriately. She has human company for at least 20 hours a week, plus her dog for companionship. Overall her quality of life has improved substantially in the last month, and she has much more freedom and comfort than she would have in even the best "facility." The road to Hell is paved with our intentions! But I hope we're managing to make the right decisions. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caring for an Alzheimer's patient is NEVER an easy job. My best wishes to you and the entire family as you try to make the right decisions as this progresses. I have always been very frightened that eventually Alzheimer's would claim me. I do not know why I feel that way, except it is a very fearsome thought. Because the brain aneurysm left me with substantial neurological damage, I have to have people come in to care for me everyday, so I sort of understand how the lady in your family feels with life. I actually look forward to the City of Independence meals-on-wheels people coming around each day at 10:30 AM and the State of Kansas SRS lady who comes around a few hours each week to do my housekeeping. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:21:22 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two questions: How much was the charge > to set it up and how much is the monthly fee? Does *95 also allow > for numbers/codes, etc previously blocked to be removed from the list > or re-authorized once again as needed? Another question of a more > personal nature: How has the alzheimers patient reacted to this > change in service? PAT] There is certainly no Call Control in California. Or, if there is, it is not on SBC's list of offerings. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My feeling is this may be what SBC and other telcos refer to as a customer specific tariff. In other words, it is developed specifically for disabled customers for example. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joe Carlson Subject: Quick Question Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:23:21 -0500 Hi, I was wondering if it was possible to block outgoing calls on only one phone line in a house?? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Assuming you want a total block on the line -- not specific numbers as our family of an Alzheimer's patient was requesting, then that is simple. Ask telco to make that one line (by telephone number) to be 'one-way incoming' only. When the job is done, by picking up the phone you will hear 'battery' or side tone, but no dial tone. People sometimes get those lines when they have one or more phones for some specific task involving incoming calls and do not want abuse on the lines otherwise. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC From: JDS Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:04:58 GMT The Zeus Phonstuff Whozz Calling 2 is terrific but relatively expensive ($185 from sandman.com). It reports all incoming and **outgoing** calls to your serial port. I've had one for several years. Tech support is outstanding. It lets you keep a complete log of all your phone activity. Also check out "NetCallerID" for only $15 - http://www.dallaswifi.net/netcallerid.html. I believe this only reports on incoming calls. ------------------------------ From: grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk Subject: Vote Machine Salesman Will Deliver Ohio to Bush in November Reply-To: grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:56:58 +0000 Organization: Customer of PlusNet Vote machine salesman will deliver Ohio to Bush in November The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio, told Republicans in a fund-raising letter that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." http://www.sweetliberty.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! Date: 17 Mar 2004 06:52:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com TELECOM Digest Editor's wrote in message news:: > <> > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And the people who *are* authorized to > spend the company's money in all probability have *no idea* or > expertise in the company telecommunications network. What President > or CEO or Chairman of the Board have you ever met who knew anything > about how the company's phone system worked? This is NOT to speak in > either way about Norvergence, good or bad, but if a salesperson is > trying to sell some sort of crappy phone thing to a company, s/he > needs to chat with a 'decision maker' (i.e. money spender) in the > hopes of slipping one through before the company's workers get wind > of what is happening. That was how MCI telemarketers operated back > in the 1970's when MCI was first getting started. They would talk to > the telecom people first with their 'get one over on AT&T and their > high prices' routine, and if the telecom people bought it (and many > did, for no other reason than the general dislike of AT&T that was > so prevalent in the 1970-80's) they were all set. If the telecom > people did NOT buy the routine, then the MCI telemarketers would > always shoot right for the top of the line, the CEO, or Board > Chairman, etc, knowing the 'save money' lie would work and nothing > else would matter (at that level). > Stop and think about it: in any really large, huge corporation, what > does the CEO, or president or Chairman of the Board *really* know > about anything? Computers, customer service, telecommunications; three > areas which can bring a company down to its knees if they are > mismanaged, and the three areas which are horribly expensive to oper- > ate and maintain. So Rodgers, do you see why telemarketers have to > 'jump the line' and get right to the top if they are going to slip > their crap in the door? PAT] Pat, I think your brush is a little too wide here when condemning the corporate mavens of lacking insight as to how their internal systems are set up and / or work. In my 40 years of experience, it isn't the chief executives that bite so much on the "see how much money you can save if you just ..." spiel, it is the upper middle management that succumbs to these tactics. Chief executives normally have the smarts from years of experience that some decisions are best researched before being pronounced. When the issue is over something they may not know all the details, they will often defer a decision until they confer with people they trust to bring the correct information to the table. The problem is that the CIO or the head of the administrative division of a corporation are some of those people that chief executives often rely on. If that department head, exec VP, VP, Director -- pick a title -- hasn't done their homework and has been sold the bill of goods, then the decision is based on faulty input from a trusted source. (Hmmm -- sounds like a current political situation involving a certain Middle Eastern country.) I have worked in organizations where every decision was made by committee, and very little was accomplished, and organizations where no one was consulted before a decision. The best organizations have their warrens of cubicles staffed with people whose job is to obfuscate everything, but something magical also happens. At some point in the process all the "cacca de toro" is stripped away and a clear picture results because the item was examined by 27 clerks who had little else to do but research. When all the research is looked at, dissected, blended, homogonized and reconstituted the truth normally is left. How that truth is presented is often tainted by the person charged with presenting it to the decision makers, but then that's another diatribe. The entire point of this is a plea, and that is to ask you carefully consider the statements you put into your comments so you are not guilty of grabbing a brush that infairly paints people who are truly competent and do their jobs with integrity when you wish to paint the few who lack these traits. Rodgers Platt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very good point. But unfortunatly, the people who are truly competent and doing their jobs with integrity are few and far between in many very large companies, and rarely do we hear from them. I think those people are mostly with smaller (by comparison) companies. It is also very important that employees have knowledge of the employees above them and below them in the 'chain' since having at least a reasonable idea of what *those* people are doing often times helps *them* take more care and concern about their own jobs. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:16:59 GMT In article , kd1s@nospamplease.verizon.reallynospam.net says: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But sir, your assertion that a judge's > signature is required on a warrant (true) making it sound as though it > were difficult to obtain (false) shows you to be very naive. Judges > tend to do whatever their puppet-masters, police and prosecutors, tell > them to do. It takes absolutely no effort to obtain a warrant at all. > Prosecutor just asks for one, and usually the judge knows better than > to refuse the request. Oh, theoretically he could refuse to sign off > on it, but in actual practice they don't refuse the request. By > eliminating that requirement it would simply bring things more in line > with how they actually are. Either that, or supply each prosecutor > with a rubber stamp of the judge's signature. PAT] I suppose it all depends upon where you live. As I may have mentioned elsewhere I once worked for the Department of Attorney General. It was a major pain to get a judge to sign off on a warrant in Rhode Island. Granted, in some places the judge is simply a rubber stamp. It's up to the citizens to get the local or state representatives to revise the qualifications and conditions attached to judicial positions in order to fix that. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, things were much different in Chicago, Illinois. Judges and prosecutors in Chicago are part of an 'untouchables club'. They all do as they please, and the other ones know most of the details. But they pretty much keep it to themselves in their club, **unless/until one of them does not play right where the others are concerned. Then the others squash him.** For instance, take Judge Maloney; he was known as a 'hanging judge' when it came to punishing criminals with long, stern prison sentences. All the prosecutors knew they had Judge Maloney on the hook because he also on occassion would accept bribes to 'fix' murder cases. Judge Maloney was himself finally sent to prison for all the bribes he took, but for years prosecutors knew about it and whenever they wanted a search warrant and the circumstances were dubious at best, someone would always suggest 'go upstairs and see Maloney, tell him to sign on it.' The rule seemed to be 'why waste a judge when you can have him around as a good tool.' Maybe one of the Chicago area readers can refresh my memory on this: How many area judges were themselves sent to prison in that purge back about 1990? I think it was 27, including the supervising judge over at the County Jail. Quite a few prosecutors went to prison also. Imagine, 27 Chicago area judges and prosecutors all with dirty hands. Is Maloney still in prison now, or was he ever released? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:29:27 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:10:55 GMT, Tony P. wrote: > In article , mchance@swbell.net > says: >> There's a certain quote by Benjamin Franklin that you need to familiarize >> yourself with. * > Ah yes -- those who clamor for security while preserving liberty deserve > neither. IIRC, the quote by Ben Franklin is "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security " And a similar quote from Abraham Lincoln: "Those who are ready to sacrifice freedom for security ultimately will lose both." The words of William O. Douglas, Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court explain why this is so: "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air however slight lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness. " ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 16:03:53 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought most encryption is already > illegal. No. Fortunately, the laws have actually weakened in the last decade. > Take that fellow in Colorado -- what's his name? Phil > something who invented PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)? Didn't he get > arrested and put on trial for telling people on the net how to > encrypt their stuff? PAT] No. He got in trouble with the old munitions law, which made it illegal to *export* high-grade encryption. Phil Zimmerman was hounded by the government for 3 years, but in the end he won when the government dropped the case. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:10:06 -0600 Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote in message news:telecom23.124.8@telecom-digest.org: > Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the > government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? > Why aren't the same people who are afraid of touch-screen voting > problems in favor of tools that will help police catch cyber- > criminals? Or what about spam? What's the point of making it illegal > if law enforcement doesn't have the tools to catch violators? > Every aspect of my well being in the USA is based upon the rule of > law. Couldn't one make the argument that the only way this "bugging" > of the Internet could be used against innocent people is if we lose > the rule of law here, but that if we lose the rule of law then the > Internet problems will be insignificant compared to all the others? > My personal view is that all of these efforts are in vain anyway. Any > first-semester encryption textbook gives me the tools to create secure > electronic communications on the Internet. (For example, if I really > cared to, I could generate a huge one-time random cypher, give the > only copy to my friend, and the only way people could read our > conversations is if they stole a copy of the key. If I wanted to > transfer the key without telling my friend "I'm transfering the key," > I could use a track on a publicly available CD for the key, or send a > JPG of a friend, etc.) > -Joel This is troll, right Pat? No one is this stupid. Herb Stein herb@herbstein.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I dunno, Herb. They come pretty stupid as things go, or perhaps brazen is a better term. You've heard the rumors about playing phonograph records backwards to hear messages about devil worship, haven't you? Well, if you take most issues of Telecom Digest and run it backward through your spool then count off every 127th letter (reading backward) you can see terrorist messages. That's how I send secret messages to all those bad people in Iraq. 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. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 V23 #127 ******************************