From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Aug 27 14:54:23 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id i7RIsNg19292; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:54:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:54:23 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200408271854.i7RIsNg19292@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 #401 TELECOM Digest Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:54:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 401 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson U.S. Says Over 100 Arrested in Internet Crime Sweep (Monty Solomon) NBC Sees Last-Minute Olympic Profit Boost (Monty Solomon) Re: OS Preference (Fred Atkinson) Re: Microsoft Changed My Mind (Lisa Hancock) Re: Cincinnati Bell Alternatives (Tony P.) Re: Book Review: Fighting Spam for Dummies, Levine/Young/Church (Levine) Europe's Coming Leader in Broadband is France (Marcus Didius Falco) Forced Ads on Auto Response System (Lisa Hancock) NorVergence & the FTC (North Jersey Media Group Inc.) Response to "Hundreds Arrested in Internet Crime Sweep" (Withheld) Perfisans Delivers New Chip to Key Motherboard Makers (Editor) 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: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:36:24 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Says Over 100 Arrested in Internet Crime Sweep By Andy Sullivan and Peter Kaplan WASHINGTON, Aug 26 (Reuters) - More than 100 people have been arrested in the largest global crackdown to date on identity theft, hacking and other Internet-based crimes, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft said on Thursday. The arrests followed a three-month investigation into a range of crimes from reselling co-workers' Social Security numbers to disabling Web sites, Ashcroft said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43320357 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:41:49 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: NBC Sees Last-Minute Olympic Profit Boost LOS ANGELES, Aug 26 (Reuters) - NBC Universal, riding high on a Summer Olympics that appears on track to set a record for viewership, will beat early forecasts and turn a profit of $60 million to $70 million for its coverage of the Games from Athens, an NBC executive said on Thursday. With ratings running ahead of the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, executives said the network was able to release some advertising inventory that had been held back in case of a "make goods" situation, in which networks offer free time to advertisers if they fall short of ratings commitments. The released time translated into $20 million to $25 million in extra business, all of which went to the bottom line, said one executive who asked to remain anonymous. NBC had previously said it expected Athens to be as profitable as Sydney, which sources pegged at around $50 million. Through 12 days of competition, NBC's prime-time coverage of the Athens games was up 8 percent in the ratings compared with Sydney, according to Nielsen Media Research. Similarly, the other NBC Universal networks carrying the Games -- MSNBC, CNBC, USA, Bravo and Telemundo -- were also up sharply. While it was too early to say definitively what sort of effect the Games would have on the networks, particularly their non-Olympic programming, NBC Universal said there were some early positive indications. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43314507 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:47:02 PDT Subject: Re: OS Preference From: Fred Atkinson What's wrong with upgrading the hard drive? They are cheap these days? I just got through upgrading from a machine with a ten gigabyte hard drive to a thirty gigabyte hard drive and installed Windows 2000 on the new machine. Fred On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:30:47 PDT, in comp.dcom.telecom you wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Isn't Win 98 or Win 2000 actually > preferable and more flexible for most people anyway? PAT] > It depends :-) The computer I am typing on right now is Win98. The > main reason it's not getting updated is it's 4 GB Hard Drive. 2000 & > XP are too big. > The computer next to it is a laptop running Win2000. Not my choice, > but the IT setup is 5 year old Os's on 5 year old machines :-( > My two home machines (one laptop and on desktop) both run XP > Home. It's stable, supports USB2.0, and matches the newer hardware. My > rule of thumb is if you have at least 128 Mb of RAM, 20 GB of hard > drive and no offending hardware; run XP. The added features justify > it. > Mark L. Smith smith@stones.com http://smith.freehosting.net ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Microsoft Changed My Mind Date: 26 Aug 2004 14:05:17 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com SELLCOM Tech support wrote > I just went from a "poor Microsoft why are they persecuting it" to a > "Microsoft is really really dangerous and something needs to be done" > in only a few short hours. What caused this great change of heart > you might ask? The answer is "XP". I held out for as long as I could > without buying it, but ... In the IBM mainframe world, if you happen to have an old program from 40 (forty) years ago, you can still run it without change on current machines and operating systems. The backward compatibility is there. (Yes, most old programs would have needed Y2k changes, and there was changes from COBOL to COBOL-II/MVS, but basically everything is the same). Actually, if you had programs that were 50 (fifty) years old from an earlier generation of IBM mainframes (ie 1401 or 7090 series from the 1950s) you could STILL run them without change, too. I know of people who did just that until at least the mid 1990s. The 1948 Western Electric rotary phone on my desk works just fine, by the way. The Centrex ESS still accepts rotary dial pulses and the ringing current still rings the telephone. Voice clarity is fine. Those are pretty good records of supporting someone's software/ hardware investment. I don't think Microsoft chooses to follow that way of doing business. On the other hand, Microsoft keeps rolling out new and changed operating systems year after year. As a person of limited means who tends to keep his computers for as long as possible, my personal software becomes "obsolete" and this creates problems. Intel keeps making faster and faster chips. At work, when they upgraded me from MS Word 6.0 to Word 2000, I discovered that my macros were obsolete and had to be recoded, plus other things were changed around. I had to WASTE considerable time getting things back to how I liked them. People say the new products have new features, but most of us do not NEED the new features. I do plenty of writing and Word 6.0 met all of my needs just fine. As to chip speed, it's like using an atom bomb to kill a rabbit. Many years ago, the people at GM (by Alfred Sloan IIRC) came up with the idea of a new model year, so as to encourage people to buy new cars even if they didn't need them; just to have something new and fancy. To me, Microsoft and Intel copied the same business formula. Most of us (except those who like to play around with stuff) could really do their work in DOS on a 286, maybe 386 for heavy duty needs. Everything else is window dressing. But Intel/MS wouldn't make any money if people kept their computers until they wore out. So they keep adding features and hyping them up. When Win95 came out, I could not believe people were so excited they were lining up overnight outside stores! Likewise when the Pentium came out. I will keep using my 1996 home computer with its 14.4 modem until it dies and I am forced to upgrade. Of course they've told me the hard drive isn't compatible with new machines (surprise, surprise), so I'll have to recopy my software. Some programs were on 5" floppies originally -- how I am supposed to copy those over? (I had hoped to simply move my hard drive to the new machine and go from there.) I see that DOS under Win2000 has limitations that I don't care for, but I'm screwed. MS doesn't want me doing anything in DOS, it wants me to buy all new software. [public replies only, please] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Cincinnati Bell Alternatives Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:02:56 GMT In article , alg@aracnet.com says... > While you won't find my CLEC in Cincinnati I'd bet some of your local > CLECs are just as good. Here's what I'd try: Interview a couple of > the larger ones serving your area and tell them what level of business > they might get from you. Then install a PRI (or T-1) on a 60 day > trial basis (gratis if possible and with no disconnect penalty) and > see how they do. How's their installation interval? Have they > configured the trunks to work with your equipment correctly (or do you > have to spend hours troubleshooting with them)? Does the LD work as > you expect? Things like that. Reminds me of when we switched to Brooks Fiber at a former job. Thing is we only had 20 lines in the building. Unfortunately we were about two blocks away from Brooks fiber ring. So the solution was to have Verizon fiber drawn into the building and hooked up to a channel bank on premises (Our switch couldn't take a PRI type feed at the time.) From what I was told, Brooks was losing about $10K per month on our account. But the service was rock solid. Now it's MCI. Oh well. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2004 05:15:33 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Book Review: Fighting Spam for Dummies, Levine/Young/Church Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA I generally don't reply to flames from anonymous cowards who have so little confidence in what they say that they sent mail from fake addresses and don't sign their messages, but now and then I make an exception. > Spamassassin *does* run on Windows desktops. >> From the spamassassin home page, at > Note: This is the home page for the main open-source SpamAssassin > distribution. Packages downloaded here contain UNIX-oriented > front-end scripts. Versions for Windows, commercial versions, and > other front-ends, are listed on the wiki. > Note well: "Versions for Windows..." > Neat trick for a package that "doesn't run on Windows", isn't it? Had Mr. A.C. spent a few seconds and actually taken a look at the Wiki he refers to, he would find a bunch of little used add-on packages that let you set up a proxy mail server on your Windows box that they say can be set up to run mail through a version of spamassassin. I believe that they can be made to work, but I don't know anyone who uses spamassassin that way, and I certainly wouldn't recommend any of them to the nontechnical users who are the target of our book, because they're way too hard to manage and update. Spamassassin is a swell package. Indeed, it's so swell that we describe it in some detail in pages 186-188 of the server filtering chapter which apparently neither the original reviewer nor Mr. A.C. bothered to read. So like I said, it's a short book, if you're interested in anti-spam advice, flip through it at your local bookstore and decide for yourself. To download a PDF of chapter 1, visit the publisher's catalog page for the book at http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/DummiesTitle/productCd-0764559656.html and click on the Read Excerpt link below the picture of the cover. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:15:47 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Europe's Coming Leader in Broadband is France http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3111474 http://economist.com/printedition/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3D3111474 The attached GIF (graph of broadband) is located at http://economist.com/images/20040821/CWB428.gif European telecoms The broader art of deregulation From The Economist print edition Surprisingly, Europe's coming leader in broadband is France WHEN it comes to promoting vigorous free-market competition, France does q not spring to mind. Yet in broadband telecoms, at least, French consumers enjoy one of the most competitive markets in Europe. A new report from Ovum, a consultancy, calls France's performance stellar and predicts that it will soon overtake Germany as the European country with the most broadband-enabled telephone lines. The champion of France's broadband boom is Iliad, a young telecoms firm that offers some of the most advanced services in Europe. For a mere AC30 ($37) a month, Iliad's service, sold under the (not entirely accurate) Free brand, provides high-speed internet access, digital television and free nationwide phone calls. This is less than half the price of a similar bundle elsewhere in Europe in the few countries where it is even available. No wonder Iliad has become France's second-largest broadband-internet provider, having signed up 768,000 customers since launching its triple-play combination in October 2002. Iliad's success owes much to Autority de Regulation des Telocommunications (ART), France's telecoms regulator. ART has been getting tough with France Telecom, the dominant, partly state-owned phone company. Three years ago, ART forced the incumbent to allow its rivals to use the local loop copper wires that run from telephone exchanges to homes. ART insisted that this unbundling happen at some of the lowest prices in Europe. France had the highest rate of broadband growth in Europe last year. It has the second-largest number of unbundled local loops in Europe and, proportionately, one of the highest (see chart). Unbundled loops free rival telephone firms from the grip of the incumbent. New entrants, such as Iliad, connect the lines directly to their own equipment, inside local exchanges. This takes time and money: two years and over AC100m in Iliad's case. But then a firm can provide TV, internet and telephone services to its customers over an ordinary phone line which its rivals cannot do. Indeed, Iliad's reputation now precedes it. Under half of its customers use unbundled lines: the rest were attracted to the firm by its record of innovation. Some industry insiders mutter that ART's intervention unfairly favours new entrants. Lower prices for the local loop may discourage the development of alternatives to the phone network. Why build a competing infrastructure when you can hire the existing one on favourable terms? Yet the folks at ART seem pleased with themselves. Consumers are happy too. The clement regulatory environment has allowed Iliad to develop a nifty vertically integrated business model. Iliad designs its own set-top boxes, runs its own optical network around France and has even built the kit that sits in the local exchanges. In the age of outsourcing, this do-it-yourself approach may seem untrendy but it lets the firm save money and cut prices for consumers, says Olivier Rosenfeld, Iliad's finance chief. Amazingly, in the midst of a land grab for customers, Iliad is already making money, turning a AC34m profit on revenues of AC293m in 2003. So successful has been France's regulatory intervention that other regulators are now following suit at least in Europe. According to the Paris-based OECD, prices for unbundling have fallen in ten European countries since 2002, in some cases even making French levels now look relatively pricey. (In America, unbundling has become quite controversial State regulators have fought local phone companies to encourage local-loop unbundling but with little success. The Federal Communications Commission has, as ever, been split on the matter.) In Britain, once in the vanguard of telecoms deregulation, high prices meant that only 8,000 local loops (out of 23m) were unbundled at the end of 2003. In May, pressured by regulators, BT, the incumbent, said it would cut prices for unbundled loops by up to 70%, moving in line with the European average. France's telecoms market, like its trains, seems to have overtaken Britain's. Copyright 2004 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Economist Newspaper. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Forced Ads on Auto Response System Date: 27 Aug 2004 07:03:18 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I called my credit card bank to check my balance and got their automated response system. Before it would give me the information, it forced me to listen to some ads for extra services (ie card protection, etc). Then it added salt in the wound by asking me TWICE if I wanted this package. That is, once I said no, it repeated part of the spiel then asked me again if I was sure I didn't want it. Companies have really gotten irritating with their telephone customer service. First they shoved automated response down our throats. I have no problem with that if I have a routine question, indeed, it's faster for routine questions. However, there are times when I need to talk to a competent human, and I get very annoyed how they make it very tough to break through. Now, they have these ads. I would change credit cards, except there's a catch. There are very few credit companies out there anymore, most cards are issued by huge institutions, and smaller banks contract with them for service. Whatever happened to monopoly enforcement? Does anyone think this concentration of commerce in a few hands is a good thing? [public replies only please] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:30:23 -0400 From: North Jersey Media Group Inc. Reply-To: dor@writeme.com Subject: NorVergence and the FTC Hi, NorthJersey.com is North Jersey's web site featuring stories from The Record and Herald News newspapers. David FTC Probes Phone Lease Scandal MARTHA McKAY The Federal Trade Commission is asking questions about a bankrupt Newark phone company at the center of a growing leasing scandal. To read more, click on link below or copy and paste it into your web browser. http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkyJmZnYmVsN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2NTc0NTY0 Visit http://www.northjersey.com each day for the latest North Jersey information and news. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:02:50 -0400 From: Withheld by Request Subject: Response to "Hundreds Arrested in Internet Crime Sweep" Pat, this is not for publication, especially not under my name (what you choose to post is up to you, but I'm getting tired of dealing with those who don't wish to have their view of reality disturbed in any way, especially by something like truth). However I just thought you might find this article interesting, given some of the recent discussions on how journalists don't bother to check facts once they are handed a press release by the government. What do you want to bet that even if these guys have done nothing illegal, the powers that be will not just drop the charges and go away? In my mind it should be considered journalistic malpractice to just take a government press release and rewrite it as though it were 100% factual, since it almost never is! http://p2pnet.net/story/2269 UDGNET to AP, DoJ, FBI - p2pnet.net News:- Yesterday we reported the first criminal action launched by US police agencies against a specific p2p group. Name of the group? The Underground Network. p2pnet heard from the group's the Answer Man, as he refers to himself with more than a hint of irony: Now read on >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone. As many now may know, the FBI and DoJ have executed search warrants on some of us, and questioned others (myself included). It's unfortunate they cannot get their facts straight before spouting off to the press. (Same goes for the press ... they really should be checking their facts.) To those who have no clue what I'm talking about, try Google News. (search for: underground network p2p) If you read an article, and came here looking for answers or are curious as to what's going on, I'm about to fill you in. After all, I'm the "Answer Man". (Was odd to hear the FBI refer to me by that title as too.) There have been many misconceptions in the handful of articles I've read. They all claim to be the same article by Curt Anderson of the Associated Press. Funny how I've read 30 different versions of the same article, written by the same person. It's difficult to tell how many facts were blatently wrong to begin with, but it's downright upsetting how many are currently wrong. I could never begin to explain all the misconstuded facts, as I haven't read them all. However, I would like to clear up a few "facts" I've read about a place I've been involved in for some time. That place: The Underground Network. First off, I've yet to figure out the "100 Gigabyte minimum requirement" claim for joining the network. What is it to join the network anyway? What is the network? These are the questions so many have wrong. If you're talking about the forums ... which is the only thing there IS to join in any sense, then there are no requirements. Well, no requirements past having access to a computer, the Internet, and an email account, plus being older then 13 (or lying that you are). It's the standard "requirements" of any other vB forum. There are thousands of them out there. Check Google. So that must not be what they are talking about when they say "members are required to share 100gb of copyrighted material to join" (quoting a story posted to the Register.co.uk). Excuse me? If they are talking about the hubs, well, you don't "join the network" to login to a hub. You connect to one of the hubs with our name in it. That's really all there is to it. We are just a collection of people with similar interests (read the forums to learn some of them) who also help eachother out in the hubs. To join a hub (like all other 13,000+ Direct Connect hubs out there, besides ours), you need a preset "minshare" that the hub decides. That is, files you are willing to share with other users in that hub. We do NOT police these files beyond the stuff we KNOW is illegal (underage porn, beastality, etc). Beyond that we are very clear with one point: THE USER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR SHARE! If you connect to one of the hubs with our name on it and are sharing files you shouldn't, then YOU made a boo-boo. Not us. The media and the FBI seem to have missed this point. I've seen write-ups about how much info "is stored on" or "passes through hubs". They claim "up to 60,000 movies and 18 million songs a day" (again, quoting an article). EXCUSE me? No ... the hubs don't hold a SINGLE byte of digital information. They don't even transfer any of it from user to user in fact. Did anyone bother to do the research? They didn't call the protocol and application "Direct Connect" because it sounded pretty. Once you are in the hub as a USER (not a member -- nothing to join), you DIRECTLY CONNECT to the other users in the hub. Not too complicated ... yet the FBI "infiltrated and investigated for 3 months" and they still have the facts wrong. John Ashcroft has some explaining to do. It's a scary world we live in if our own government gathers and uses their facts this way. Oh there is so much else. Yes, users are required to share to connect to the hub. It can be a FREE open source (non-copyrighted) Linux operating system downloaded from http://www.LinuxISO.org. It could be programs YOU wrote that you want to distribute. It could be a song YOU recorded to MP3 that you want the world to hear. That's up to you. That's the USER'S responsibility. We do not condone or encourage piracy of any form. Unfortunately this fact also escaped the powers that be. A 'hub' is simply a meeting place for people to come to and have fun, chat, and share what THE USER decides they want to (and is responsible for). The hub operator DOES NOT in ANY way share or distrubute ANY material, copyrighted or otherwise. Browse around the forums. You will see what we do. We chat with each other on current events. We help each other with hardware or software troubles. We joke around and have fun. We provide a shoulder to cry on if you had a bad day. We share knowledge and information, just like every other forum on the planet. We don't ask, suggest, or force you to share illegal files or spread copyright material ourselves. (In fact, frequently we will remind people that it's not welcome on our forums. Once again, browse around and see for yourself.) Those "facts" are simply fabrication of the press, or worse, the FBI/DoJ. I'll repeat what I told the special agent this morning when he came knocking: You guys are on a wild goose chase. You're going after the wrong people in this scenario. Instead of the administrators and hub owners, you need to be worrying about the USERS that are sharing 100+ GBs of these files the FBI claimed they downloaded. The hub owner didn't push that file on you. YOU requested it, then DIRECTLY CONNECTED to the other user to download it. The hubs simply provide a meeting place for people with like interests. You can chat, get help, or share files. What you do is up to YOU. The "organization" and "admins" of the network are also misunderstood. We are not some massive group plotting against anyone. It's just everyday people with some free time that have tried to help out others when they could. Look at my posts, for example, and you'll see what I mean. I was made an "administrator of the network" simply because I have computer knowledge and could help users/"members" when necessary. I like to help -- it's what makes me tick. That isn't a crime. Each person does their own thing. Some help keep the forums running well. Some help keep the website up. Others help the hub owners with their computer problems. No one is a "ring leader". No one organizes any "warez" rings or checks the non-existant "minimum requirements of members". Misconstrued facts + false information = ignorance and inno- cent people having their hard earned personal property seized. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't be one of the ignorant ones -- know the facts and realize the truth. Hopefully this will clear up a few misconceptions and blatant lies about what the Underground Network is. I certainly hope the press will dig into the REAL facts, and actually tell the truth. I also hope that the FBI/DoJ will realize their mistake(s) and not cause any more undue harm to us. Thank you for reading. (Thursday 26th August 2004) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, the government won't just drop the falsely-laid charges and go away. The thing in court about 'how do you plead, guilty or not guilty' is a total fiction because if you were not guilty police would not have not arrested you to start with. Everyone knows that. They *have* to give you that option due to the requirements of the USA constitution, which as any good police officer would tell you is a total abomination. I mean, imagine, giving all that scum the same freedoms and liberties as the few (very damn few! mainly us and our wives and immediate families and our co-workers in the corrections industry) good people are allowed to have. Next thing you know, they'll be expecting us to apologize when we make mistakes in who we arrest. Any good citizen knows you cannot harbor grudges or have hard feelings just because your home was ransacked and looted by the government and police. The FBI was here in Independence last week (not for me, thank goodness!) rummaging around in that 'hundreds arrested' case. I didn't see them, but our cab driver who knows all and sees all told me about it when he was bringing me home from Marvin's with my groceries yesterday. I am sure they did not come all the way down here from Wichita, KS and stay overnight at AppleTree Inn just to go back home empty handed. They always make such a big production out of whatever they do (a caravan of many cars and agents in order to arrest some nerd, ransack his house, steal his computers). The cab driver told me they were over at Arco Building (among other things there is the offices of TerraWorld) to serve a search warrant or two, and I am sure they did not go back to Wichita all heart broken and disillusioned on account of some scum who got away from them. I wonder now, with the 'hundreds arrested' if Bush, or Ashcroft or some others of their crowd will make a tie-in to 'terrorism' which is their favorite thing this year. What do you want to bet some one or more persons in the movie, music and other entertainment industry put them up to this latest attack on people? The next major outburst by police will be **August 31 or September 1** in New York before the Republicans have their convention. Watch and see. Police will go crazy, and riot just like they did in 1968 at the Democratic event in Chicago. Of course they will blame it all on the citizens, even when eventually some higher authority (such as Governor Dan Walker in Illinois in 1968) proves it was a police riot. Watch the middle to end of next week in New York as police deliver the November election victory to guess who. Their hero, their friend. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:01:00 +0400 From: Editor Subject: Perfisans Delivers New Chip to Key Motherboard Makers http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com Networking Technology Company Continues Proactive Execution of Strategic Plan for Launch of Next-Generation Chip Los Angeles, CA - August 27, 2004 (PRN): Perfisans Networks Corporation (OTC BB: PFNH), a next generation technology company focused on the burgeoning Gigabit Ethernet market, announced today that it has delivered its high speed, leading edge, cost-effective, system-on-chip (SOC) integrated circuits to leading manufacturers of PC motherboards in the Asia Pacific region for evaluation, prior to the full worldwide rollout of the next generation chip as the next step in the execution of the Company's strategic plan. Steve Gormley, vice president of the Company, stated that, "we believe that, once accepted and approved by the PC motherboard manufacturers, the SOC circuits will represent a revolutionary next generation technology." Mr. Gormley stated "We believe that the Perfisans' chip will run up to 10 times faster than most Ethernet chips and will also be up to three times faster than most enabled 1Gbps systems. The Perfisans' technology will provide quick and painless acceleration of the computer data delivery with the effective performance of an additional processor. Quite simply, applications will run faster and files will download and upload faster." About the ENA1001 The ENA1001 is a sophisticated System-on-a-Chip device, and uses Innovative chip architectures to bring far greater speeds to the Windows 2000 and XP customer base. The advanced features include significant cost/performance benefits to a wide array of Internet server applications that spend a significant portion of time processing network data. ENA1001 TOE technology can also be deployed in Fast Ethernet (FE) applications. The Internet server applications will further benefit from significantly reduced capital costs by not having to replace existing systems in order to upgrade with Perfisans technology. These applications will be able to offload the processing intensive TCP/IP communication protocol by employing Perfisans ENA1001 LAN on Motherboard configuration or through Perfisans ENA1001 (TOE) enabled Network Interface Cards (NIC). Network system manufacturers, in turn, will achieve reduced design cycle times, lower product development costs and faster times to market, by using Perfisans production-ready board level designs. The ENA1001's suite of TOE functions include: checksum assistance in Tx and Rx, TCP segmentation of Tx traffic, IP de-fragmentation and TCP reassembly assistance on Rx, and VLAN header insertion/removal. About Perfisans Holdings, Inc. Founded in 2001, Perfisans Holdings, Inc. is an emerging ASIC design house focused on developing leading edge, cost-effective, system-on- chip (SOC) integrated circuits (IC) and delivering innovative solutions that address the performance needs of next generation network systems. Rapidly being recognized by industry leaders for its innovative network interface products, the Company's technologies have applications in telecommunication, data communication, storage networks, content delivery networks, broadband networks, and rich streaming media. More information can be obtained from the Company's web site at www.perfisans.com. Contacts: For the Company: Steve Gormley 888.847.6972 x264 ir@perfisans.com Investor Relations: Michael Briola Executive Vice President Trilogy Capital Partners, Inc. michael@trilogy-capital.com 800.251.1770 editor@pressreleasenetwork.com http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com ------------------------------ 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 ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 V23 #401 ******************************