From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Nov 23 15:36:44 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iANKahD16228; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:36:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:36:44 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411232036.iANKahD16228@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 #563 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:36:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 563 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nude Photo Publisher Perfect 10 Sues Google (Lisa Minter) Bofra exploit hits The Register ad serving supplier (Monty Solomon) WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? (Michal) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Steve Sobol) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Lisa Hancock) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Scott Dorsey) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Steve Sobol) Re: Sears and K-Mart (Robert Bonomi) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8? (John McHarry) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Nathan Strom) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? (Gary Breuckman) Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech (Scott Dorsey) Re: The Persuaders (Thomas A. Horsley) Deja Vu All Over Again (Patrick Townson) Last Laugh! Online Casino Buys Virgin Mary Sandwich For $28,000 (Minter) Last Laugh! Ordering a Pizza by Phone in 2008 (Patrick Townson) 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: Lisa Minter Subject: Nude Photo Publisher Perfect 10 Sues Google Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:02:54 EST By Lisa Baertlein SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A California-based pornographer said on Monday it has sued Google Inc. alleging that its leading Internet search engines are illegally allowing people to view hijacked versions of its nude photos and to access its Web site with stolen passwords. Perfect 10 -- whose current slogan is "The World's Most Beautiful Natural Women" -- alleged in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Los Angeles on Friday that Google's image search engine gives users illegal access to photos it owns and produced, violating copyrights and harming its ability to profit from the distribution of the photos via its magazine and Web site. Further, a Google Web search for "perfect10.com passwords" serves up a list of usernames and passwords that would enable searchers to access Perfect 10's Web site and bypass its $25.50 monthly membership fee. "They're showing the pictures from my magazine and my Web site for free so there's no reason for anyone to buy my products. To add insult to injury, they give away my user names and passwords," said Norm Zada, president of Beverly Hills, California-based Perfect 10. Zada added that his company had sent almost 30 formal requests to Google, asking the newly public company to remove the photos and password lists from its search results. He said it sued after being dissatisfied with Google's response. In its lawsuit, Perfect 10 charges Google with copyright and trademark infringement and circumvention of copyright protection systems. It further alleges trademark dilution, unfair competition and violation of rights of publicity. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages. Google (GOOG.O) had not reviewed the lawsuit, said a spokesman, who declined further comment. In 2002, a federal appeals court ruled that Web sites may reproduce and post "thumbnail" or down-sized versions of copyrighted photographs. Nevertheless, it said displaying full-sized copies of photographs is a copyright violation. Google's image search results show photographic thumbnails. Some of those thumbnails link to sites that Perfect 10 said are illegally displaying full-sized photographs it owns. Earlier this year, Perfect 10 sued Visa, MasterCard and other financial institutions, alleging they facilitated and have profited from the illegal sale of pirated sex images flooding the Internet and thus should bear responsibility for any related copyright violations. Google, which went public in mid-August and runs a very profitable advertising business, has been hit with several intellectual property lawsuits from advertisers seeking to protect their trademarks. *** 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, Reuters News Service. . For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:20:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bofra Exploit Hits The Register Ad Serving Supplier http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/21/register_adserver_attack/ Bofra exploit hits our ad serving supplier By Team Register Published Sunday 21st November 2004 16:18 GMT Important notice Early on Saturday morning some banner advertising served for The Register by third party ad serving company Falk AG became infected with the Bofra/IFrame exploit. The Register suspended ad serving by this company on discovery of the problem. Bofra/IFrame is a currently unpatched exploit which affects Internet Explorer 6.0 on all Windows platforms bar Windows XP SP2. If you may have visited The Register between 6am and 12.30pm GMT on Saturday, Nov 20 using any Windows platform bar XP SP2 we strongly advise you to check your machine with up to date anti-virus software, to install SP2 if you are running Windows XP, and to strongly consider running an alternative browser, at least until Microsoft deals with the issue. We have asked Falk for an explanation and for further details of the incident, and pending this we do not intend to restart ad-serving via the company. Falk will, we understand, be making a statement regarding the matter on Monday. Although the matter was beyond our direct control, we do not regard it as acceptable for any Register reader to be exposed in this way, and wish to apologise sincerely to anyone who was. Further information about this particular exploit is available here or here. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/ie_iframe_vuln/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/10/bofra_worm/ ------------------------------ From: michalkuls@o2.pl (Michal) Subject: WiFi Centrino RANGE Increase POSSIBLE? Date: 23 Nov 2004 06:37:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I have a Toshiba A50-101 which is Centrino (with Wifi of course) I'm using Wifi access point from Linksys named WAG54G. I need to use the computer on other floor than the access point is. It works really poor. The wifi range is not sufficient. Is it possible to increase my wifi range by using some sort of PCMCIA antenna or something? Thanks for any advice! Regards, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I increased my range *a little* using an EZ-10 thing (see the EZ-10 web site). Basically, it uses tin-foil around the antenna on the base unit to reflect the signal, or push it forward. Considering its cost (free, with construction time about ten minutes) you might want to see if it helps a little. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:13:12 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Robert Bonomi wrote: > I've been in a Walmart precisely _once_ in my life (BB's are d*mn > hard to find in the big cities these days -- the kid at the local > hardware store said "what are BBs?" *sigh* Walmart is about the > *only* place in the area that has 'em. I wasn't going shooting, I > just needed a bunch of 'em as lightweight ball-bearings. Anyway ...) > In that store, and in *every* *other*store*of*any*type* that takes > 'mixed bag' (debit, credit, check, ATM) cards that I've been in in the > last circa 10 years, the card NEVER LEAVES THE CUSTOMER'S HAND. I beg to differ, Sir. At our Wal*Mart, you can swipe the card yourself but more often than not, out of habit, I hand the card to the cashier anyhow and she swipes it. Same with grocery stores, etc. Generally people do swipe the cards themselves but that is NOT always the case. Then TELECOM Digest Editor noted in partial response: > But in the customer service office, it is different. If you want to > purchase a money order for example, you cannot use a credit card, only > a debit card (bank/ATM card). So they want to take your card, look at > it, etc. When the computer finishes printing up your money orders or > your postage stamps (and other things you buy in that area) then the > customer service person swipes your card on her side of the counter. Well, yeah; if I'm giving you a cash equivalent (money order, for example), I'm going to make damned sure that the transaction goes through. So, yes, I'm going to take extra precautions to that end. I'm not, however, arguing that your Wal*Mart is wonderful. It's entirely possible that it is horrid. Just making a couple counterpoints to your points. Paul A Lee wrote: >> Why is it OK for the a big chain like Walgreen's (or CVS, >> Rite-Aid, etc.) to come into a town and drive the little >> independent drugstores out of business ... indeed you salute >> them for opening a new store in your downtown > More often than not, when a Rite Aid pharmacy replaces a little > independent drugstore", we acquire and "pour over" the pharmacy > business into a new or nearby existing Rite Aid store. I didn't know this. If the Rite Aid five minutes from my house didn't have absolutely horrendous customer service, this would be another reason to shop there. (Front-end is ok, but the pharmacy employees are all jerks. The other area Rite Aids have decent employees working for them, and good customer service, and I've complained to the regional manager about my neighborhood store and perhaps he's fixed things up by now.) The important thing is that, in this area, when Rite Aid bought the local Thrifty drug stores, they kept the Thrifty ice-cream counters! :) (You gotta have priorities!) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits Date: 23 Nov 2004 08:04:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote > Doing multiple charges against a card is simply *not* one of them. > The audit trail catches it at the end-of-shift, or over-night, at > worst. And the records point directly to the perp. An audit trail works only if someone actually reads and checks the audit trail. There have been many crimes of stealing because an audited wasn't conducted until a long time (sometimes years) after the transaction, or all the money finally disappeared. There was a recent case of an armored truck crew stealing from ATM machines they filled with cash. Apparently no one bothered to check how much cash was still in the ATM before they refilled it, so the crews could take that cash without accountability. For some reason, an awful lot of people today are terrified of simple income and balance sheet statements. Anyone involved in a business must read and understand these reports every month and watch for unusual transactions. From time to time a detailed external audit of every transaction is necessary. Many businesses -- large and small -- run into big trouble because no one is studying and understanding the monthly financial reports. > A cashier, and customer, _in_collusion_, can steal merchandise from > the store, by the simple expedient of the cashier 'failing to ring' > the item as it passes to the sacking area. Stores check for that by using (1) private detectives who come into a store and monitor employees and (2) CCTV cameras on the register. Stores that hire a lot of kids have to watch them giving free stuff to their friends or under-ringing. Apparently no one cares at all about youngsters selling cigarettes to their underage friends -- that practice is rampant. > Stealing money from the till is a real problem. There is a known > count (counted by _several_ people, including you) in the till when > you start, every sale is recorded, how much money is given in, and how > much change is given out, are also recorded. But is it checked by an independent person? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In business, the issuing and receiving checks, the gross amounts received and disbursed need to be compared with the invoices and vouchers by a separate person as well as by outside auditors. People set up a phony accounts payable account which is actually themselves. Auditing checks vs. separately prepared vouchers helps prevents that. > Bringing up the possibility of 'employee theft' early on, putting them > on the defensive -- was *not* particularly smart. At least, not if > you wanted their help in getting to the bottom of things. One regional convenience store chain got into hot water by taking a very aggressive approach with this. When they suspected an employee of theft (ie eating a bag of potato chips without paying for it) they pulled them into a back room and threatened them with severe criminal charges unless they confessed and pleaded guilty to a minor charge, which most employees did out of fear regardless if they actually stole. IIRC, a major national chain used lie-detectors on hiring employees or on existing employees suspected of theft. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Independence Walmart has some very young cashiers now and then and there was a problem where the kids were ringing up beer and cigarettes for their friends, etc. So does Marvins, but Walmart changed their system where any purchases of tobacco products have to be taken to *one single register* for handling. All tobacco products are stored at that one register, and whatever you ask for, the clerk gets it from the shelf and gives it to you (after payment). Beer on the other hand, because of its larger, bulky size can go through any register with your other purchases. I was in Walmart one day and they had all young kids at the registers. Some guy came though with his shopping cart full of stuff including a six-pack of some beer. The kid rings up *everything else* (moving the beer out the way on the conveyor belt, then he said into the overhead loudspeaker "twenty one! Register 7" and just stood there. The old biddy who works in the office there stuck her head out of the door, and looked over at him, then walked over to his register. *She* swiped the beer on the glass of the scanner, and put it in the plastic bags they use for customer merchandise, then turned the register back over to him, and waddled back to the office. The kid collected all the money but knew better than to touch or handle or 'be in possession of' the alcohol personally as Walmart stipulates. I guess the law requires them to have a person over the age of 21 make those sales. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: 23 Nov 2004 11:47:07 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , Thomas A. Horsley wrote: >> ...Frontier -- has at least some walk-in offices. I wonder what the >> Bells are so afraid of that non-Bells aren't ... > My impression has always been that they feel they are "The Phone > Company" and By God you ought to be using your $#@! phone to do > business with them. Many years ago I went to a local phone office to > try and solve some problem in the hope that speaking to a real person > would help, and all they did was put me on the phone with somebody > :-). "My phone doesn't work." "Sir, you need to call this number..." "But my phone doesn't work." --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:06:03 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Lisa Hancock wrote: > As to the costs of running an office, the rent in a small town main > street will be much less than in a downtown city. The incremental > cost of providing customer space would be modest. > Further, the office might double has an office for engineers and > contractors who have business with the phone company, so adding a few > POTS customers here and there is no big deal -- in other words, a > receptionist and waiting room are already there. In contrast, a big > phone company in a city could get flooded with customers and would > need much more expensive space. Further to my comments about Verizon still owning and operating retail stores: Verizon has a large operation here in the Victor Valley. Aside from the five or six COs they have within fifteen mintues of each other, they have a Verizon Plus retail store and a call center operation. The Verizon call center in Victorville handles 411 directory assistance for Verizon landline and Verizon Wireless customers, and presumably also customers of other LECs and wireless providers. In addition, the Victorville CO on Mojave Drive is much larger than you'd normally expect a CO to be, and since there are a large number of company trucks, etc., in its parking lot, I assume it's some sort of regional service center. So it makes sense to have a human presence here, and they have had one at least since GTE and probably since back in the ConTel days (the call center still has an old sign out front that reads "GTE Employee Parking"). SBC is a different animal. Ameritech Ohio used to be headquartered in downtown Cleveland, at Erieview Plaza, and the Ameritech building did have walk-up windows for customers. SBC, while still maintaining corporate offices at Erieview, no longer has the space for customers, although they might have a Cingular Wireless store there (but for some reason I recall the closest Cingular corporate store being a few mintues away). I believe this is SOP for SBC ... JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Sears and K-Mart From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:13:11 +0000 In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: [[.. munch ..]] > Beyond that, it is a matter of 'priorities'. Is 'cutting costs' more > important than 'customer convenience', or not? Everybody comes down > on a different side of that question on various things. Look at how > few companies have a live person answering the main phone number any > more, for one example. They figure that the cost savings of the d*mn > 'auto attendant' are 'worth' the increase in customer aggravation, and > wasted _customer_ time (after all *they* aren't paying for the > customer's time :). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yet, they have the temerity to wonder > 'why customers go postal' sometimes ... and your two reasons given for > why there are no more (or very few) public offices available any longer > does not explain how small independent telcos still manage to do it: Yes, it *does*. Repeating from the above paragraph: "It is a matter of 'priorities'. The smaller telco has decided the additional cost _is_ worth it. The big telco has made a different decision. > Making floor space available for chairs and the cost of rent is an > equal problem for them. And I would suppose theoretically the problem > of someone 'going postal' is also worth considering. Actually, it is _not_ an 'equal' problem, as far as costs. Yes, it is an expense, but the magnitude of the expense is _considerably_ different. Whether you look at it in absolute dollar cost per square foot, -or- in terms of the price they sell their service for. It's strange, but the cost of 'basic' service from a traditional telephone company varies by only a factor of about 2, nation-wide. Rental pricing for an 'equivalent' (in terms of customer accessibility -- locale, transportation, 'convenience', etc.) 'storefront' space encompasses a range of more than 15:1. > But why do you suppose the small, non-Bell telcos don't have those > problems, Who says they "don't" have those problems? The same issues exist. The dollar-value of the costs may be significantly different. The _perception_ by the company of maintaining the service may be that it *is* =worth= a higher cost. It's not that they "don't have" those problems, but they either do not _have_them_to_the_same_degree_, or have 'valued' customer convenience differently. _What_ they use to make the decision, is a different matter from _why_ somebody comes down on a specific _side_ of a given issue. And "how" they went about making that decision is yet another issue. > and can continue to operate their public facilities? The answer to that, as anyone with intelligence above that of an idiot can plainly see, is: "Because they _choose_ do do so." They have made a 'business decision' that the additional 'hard dollar' costs _are_ worth the 'intangible benefit' in "customer satisfaction". Other companies have made a _different_ determination regarding the relative benefits vs costs. Maybe the costs are different. Maybe the perception of 'value' is different. In one case they decided value outweighs costs. In the other case, they decides that costs were higher than the value derived. The issue is not one of "can" vs. "can't". but "chose to" vs. "chose not to". The answer to _any_ question -- in the business world, at least -- that starts off "Why don't they ...", is *always* "Money". When two businesses make a different decision on the same subject, it is because either their 'costs' are different, or the *perceived* value of the benefit to the company is different. > Do you think if SBC were to outsource all its 'customer service' > functions to China or India they would be able to get rid of all > their pseudo problems with finding good, cheap real estate? PAT] A question resting on a false assumption (i.e., that it is a 'pseudo problem') has no meaningful answers. That aside, one of the 'attractions' (to management) of 'off-shore' outsourcing of *anything* IS that 'costs' are lower, Often _dramatically_ lower. Many times enough lower to more than offset the increased costs of having the job done in a 'remote' location. The straight 'hard-dollar' economic-analysis makes such actions nearly _irresistible_. Only when one factors in the (sometimes -major-) negative impact on 'customer satisfaction' does _any_ question arise. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 02:38:34 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I have Packet8 because I could not get a local Vonage number, and they are a bit less expensive. It is good enough for me, although not quite landline quality. It is probably slightly better than cellular, but there is noticeable delay and degradation when talking to a cell phone, probably due to the double compression. I made one international call to Germany, which didn't last long enough to get a good notion of the quality, but the return call seemed to sound better, so I wonder about the quality of the transatlantic link. Soon after you get it you probably want to upgrade the firmware in the interface box. It is painless, and there are fixes and features that were not in the firmware as shipped. That may no longer be the case, but it doesn't hurt to make sure. ------------------------------ From: nstrom@ananzi.co.za (Nathan Strom) Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Date: 23 Nov 2004 07:46:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com rekingus@yahoo.com (reking) wrote in message news:: > Anyone know how I can retrieve a phone number for a line that I have > recently discovered within our business. > SBC is our carrier but they tell me I would have to have someone come > out and trace the line at a charge. Is there a way of determining the > nimber by using some code entered on the phone. If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try calling 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the calling phone. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now and it worked fine on my Vonage line, and also on my cell phone line. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 23 Nov 2004 11:02:08 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , jdj wrote: > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:12:34 -0500, Dan Lanciani wrote: >> My filters respond to every (seemingly) spam message with a note >> indicating how to bypass the filter if in fact the mail is not spam. >> (Actually they do this only once per sender per some months, but you >> get the idea.) I really can't just dump (seeming) spam in the bucket >> since there are a few false positives. But I get 1500+ spams per day >> and I can't look at them all. > Chances are that your filters are sending responses to forged > addresses. Occasionally I see messages like that and they are treated > like spam, since they have nothing to do with me and responding to > them is useless. They go to /dev/null. Until it's full. I am totally inundated these days with misidirected challenge/response messages and bounces from spammers that send out huge amounts of spam using my e-mail in the return address. It's got to the point where I just dump anything from mail-daemon or from postmaster addresses, and I just dump anything that looks like a C/R. When someone does a spam run with my return address, I will get ten to fifteen thousand bounces in a 24 hour period. This is very annoying. You _might_ do a lot better just to extract the first Received: line from the header and send a complaint to wherever that came from. For example, take the following procmail rule: # Comcast dynamic addresses :0 * ? /usr/local/bin/formail -xReceived: -uReceived: | grep client.comcast.net |cat $HOME/spam - | Mail -s "Your Spam" abuse@comcast.net We can basically be sure that if something comes from a dynamically allocated address on comcast, that it's spam from a zombie machine, so the false positive rate on this is basically zero. Real mail from comcast customers comes from the comcast mail server. Of course, Comcast doesn't care and they won't do anything about the complaints, but it will make you feel better to report the stuff anyway. And there are legitimate ISPs that do actually take care of problems, although these days they are increasingly in the minority. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Anyone Having any Luck With Google Ads? Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:05:24 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: puma@catbox.com Jeffrey Mattox wrote: > Pat: > [Please withhold my email address if you publish this.] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not had very good luck with them > to date. They seem to undercount hits to my various pages (based on my > examination of my logs) and some days they cannot come up with any > good ads at all. According to their figures, I am getting about 1.2 % > rate of impressions to clicks, but most people seem to get a lot > more. PAT] > I bet Google's hit count is more accurate regarding readership than > examining your logs. Although your logs are correct for pages served, > you cannot assume that every serve is to a human being. For example, > any spider or robot looking at your pages will appear as a hit in your > logs, but that robot will not trigger Google's hit counter because the > robot won't go to Google's site to fetch the ads. Depending on your web host, you can turn on something called 'referrer logs.' The referrer logs show WHERE the link to your page came from, and in the case of search engines often show the search keys that were used to find you. I often find it amusing to see what people used to find my pages. Knowing what keywords people actually used can help you put together the meta keyword and description tags in your pages, to make you even more findable. ie., if they put in 5 keywords and your tags only have two of them, maybe you should include the others for folks that only used THOSE. I also sometimes find other pages that have links to me that I didn't know about. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: EFF: Anti-Spam Measures Block Free Speech Date: 23 Nov 2004 13:23:14 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Barry Margolin wrote: > Where does it say that this is the reason why MoveOn.org's mail is > being blocked? One of the other problems that the white paper > mentioned is mailers that assume that any bulk email is spam -- but > legitimate mailing lists will necessarily send out bulk email. It doesn't. In fact, MoveOn.org's mail is blocked because they persist in sending huge amounts of mail out to people who never requested it. It's true that they are downstream of above.net, and it's true that a lot of folks do block above.net because they cater to so many spammers. So you can well imagine collateral damage resulting to legitimate customers of above.net. It's possible that it would have been the case if MoveOn.org was a legitimate customer, but they aren't. They are spammers, and therefore they get treated like spammers. The collateral damage issue is a serious one, but it's about the only way to get large ISPs to take the spam problem seriously. What is currently happening in Korea is a fine example of what happens when largescale blocking of spamming ISPs does not occur. > What bugs me is EFF's use of the phrase "free speech" to make this > sound like a 1st Amendment issue. The 1st Amendment only limits the > *government's* ability to curtail free speech. It doesn't require > organizations to facilitate any particular communications. And it certainly doesn't require ME to use MY resources to facilitate someone else's communications. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Persuaders From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:47:38 GMT The most fascinating aspect of TV advertising is to listen to TV executives telling their advertisers how effective TV ads are at influencing viewers one day, then see them in a Senate hearing the next day saying that violence on TV doesn't have any effect at all on viewers who are far too smart to confuse fiction and reality. I wish they would at least make up their minds about how influential TV really is :-). -- >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Deja Vu All Over Again Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:56:04 -0600 A message from my cousin, Ken Bryant of interest. From: "Ken Bryant" Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 11:21 PM Subject: Deja Vu all over again > Can you say Vietnam? Ah ... there ... I thought you could. > 40 years to the day since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. > More Troops May Be Needed in Iraq > Monday, November 22, 2004 > Senior military commanders told FOX News that they are considering a > slight increase in combat power in Iraq prior to that country's > elections at the end of January. > The Washington Post, citing unnamed military commanders, reported on > Monday that the top brass is considering increasing the total number of > combat forces to go after terrorists that fled Fallujah after the U.S. > and Iraqi-led offensive there. > U.S. and Iraqi troops continue to clear the last of the resistance from > Fallujah, the main rebel bastion that was stormed Nov. 8 in hopes of > breaking the back of the insurgency before the Jan. 30 election. > American commanders said U.S. and Iraqi forces killed more than 1,000 > enemy fighters during the eight-day battle there and found torture > chambers and the suspected headquarters of Al Qaeda-linked terrorist Abu > Musab al-Zarqawi. > The Pentagon last month ordered about 6,500 soldiers in Iraq to extend > their tours by up to two months. Military officers told the Post that > the exact number of extra troops needed is still being reviewed but > estimated it at the equivalent of several battalions, or about 3,000 to > 5,000 soldiers. The number of U.S. troops in Iraq fell to nearly 100,000 > last spring before rising to 138,000, where it has stayed since the > summer. > Senior commanders told FOX News that the increase being considered in > Iraq will be much like the increase seen in Afghanistan prior to those > elections, but on a bigger scale. > The troop movement in Iraq has always been a possibility, and now with > the success in stomping out much of the insurgency in Fallujah, one > senior commander said: "We have to keep the pressure on." > Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, said > Friday that military leaders will further assess the situation as time > goes on and will look at the impact of the Fallujah operation on the > entire country. Currently, the United States has 18 brigades in Iraq. > "We will expect, by using extensions of some troops that were only > planning on being over there for 10 months, extending them another two > months so that they still would be on the ground, you know, about a > year, and using that to add additional forces over there," Smith said. > "The issue, by the way, is not just numbers. The issue is really about > experienced troops during this period of time of expected increased > violence." > Smith postulated that about an additional brigade's worth of forces may > be needed but that number hasn't yet been finalized. It's not the > military's intent to keep troops in Iraq beyond a year, Smith said. A > brigade is usually 2,500 to 3,500 troops. > "If we believe the security situation requires that, we will make the > appropriate recommendation to the secretary and through our leadership > channels," he added. > Troop numbers could reach about 141,000 to 145,000, Smith said. > The military also hasn't ruled out using the U.S. strategic reserve > forces, he said. > "But again, I think too early to try and decide that until we really see > what's happening with the - after - in the aftermath of Fallujah." ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Last Laugh! Online Casino Buys Virgin Mary Sandwich for $28,000 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:06:58 EST MIAMI (Reuters) - An online casino won the eBay bidding for a decade-old cheese sandwich bearing what some people consider a likeness of the Virgin Mary and immediately began hawking Virgin Mary Grilled Cheese T-shirts. GoldenPalace.com's bid of $28,000 was the highest offer for the sandwich when bidding closed late on Monday, the Internet casino's Web site said. The seller, Fort Lauderdale, Florida resident Diana Duyser, says she made the cheese sandwich 10 years ago and after taking a bite, saw "the Virgin Mary staring back at me." In her eBay ad, Duyser said the sandwich has been kept in a plastic case for a decade and has developed no mold or bacteria. "It is like a miracle," she said. "I would like all people to know that I do believe that this is the Virgin Mary, Mother Of God," the ad said. "That is my solemn belief, but you are free to believe that she is whomever you like, I am not scamming anyone." GoldenPalace.com said on its Web site that the "sacred sandwich" had received more than 1.7 million hits since being posted on eBay. The company's chief executive, Richard Rowe, said the sandwich would be used to raise money for charity. The T-shirts, in various styles bearing a picture of the sandwich and a GoldenPalace.com logo, sell for $19.99. "We believe that everyone should be able to see it and learn of its mystical power for themselves," Rowe said. *** 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 Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Last Laugh! Ordering Pizza by Phone in 2008 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:52:35 -0600 This is so close to what is probably going to be happening in 2008 that I'm not sure how funny this really is or if it should be a last laugh. ORDERING PIZZA BY PHONE IN 2008 - Operator: Thank you for calling Pizza Hut. May I have your national ID number? Customer: Hi, I'd like to place an order. Operator: I must have your NIDN first, sir. Customer: My National ID Number, yeah, hold on, eh, it's 6102049998-45-54610. Operator: Thank you Mr. Smith. I see you live at 1742 Meadowland Drive, and the phone number is 494-2366. Your office number over at Lincoln Insurance is 745-2302 and your cell number is 266-2566. Email address is smith@home.net Which number are you calling from? Customer: Huh? I'm at home. Where'd you get all this information? Operator: We're wired into the HSS, sir. Customer: The HSS, what is that? Operator: We're wired into the Homeland Security System, sir. This will add only 15 seconds to your ordering time. Customer: (sighs) Oh well, I'd like to order a couple of your All Meat Special pizzas. Operator: I don't think that's a good idea, sir. Customer: Whaddya mean? Operator: Sir, your medical records and commode sensors indicate that you've got very high blood pressure and extremely high cholesterol. Your National Health Care provider won't allow such an unhealthy choice . Customer: What?!?! What do you recommend, then? Operator: You might try our low-fat Soybean Pizza.I'm sure you'll like it. Customer: What makes you think I'd like something like that? Operator: Well, you checked out 'Gourmet Soybean Recipes' from your local library last week, sir. That's why I made the suggestion. Customer: All right, all right. Give me two family-sized ones, then Operator: That should be plenty for you, your wife and your four kids. Your 2 dogs can finish the crusts, sir. Your total is $49.99. Customer: Lemme give you my credit card number. Operator: I'm sorry sir, but I'm afraid you'll have to pay in cash. Your credit card balance is over its limit. Customer: I'll run over to the ATM and get some cash before your driver gets here. Operator: That won't work either, sir. Your checking account is overdrawn also. Customer: Never mind! Just send the pizzas. I'll have the cash ready. How long will it take? Operator: We're running a little behind, sir. It'll be about 45 minutes, sir. If you're in a hurry you might want to pick'em while you're out getting the cash, but then, carrying pizzas on a motorcycle can be a little awkward. Customer: Wait! How do you know I ride a scooter? Operator: It says here you're in arrears on your car payments, so your car got repo'ed. But your Harley's paid for and you just filled the tank yesterday. Customer: Well, I'll be a #%#^^&$%^$@# Operator: I'd advise watching your language, sir. You've already got a July 4, 2003, conviction for cussing out a cop and another one I see here in September for contempt at your hearing for cussing at a judge Oh yes, I see here that you just got out from a 90 day stay in the State Correctional Facility. Is this your first pizza since your return to society? Customer: (speechless) Operator: Will there be anything else, sir? Customer: Yes, I have a coupon for a free 2 liter of Coke. Operator: I'm sorry sir, but our ad's exclusionary clause prevents us from offering free soda to diabetics. The New Constitution our country started using in 2006 prohibits this. Thank you for calling Pizza Hut. ------------------------------ 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 #563 ******************************