|
|
Message Digest
Volume 29 : Issue 62 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Catalina Island to the SoCal mainland
Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Re: Speaking of microwave...
Re: Channel islands, was More about 5E remote from Catalina Island
Need minor part for 2500 phone
Re: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Re: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Re: US school district spied on students through webcams, court told
Re: Catalina Island to the SoCal mainland
Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
====== 28 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
===========================
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. Geoffrey Welsh
===========================
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 20:32:20 -0800
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Catalina Island to the SoCal mainland
Message-ID: <4B8C94D4.8050507@thadlabs.com>
On 3/1/2010 3:00 PM, Steven wrote:
> dreamsofowls@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>> [...]
>> No, it wasn't that easy, I've not added all the shenanigans from
>> Verizon and the local company. As Verizon tech support told me,
>> you're too close to the tower to get a signal, you'll have to
>> replace your telephone. But it works fine in Roseville CA, right
>> under the tower there..
>
> Years ago (before I retired from GTE/Verizon), I was working in
> Idyllwild and right across from the CO there was a cell site, We were
> unable to make cell calls from the CO, we had to go across the street,
> we were told it was because we were below the tower.
> [...]
Odd, I had no such problems in San Mateo CA on the 10th (top) floor of
the "Crossroads" office complex at US-101 and California Hwy 92. Not
only was every cell phone vendor's gear atop the building, so was all
the police, fire and sheriff radio gear. And on the 9th floor (beneath
me) there was a company developing "something" for cellphones and they
had their own set of "cell towers" operating low-power on that floor.
5 bars was the norm on everyone's cell phone no matter which carrier,
AT&T, T-mobile, Verizon, etc. Less than a mile-away, though, the local
AT&T store was nearly in a "black hole" and they finally had to move
their operations to another location (27th street and El Camino) to be
able to demonstrate product; that was strange because I could see the
(old) AT&T store from the roof of the building -- direct line-of-sight
to the Safeway shopping center flanking El Camino and Hwy 92.
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 20:47:06 -0800
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Message-ID: <4B8C984A.5010102@thadlabs.com>
On 3/1/2010 5:32 PM, Wesrock@aol.com wrote:
> [...]
> The NBC affiliate in Oklahoma City has an antique appraisal segment on
> the news each Wednesday that the party calls in to seek to show their
> stuff reaches a recording and the anchor warns that when they call you
> back the caller ID will show 111-111-1111 so you'll know it's not an
> unwanted call.
>
> I don't know how that will identify it as not spam because spam calls
> also have come in with the same spoofed caller ID
Agreed. I've seen 111-111-1111 and a variety of 800, 888, 877, and 866
numbers spam-spoofed but what really annoys me is seeing my own number
as the caller. Needless to say, I never answer any of those and they've
stopped for at least several months now.
One thing I do is ask people from what number they would be calling me
so I can have that number in my "phone book" as a known caller; most
companies and people are receptive to this idea after I assure them I
will answer the phone when called and not hassle them with voice mail
(which is a benefit to me, too, since AT&T's cellular voice mail is
the worst system I've ever had the displeasure of using: poorly designed
menu system, poor voice quality, too-fast prompts, etc etc a real mess
and my only gripe about AT&T Mobility). It's only when I'm driving that
I let known callers go to voice mail and I'll usually return the call
when safe to do so without even listening to any voice mail.
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 05:36:28 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Message-ID: <hmi84s$37d$2@reader1.panix.com>
In <3acfd.63ab4c4e.38bdc4c2@aol.com> Wesrock@aol.com writes:
>
> The NBC affiliate in Oklahoma City has an antique appraisal segment
> on the news each Wednesday that the party calls in to seek to show
> their stuff reaches a recording and the anchor warns that when they
> call you back the caller ID will show 111-111-1111 so you'll know
> it's not an unwanted call.
>
> I don't know how that will identify it as not spam because spam
> calls also have come in with the same spoofed caller ID
I recently had some tests at a hospital. During the prep they
explained that, as part of quality assurance, I'd be getting
a phone call from them in about a week.
And.... to comply with HIPAA [a] privacy issues regarding
medical care, she explained, the caller ID would not
be the hospital, but would be (iirc) that same 111-111-1111,
and could I please answer....
(Since she had a big needle with her I didn't argue the point).
[a] HIPAA = The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act of 1996. Aka Kennedy-Kassebaum (the bill sponsors).
- -
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
***** Moderator's Note *****
They spoof their CID to comply with HIPAA? THAT's what they said?
That's the most transparent and insulting pile of bull I've ever
heard!
They're not trying to comply with HIPAA: they're trying to channel all
callbacks into their overseas paid-by-the-call-barely-speaks-English
billing/renewals/our-medical-deities-can't-be-bothered voice mail
system!
HIPAA?? BULL!
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 07:33:54 -0800 (PST)
From: stan <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Speaking of microwave...
Message-ID: <d3c9cf7d-581d-4149-b4e4-41718458e178@f35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 1, 4:23 pm, tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlL...@att.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 08:15:39 -0500, earle robinson
>
> <earler.rem...@remove.gmail.com> wrote:
>> LaGuardia, while mayor until 1945, changed the name of 6th Avenue [to]
>> Avenue of the Americas. [It was a] mistake because it was a cumbersome
>> name, and everyone still said 6th Avenue. Even LaGuardia admitted the
>> error, alas never corrected. Thus, other than for postal addresses, no
>> one speaks of Avenue of the Americas.
>
> And a later mayor made the same mistake for a stretch of 7th Avenue,
> hoping to dub it Fashion Avenue. Only the street signs themselves now
> say it that way, not the locals ... nor even the tourists :-) .
Recollection that 'back in the 1950s' Bell Canada and ATT used long
haul TD-2 microwave transmission systems in the 2000 megahertz (2.0
gig) band. Not sure what the bandwidth (number of telephone or TV
channels they were capable of). These days 2.4 gig. is used for
cordless home phones, microwave ovens etc.
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 07:58:30 -0800 (PST)
From: stan <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Channel islands, was More about 5E remote from Catalina Island
Message-ID: <3aec9492-51b0-450d-be79-d60d33b20d41@d2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 27, 5:34 pm, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:
>> They are integrated with the UK financial system, but not part of the
>> UK and not subject to UK or EU taxes. If you are doing business in
>> the UK, but you're not subject to UK taxes because you're not a UK
>> resident, Jersey's where you probably do your banking.
>
>> This means they have a lot more need for high-tech communication than
>> your typical offshore island. No wonder they have all the fiber.
>
>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>> If I'm not a UK resident, and therefore not subject to UK taxes, why
>> wouldn't I just do my banking in London?
>
> Because the banks would collect taxes and you'd have to try to get
> them refunded. I do have an account in the UK, and I have here a tax
> certificate saying that last year they withheld £102.38 from the
> interest they paid me. In the US I can credit that small amount
> against my US taxes but for larger amounts and other countries, it's a
> lot more complicated.
Large volumes of digital traffic being monitored by computers, eh? If
so, one could post numerous 'false messages', spattered with words
which might attract attention, such as bombing, explosion, Taliban,
Islam, religious-zealots, right-wing extremists, liberal, communist,
socialist, anti-governemnt etc. etc. That should keep CIA busy! Then
the 'real' message would be coded and seemingly innocent.
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 08:04:19 -0800 (PST)
From: stan <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Message-ID: <b6286e5d-b9ea-4f47-84fe-95dab2973581@19g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>
Our Bell System 2500 phone is missing one of the small white plastic
plungers that press down the 'on hook' switch when the handset is
placed on the cradle. Only one is needed to restore the phone to
original health and reasonably good condition!
Would much welcome advice as to possible source. TIA
Date: 2 Mar 2010 18:33:26 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Message-ID: <20100302183326.16031.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
> Our Bell System 2500 phone is missing one of the small white plastic
> plungers that press down the 'on hook' switch when the handset is
> placed on the cradle. Only one is needed to restore the phone to
> original health and reasonably good condition!
>
> Would much welcome advice as to possible source. TIA
This is the kind of stuff that long time Digest supporter Mike Sandman
sells at www.sandman.com
R's,
John
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 19:32:39 EST
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Message-ID: <80943.5c17b11a.38bf0827@aol.com>
In a message dated 3/2/2010 4:02:30 PM Central Standard Time,
johnl@iecc.com writes:
>> Our Bell System 2500 phone is missing one of the small white plastic
>> plungers that press down the 'on hook' switch when the handset is
>> placed on the cradle. Only one is needed to restore the phone to
>> original health and reasonably good condition!
>>
>> Would much welcome advice as to possible source. TIA
>
> This is the kind of stuff that long time Digest supporter Mike Sandman
> sells at www.sandman.com.
Mention of Mike Sandman brings to mind that the other day I was doing
a search on Caller ID boxes and Mike's website popped up with a
notation that he did not carry low-end Caller ID boxes because they're
readily available in hardware stores and drug stores.
I thought so, too, until I started looking for one (low-end) in those
types of stores and couldn't find one.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 07:04:46 -0800 (PST)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: US school district spied on students through webcams, court told
Message-ID: <9a286ab9-f6a8-4dcb-88ba-184e74793fb0@y11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 19, 11:08 am, Monty Solomon <mo...@roscom.com> wrote:
> Pennsylvania district accused of using remote-control laptops to
> photograph teenage students at home without their knowledge
On Tuesday, March 2 the Inqr reported:
Parents groups oppose class-action suit on laptops
A group of Lower Merion and Harriton High School parents will meet
tonight to discuss ways to derail the possibility that a federal
lawsuit over laptop spying could lead to a lengthy and expensive
class- action case against their district. [Many parents in the
school district feel a lawsuit is the wrong way to resolve the issue.]
For full article please see:
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20100302_Parents_groups_oppose_class-action_suit_on_laptops.html
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:28:37 -0600
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Catalina Island to the SoCal mainland
Message-ID: <cMudna_6_sGYHhDWnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <pan.2010.02.27.22.38.40.880158@myrealbox.com>,
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 01:09:21 -0600, GlowingBlueMist wrote:
>........
>> And I thought we had fun at Ramstein AFB in Germany with a microwave link
>> shooting across the runway. Everything worked perfectly until those pesky
>> C5 planes parked in the wrong place. The tail fin stuck up higher than
>> the microwave beam. We had to call the tower to have them "move the
>> &#^%~* plane" a couple of times a month.
>
> I recall a story an ex-workmate once told me (years ago now) when he
> was in the Australian Army in the late 1960's and part of a squad that
> set up mobile microwave point-to-point links.
>
> They (apparently) once were told to set up a link from Point "A" to
> Point "B", but unfortunately there was a hill in the way blocking the
> line of sight, so (apparently) their new officer - when informed of
> the problem and how microwave links only work when the dishes can
> "see" each other came up with a solution - and ordered them to take
> two dishes to the hill and just connect them
> back-to-back...... directly..... with no repeater equipment.....
>
> It is always a lot easier in the military to follow orders than try to
> argue with your "superiors", so they did what they were told.... with
> predictable results..... :-)
>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> Well, that sounds like it might have worked with a big enough dish. We
> used to put reflectors in the "Near field" of microwave stations, so
> that the actual antenna could be at ground level, with just a
> "billboard" on the tower. The FCC finally outlawed them; I don't know
> why. Anyway, is what David describes possible in theory?
Possible? Sure! One dish captures incoming signal and focuses it
into a waveguide, the waveguide 'pipes' it to the other unit where it
is bounced off the second dish, and on towards the destination.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_repeater for more detailed
info.
IIRC, such a dual-dish hook-up is going to have a "theoretical
_minimum_" loss of 6db, and, in practice, the net insertion loss is
generally considerably higher.
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 20:06:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <p06240884c7b3666b4213@[10.0.1.4]>
Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears [VIDEO]
Yeah, everyone has stolen Wi-Fi at one point or another, but not
everyone has called into a tech show in order to complain about the
fact that someone put the kibosh on said stealing.
Meet Jennifer, she had been unwittingly yoinking Wi-Fi for more than
a year and a half when the gravy train ran out, after which she
called into Leo Laporte's Tech Guy radio show in a state of utter
confusion.
After hitting YouTube this weekend - the show aired on Saturday - the
video depicting Laporte interviewing the confused woman has gone
viral, racking up 122,661 views at the time of this post.
...
http://mashable.com/2010/02/22/stolen-wifi-confusion/
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition 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 Bill Horne. 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.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
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
Copyright (C) 2009 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.
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 The Telecom digest (11 messages)
|
or 