|
|
Message Digest
Volume 29 : Issue 64 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Re: breep breep, was Clueless Woman Calls
Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA
Sint Maarten's Migration into the NANP has been DELAYED Somewhat
It's that time again in North America
Re: It's that TIME again in North America
Re: It's that time again in North America
Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Re: Prison to Test Cellphone Jamming
Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Re: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Re: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Re: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
AT&T CEO Sees Metered Pricing In Future, No iPad Issue
====== 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: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 10:46:44 -0800
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Need minor part for 2500 phone
Message-ID: <4B8EAE94.8010703@thadlabs.com>
On 3/3/2010 6:22 AM, Sam Spade wrote:
>> [...]
>> 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.
> [...]
> Frys has one:
>
> http://www.frys.com/search?search_type=regular&sqxts=1&query_string=caller+id+box&cat=0
Amazing! Entering "caller id box" explicitly to Fry's search box on
their website at 8PM PST last night found nothing as I wrote shortly
afterwards. I wonder if my failed search was "flagged" and alerted
someone to check inventory?
Search engines are getting smarter; see the March 2010 issue of WIRED,
page 96 onwards. I need to do a "Fry's run" this week and I'll ask
if that's what might have happened.
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:12:03 -0800
From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <hmmfqj$4pk$1@news.eternal-september.org>
John Mayson wrote:
(Moderator snip)
> As a techie I sometimes forget just how forbidding technology can be
> to some people. Back when my son was in Boy Scouts we were at a
> meeting and I saw a Blackberry sail across the room. It was another
> parent. He had just bought a brand new Blackberry and was trying to
> transfer contact information from his previous phone and it wasn't
> working. Turns out he had already thrown away his old phone. He
> simply could not understand why he needed the old phone to get the
> information off of it. He's a very successful, intelligent man. But
> he just could not wrap his head around that. It's not like his data
> was in the cloud. This was several years ago before the idea of "the
> cloud" had really taken off. His rationalization about why he
> shouldn't have to have physical possession of his old phone to get the
> data off it made no sense to me, but apparently made perfect sense to
> him. He then shared with me that he owned half-a-dozen digital
> cameras because he couldn't figure out how to get the pictures off of
> them. When the camera got full he'd buy a new one. I wanted to ask
> him if he bought a new car every time he ran out of gas.
>
> To put a telecom angle back on this, I now understand why some people
> continue to use a traditional land-line phone without any features and
> perhaps a cassette-based answering machine. It's simple and they know
> how to use it.
I have a friend that has a Palm 650 and is now upgrading to a 755P:
when she got it she had Verizon disable the call waiting [because] she
thinks it is rude. I some what agree with that, also text, not sure
about that since I use it for business, also a few other features. I
don't know the reason she even got that phone unless she likes the
picture/ringing CID.
Verizon looked at here like she was crazy, it is not that she does not
know or like tech features, she is a very well trained and smart
programmer.
- -
The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co.
***** Moderator's Note *****
I have a form of call waiting too: if someone calls my house, they
sometimes hear a quaint audible signal known as "busy tone". It means
they have to wait until I'm done with my previous call.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: 4 Mar 2010 15:49:49 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: breep breep, was Clueless Woman Calls
Message-ID: <20100304154949.84321.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
> I have a form of call waiting too: if someone calls my house, they
> sometimes hear a quaint audible signal known as "busy tone". It
> means they have to wait until I'm done with my previous call.
That's the advanced "call defer" feature. It alerts callers with a
special tone to tell them that if they call back later, they can get
your undivided attention.
R's,
John
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:11:17 -0800
From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <hmopjp$vl7$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Steven wrote:
> John Mayson wrote:
>
> (Moderator snip)
>
>> As a techie I sometimes forget just how forbidding technology can be
>> to some people. Back when my son was in Boy Scouts we were at a
>> meeting and I saw a Blackberry sail across the room. It was another
>> parent. He had just bought a brand new Blackberry and was trying to
>> transfer contact information from his previous phone and it wasn't
>> working. Turns out he had already thrown away his old phone. He
>> simply could not understand why he needed the old phone to get the
>> information off of it. He's a very successful, intelligent man. But
>> he just could not wrap his head around that. It's not like his data
>> was in the cloud. This was several years ago before the idea of "the
>> cloud" had really taken off. His rationalization about why he
>> shouldn't have to have physical possession of his old phone to get the
>> data off it made no sense to me, but apparently made perfect sense to
>> him. He then shared with me that he owned half-a-dozen digital
>> cameras because he couldn't figure out how to get the pictures off of
>> them. When the camera got full he'd buy a new one. I wanted to ask
>> him if he bought a new car every time he ran out of gas.
>>
>> To put a telecom angle back on this, I now understand why some people
>> continue to use a traditional land-line phone without any features and
>> perhaps a cassette-based answering machine. It's simple and they know
>> how to use it.
>
> I have a friend that has a Palm 650 and is now upgrading to a 755P:
> when she got it she had Verizon disable the call waiting [because] she
> thinks it is rude. I some what agree with that, also text, not sure
> about that since I use it for business, also a few other features. I
> don't know the reason she even got that phone unless she likes the
> picture/ringing CID.
> Verizon looked at here like she was crazy, it is not that she does not
> know or like tech features, she is a very well trained and smart
> programmer.
>
> - - The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down
> today? (c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co.
>
>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I have a form of call waiting too: if someone calls my house, they
> sometimes hear a quaint audible signal known as "busy tone". It means
> they have to wait until I'm done with my previous call.
>
> Bill Horne
> Moderator
>
If I make a call, both at home and on the cell phone and it is
important, I will disable call waiting. On my home phone I get about 4
or 5 calls a week, and most of the time it is a junk call, if I'm home
when it comes in and it is a real person I hit them with Milli-Watt,
then gets their attention. If it is a recording I just hand up on it. I
have a few of those old Radio Shack CID boxes that allows you to block
calls, plus I bought one of the new ones which allow you to program what
numbers will even ring the phone, I'm in the process of programming the
numbers that I want to get through, any not listed will not even ring
the phones.
--
The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co.
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:32:45 -0500
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <op.u82r4vwditl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 12:11:17 -0500, Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
wrote:
> ... [long snip] ...
> ...have a few of those old Radio Shack CID boxes that allows you to
> block calls, plus I bought one of the new ones which allow you to
> program what numbers will even ring the phone, I'm in the process of
> programming the numbers that I want to get through, any not listed
> will not even ring the phones.
That won't work for this household, as we get calls occasionally from
relatives abroad; these don't send any sort of number identification,
and we certainly don't want to have ringing disabled for such calls.
Cheers, -- tlvp
- -
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
***** Moderator's Note *****
What we need is a combined cross-platform solution. Let's hook up an
Internet server with a "port knocking" access code, and use it to
enable your incoming phone line. If someone overseas wants to talk
with you, they just access the right port on your server, and then
they get - oh, say ten minutes? - to make the call.
Patent Pending, of course: it's my idea, and you have to pay me for
it. ;-)
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:25:58 -0500
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <op.u82rtkieitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:12:03 -0500, Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
wrote:
> ... (multiple snips) ...
>
> I have a friend that has a Palm 650 and is now upgrading to a 755P:
> when she got it she had Verizon disable the call waiting [because]
> she thinks it is rude. I some what agree with that, ...
>... (again) ...
>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I have a form of call waiting too: if someone calls my house, they
> sometimes hear a quaint audible signal known as "busy tone". It
> means they have to wait until I'm done with my previous call.
For years the only part of my LEC's "TotalPhone" bundle I've ever
subscribed to was CallerID, currently at a $10/mo surcharge over my
basic local service.
Call-waiting? Thanks, but no thanks! Same rudeness reasoning as above.
Recently my LEC offered me a bundle of basic local service + CallerID
+ Call-waiting at at a rate only $4/mo over my raw basic local
service's, i.e., the bundle cost $6/mo less than basic local service
+ $10 CallerID.
Penny-pincher that I am, I took 'em up on it -- and even earned an
extra $5/month "valued customer" discount for the next 24 months as
well, so for a while I pay a buck less per month for the bundle than
I'd been paying for just the basic local service portion hitherto.
Oh yes, and I learned about the free *70 for per-call
CancelCallWaiting on outbound calls :-) . As for inbound callers? Any
second call trying to interrupt a first call will get studiously
ignored, unless that first call was an unanticipated sales-droid :-) .
Yup, everyone has his price: I welcome the $72/year annual rate
reduction.
Cheers, -- tlvp
- -
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
***** Moderator's Note *****
Caller ID can be blocked on incoming calls as well, but you have to
pay for Three-party conference capability in order to use it. I
decided to just keep it simple.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 21:17:09 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA
Message-ID: <p062408a5c7b4c059cbdd@[10.0.1.4]>
Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA
Fred Von Lohmann
Electronic Frontier Foundation
February 2010
This document collects reported cases where the anti-circumvention
provisions of the DMCA have been invoked not against pirates, but
against consumers, scientists, and legitimate competitors. It will be
updated from time to time as additional cases come to light. Previous
versions remain available.
Executive Summary
Since they were enacted in 1998, the "anti-circumvention" provisions
of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), codified in section
1201 of the Copyright Act, have not been used as Congress envisioned.
Congress meant to stop copyright infringers from defeating
anti-piracy protections added to copyrighted works and to ban the
"black box" devices intended for that purpose.
In practice, the anti-circumvention provisions have been used to
stifle a wide array of legitimate activities, rather than to stop
copyright infringement. As a result, the DMCA has developed into a
serious threat to several important public policy priorities:
* The DMCA Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.
Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to
stifle free speech and scientific research. The lawsuit against 2600
magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten's team of
researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov
have chilled the legitimate activities of journalists, publishers,
scientists, students, programmers, and members of the public.
* The DMCA Jeopardizes Fair Use.
By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools
that can be used for circumvention, the DMCA grants to copyright
owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the public's fair use
rights. Already, the movie industry's use of encryption on DVDs has
curtailed consumers' ability to make legitimate, personal-use copies
of movies they have purchased.
* The DMCA Impedes Competition and Innovation.
Rather than focusing on pirates, some have wielded the DMCA to hinder
legitimate competitors. For example, the DMCA has been used to block
aftermarket competition in laser printer toner cartridges, garage
door openers, and computer maintenance services. Similarly, Apple has
used the DMCA to tie its iPhone and iPod devices to Apple's own
software and services.
* The DMCA Interferes with Computer Intrusion Laws.
Further, the DMCA has been misused as a general-purpose prohibition
on computer network access, a task for which it was not designed and
to which it is ill-suited. For example, a disgruntled employer used
the DMCA against a former contractor for simply connecting to the
company's computer system through a virtual private network ("VPN").
...
http://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca
http://www.eff.org/files/eff-unintended-consequences-12-years.pdf
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 18:45:01 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mark J. Cuccia" <markjcuccia@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Sint Maarten's Migration into the NANP has been DELAYED Somewhat
Message-ID: <255616.36851.qm@web31102.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
The other day, I'd heard that Sint Maarten's incorporation into the NANP
might be delayed somewhat. The permissive dialing was to have been on
31-May-2010, mandatory on 30-November-2010. They are presently a part of
the Netherlands Antilles +599, but that political entity is to be
dissolved by the end of 2010, each current member island to have its own
direct relations of one form or another with the Dutch Kingdom. Aruba
broke from the Netherlands Antilles political entity back in the early
or mid 1980s, although is still associated with Holland itself,
directly, but they requested and received their own ITU Country Code
+297 at the time some 25 or so years ago.
Sint Maarten (but NOT the French side of the island, the French Antilles
side known as Saint-Martin) has been assigned Area Code 721 under the
NANP (Country Code +1), and will eventually be recognized by "the world"
as +1-721-. All of their landline, CLEC, and wireless "POTS" office
codes are of the 5xx format, and their local numbers are seven-digits.
Thus, their +599-5xx-xxxx numbers will change to +1-721-5xx-xxxx.
However, there is a Cellular "POTS" 555 office code, and according to
the ITU's website of national numbering plans, Sint Maarten was also
recently assigned a 511 cellular "POTS" office code. These would NOT be
allowed to continue as such under the NANP.
NeuStar-NANPA issued PL-396 back in early October 2009 announcing that
Sint Maarten will be joining the NANP according to the schedule of dates
referenced above. There was a chart/list of 54x office codes, but these
are the codes of the landline ILEC "Telem". NONE of the other 5xx codes
for the CLECs or wireless (not even the wireless carrier associated with
landline ILEC Telem) were shown on that chart. The NANPA PL of Oct.2009
also stated that the test-number would be announced "at a later date".
I have heard that +1-721-622-7836 could be the test-number, since
622-7836 spells "MAARTEN". And there are NO +599-6xx office codes
ANYWHERE ELSE in the Netherlands Antilles, and obviously not in
Sint Maarten itself since uses the 5xx c.o.code range.
However, there was still NO further PL from NANPA, nor anything at the
ITU's website, nor anything from Telcordia-TRA regarding the additional
details on Sint Maarten's migration into the NANP. The end of February
2010 is three months before the intended permissive dialing date, and
that is the time-frame when the test-number is usually activated for
new area codes in the US, Canada, and even the Dominican Republic.
Sometimes, test-numbers have been activated even much sooner than the
3-months period before the effective overlay date, or if a split then
the permissive dialing date, but for the past several years (after 2000
or so, things in the later 1990s were very confusing!), the test-numbers
are activated no later than three months before permissive dialing of a
split or the effective date of POTS office codes (pre)assigned (whether
or not any are assigned codes initially) in an overlay.
But even though +1-721-MAARTEN could likely be the test-number, there
has still been NO formal/official/public announcement that this will
indeed be the test-number, and the permissive dial date for +1-721
(alongside six more months of continued access as +599) for Sint Maarten
(current 5xx office codes) is now LESS than three months away!
Well, NANPA has REMOVED the effective date of 31-May-2010 from their
website's page "Planned NPAs Not Yet In Service",
http://www.nanpa.com/nas/public/plannedNpasNotInServiceReport.do?method=displayPlannedNpasNotInServiceReport
AND that NANPA webpage also has a second PL referenced for Sint Maarten,
PL-404, which can be found from http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_404.pdf
This PL-404 dated today, Wednesday 03-March-2010.
The new Planning Letter #404 simply states the following:
"The Regulatory Authority of the Government of St. Maarten, NA has
requested that the introduction of the 721 NPA be delayed. At this time,
additional information concerning a new implementation schedule is not
available. Another Planning Letter will be issued when the Authority
has established new dates for implementation."
No proposed rescheduled permissive nor mandatory dates are indicated
whatsoever. So, it's now a "wait and see". HOPEFULLY, all of the bugs
and such that have caused this postponement from the previously
anticipated dates will be worked out soon, especially information on
what the test-number will be (+1-721-MAARTEN ??), as well as the dates
for the test-number... and that the rescheduled permissive dial period
will be AT LEAST six months. Also, that full documentation be supplied
to Telcordia-TRA and the ITU, in addition to NeuStar-NANPA.
Mark J. Cuccia
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 20:28:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: It's that time again in North America
Message-ID: <362469.59593.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Here in North America we will leave standard time and will adjust our time one hour ahead for daylight saving (no S) time at 02:00 Sunday 7 March 2010.
There still are a few telephone numbers where you can get the time of day (and sometimes local temperature and even a short weather forecast.) The numbers I have are the following:
Appleton, WI 920 734-0123
Baltimore MD 410 844-1234
Boston MA 617 637-1234 (also 617 NERVOUS)
Chattanooga TN 423 265-1411
Washington DC 202 844-1234
Houston TX 713 755-7171 (installed by Harris County gov)
OKC OK 405 599-1234
Orlando FL 407 646-3131
Portland ME 207 775-4321
US Naval Observatory 202 762-1401*
WWV CO 303 499-7111*
WWVH HI 808 335-4363*
*Very accurate
You can also go to http://time.gov or http://timeticker.com or http://timeanddate.com for accurate time.
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 15:36:03 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mark J. Cuccia" <markjcuccia@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: It's that TIME again in North America
Message-ID: <168628.10407.qm@web31105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
<362469.59593.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Joseph Singer <joeofseattle at yahoo dot com> wrote:
> Here in North America we will leave standard time and will adjust
> our time one hour ahead for daylight saving (no S) time at 02:00
> [local time] Sunday 7 March 2010.
Ummm..... the US and Canada (where Daylight Saving (no 's') Time is
observed) will "spring-forward" the FOLLOWING weekend,
Sunday 14 March 2010, NOT this weekend.
I would have thought it was the first Sunday in March (according to the
new/revised schedule a few years ago), but I double-checked several
sources, and NO it is NOT the first Sunday in March, but rather it is
the SECOND Sunday in March when the US/Canada springs-forward into
Daylight Saving (no 's') Time.
We do FALL-BACK to Standard Time on the FIRST Sunday in November though,
according to the current schedule adopted a few years ago. It's now
AFTER Halloween. It used to be the Sunday BEFORE (or ON) Halloween in
most places in the US and Canada which observed Daylight time, so
depending on the latitude and where east/west one was in their time-zone,
it was already dark at 6pm when the kids would just start "trick-or-treating".
Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina
***** Moderator's Note *****
I have an alarm clock - a Scott model SCR120 - which sets its time
automagically with a built-in WWVB receiver, and adjusts for Daylight
Saving Time automatically as well.
But, it's hard-wired to switch to Daylight Saving Time on the OLD
schedule, not the new one, and it drives me nuts twice a year, because
I must manually switch it to another time zone to change it to EDT on
the new start date, and then I must switch back to the "correct"
time zone on the old start date. It's the same process in reverse
come the fall.
I know I can buy a new one, but I'm a cheap Yankee, so I'll ask if anyone
knows how to reset this clock to the new DST switchover dates, or,
failing that, how to disable automatic DST changes entirely.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:57:10 -0500
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: It's that time again in North America
Message-ID: <op.u82s9kw7itl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 23:28:29 -0500, Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Here in North America we will leave standard time and will adjust
> our time one hour ahead for daylight saving (no S) time at 02:00
> Sunday 7 March 2010.
>
> There still are a few telephone numbers where you can get the time
> of day (and sometimes local temperature and even a short weather
> forecast.) The numbers I have are the following:
>
> Appleton, WI 920 734-0123
> Baltimore MD 410 844-1234
> Boston MA 617 637-1234 (also 617 NERVOUS)
> Chattanooga TN 423 265-1411
> Washington DC 202 844-1234
> Houston TX 713 755-7171 (installed by Harris County gov)
> OKC OK 405 599-1234
> Orlando FL 407 646-3131
> Portland ME 207 775-4321
> US Naval Observatory 202 762-1401*
> WWV CO 303 499-7111*
> WWVH HI 808 335-4363*
>
> *Very accurate
>
> You can also go to http://time.gov or http://timeticker.com or
> http://timeanddate.com for accurate time.
Here's another local time/temp item for your collection:
New Haven CT 203 776-2210 (aka 203 SPRINGS)
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:59:30 -0800
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Message-ID: <SFRjn.94238$G_2.16100@newsfe15.iad>
tlvp wrote:
> Thad Floryan wrote:
>
>> On 2/28/2010 8:17 PM, danny burstein wrote:
>>
>>> [Queens Chronicle]
>>>
>>> Penalties for phone spoofers a possibility
>>>
>>> rest:
>>> http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20412517&BRD=2731&PAG=461&dept_id=574905&rfi=6
>>>
>>
>>
>> Missing from that article (and every other similar one I've seen over the
>> years) is: HOW is the phone spoofer actually identified and caught?
>
>
> Also missing is any explanation for why it's the caller, and not the
> switch at the caller's CO, with the capability to determine what to
> send as caller-ID.
>
> To put it another way, why should Caller-ID, ANI, and CNID not all be
> the same, and un-spoofable by the calling party?
>
> Cheers, -- tlvp
>
No privacy marker for ANI.
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:01:07 -0800
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Message-ID: <nHRjn.94239$G_2.82588@newsfe15.iad>
John Levine wrote:
>>>Missing from that article (and every other similar one I've seen over the
>>>years) is: HOW is the phone spoofer actually identified and caught?
>
>
> How about answering the call, recording it, and getting them to say
> who they are?
>
>
>>To put it another way, why should Caller-ID, ANI, and CNID not all
>>be the same, and un-spoofable by the calling party?
>
>
> Caller-ID and CNID are the same thing. ANI can legitimately be
> different, with the usual example being a call from a PBX with ANI of
> the main billing number, and CNID of the extension.
>
> As to why they can be spoofed, it's a combination of laziness and the
> design not matching the way the phone system now works. The laziness
> part is telcos and PBXes. Telco switches can and should be programmed
> so they know the range of numbers assigned to a PBX and replace the
> CNID with its main number if it's out of range. Some telcos do that,
> some don't.
>
> The design problem is that CNID was designed for a closed network in
> which all of the sources of CNID were trustworthy or could at least be
> verified. In today's wild'n'crazy world of VoIP, inbound and outbound
> calls are often handled directly, and there is no way to tell what
> number should go with what call. For example, I have a VoIP phone on
> my desk. It has three inbound numbers, [served from] California,
> Quebec, and England. Outbound calls go through a cheap VoIP service in
> Germany. When I make calls, the CNID is pretty random, sometimes
> comes through as private, somtimes as noise characters, sometimes as
> digits. I would be happy to give them one of my inbound numbers to
> use as the CNID, but the provider offers no way to do that, and they
> couldn't tell whether I was lying.
>
> R's,
> John
>
I have Vonage with my primary number in Washington, DC and a virtual
number in California. Vonage always delivers my DC number.
Date: 4 Mar 2010 11:29:35 -0500
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Prison to Test Cellphone Jamming
Message-ID: <hmon5f$sj6$1@panix2.panix.com>
John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>
>> I thought prisoners had to call collect.
>
> It could vary from state to state or even county to county for
> jails. Texas apparently has a friends and family plan.
> http://www.texasprisonphone.com/ The FAQ specifies a land line phone
> and the registration form says it's for security reasons. There are
> a variety of payment plans including recipient pays and caller pays.
>
> Have we made it so difficult for a prisoner to make a legal call
> that smuggled cell phones have become the path of least resistance?
That's part of it, but part of it is also that some prisoners want to
say things that they don't want recorded. Prison phone calls are not
private, and if you want to call a friend to have your defense
attorney bumped off, you probably don't want it recorded... so you use
an unauthorized cellphone.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:32:33 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Message-ID: <4B9018E1.6@horne.net>
The city of Loma Linda, California, is now offering insurance against
its residents having to pay per-incident fees when Fire Department
medical teams answer 911 calls.
According to Jeff Bender, who is the Fire Chief for the City of Loma
Linda, California, residents of the city now have the option of paying
a yearly "voluntary subscription" and enrolling in a program that will
cover the costs of Fire Department medical personnel responding to 911
calls. Those residents who pay the fee - currently Forty-Eight
Dollars per year - will be exempt from having to pay Three-Hundred
Dollars per incident (Four Hundred for non-residents) when medical
personnel respond to an emergency.
In a telephone interview yesterday, Chief Bender assured me that there
is no provision being made to alter the 911 system so that subscribers
to the program receive priority treatment, and the Chief said that his
department will continue to respond to all calls in the same way it
has in the past. However, people who receive services and are not
subscribers of the "Fire Medical" program will be expected to pay for
every support incident, and the city will be turning uncollected bills
over to dept-collection agencies.
Local municipalities have been billing accident victims for ambulance
and paramedic services for a while now: my wife got a bill from the
fire department in a neighboring community after she took an ambulance
ride a couple of years ago. What's different in Loma Linda is that the
city is willing to insure citizens against the costs of medical
services directly, without them having to rely on their medical
insurance carriers to cover the expense. This is, IMNSHO, an admission
by the department that the costs of collecting its fees directly from
insurance carriers have proven too high to be practical, and may also
be evidence of a deteriorating insurance coverage pattern in general,
as HMO's and other penny-pinchers try to nickel-and-dime their
customers to death.
Of course, such municipal maneuvering is nothing new: "The Ancient
Political Fishlike Smell" that Ogden Nash wrote about so long ago will
continue to spread its ordure among twenty-first century voters, just
as it always has. Call it what you will, it's another tax, as
inevitable as death and cost externalization.
Bill Horne
Details here:
http://www.lomalinda-ca.gov/asp/Site/Departments/FireDepartment/MedicalServices/intro.asp
--
(Filter QRM for direct replies)
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:29:42 -0800
From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Message-ID: <hmpfp9$pac$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Bill Horne wrote:
> The city of Loma Linda, California, is now offering insurance against
> its residents having to pay per-incident fees when Fire Department
> medical teams answer 911 calls.
>
> According to Jeff Bender, who is the Fire Chief for the City of Loma
> Linda, California, residents of the city now have the option of paying
> a yearly "voluntary subscription" and enrolling in a program that will
> cover the costs of Fire Department medical personnel responding to 911
> calls. Those residents who pay the fee - currently Forty-Eight
> Dollars per year - will be exempt from having to pay Three-Hundred
> Dollars per incident (Four Hundred for non-residents) when medical
> personnel respond to an emergency.
>
> In a telephone interview yesterday, Chief Bender assured me that there
> is no provision being made to alter the 911 system so that subscribers
> to the program receive priority treatment, and the Chief said that his
> department will continue to respond to all calls in the same way it
> has in the past. However, people who receive services and are not
> subscribers of the "Fire Medical" program will be expected to pay for
> every support incident, and the city will be turning uncollected bills
> over to dept-collection agencies.
>
> Local municipalities have been billing accident victims for ambulance
> and paramedic services for a while now: my wife got a bill from the
> fire department in a neighboring community after she took an ambulance
> ride a couple of years ago. What's different in Loma Linda is that the
> city is willing to insure citizens against the costs of medical
> services directly, without them having to rely on their medical
> insurance carriers to cover the expense. This is, IMNSHO, an admission
> by the department that the costs of collecting its fees directly from
> insurance carriers have proven too high to be practical, and may also
> be evidence of a deteriorating insurance coverage pattern in general,
> as HMO's and other penny-pinchers try to nickel-and-dime their
> customers to death.
>
> Of course, such municipal maneuvering is nothing new: "The Ancient
> Political Fishlike Smell" that Ogden Nash wrote about so long ago will
> continue to spread its ordure among twenty-first century voters, just
> as it always has. Call it what you will, it's another tax, as
> inevitable as death and cost externalization.
>
> Bill Horne
>
> Details here:
> http://www.lomalinda-ca.gov/asp/Site/Departments/FireDepartment/MedicalServices/intro.asp
>
> --
> (Filter QRM for direct replies)
A lot of cities are doing it at least in California, it is around
$40.00 a year. What I want to know is what are the government agencies
doing with the the money they get on our property tax bills that are
listed and should be going to the fire departments? My guess it that
they are using it for outher projects or just stuffing their pockets,
the City of Riverside was putting money collected in street lighting
fees [even in areas of the city that don't have street lights] for
police services and putting money away for a rainy day as they put it;
then giving themselves a 20% pay raise.
--
The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co.
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 21:26:38 -0500
From: Eric Tappert <e.tappert.spamnot@worldnet.att.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Message-ID: <06q0p5hlsd4c6gf1qbcl7p23je5jttgqoi@4ax.com>
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:29:42 -0800, Steven
<diespammers@killspammers.com> wrote:
>Bill Horne wrote:
>> The city of Loma Linda, California, is now offering insurance against
>> its residents having to pay per-incident fees when Fire Department
>> medical teams answer 911 calls.
>>
>> According to Jeff Bender, who is the Fire Chief for the City of Loma
>> Linda, California, residents of the city now have the option of paying
>> a yearly "voluntary subscription" and enrolling in a program that will
>> cover the costs of Fire Department medical personnel responding to 911
>> calls. Those residents who pay the fee - currently Forty-Eight
>> Dollars per year - will be exempt from having to pay Three-Hundred
>> Dollars per incident (Four Hundred for non-residents) when medical
>> personnel respond to an emergency.
>>
>> In a telephone interview yesterday, Chief Bender assured me that there
>> is no provision being made to alter the 911 system so that subscribers
>> to the program receive priority treatment, and the Chief said that his
>> department will continue to respond to all calls in the same way it
>> has in the past. However, people who receive services and are not
>> subscribers of the "Fire Medical" program will be expected to pay for
>> every support incident, and the city will be turning uncollected bills
>> over to dept-collection agencies.
>>
>> Local municipalities have been billing accident victims for ambulance
>> and paramedic services for a while now: my wife got a bill from the
>> fire department in a neighboring community after she took an ambulance
>> ride a couple of years ago. What's different in Loma Linda is that the
>> city is willing to insure citizens against the costs of medical
>> services directly, without them having to rely on their medical
>> insurance carriers to cover the expense. This is, IMNSHO, an admission
>> by the department that the costs of collecting its fees directly from
>> insurance carriers have proven too high to be practical, and may also
>> be evidence of a deteriorating insurance coverage pattern in general,
>> as HMO's and other penny-pinchers try to nickel-and-dime their
>> customers to death.
>>
>> Of course, such municipal maneuvering is nothing new: "The Ancient
>> Political Fishlike Smell" that Ogden Nash wrote about so long ago will
>> continue to spread its ordure among twenty-first century voters, just
>> as it always has. Call it what you will, it's another tax, as
>> inevitable as death and cost externalization.
>>
>> Bill Horne
>>
>> Details here:
>> http://www.lomalinda-ca.gov/asp/Site/Departments/FireDepartment/MedicalServices/intro.asp
>>
>> --
>> (Filter QRM for direct replies)
>
> A lot of cities are doing it at least in California, it is around
> $40.00 a year. What I want to know is what are the government agencies
> doing with the the money they get on our property tax bills that are
> listed and should be going to the fire departments? My guess it that
> they are using it for outher projects or just stuffing their pockets,
> the City of Riverside was putting money collected in street lighting
> fees [even in areas of the city that don't have street lights] for
> police services and putting money away for a rainy day as they put it;
> then giving themselves a 20% pay raise.
Actually this type of thing is common in my rural east coast area.
Many local ambulance and paramedic squads are operated by volunteer
outfits (many have some full time paid folks, particularly to cover
the daytime calls). While the local government gives them some money,
it is never enough to cover costs, so they solicit donations. The
deal is that you donate a subscription fee (about $35-50 per year
depending on how many are in the family) and if you need them they'll
settle for whatever your insurance company pays and they don't bill
you for the rest. Not a subscriber? Then you get a bill for the
difference between the insurance payment and their real bill. Since
the volunteer squads are independent of the government, there is no
diversion of funds to other government services.
The local volunteer fire companies also solicit donations to balance
their budgets, but they don't bill you or the insurance company for
putting out a fire...
ET
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 19:47:36 EST
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Loma Linda California Now Selling 911 Insurance
Message-ID: <5b0d8.ba54c17.38c1aea8@aol.com>
In a message dated 3/4/2010 2:37:25 PM Central Standard Time,
bill@horneQRM.net writes:
> Local municipalities have been billing accident victims for
> ambulance and paramedic services for a while now: my wife got a bill
> from the fire department in a neighboring community after she took
> an ambulance ride a couple of years ago. What's different in Loma
> Linda is that the city is willing to insure citizens against the
> costs of medical services directly, without them having to rely on
> their medical insurance carriers to cover the expense. This is,
> IMNSHO, an admission by the department that the costs of collecting
> its fees directly from insurance carriers have proven too high to be
> practical, and may also be evidence of a deteriorating insurance
> coverage pattern in general, as HMO's and other penny-pinchers try
> to nickel-and-dime their customers to death.
In the Oklahoma City and Tulsa metropolitan area the ambulance service
is provided by a contracted organization set up for the purpose, and
it bills users directly. The price for an emergency call is around
$800.
However, most municipalities in the Oklahoma City metropolitan area
now have a plan where for a fee billed on your water/sewer bill, there
is no charge for ambulance service. In some of the municipalities the
fee is optional, in others it is mandatory, as is the case in my
municipality. The ambulance service, set up as a governmental
authority, still bills your insurance company, but eats any amount
beyond that if you're enrolled in the plan. The fee is something less
than $10 a month, as I recall.
There has never been free (taxpayer paid) ambulance service in this
area, although the ambulance service gets a subsidy from the
municipalities.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:06:59 -0600
From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (PV)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <LsKdnQD6X4xuvQ3WnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@supernews.com>
John Mayson <john@mayson.us> writes:
> I'm still trying to decide just how naive she really was. If she
> thought to go buy a wireless extender that tells me she sort of knew
> she was accessing someone else's wifi. But to call into Leo's show,
> wow, maybe she really is that lost.
Nah, she wasn't lost at all. She was hoping there was some technical
fix that would let her continue to steal wifi. She admitted as much on
the call.
She thought she was entitled to steal. A leech, not clueless. *
--
* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something
like corkscrews.
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:04:07 -0500
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Clueless Woman Calls Tech Show When Her Stolen Wi-Fi Disappears
Message-ID: <op.u82qs514itl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 16:06:59 -0500, PV <pv+usenet@pobox.com> wrote:
> John Mayson <john@mayson.us> writes:
>> I'm still trying to decide just how naive she really was. If she
>> thought to go buy a wireless extender that tells me she sort of knew
>> she was accessing someone else's wifi. But to call into Leo's show,
>> wow, maybe she really is that lost.
>
> Nah, she wasn't lost at all. She was hoping there was some technical
> fix that would let her continue to steal wifi. She admitted as much
> on the call.
>
> She thought she was entitled to steal. A leech, not clueless. *
More likely, she thought wi-fi was some sort of birth-right, like air
or water. Sure, you can buy your wi-fi service from an ISP, just as
you can buy bottled water, but why do so if, like the air you breath
or the water from your tap, it's just there, free for the taking?
Cheers, -- tlvp
- -
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
***** Moderator's Note *****
Well, I've made my position clear already. Using a resource that the
owner chooses not to safeguard is, to my mind, "acceptable use".
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 21:44:20 -0500
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: NYS "bill" in works to outlaw phone ID spoofing
Message-ID: <MPG.25fa3a1029bf47c4989ca9@news.eternal-september.org>
In article <20100303155145.34908.qmail@simone.iecc.com>, johnl@iecc.com
says...
> How about answering the call, recording it, and getting them to say
> who they are?
I've not recorded [them], but [I have] asked them to identify, and for
a mailing address. They either laugh or they hang up.
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:18:40 -0000
From: Wes Leatherock <wesrock@aol.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: [sbcepr] AT&T CEO Sees Metered Pricing In Future, No iPad Issue
Message-ID: <hmp4j0+c6ho@eGroups.com>
This is forwarded from a list made up mostly of SWC (now AT&T) retirees.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
"None" <dennisuzzell@prodigy.net> wrote:
Interesting concept(s) on wireless usage...
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/att-ceo-backs-metered-billing-sees-no-ipad-woes-2010-03-02?siteid=nbsh
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 (22 messages)
|
or 