|
|
The Telecom Digest
Volume 29 : Issue 91 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds (Steven)
Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds (David Clayton)
Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds (Sam Spade)
Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds (David Clayton)
Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds (Sam Spade)
New iPhone Could End AT&T's U.S. Monopoly (Monty Solomon)
AT&T Prepares Network For Battle (Monty Solomon)
Pogue Reviews: Love It or Not? Looking at iPad From 2 Angles (Monty Solomon)
Baig: Verdict is in on Apple iPad: It's a winner (Monty Solomon)
Ihnatko Review: iPad is pure innovation - one of best computers ever (Monty Solomon)
Mossberg Apple iPad Review: Laptop Killer? Pretty Close (Monty Solomon)
Qwest DSL outage last weekend (Ted Lee)
Re: Distracted driving (Anonymous)
Re: New technology could warn drivers about cell phones (Robert Bonomi)
====== 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, 31 Mar 2010 21:04:42 -0700
From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds
Message-ID: <hp160t$to3$1@news.eternal-september.org>
David Clayton wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:03:30 -0400, Barry Margolin wrote:
>
>> In article <pan.2010.03.31.22.56.25.915912@myrealbox.com>,
>> David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>>
>
> Failing a skills test should be an obvious message to people that they
> actually do not have the ability to do what they believe they can.
>
> I have done advanced car control courses which clearly showed everyone on
> the courses what their limitations were, and a lot of us now try and stay
> within them.
>
> Maybe it won't change the behaviour of a lot of people, but it's better
> than the situation that now exists where fools believe that they are
> capable of doing things that they obviously shouldn't - despite the law.
>
> --
> Regards, David.
>
> David Clayton
> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
> Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
> measure of how many questions you have.
>
Tell that to AT&T, I'm getting tired of having to take the test to keep
my Red Card with them and be allowed to work. Same test same answers
and I pass it each time, in the years I have done contract work for them
and others I have never had a problem or caused any major outages.
--
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: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:51:58 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds
Message-ID: <pan.2010.04.01.22.51.55.379250@myrealbox.com>
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:04:42 -0700, Steven wrote:
.........
> Tell that to AT&T, I'm getting tired of having to take the test to keep my
> Red Card with them and be allowed to work. Same test same answers and I
> pass it each time, in the years I have done contract work for them and
> others I have never had a problem or caused any major outages.
But do you know of those that don't pass the test?
Having regular tests like these is just about necessary now in any
specialised area because of the significant minority that don't do the
right thing.
As an example, we have recently had a major political uproar here over a
government insulation scheme where dodgy contractors ended up causing
fires and electrocutions by not following the law. The trouble is that
there are still a lot of similar problem caused by allegedly qualified
electricians and insulation installers as well, and I'm not sure if these
people ever have to re-qualify after receiving their initial
accreditation.
Unfortunately it's human nature for a significant number of people to let
standards slip in any industry, and the only solution at the moment is the
"lowest common denominator" fix where everyone is required to do things
that may not be necessary for a lot of them - like regular
re-qualification.
If there's a better solution to maintaining standards in all sorts of
areas, I'd like to hear about it.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 06:34:06 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds
Message-ID: <ih1tn.1693$vC3.379@newsfe04.iad>
David Clayton wrote:
>
> Put together a difficult, realistic test (you know, like the ones that
> pilots have to do before being accredited to fly) that requires many
> dollars and lots of time to pass, and then the "talented few" may well
> qualify to use a phone while driving.
Depends on the pilot. Private pilots are subject to minimal testing and
some never seek further training after a fairly easy training course.
Professsion pilots are a different matter (for good operators at least)
>
> Such tests will need to be repeated every few years to ensure that the
> skills are still there - no "licence for life" rubbish - which also won't
> be cheap.
How about every six months like the professional pilots do?
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:42:07 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds
Message-ID: <pan.2010.04.01.22.42.04.641132@myrealbox.com>
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 06:34:06 -0700, Sam Spade wrote:
> David Clayton wrote:
>
>
>> Put together a difficult, realistic test (you know, like the ones that
>> pilots have to do before being accredited to fly) that requires many
>> dollars and lots of time to pass, and then the "talented few" may well
>> qualify to use a phone while driving.
>
> Depends on the pilot. Private pilots are subject to minimal testing and
> some never seek further training after a fairly easy training course.
> Professsion pilots are a different matter (for good operators at least)
>>
>> Such tests will need to be repeated every few years to ensure that the
>> skills are still there - no "licence for life" rubbish - which also
>> won't be cheap.
>
> How about every six months like the professional pilots do?
Whatever is reasonable, the whole concept that someone who passes a test
that is directly reliant on a set level of physical and mental skills at
one point in time and is then assumed to retain those skills forever is
absurd.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 06:37:36 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Most people can't talk on a cellphone and drive safely, study finds
Message-ID: <Ak1tn.1695$vC3.1089@newsfe04.iad>
Steven wrote:
>
> That will not help, pilots use cell phone and laptops and both are
> violations of airline policy and Federal law.
>
How do you know airline pilots use cell phones in flight?
As to laptops, some airlines require their use during certain phases of
flight to make complex airport performance calculations. The abuse
indicdent at NWA got blown way out of contect, because the laptops were
being used for personal purposes plus NWA did not have a certified
laptown performance program, unlike some airlines.
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:14:37 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: New iPhone Could End AT&T's U.S. Monopoly
Message-ID: <p062408d6c7da3ea9e1da@[10.0.1.4]>
New iPhone Could End AT&T's U.S. Monopoly
By YUKARI IWATANI KANE, TING-I TSAI And NIRAJ SHETH
MARCH 30, 2010
Apple Inc. plans to begin producing this year a new iPhone that could
allow U.S. phone carriers other than AT&T Inc. to sell the iconic
gadget, said people briefed by the company.
The new iPhone would work on a type of wireless network called CDMA,
these people said. CDMA is used by Verizon Wireless, AT&T's main
competitor, as well as Sprint Nextel Corp. and a handful of cellular
operators in countries including South Korea and Japan. The vast
majority of carriers world-wide, including AT&T, use another
technology called GSM.
With Apple developing a phone with CDMA capability, its exclusive
U.S. arrangement with AT&T dating to 2007 appears set to end.
Verizon Wireless, owned by Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone
Group PLC, declined to comment. An AT&T spokesman said: "There has
been lots of incorrect speculation on CDMA iPhones for a long time.
We haven't seen one yet and only Apple knows when that might occur."
Apple declined to comment.
Separately, Apple plans to release a new version of its current
iPhone this summer, continuing its practice of annual upgrades at
about the same time of year, said people briefed on the matter. The
model is likely to be thinner and have a faster processor, two people
familiar with the device said.
...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304370304575152242601774892.html
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:14:47 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: AT&T Prepares Network For Battle
Message-ID: <p062408d7c7da3eb3e420@[10.0.1.4]>
MARCH 31, 2010
AT&T Prepares Network For Battle
By NIRAJ SHETH
With a new version of the iPhone in the works, the clock is ticking
for AT&T Inc. to get its much-criticized network ready for the
looming battle.
The carrier has taken a beating from consumers who have complained
about poor coverage in major cities including New York and San
Francisco. Now, AT&T is racing to reduce its dropped calls and speed
up Web-surfing before Apple Inc. releases a new version of the iPhone
that could run on Verizon Wireless's network.
In mid-December, AT&T executives set up a 100-day plan to
dramatically improve the company's network in densely-populated
cities, according to people familiar with the plan. Since then, AT&T
has added new network spectrum to better handle traffic, repositioned
antennas to improve reception in office towers and wired more
neighborhood cell towers with faster connections.
But even with its recent efforts, the network still has not met
customers' quality standards everywhere. While some third-party tests
have given AT&T nods for having a faster network, a poll last month
by J.D. Power & Associates found AT&T still ranks poorly against
Verizon Wireless in call quality.
Some analysts say the scramble to add more capacity might still fall
short. "They haven't fixed the network and they're going to see a
huge exodus to Verizon" when it gets the iPhone, said Edward Snyder,
managing director of Charter Equity Research, a financial research
firm that studies the cellular phone industry.
AT&T defended its wireless efforts, and said this year it expects to
spend $2 billion more on build-outs for its wireless network and add
twice as much capacity as it did in 2009. A spokesman declined to
provide details on its spending last year.
It argues that its growing pains with the iPhone position it to
provide better service than any rivals picking up the smart phone for
the first time.
...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052702304739104575154072784198614.html
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:15:14 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Pogue Reviews: Love It or Not? Looking at iPad From 2 Angles
Message-ID: <p062408d8c7da3ecdea09@[10.0.1.4]>
Reviews: Love It or Not? Looking at iPad From 2 Angles
By DAVID POGUE
March 31, 2010
In 10 years of reviewing tech products for The New York Times, I've
never seen a product as polarizing as Apple's iPad, which arrives in
stores on Saturday.
"This device is laughably absurd," goes a typical remark on a tech
blog's comments board. "How can they expect anyone to get serious
computer work done without a mouse?"
"This truly is a magical revolution," goes another. "I can't imagine
why anyone will want to go back to using a mouse and keyboard once
they've experienced Apple's visionary user interface!"
Those are some pretty confident critiques of the iPad - considering
that their authors have never even tried it.
In any case, there's a pattern to these assessments.
The haters tend to be techies; the fans tend to be regular people.
Therefore, no single write-up can serve both readerships adequately.
There's but one solution: Write separate reviews for these two
audiences.
Read the first one if you're a techie. (How do you know? Take this
simple test. Do you use BitTorrent? Do you run Linux? Do you have
more e-mail addresses than pants? You're a techie.)
Read the second review if you're anyone else.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/technology/personaltech/01pogue.html
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:15:20 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Baig: Verdict is in on Apple iPad: It's a winner
Message-ID: <p062408d9c7da3ed6ec11@[10.0.1.4]>
Verdict is in on Apple iPad: It's a winner
By Edward C. Baig, USA TODAY
March 31, 2010
Months of speculation, feverish lust, an überhyped prize that could
disrupt the status quo of computing. You wouldn't be the first person
to compare the run-up to Saturday's arrival of the iPad to the
prelaunch mania that surrounded the iPhone. Apple's freshly conceived
slate-style computer promises to influence the media, mobile
entertainment and publishing industries the way its close cousin the
iPhone has affected wireless.
The first iPad is a winner. It stacks up as a formidable
electronic-reader rival for Amazon's Kindle. It gives portable game
machines from Nintendo and Sony a run for their money. At the very
least, the iPad will likely drum up mass-market interest in tablet
computing in ways that longtime tablet visionary and Microsoft
co-founder Bill Gates could only dream of.
For more than a decade, nobody, not even a deep-pocketed company like
Microsoft, has successfully cracked the tablet market. Apple, based
on my tests over several days, is likely to be the first. Back in
2001, Gates predicted tablets would be the most popular form of PCs
sold in America within five years. That obviously didn't come to
pass. Apple's roots with the tablet form of computing date at least
to its ill-fated Newton, an early 1990s personal digital assistant
pushed by then-CEO John Sculley and later killed by Steve Jobs.
These days, several large computing companies have shown off or
announced some sort of slate-type computer, including Dell,
Hewlett-Packard and Lenovo. Netbook pioneer Asus told Forbes that it,
too, plans to roll out tablets. But Apple's new tablet will do the
most to spawn renewed interest in the category and could tap into
markets as varied as medicine and education. This week,
Pennsylvania's Seton Hill University announced plans to give every
full-time student this fall an iPad. Piper Jaffray analyst Gene
Munster expects 2.7 million iPads to be sold in 2010 and 8 million
next year. Endpoint Technologies analyst Roger Kay ups the sum to
about 4 million units the first year.
An often-asked question after Jobs unveiled the tablet at the end of
January was: What is iPad's purpose for being? I answered that
question by surfing the Web, watching the movies Up and Michael
Jackson's This Is It, reading the late Sen. Edward Kennedy's True
Compass, playing Scrabble and an accelerometer-driven game called
RealRacing HD, and boning up on the periodic table of elements.
The iPad is larger than a smartphone but smaller than a typical
laptop. Depending on your perspective, the space between is either
fertile ground for an electronic device or a no-man's land. Even
Apple seems unsure to what degree the iPad may hurt sales of its
MacBook or MacBook Pro notebooks.
...
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2010-03-31-apple-ipad-review_N.htm
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:15:34 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Ihnatko Review: iPad is pure innovation - one of best computers ever
Message-ID: <p062408dbc7da3ee2eeed@[10.0.1.4]>
Review: iPad is pure innovation - one of best computers ever
By ANDY IHNATKO
Chicago Sun-Times
March 31, 2010
No company can generate as much hype around a product launch as
Apple. But that's perfectly OK because no company is also nearly as
successful at producing a new product that can justify almost any
level of excitement that precedes it.
They don't do it with every product launch, but bloody hell: they've
done it with the iPad.
It's a computer that many people have been wanting for years: a slim,
ten-hour computer that can hold every document, book, movie, CD,
email, picture, or other scrap of data they're ever likely to want to
have at hand; with a huge library of apps that will ultimately allow
it to fulfill nearly any function; and which nonetheless covers the
dull compulsories of computing (Mail, the web, and Microsoft
Office-style apps) so well that there will be many situations in
which this 1.5-pound slate can handily take the place of a laptop bag
filled with hardware and accessories.
In fact, after a week with the iPad, I'm suddenly wondering if any
other company is as committed to invention as Apple. Has any other
company ever demonstrated a restlessness to stray from the safe and
proven, and actually invent things?
...
http://www.suntimes.com/technology/ihnatko/2134139,ihnatko-ipad-apple-review-033110.article
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:15:40 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Mossberg Apple iPad Review: Laptop Killer? Pretty Close
Message-ID: <p062408dcc7da3eeaf0c1@[10.0.1.4]>
Apple iPad Review: Laptop Killer? Pretty Close
March 31, 2010
by Walter S. Mossberg
For the past week or so, I have been testing a sleek, light,
silver-and-black tablet computer called an iPad. After spending hours
and hours with it, I believe this beautiful new touch-screen device
from Apple has the potential to change portable computing profoundly,
and to challenge the primacy of the laptop. It could even help,
eventually, to propel the finger-driven, multitouch user interface
ahead of the mouse-driven interface that has prevailed for decades.
But first, it will have to prove that it really can replace the
laptop or netbook for enough common tasks, enough of the time, to
make it a viable alternative. And that may not be easy, because
previous tablet computers have failed to catch on in the mass market,
and the iPad lacks some of the features-such as a physical keyboard,
a Webcam, USB ports and multitasking-that most laptop or netbook
users have come to expect.
If people see the iPad mainly as an extra device to carry around, it
will likely have limited appeal. If, however, they see it as a way to
replace heavier, bulkier computers much of the time-for Web surfing,
email, social-networking, video- and photo-viewing, gaming, music and
even some light content creation-it could be a game changer the way
Apple's iPhone has been.
The iPad is much more than an e-book or digital periodical reader,
though it does those tasks brilliantly, better in my view than the
Amazon Kindle. And it's far more than just a big iPhone, even though
it uses the same easy-to-master interface, and Apple says it runs
nearly all of the 150,000 apps that work on the iPhone.
It's qualitatively different, a whole new type of computer that,
through a simple interface, can run more-sophisticated, PC-like
software than a phone does, and whose large screen allows much more
functionality when compared with a phone's. But, because the iPad is
a new type of computer, you have to feel it, to use it, to fully
understand it and decide if it is for you, or whether, say, a netbook
might do better.
So I've been using my test iPad heavily day and night, instead of my
trusty laptops most of the time. As I got deeper into it, I found the
iPad a pleasure to use, and had less and less interest in cracking
open my heavier ThinkPad or MacBook. I probably used the laptops
about 20% as often as normal, reserving them mainly for writing or
editing longer documents, or viewing Web videos in Adobe's Flash
technology, which the iPad doesn't support, despite its wide
popularity online.
My verdict is that, while it has compromises and drawbacks, the iPad
can indeed replace a laptop for most data communication, content
consumption and even limited content creation, a lot of the time. But
it all depends on how you use your computer.
...
http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20100331/apple-ipad-review/
***** Moderator's Note *****
With all the hype surrounding this product, you'd think that someone
would ask what seems to me to be an obvious question: "Why should
anyone care"?
It's a computer, after all. It's obviously well-marketed, but that
doesn't change the fact that it's still just a computer. I think
computers have been around long enough for users to be able to look at
them rationally, and that infers looking at them in light of what, if
anything, they do to make our lives better. Apple's new design is,
IMNSHO, just another electronic leash that ties its owner to a global
network of pitchmen and spammers and media glitz, without doing
anything to give those same owners the options of privacy, quiet time,
or better insights into our world.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:04:38 -0500
From: Ted Lee <TMPLee@MR.Net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Qwest DSL outage last weekend
Message-ID: <TMPLee-037B1B.13043701042010@mx01.eternal-september.org>
Does anyone have any details (what went wrong) about a Qwest DSL outage
at least in the Minneapolis area last weekend? My internet connection
was out from sometime Friday night until late Saturday, then again most
of Sunday, and part of Monday (if I remember right.) At first my
"modem" showed a good DSL/Internet connection and when I called the
automated trouble number at Qwest was told my circuit was fine. A very
accommodating technician at my ISP (working from home on Saturday) did
some checking, was pretty sure his equipment was OK, but found something
fishy at the DSL/ATM level. So I called Qwest back and waded through
the prompts to talk to a person -- she acknowledged that in fact they
were having a problem (affecting more than me -- it sounded like quite a
bit more than me), couldn't give an ETR, and couldn't explain why the
automated circuit test indicated everything was OK. (I am guessing the
circuits were fine -- just misconnected or misrouted -- so an end-to-end
test on my "circuit" got a good response -- just that it wasn't to my
modem!) Shortly thereafter the modem lights did go on blink and when I
recalled the automated trouble number that day and the next two days it
did acknowledge a problem.
I haven't been able to find any mention of the outage anywhere.
Ted Lee
Minnetonka, MN
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:47:05 -0400
From: Anonymous <anonyous@telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Distracted driving
Message-ID: <004401cad1e9192dd660$4b898320$@telecom-digest.org>
Bill,
I'm not sure that a group on a telecom board can really bring anything
new to this topic, but as an active reserve police sergeant, I
certainly recognize some problems with the use of mobile telephones
while driving. It certainly reduces my overall driving skills
somewhat; probably yours as well.
Your brother Tom can rail on, as can I, about fatal accidents ... but
in 26 years of police work, I still see MORE problems out there with
teens driving overconfidently, and drunk drivers in general, then I do
with mobile phone users.
Some phone users are better, some worse. Many cause accidents
... many more near misses.
So do, in fairly equal numbers to phone users:
* Distracted soccer Moms (but heavens, we can't speak ill of them, now
can we?)
* Tipsy drivers just under the limit
* Outright drunks
* Couples arguing
* Larger (3-5) groups on lunch hour from an office, animatedly
discussing office politics
* Tired drivers on freeways (phones probably REDUCE those fatalities
via keeping them awake)
* Visitors to an area negotiating unfamiliar and unique situations
like roundabouts.
I write tickets to these groups freely, whenever I see them commit a
minor infraction. It's difficult and controversial to prove
distraction, so I don't bring it up. I can, although, prove crossing
the line, failure to signal, failure to come to a full stop, etc.
Picking on phone users seems to be low hanging fruit; moms are off
limits, drunks seem to get a special pass by society (less now but
still commonly) cause we all seem to like a snort now and then, etc.
No one seems to even consider the other groups.
I see NO difference in handset vs. hands-free use, personally. So few
people drive with 2 hands on the wheel that the issue is really moot.
I think it is an acceptable 'compromise' by the industry to mollify
those that wanted an outright ban.
We don't need more laws ... we just need better parenting so more
people obey the ones we have. Golden rule and all that.
Regards,
Anon
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:34:00 -0500
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: New technology could warn drivers about cell phones
Message-ID: <xr2dne32AtLFgijWnZ2dnUVZ_tydnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <barmar-758116.02432531032010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> .
> .
> It's understandable that Jack Bauer might not feel he has time to
>pull over when that clock is ticking, but most other characters on TV
>are not under such intense time pressure.
>
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>I just want to know what cell plan Jack uses: His cell phone works
>after nuclear bombs go off!
Heck, that's an easy one to answer!
"Everybody knows" (even though it isn't true) that the IP network was designed
to continue to function even in the event of a nuclear attack.
Thus, he's "obviously" using a VoIP phone.
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 (14 messages)
|
or 