|
|
The Telecom Digest for April 14, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 103 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Cell Phones That Protect Against Deadly Chemicals (Thad Floryan)
Cellular network no longer just for phones (Thad Floryan)
Interesting Trivia (Steven)
Re: Please do not change your password (John Mayson)
Disney World (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon) (Mark Cuccia)
Re: Disney World (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon) (Wes Leatherock)
Zenith/Enterprise/WX (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon) (Mark Cuccia)
Re: Zenith/Enterprise/WX (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon) (Wes Leatherock)
Re: Mexico shutting down 25.9 Million cellphones (David Clayton)
Re: Please do not change your password (Robert Bonomi)
Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ... (Bill Horne)
Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ... (Wes Leatherock)
Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ... (Wes Leatherock)
Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ... (Wes Leatherock)
====== 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, 12 Apr 2010 05:54:19 -0700
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Cell Phones That Protect Against Deadly Chemicals
Message-ID: <4BC317FB.4070408@thadlabs.com>
I feel this is a brilliant idea. I'm reminded of the odor I
smalled shortly after California's Loma Prieta earthquake in
1989 thinking it was a ruptured natural gas line; PG&E's crew
rushed to the area with special sensors and it turned out the
odor came from broken glass containers of insecticide in one
home's garage, but still ...
In today's (12-APR-2010) issue of Science Daily:
"
" Do you carry a cell phone? Today, chances are it's called
" a "smartphone" and it came with a three-to-five megapixel lens
" built-in -- not to mention an MP3 player, GPS or even a bar code
" scanner. This 'Swiss-Army-knife' trend represents the natural
" progression of technology -- as chips become smaller/more
" advanced, cell phones absorb new functions.
"
" What if, in the future, new functions on our cell phones could
" also protect us from toxic chemicals?
"
" Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate (S&T)'s
" Cell-All is such an initiative. Cell-All aims to equip cell
" phones with a sensor capable of detecting deadly chemicals. The
" technology is ingenious. A chip costing less than a dollar is
" embedded in a cell phone and programmed to either alert the cell
" phone carrier to the presence of toxic chemicals in the air,
" and/or a central station that can monitor how many alerts in an
" area are being received. One might be a false positive. Hundreds
" might indicate the need for evacuation.
"
" "Our goal is to create a lightweight, cost-effective, power-
" efficient solution," says Stephen Dennis, Cell-All's program
" manager.
"
" How would this wizardry work? Just as antivirus software bides
" its time in the background and springs to life when it spies
" suspicious activity, so Cell-All would regularly sniffs the
" surrounding air for certain volatile chemical compounds.
"
" When a threat is sensed, an alert ensues in one of two ways. For
" personal safety issues such as a chlorine gas leak, a warning is
" sounded. The user can choose a vibration, noise, text message or
" phone call. For catastrophes such as a sarin gas attack, details
" -- including time, location and the compound -- are phoned home
" to an emergency operations center. While the first warning is
" beamed to individuals, the second warning works best with
" crowds. And that's where the genius of Cell-All lies -- in crowd
" sourcing human safety.
"
" Currently, if a person suspects that something is amiss, he might
" dial 9-1-1, though behavioral science tells us that it's easier
" to do nothing. And, as is often the case when someone phones in
" an emergency, the caller may be difficult to understand,
" diminishing the quality of information that's relayed to first
" responders. An even worse scenario: the person may not even be
" aware of the danger, like the South Carolina woman who last year
" drove into a colorless, odorless, and poisonous ammonia cloud.
Article continues at this URL:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100409162722.htm
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:41:39 -0700
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Cellular network no longer just for phones
Message-ID: <4BC33F33.4080909@thadlabs.com>
In today's San Francisco Chronicle by a staff writer:
" There was a time when the primary devices on cellular networks
" were cellular phones.
"
" But those days are giving way to a new reality where cellular
" chips are being embedded in a variety of unlikely devices and
" machines, everything from dog collars and prescription pill cap
" systems to photo frames and smart meters.
"
" Consumers have gotten a glimpse of the technology through cars
" like GM's OnStar-equipped vehicles and devices like the Kindle
" that are outfitted with cellular.
"
" Now with cellular component prices falling and the U.S. mobile
" phone market nearly saturated - there were 286 million subscriber
" accounts at the end of 2009 - wireless operators and device
" manufacturers are moving toward the next big opportunity in
" cellular: connecting many of the other devices around us.
"
" Embedding devices with cellular endows them with intelligence
" beyond unconnected machines and provides greater reach and ease
" of use than many Wi-Fi devices. Ericsson recently forecast 50
" billion wirelessly connected devices by the year 2020.
"
" "What you have is this incredibly fantastic time for devices to
" be connected to cellular networks," said Craig Harper, president
" and founder of Berkeley-based Apisphere.
"
" Apisphere recently announced plans to sell a dog collar outfitted
" with GPS and cellular service. Owners who outfit their pets with
" the collar can get e-mail or text alerts when their animals stray
" from a certain area and can track their pets on a map. The
" service will also be able to send out status updates to social
" networks based on an animal's location.
"
" One of the most aggressive carriers in this new market has been
" AT&T, which formed an emerging devices group two years ago. Glenn
" Lurie, the president of AT&T's emerging devices organization,
" said the carrier now sees a bright future in embedded devices and
" is working hard to strike deals with device manufacturers.
"
" There were 19 devices on AT&T's network last year, and the
" company has announced five others this year with many more in the
" works. Lurie said the chips could work their way into everything
" from shipping containers and clothing to car diagnostic systems
" and consumer electronics.
article continues here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/11/BUFB1CQLFV.DTL
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:46:51 -0700
From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Interesting Trivia
Message-ID: <hpvmad$45u$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Alfred J. Gross was a Canadian born pioneer in mobile wireless
communications. Cartoonist Chester Gould once visited Gross and asked if
he could use Gross's wristwatch-radio prototype for a comic strip he
wrote. Gross agreed and in January 1946 this wristwatch-radio appeared
in what comic strip? Dick Tracy.
--
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: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:54:29 -0500
From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Please do not change your password
Message-ID: <F723C3CF-982B-466E-8D45-70C852743342@mayson.us>
On Apr 11, 2010, at 9:48 PM, Monty Solomon wrote:
>
> Please do not change your password
> You were right: It's a waste of your time. A study says much computer
> security advice is not worth following.
Something I discovered on my own twenty years ago when I was in school
and working for a phone company. We put a new policy in place where
users had to change passwords once a month and use upper and lower-case
letters, a number, and a special character. When we put the stricter
password policies into place the users were more likely to write their
password in pencil under their keyboard or write it on a poorly-hidden
sticky note. It actually made things less secure. We were finding
people's passwords just by glancing around their offices for a few
seconds.
John
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 02:21:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: markjcuccia@yahoo.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Disney World (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon)
Message-ID: <99673c44-939e-4c95-af3f-a3ed5af37f5e@b23g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 11, 2010, Barry Margolin wrote:
[ ... ]
> That's always bugged me about Walt Disney World. To make a
> reservation there, you have to call 407-WDISNEY. How could a
> company like this not offer a toll free number?
>
> Maybe they think they're so well known and popular that they don't
> need this to increase their goodwill. People will go to Disney
> despite having to pay to call them (and in many cases they probably
> make the reservations through an agent, so they never call in the
> first place).
Maybe it has to do with the fact that (until a few years ago), Disney
OWNED the local telephone company in that area! Yes, Disney bought
swamp land in the mid-1960s in an uninhabited area which still had
NO tariffed or "classified" telephone company as far as the Florida
Public Service Commission was concerned. Neither Southern Bell, nor
General Telephone, nor whoever another nearby telco that later became
part of United (later Sprint, later Embarq, now part of CenturyLink
after Embarq merged with CenturyTel).
Thus, Disney actually became its "own" telephone company for the Walt
Disney World area. For many years in the 1980s/90s-era, they were a
joint-venture with United though, known as something like "United/
Vista" or "United/Buena Vista" (I forget exactly). Buena Vista is a
name that the Disney organization uses, probably because one of the
streets in Burbank CA where Disney Studios is located is Buena Vista
Blvd; Buena Vista Records is the recording/music arm of Disney.
In more recent years, Disney and United/Sprint must have ceased their
joint-venture as Sprint/Vista in the Disney World area, and Disney
either sold their telco, or went into another joint venture, with
Smart City Telecom.
It has been stated here before that Disney World's telco is the only
(or first) "known" ILEC in the North American Network that rejects
dial pulse dialing, accepting ONLY touch tones. I don't know if this
is actually true or not, but considering that Disney owns their own
telco, and the only "residential" customers had been employees living
at Disney World, Sprint/Vista or United/Vista or whatever they call
themselves, "owned" everything, probably including the actual
telephone units. The residential units were still Disney property, not
the same as regular leased apartments. (And even then, there has also
been "shared tenant service" offered in some places, and I wonder if
the apartment owner can "dictate" as to what type of telephone the
lessees can use? Thankfully, "STS" is not as widespread as it could
have been!)
Mark J. Cuccia
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:56:29 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Disney World (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon)
Message-ID: <d694.7105d982.38f5d20d@aol.com>
In a message dated 4/13/2010 7:42:08 AM Central Daylight Time,
markjcuccia@yahoo.com writes:
> Maybe it has to do with the fact that (until a few years ago), Disney
> OWNED the local telephone company in that area! Yes, Disney bought
> swamp land in the mid-1960s in an uninhabited area which still had
> NO tariffed or "classified" telephone company as far as the Florida
> Public Service Commission was concerned. Neither Southern Bell, nor
> General Telephone, nor whoever another nearby telco that later became
> part of United (later Sprint, later Embarq, now part of CenturyLink
> after Embarq merged with CenturyTel).
> Thus, Disney actually became its "own" telephone company for the Walt
> Disney World area. For many years in the 1980s/90s-era, they were a
> joint-venture with United though, known as something like "United/
> Vista" or "United/Buena Vista" (I forget exactly). Buena Vista is a
> name that the Disney organization uses, probably because one of the
> streets in Burbank CA where Disney Studios is located is Buena Vista
> Blvd; Buena Vista Records is the recording/music arm of Disney.
> In more recent years, Disney and United/Sprint must have ceased their
> joint-venture as Sprint/Vista in the Disney World area, and Disney
> either sold their telco, or went into another joint venture, with
> Smart City Telecom.
> It has been stated here before that Disney World's telco is the only
> (or first) "known" ILEC in the North American Network that rejects
> dial pulse dialing, accepting ONLY touch tones. I don't know if this
> is actually true or not, but considering that Disney owns their own
> telco, and the only "residential" customers had been employees living
> at Disney World, Sprint/Vista or United/Vista or whatever they call
> themselves, "owned" everything, probably including the actual
> telephone units. The residential units were still Disney property, not
> the same as regular leased apartments. (And even then, there has also
> been "shared tenant service" offered in some places, and I wonder if
> the apartment owner can "dictate" as to what type of telephone the
> lessees can use? Thankfully, "STS" is not as widespread as it could
> have been!)
Disney has an unusual situation in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, the
corporate name of the city. They own the town, including the
municipal government. Any businesses they allow to locate there have
to pay municiapl taxes to Lake Buena Vista, which is indeed paying
taxes to Disney. I believe they own the other utlities, too, not just
the telephine company.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 01:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Cuccia <markjcuccia@remove-this.yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Zenith/Enterprise/WX (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon)
Message-ID: <5d060175-65a5-4177-9eef-2de80d1f3c4b@c21g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 11, 2010, Thad Floryan wrote:
> On 4/11/2010 4:04 PM, Lisa Hancock wrote:
[...]
>> As an aside, the Bell System offered a manually connected toll free
>> service since the 1930s. It's name varied by location, but often
>> called "Enterprise". One dialed their operator and asked for
>> Enterprise nnnn. The operator looked it up in table to get the
>> actual number and placed a collect call to it, not bothering to get
>> permission to accept the charges. This service was offered for both
>> intra state and interstate callers, even short haul toll callers.
>>
>> This service apparently ceased in the 1990s. In its last days, one
>> had to get an AT&T operator supervisor to dig out the conversion
>> table since the service was very rarely used by that point and most
>> operators never heard of it. Indeed, once 800 numbers came out, I
>> don't know why the service lasted as long as it did. Anyone know?
> No, but you have a good memory! :-) The last time I heard of such
> "Enterprise" numbers must have been during the late 1950s.
>
> A Google search didn't turn up anything useful (the word "enterprise"
> is too ubiquitous) but it did find the following article from this
> group's archives dated 7-May-2007 in which "Enterprise" is attributed
> to AT&T and "Zenith" to GTE:
>
> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/TELECOM_Digest_Online/1186.html
I know that you had problems reading white and green text against a
black background, but if you noticed the TDO links on that post, there
were some replies to it. Including one that refuted Pat Townson's
mention that "Enterprise was AT&T and Zenith was GTE". That is just
an old wive's tale! Please let's NOT perpetuate any more of these old
wives tales on these matters!
Enterprise, Zenith, WX, and others were used by the ENTIRE US and
Canadian telco industry, without any regard to who the terminating
telco happened to be, Bell or independent. The use of different
"exchange" names for this manually handled toll-free service prior
to the development of automated 800/InWATS (and even for many
years since 800 was introduced and became commonplace) is that
each LOCATION developed its own "exchange names". In some
locations in the 1930s, "Commerce" was also used.
But "Zenith", "Enterprise", and "WX" became the legacy names used
in the 1960s-forward era.
Also, the "line-number" following the name could be as few as
three-digits or as many as five-digits, at least I've seen three,
four, and five-digit line-numbers.
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
[ ... ]
> Vis-a-vis "Enterprise" numbers: some may still be in service -
>
> http://www.co.missoula.mt.us/911center/history.htm
> http://state.hi.us/dlnr/chair/pio/HtmlNR/02-09.htm
>
> Bill Horne
> Moderator
It takes a LONG TIME for some things to completely disappear! :-)
And telco frequently is required under regulatory orders to
grandfather existing customers under old, mostly discontinued
services, unless telco can prove that it would create a severe
unnecessary financial burden. Thus, there continue to be legacy
"Zenith", "Enterprise", and "WX" numbers out there.
Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:59:48 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Zenith/Enterprise/WX (Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon)
Message-ID: <da8a.5b146a5e.38f5d2d4@aol.com>
In a message dated 4/13/2010 7:46:01 AM Central Daylight Time,
markjcuccia@remove-this.yahoo.com writes:
> But "Zenith", "Enterprise", and "WX" became the legacy names used in
> the 1960s-forward era.
The service was on a per-exchange basis. If you wanted the service from
more than one originating exchange, you had to subscribe to the service and
pay for it for each exchange.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:59:54 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Mexico shutting down 25.9 Million cellphones
Message-ID: <pan.2010.04.12.07.59.51.996528@myrealbox.com>
.........
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I wonder if there are exceptions for "disposable" phones, such as those
> sold at airports, or for other reasons. While I admire the Mexican
> government's decisiveness in this matter (a quality sadly lacking in the
> U.S. government's handling of every technical challenge from uniform rules
> for ten-digit-dialing to the Citizens Radio Service debacle), I can't help
> but wonder just how effective such programs really are in reducing crime.
Like most "blanket" laws, it will affect the lower-intelligence strata of
the criminal brigade, the smart ones will probably be little
inconvenienced.
--
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: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:23:16 -0500
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Please do not change your password
Message-ID: <xPCdnVLvvpCZyl7WnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <4BC29BD6.5080402@thadlabs.com>,
Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> wrote:
>On 4/11/2010 7:48 PM, Monty Solomon wrote:
>> Please do not change your password
>> You were right: It's a waste of your time. A study says much computer
>> security advice is not worth following.
>> [...]
>
>One can legitimately argue some passwords SHOULD be changed.
>
>As a good example of which, consider these cracked passwords which
>can be seen in the bottom page margin on page 40 of the April 2010
>hardcopy issue of WIRED:
>
> Paris Hilton: TINKERBELL
> SARAH PALIN: WASILLA HIGH
> MILEY CYRUS: LOC092
> SALMA HAYEK: FRIDA
>LINDSAY LOHAN: 1234
Then there is the classical 'good' password:
MickeyMinniePlutoHueyLouieDeweyDonaldGoofySacramento
Purportedly used by a blonde, as in "Helloooo -- they said it had to be
eight characters and a capital!"
***** Moderator's Note *****
I'm sure that the poster's remark is not made with any malice toward
any particular person with light colored hair.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:31:58 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ...
Message-ID: <3D25D7F49094FF45BA3128895224E7633369994CD3@fx-w2k3-ex-01.industrialdefender.com>
Message-ID: <4BC29875.9090208@thadlabs.com>
>On 4/11/2010 6:35 PM, Thad Floryan wrote:
>> [...]
>> A Google search didn't turn up anything useful (the word "enterprise"
>> is too ubiquitous) but it did find the following article from this
>> group's archives dated 7-May-2007 in which "Enterprise" is attributed
>> to AT&T and "Zenith" to GTE:
>>
>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/TELECOM_Digest_Online/1186.html
>>
>> Dunno 'bout everyone else, but reading white print on a star-studded
>> black background is neither easy nor comfortable for me.
>>
>>
>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>>
>> It's a scientific fact that dark backgrounds and white (or color)
>> symbols, combined with proper lighting, is the most easily readable
>> presentation. That's why the FAA uses it on "radar" displays in
>> aircraft control centers.
>
> Curious, I found these three (small) examples:
>
> http://www.sjflight.com/images/RHVRadar2.jpg
> http://www.eddh.de/x-files/topics/atc-radar.jpg
> http://vision.arc.nasa.gov/personnel/al/papers/01hfes/01hfes_files/image004.gif
You're making my case for me: those pictures all show dark
backgrounds, and white or color symbols.
Of course, books are printed with (dark) ink on (white) paper because
that' s the cheapest way to manufacture them, and academic
cost-managers DO care about the cost of toner in your laser printer.
I think we should all go back to the H-19 displays Heathkit used to
put out: Yellow (sometimes Green) text on a dark background. They
displayed 80 symbols per line!
Bill
--
(Filter QRM for direct replies)
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:02:30 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ...
Message-ID: <dda1.11ab5ee3.38f5d376@aol.com>
In a message dated 4/13/2010 7:54:33 AM Central Daylight Time,
bill@horneQRM.net writes:
> I think we should all go back to the H-19 displays Heathkit used to
> put out: Yellow (sometimes Green) text on a dark background. They
> displayed 80 symbols per line!
Amber or green (black background) VT-100 terminals were among the most
readable displays I've seen or used.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:20:45 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon, to Join Toll-Free 800, 888, 87...
Message-ID: <4c71a.267481e9.38f4863d@aol.com>
In a message dated 4/11/2010 2:24:07 PM Central Daylight Time,
dannyb@panix.com writes:
> It looks more professional for the company, and gives
> the impression that the caller is dealing with a national
> organization rather than a local rinky-dink all the
> way over in East Cupcake.
>
> (Of course, if the caller is also in East Cupcake, they
> might prefer knowing that when they head to the phone...).
I have noticed recently a number of commercials giving only an 800
(etc.) for a business I believe is a local business and in some cases
I know it is (a car dealer).
In many cases I don't want to deal with an 800 number but a local
business where I can see their product and discuss other questions
that would not be appropriate to deal with a distant place.
I don't see any problem in a business that gives its local number and
an 800 number (the latter being useful for out-of-town potential
customers) .
But in some cases the 800 number is needed for a national ordering
number. A recent case that comes to mind is an order I placed with
JCPenney. I wanted the bank of order-taking people who understood
taking orders, not someone at the local store.
On the contrary, if I want the local store I'm not interested in the
national order-taking bunch.
I can also assure that for many people the costs of long distance are
not irrelevant, no matter how small, and many of them are not aware of
the many options available to lower their long distance calls. Not
everyone is as telecom-savvy as the people in this group.
You ought to hear the arguments before the Oklahoma Corporation
Commission about their proposal to make all of Oklahoma toll-free.
Carriers, big customers and many other people with axes to grind are
screeching about how their oxen will be gored and how much POTS rates
will have to go up.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:35:20 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ...
Message-ID: <828fa.466c78fc.38f51648@aol.com>
In a message dated 4/11/2010 7:55:11 PM Central Daylight Time,
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> As an aside, the Bell System offered a manually connected toll free
> service since the 1930s. It's name varied by location, but often
> called "Enterprise". One dialed their operator and asked for
> Enterprise nnnn. The operator looked it up in table to get the actual
> number and placed a collect call to it, not bothering to get
> permission to accept the charges. This service was offered for both
> intra state and interstate callers, even short haul toll callers.
The operator did not get the collect call accepted because the
subscriber to the "Enterprise" or "Zenith" or "WX" service agreed to
pay for the call and since it was a "toll free" service to the caller
did not necessarily want the caller to know how the call was paid for.
Of course a caller could have placed a collect call but in many cases
would have considered that inappropriate. The receiver of the call
wanted to encourage calls for sales or whatever.
I had such service at Konawa OK, from Wewoka OK in the early 1950s.
Because there were still a shortage of facilities in some places after
World War II, it required separate approval from Bell if it involved
more than one toll center. Even though Konawa was in the same county
as Wewoka (the county seat) the toll center for Konawa (a CDO) was
Ada, in the next county, so two toll centers were involved, Wewoka and
Ada.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
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 
