30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for May 22, 2012
Volume 31 : Issue 123 : "text" Format
====== 30 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 Bill Horne 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 that person, or email address
owner.
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of
that address. 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: Sun, 20 May 2012 22:36:41 -0400
From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: We Learn About The Telephone
Message-ID: <wbf8eagunt7a.1im7day8sqwq2.dlg@40tude.net>
On Sun, 20 May 2012 13:19:07 -0700 (PDT), Joseph Singer wrote:
> ... he dials the
> standard Bell advertising number i.e. 555-2368! ...
Hmm ... 2368 = BENT? = A FOU? = CENT? -- Anyone?
TIA; and cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 07:18:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Leatherock <wleathus@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: We Learn About The Telephone
Message-ID: <1337609891.35428.YahooMailClassic@web111709.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
--- On Sun, 5/20/12, Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> wrote:
> When the boy dials "Bobby Martin" you'll notice that he dials the
> standard Bell advertising number i.e. 555-2368!
At that time, the prefix 555- was reserved for non-functional
uses such as advertising, use in films, plays or novels, or any other
genre where a number was needed that would not never be an actual
customer number.
This usage went back to before toll dialing or area codes, and
also could be used in its 2L-5N equivalent KL5-.
Wes Leatherock
wleathus@yahoo.com
wesrock@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 02:45:27 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Cellphone service in Boston subway by years end
Message-ID: <p062408b6cbdf94c175e4@[10.0.1.5]>
Full cellphone reception expected for T subway by year's end
AT&T, T-Mobile have signed on
By Matt Rocheleau
Globe Correspondent / May 21, 2012
All underground portions of the MBTA subway system should be fully
wired for cellphone reception by the end of the year, the company
designing and installing the network predicted.
But many T riders may have to wait longer before they can talk, text,
and check e-mail throughout the system's 19 miles of tunnels: Only
two major mobile carriers, AT&T and T-Mobile, have immediate plans to
introduce or expand their subterranean coverage.
Verizon offers service at four downtown stations and the tunnels
between them but has not announced plans to expand its coverage.
Other carriers have not worked out agreements with InSite Wireless,
which signed a contract with the T in 2005 to oversee the project.
The company charges carriers to connect to the underground network
and gives a percentage of the revenue to the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority.
The T expects the deal will net the agency about $5.3 million over
the course of its 15-year contract with InSite Wireless. That figure
should rise as the areas where cell service is offered expand and as
more carriers sign on, said MBTA spokesman Joe Pesaturo.
...
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/05/21/mbta_subway_will_be_fully_wired_for_cellular_service_by_end_of_year/
Date: 21 May 2012 04:28:51 GMT
From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 3rd party billing from AT&T
Message-ID: <2029280979359266866.194572fatkinson-mishmash.com@news.newsguy.com>
Javier <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> In the past months I started recieving 3rd party billing from never
> demanded services from USBI. The actual company seemed to be
> Onelink Communications Inc. It was $6 a month.
[Moderator snip]
Switch to VOIP. The VOIP companies don't allow third party billing.
Fred
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 17:18:58 -0500
From: John <redacted@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Q.: Should jailbreaking mobile phones be legalized?
Message-ID: <jpbqki$ujo$1@dont-email.me>
On Sun, 20 May 2012 00:58:27 -0400 tlvp wrote:
> The latest Sophos.com "Naked Security" blog post asks:
>
> : Should jailbreaking gaming consoles, mobile phones and tablets be
> : legalized?
>
> Rationale for raising the question:
>
> | Yesterday US copyright regulators opened up the floodgates for a public
| hearing (PDF at
| http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77fr15327.pdf
> | )
> | of proposals to change copyright law, including authorizing the cracking
> | of tablets, DVDs, gaming consoles and mobile phones.
>
> More at (sorry for the overly long URL):
>
>
> http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/05/18/should-jailbreaking-gaming-consoles-mobile-phones-and-tablets-be-legalised/
>
> -or-
>
> http://tinyurl.com/c2wfoyx
>
>
> Cheers, -- tlvp
Laws should have never protected anything that you have purchased for
your own use.
That is quite different than someone making a profit selling something
that someone else has created as the inventor or writer.
Leave it to lawyers to continuously create laws that churn confusion for
their own monetary desires.
Until lawyers are outlawed, there will always be outlaws.
--
John
When a person has -- whether they knew it or not -- already
rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 21:13:22 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: We Learn About The Telephone
Message-ID: <MPG.2a2360c1bb2fd0ce989d4f@news.eternal-september.org>
In article
<1337545147.90636.YahooMailClassic@web161505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>,
joeofseattle@yahoo.com says...
>
> Thu, 17 May 2012 13:50:57 -0500 Dave Garland gave us this link:
>
> > 1965 Bell movie for elementary-school audiences:
> >
> > http://archive.org/details/WeLearnA1965
> > >>
>
> Notes: When telephones ring they're all the 302 ringer even when they
> illustrate everything with a 500 set.
>
> When the boy dials "Bobby Martin" you'll notice that he dials the
> standard Bell advertising number i.e. 555-2368!
Fascinating view into mid 60's telephony. By that point they had Telstar
up and running and most long distance was still over Microwave and Coax.
DTMF would come about shortly thereafter and I believe 1965 was the year
of the Morris ESS trial.
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 19:29:31 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Conference Calling providers
Message-ID: <jpe52r$n89$1@reader1.panix.com>
I'm seeking providers of conference calling services.
Specifically:
A) Managed groups of 10-75 people. Management means web page showing
directory numbers of callers & way to have nametags on number. Page
would show who was talking, etc.
B) Web page control should have mute controls; callers are normally
muted but can signal ("raise hand") to request chance to speak.
C) NOT "800" service; just a US 10D number. If 800 is also available,
that's OK but not required. There is no reason to pay for 800
inbound from phones with unmetered LD.
Suggestions/experiences?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 07:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 3rd party billing from AT&T
Message-ID: <1a192373-423a-49e6-b1ec-69a55711c482@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
On May 19, 11:31 pm, Javier <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Is there a way to stop this nonsense? Can I control 3rd party billing
> online or [by] writting by letter to somebody? Speaking to people in call
> centers is most of the times unsucessful; the last time I needed to
> speak to many of them until somebody [agreed] to reverse the charges.
> Most of them told me that AT&T could not do nothing.
Most business have a "In case of questions about your bill" mailing
address printed somewhere on the invoice (it may be in fine print).
Indeed, this may be mandatory.
It may be helpful to send a Certified Letter with your complaint to
that address. While it costs a few bucks to do so, the recipient must
sign for Certified Mail and this is proof that you submitted a
complaint. Businesses tend to be more responsive to such letters, and
you may get a phone call from someone more empowered to assist you.
> Also, is there a way to see my bills online? I have lost track of
> this matter and possibly I need to reverse some more charges appart
> from this month.
Businesses these days are encouraging their customers to switch to
email/online bills since it saves them printing and postage. It also
gets the bill out to the customer faster which may result in a faster
payment and thus better cash flow.
Unfortunately, some businesses use your email to send you ads from
time to time.
IMHO, conventional hard copy bills are better. I've heard of people
seeking to see older statements and they weren't available. Some
businesses abuse the email ads, sending out stuff frequently. If you
change your email address--as many people do often--you will lose your
statements.
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.
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) 2012 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 (8 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues