See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 18:49:49 +0000 (UTC)
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Free Hotel Wi-Fi is increasingly on Travelers' Must-Have Lists
Message-ID: <mnucsd$2b3f$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>
In article <20150712163021.GA26196@telecom.csail.mit.edu>,
Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> wrote:
>So, you're in Manhattan at a hotel, on the first day of your vacation,
>with nothing to do. Your spouse suggests that you both make a night of
>it, and have a great dinner and see a Broadway play.
>
>Like every sensible new age spouse, you agree.
>
>Now (pay attention, there will be a test at the end), there are three
>ways that you can obtain tickets for a Broadway play on a few hours
>notice:
>
>1. You could stand in front of the theater with a $500 bill held up in
> your hand and shout "Tickets" as the patrons arrive.
>
>2. You could use a computer to access the various online ticket
> agencies, and select from the offerings they have available for
> that evening: most likely, a set of split seats at a play that is
> more "off" Broadway than it is "on".
>
>3. You could visit the hotel Concierge and let him handle it for you.
4. You go to the TKTS booth in Times Square like everyone else. It's
New York, and this is a long-solved problem.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman
wollman@bimajority.org
Opinions not shared by
my employers.
|
What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
repeated, than the story of a large research program
that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
|
|
| Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:35:27 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Free Hotel Wi-Fi is increasingly on Travelers' Must-Have Lists
Message-ID: <20150713133527.GA30459@telecom.csail.mit.edu>
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 06:49:49PM +0000, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <20150712163021.GA26196@telecom.csail.mit.edu>,
> Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> wrote:
>> So, you're in Manhattan at a hotel, on the first day of your
>> vacation, with nothing to do. Your spouse suggests that you both
>> make a night of it, and have a great dinner and see a Broadway
>> play.
>>[snip]
>> 3. You could visit the hotel Concierge and let him handle it for
>> you.
> 4. You go to the TKTS booth in Times Square like everyone else. It's
> New York, and this is a long-solved problem.
I tried that, once. I wound up in a "Broadway" theater, with an
entrance next to a bodega and up a flight of stairs, which was being
repaired and had carpenters' tools atop ladders that spanned some of
the seats. I don't remember the performance, which is a good thing.
No self-respecting Concierge would have ever let me within a mile of
that place. A computer would have had no problem, though.
My point stands: the TKTS booth could easily be replaced by a web
site, with equally poor results. Being "Always On" does not mean
I'm "connected".
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my email to write to me directly)
|
| Date: 12 Jul 2015 20:23:33 -0000
From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 1xx exchange in area code 212?
Message-ID: <20150712202333.16499.qmail@ary.lan>
In article <f--dnX9KH4yuHz3InZ2dnUU7-V2dnZ2d@posted.internetamerica> you write:
>> It had the telephone number 212-165-8220.
>....
>> Exchange 165?
I gather that 1XX pseudo-prefixes have been used for leased lines and
stuff like that, so even in areas with all 10D or 1+10D dialing, they
still don't use them. Ditto 0XX prefixes. Making them available is
called clearing the D digit, which isn't planned to happen until after
they expand the NANP, which currently isn't expected until sometime
after 2045. (As described below, they need to use 0 and 1 after the
area code to disambiguate numbers during the length transition.) Area
codes of the form N9X are currently reserved for a different expansion
plan, and could be released to push the transition date out even
farther.
>The plan at that point involves changing all existing phone numbers
>to insert 00 or 11 between the area code and the exchange (based
>on country. USA gets 00 and Canada gets 11, or vice versa.).
I presume you got that from the Wikipedia article. If you read the
ATIS report it's based on, you'll find the article misrepresents what
the report says. The most likely plan is to insert 0 or 1 after the
area code. One option is to add another 0 or 1 before the prefix at
the same time, the other is to add only the digit to the area code,
and wait to see if they need to add another digit later. (Probably
not, I'd guess, since that would give 6000 new area codes, which is a
lot.) There'd be a one year transition period during which you could
dial either the old 10D or the new 11D or 12D, then 10D would be over
and they could release the rest of the new numbers.
They mention the option of expanding Canadian area codes with one
digit (1 perhaps) and all others with the other digit (which would be
0), so you could tell Canadian numbers from others without needing a
complete table of area codes. That would only be the area code digit,
so if they went directly to 12D it could be 10 and 00 or 11 and 01 or
even a mix of 11 and 10 for Canada and 00 and 01 for everywhere else.
At this point, a separate digit for Canada doesn't make much sense,
since there are a dozen countries other than the US and Canada in the
NANP, so you'll still need a full set of area codes to figure out how
much a call costs and where to route it. By 2045 it's hard to imagine
that the cost of keeping a few thousand area code translations in a
switch or PBX would matter to anyone.
R's,
John
|
| Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 01:16:13 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Addicted to Your Phone? There's Help for That
Message-ID: <D4F49392-7174-4449-A2FD-C387BCDDE878@roscom.com>
Addicted to Your Phone? There's Help for That
There's new technology to save us from technology.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/sunday-review/addicted-to-your-phone-theres-help-for-that.html
|
| Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 16:51:42 -0400
From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Free Hotel Wi-Fi is increasingly on Travelers' Must-Have Lists
Message-ID: <barmar-223B32.16514212072015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>
In article <80cc6300-a294-47fc-a4ef-806c8b2074ce@googlegroups.com>,
Neal McLain <nmclain.remove-this@and-this-too.annsgarden.com> wrote:
> On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 5:28:41 PM UTC-5, Barry Margolin wrote:
> > In article <1olamrwqxfdhw$.m61zma6vmspn.dlg@40tude.net>,
> > tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Discount hotels, on the other hand, use price as their
> > main marketing feature. Charging extra for something
> > like [wifi] would cut into the only reason people go
> > to those hotels.
>
> But even some discount motels have those horrible little "safes" that cost an
> extra $1.00 to $1.50 per day whether you use them or not. I've encountered
> them in Holiday Inns and Super-8s, but at least they took the charge off the
> bill when I complained. But TraveLodge -- at two different properties --
> refused to take the charge off the bill, stating, rather impertinently, "it's
> mandatory."
Conversely, those safes are usually free at high-priced hotels (I think
I've only seen a charge for them once). I'm surprised that discount
motels have them at all.
Probably most people who stay at discount motels don't have fancy
valuables that need to be locked up, so this is more of an "extra".
Since it's not an expected feature, it doesn't figure into the price
comparison equation.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
|
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 educational service offered to
the Internet 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 © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself. Thank you!
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.
