---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <64B01452-BB93-4160-AB98-2F75AD553B9E@roscom.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 13:49:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: 'Error 53' fury mounts as Apple software update threatens to kill your iPhone 6 "Error 53" fury mounts as Apple software update threatens to kill your iPhone 6 It's the message that spells doom and will render your handset worthless if it's been repaired by a third party. But theres no warning and no fix. Thousands of iPhone 6 users claim they have been left holding almost worthless phones because Apple's latest operating system permanently disables the handset if it detects that a repair has been carried out by a non-Apple technician. Relatively few people outside the tech world are aware of the so-called "error 53" problem, but if it happens to you you'll know about it. And according to one specialist journalist, it "will kill your iPhone". http://www.theguardian.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <n90if8$7pf$1@reader1.panix.com> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:14:00 +0000 (UTC) From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@panix.com> Subject: Re: FX charge for local line?! Phil Smith III <phsiii@gmail.com> wrote: :25 years ago, we moved to this house and got a new phone number. :At some point, I noticed a 72-cent-per-month FX charge on our bill. Given that :we hadn't asked for a number to be ported, that made no sense, so I called :Verizon. They had no idea, promised someone would call me back. Of course that :never happened. Over the last few years, I've asked several times. At 72 cents :a month, it wasn't worth a lot of my time, obviously. :Today I had a few minutes and was curious, so I called again. Once we got past :the rep going away for ten minutes to find out what an FX line was (which he :then tried to explain to me), he got me a supervisor, who spent another 20 :minutes on it, eventually saying that the only way to lose the charge is to :change the number. :Did a lookup on localcallinguide.com, found that it's at the local CO: :http://www.localcallingguide.com/lca_prefix.php?switch=3DRSTNVAFMDS0<<< -- as are :all of my neighbors (I recognize all of those exchanges). :Next will be to ask a few of the neighbors if they're paying FX charges. :Seems like this is pretty simple: Vz is charging for something they shouldn't :be. OTOH, I don't know what "Washington Zone 19" vs. "Herndon" means in the :"Rate Centre" (British spelling?!) column. We'd be one of the "Washington Zone:19" NXX. The rate center is what's used to bill the call. It's likely historical: there are many fewer switches and wire centers than there used to be, and the switches that are left often handle many rate centers. In some places, like in illinois, local rates are based on the geographic distance between the historical rate center, which means that a call that never leaves a consolidated switch can be billed as one that is 20 miles or more. I suspect you have a number that's 'washington zone 19' but you're in the Herndon geographic area. I suspect thassqt's just an error, and not a scheme to extract $8.64 a year from you, but I wouldn't be surprised if the reason they won't fix it is that $8.64. (Times how many thousands of customers they're squeezing it out of.) -- sig 114 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <201602061752001@telecom-digest.org> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 17:42:41 -0500 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Wildly Popular App Kik Offers Teenagers, and Predators, Anonymity By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and RICHARD P=C3=89REZ-PE=C3=91A The allegations are beyond chilling: two Virginia Tech freshmen charged with the premeditated kidnapping and killing of a 13-year-old girl who, authorities say, communicated with her murderer online. But the way they chatted - on a wildly popular messaging app called Kik - has increasingly become a source of concern for law enforcement. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/06/us/social-media-apps-anonymous-kik-crime.html?_r=3D0 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20160206151150.78370.qmail@ary.lan> Date: 6 Feb 2016 15:11:50 -0000 From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: FX charge for local line?! >I suspect you have a number that's 'washington zone 19' but you're in >the Herndon geographic area. I suspect thassqt's just an error, and not >a scheme to extract $8.64 a year from you, but I wouldn't be surprised >if the reason they won't fix it is that $8.64. (Times how many >thousands of customers they're squeezing it out of.) That sounds right. Suburban D.C. historically had very bizarre rate centers, with a lot of special cases to let people be a local call from D.C. I recall somewhere in Maryland where you could choose a local or DC local number, both served from the same CO, so that people in adjacent houses would be a toll call apart. R's, John ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20160206225613.GA6727@telecom.xen.prgmr.com> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 22:56:13 +0000 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Verizon's mobile video won't count against data caps - but NetFlix does Verizon Wireless tests limit of net neutrality rules by zero-rating own data. by Jon Brodkin Verizon Wireless is testing the limits of the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules after announcing that it will exempt its own video service from mobile data caps - while counting data from competitors such as YouTube and Netflix against customers' caps. The only way for companies to deliver data to Verizon customers without counting against their data caps is to pay the carrier, something no major rival video service has chosen to do. While data cap exemptions are not specifically outlawed by the FCC's net neutrality rules, the FCC is examining these arrangements to determine whether they should be stopped under the commission's so-called "general conduct standard." The FCC is already looking into data cap exemptions - also known as zero-rating - implemented by Comcast, AT&T, and T-Mobile USA. http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/02/verizons-mobile-video-wont-count-against-data-caps-but-netflix-will/ -- Bill Horne (Please remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20160206234105.GA7249@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 18:41:05 -0500 From: Bill Horne <Bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Kik app has been around for a while, and so have concerns The recent spate of articles about the Kik app, and how it might be used by paedophiles to groom children for illegal activity, is scary stuff - but the fear is not as new as I had first thought. Wikipedia includes this in its article about Kik: In March 2015, Kik announced that it would begin using Microsoft's PhotoDNA Cloud Service to automatically detect and report the distribution of child exploitation images. The proposed child exploitation tool will only remove and scan for known child pornography that exists in an international database. The new tools will not be able to screen messages from pedophiles who may be engaging in child grooming. In addition, Kik announced that the company joined the Virtual Global Taskforce, a partnership between businesses, child protection agencies, and international police services to combat online child abuse. Kik also uses a feature that blurs messages from strangers so that users must opt in to view content sent by people outside their network. If they determine content or users are objectionable, they can delete or block those users. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kik_Messenger ... so there has been longstanding concern about the ways the Kik app has been, and can be, used. I've said before, and now repeat, that I was always amazed that President Bush didn't take action to require identity verification for email after 9/11: since the terrorists used email to communicate, I thought that was probably the one time in America's history when voters would have gone along with the idea. Now, I wonder. We've all grown up along with the net, and I think there's enough popular support for the idea that we could make it an issue in this election year. Bill -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sun, 07 Feb 2016