|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 270 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Western Union's satellite loss
At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
Re: Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
Re: Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
Re: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which stude...
Re: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which stude...
Re: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which stude...
USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Re: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Re: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Re: Guess What Texting Costs Your Wireless Provider?
Re: What if People Don't Take the Bait to Go Paperless?
====== 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: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:34:04 -0400
From: Steve Stone <n2ubp@hotmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Message-ID: <ha27k4$nu2$1@news.eternal-september.org>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> I understand that Western Union was launching one of its Westar
> communication satellites with the Challenger and lost it. Apparently
> the insurance company wouldn't pay so WU lost about $100 million, and
> they were tight on money.
>
> If anyone knows more, could they share it with us?
>
The wiki entry says Loyds of London would not pay for the satellite loss
because it was NOT an act of God.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 08:48:02 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Message-ID: <p06240812c6ea55331269@[10.0.1.5]>
DRIVEN TO DISTRACTION
At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
By MATT RICHTEL
October 1, 2009
JOPLIN, Mo. - Looking back, Paul Dekok wonders what he was thinking
that May morning when the urgent call came in. Mr. Dekok, a manager
at the Potash Corporation, learned that a 25-ton truckload of the
company's additive for livestock feed had been rejected by a customer
as contaminated.
Scrambling to protect his company's credibility with a big customer,
he grabbed his cellphone to arrange a new shipment, cradling it
between his left ear and shoulder, and with his right hand e-mailed
instructions to his staff from his laptop computer - all while
driving his rental car in a construction zone on a two-lane highway
in North Carolina.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/technology/01distracted.html
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 08:54:06 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
Message-ID: <p06240815c6ea56b46c82@[10.0.1.5]>
Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
By JOE SHARKEY
September 29, 2009
Cellphone use on airplanes, it would seem, is on extended hold in the
United States.
The national union representing flight attendants wants Congress to
ban in-flight phone calls, and survey after survey of airline
passengers shows strong opposition to allowing cellphones on planes.
So while domestic airlines rush to wire their cabins to provide
in-flight Wi-Fi connectivity, there is no indication whether, or
when, passengers in the United States might be able to make a
cellphone call at 37,000 feet.
In much of the rest of the world, meanwhile, passengers on various
foreign airlines are already routinely using cellphones and other
personal wireless devices to make and receive calls in flight.
Industry officials say cellphones can be used on more than 15,000
flights a month.
Despite dire warnings that cellphone use on planes would unleash
social turbulence and possibly even violence in the cabin, there have
been remarkably few complaints so far, industry executives and
passengers say.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/technology/29phones.html
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 08:15:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
Message-ID: <36203c43-67fc-4318-b5ed-dd9e2d18e44e@t2g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 1, 10:51 am, Monty Solomon <mo...@roscom.com> wrote:
> Cellphone use on airplanes, it would seem, is on extended hold in
> the United States. The national union representing flight
> attendants wants Congress to ban in-flight phone calls, and survey
> after survey of airline passengers shows strong opposition to
> allowing cellphones on planes.
Good idea. On trains the cellphones are a nuisance. People talk
loudly, sharing their most private personal or business affairs to
unwilling listeners nearby.
On airplane, which has much denser seating and lower ceilings than a
commuter train, the situation would be even worse.
If an argument breaks out among passengers on a commuter train the
next station isn't too far away where help can be obtained. But on an
airplane that isn't the case, plus it could be a major safety hazard.
When mobile phones on trains first came out in 1948, an enclosed booth
with seat and table was provided for the privacy of the caller and
courtesy to other passengers, this practice continued up to the
Metroliner trains in 1969. Newer trains that had mobile phones didn't
have a full booth, but the phone was at the end of the car somewhat
away from other passengers.
Unfortunately, airplanes are so squeezed for space they simply can't
afford to waste a few seats to put in a phone booth or even a nook.
Further, while train passengers can get up and move around at any time
during their trip, airplane passengers need to stay seated as much as
possible, and can not get up during takeoffs, landings, and turbulent
weather.
As an aside, Western Union hoped to be a player in airplane phone
service with "airfone" and other business partners. WU eventually
sold its interest in this effort. (WU also sought to be a
conventional cell phone provider, another effort that did not work
out.)
Date: 1 Oct 2009 23:07:28 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Foreign Airlines Ahead of U.S. on Cellphone Use
Message-ID: <20091001230728.13973.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>On airplane, which has much denser seating and lower ceilings than a
>commuter train, the situation would be even worse.
You might think so, but planes are so noisy that it turns out that you
can barely hear somone talking on the phone in the next seat. I read
an article about experience on planes in Europe and Asia, and that was
my experience the one or two times I tried to use Airfone.
I'm not a big fan of phones on planes, since it's one of the few
places where one is not on an electronic leash, but the noise argument
is bogus.
R's,
John
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 06:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which stude...
Message-ID: <05278206-98ed-4d8f-8db4-f4a67149265e@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
On Sep 27, 7:25 pm, Wesr...@aol.com wrote:
> There are websites maintained by the funeral homes as well as the
> newspapers that generally show exactly what information appeared in
> the public newspaper, and was provided by the releatives of the
> deceased who placed the obituary in the paper. These provide the
> information that the relatives provided.
> If you don't want such information out there, don't have an obituary
> published in the newspaper.
I respectfully disagree. This is not a reasonable thing to expect to
do for several reasons.
Web distribution is not something people think about when putting
together an obituary. More importantly, people who might be aware
that an obituary will show up on websites do not realize they get a
life of their own and stay out there.
Also, the immediate family of the deceased (or marriage) prepares the
obituary (or wedding notice). Cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. listed are
not consulted in the preparation. It's not something people think
about.
> > 5) Real estate sales: . . .
> These are by law public records.
> > 7) Court, govt administrative activity: . . .
> These, too, are by law public records.
Society has to come to terms with privacy issues the Internet has
brought to public records. There are two radically different changes
than the past and the changes must be considered:
1) Easy searching: Before computers, public records were difficult to
search. Deeds, for example, were stored sequentially on microfilm
or in books and the date of sale had to be known. Typically there
were not indexes to search by address or name. But today computers
make it possible to search for records by a variety of criteria.
2) Remote accessibility: Before computers, public records were
typically stored in only one physical location, and one had to go
there, during office hours, to access the records. With computers
and the Internet, the records may be accessed remotely from
anywhere around the world.
These two factors combined may the privacy issue very different from
the past. In the past only the most determined person would bother to
visit the courthouse and search through records. Today anyone can do
so easily.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:19:42 +0000 (UTC)
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which stude...
Message-ID: <ha2kqu$9uj$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>
In article <05278206-98ed-4d8f-8db4-f4a67149265e@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> These two factors combined may the privacy issue very different from
> the past. In the past only the most determined person would bother
> to visit the courthouse and search through records. Today anyone
> can do so easily.
In the past, plenty of marketers paid minimum-wage clerical staff to
do nothing but sit around at the registry of deeds and take note of
every property sale (including buyer, seller, and price) to target
their p-spam.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:24:09 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Project 'Gaydar': At MIT, an experiment identifies which stude...
Message-ID: <bc3.55c8e216.37f62399@aol.com>
In a message dated 10/1/2009 9:59:51 AM Central Daylight Time,
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> 1) Easy searching: Before computers, public records were difficult to
> search. Deeds, for example, were stored sequentially on microfilm
> or in books and the date of sale had to be known. Typically there
> were not indexes to search by address or name. But today computers
> make it possible to search for records by a variety of criteria.
[For deeds], the original document was filed. Microfilming came
hundreds of years later [than paper].
Even in Oklahoma, indexes going back before statehood were established
by the legal description (the "address" has no specific legal meaning
for this purpose and is only a handy convenience). You can always
look up the plat, survey, government patent or other document finding
what address corresponds to what "legal description." More recently,
such relationships have been computerized, usually by the Registrar of
Deeds, which saves a step. I have looked up many such deeds,
mortgages, plat restrictions and other documents in person at the
Registrar of Deeds' offices. In the last few years, it has become a
lot easier with such records on line in many counties and the indexes,
too, have been computerized in the registrars' office to make it
easier.
> 2) Remote accessibility: Before computers, public records were
> typically stored in only one physical location, and one had to go
> there, during office hours, to access the records. With computers
> and the Internet, the records may be accessed remotely from
> anywhere around the world.
These two factors combined make the privacy issue very different from
the past. In the past only the most determined person would bother to
visit the courthouse and search through records. Today anyone can do
so, easily.
I think for hundreds of years there have been companies providing
these serviceas, including indexing in places where such indexes do
not exist. They are called "abstract companies" or "title companies"
and there services are generally available to all comers, local or
distant. I have an abstract for property in which I own a small
interest in Texas. The documents go back to a grant from the King of
Spain (with a translator's certificate).
Many people have need of such services.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 08:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Message-ID: <86e8366b-fadd-4e80-9085-171db3d3a23e@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
[The United States government's Department of Transportation] plans to
offer recommendations to address the growing traffic safety risk of
distracted driving and the use of mobile devices by multitasking
drivers.
The Transportation Department reported that nearly 6,000 people were
killed and a half-million were injured last year in vehicle crashes
connected to driver distraction, often by mobile devices and cell
phones.
http://www.rita.dot.gov/distracted_driving_summit/
* * *
Many times cell phone yakkers block or slow down traffic.
Participants in the roads newsgroup are generally vehemently opposed
to any restrictions on cellphone use. They are adamant that they are
great drivers and can drive perfectly well while talking.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:57:37 -0500
From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Message-ID: <6645152a0910011457u16cd3fft40376af0822cac92@mail.gmail.com>
Along with it Pres. Obama has banned texting while driving for federal
workers in government vehicles.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/technology/02distracted.html?_r=1&hp
I can't say I'm all that surprised or upset it's come to this. As
long as people refuse to police themselves, the government will
eventually step in and do it for them.
John
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 00:10:44 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Message-ID: <ha3ge4$odl$3@news.eternal-september.org>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>Participants in the roads newsgroup are generally vehemently opposed
>to any restrictions on cellphone use. They are adamant that they are
>great drivers and can drive perfectly well while talking.
Alcoholics also report that they are perfectly capable of driving after 5
beers.
--
"You're in probably the wickedest, most corrupt city, most
Godless city in America." -- Fr Mullen, "San Francisco"
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:41:27 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Guess What Texting Costs Your Wireless Provider?
Message-ID: <ha2t4l$hl6$1@news.eternal-september.org>
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> What's the big deal? "Everyone" doesn't have to reach one
> immediately while out of the country. One especially doesn't want to
> hear from people who refuse to appreciate the time zone difference
> and when one is likely to be awake.
I have programmed special numbers to ring differently and have learned
to subconsciously ignore rings that are not distinctive. Thus, I
don't have a problem with people phoning me when I'm asleep. In fact,
[even] when I'm awake, I'm sometimes surprised to find that I slept
through a junk sales call.
--
"You're in probably the wickedest, most corrupt city, most
Godless city in America." -- Fr Mullen, "San Francisco"
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:25:25 -0700
From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: What if People Don't Take the Bait to Go Paperless?
Message-ID: <ha2vn9$dab$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Steven wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Sep 30, 6:26 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>>> . . .
>>
>>> I do, however, feel strongly that non-commercial users should have a
>>> few calls "free" each month. Such allowances increase the likelihood
>>> of new business calls, make it easier to get help after a tragedy, and
>>> benefit the elderly and infirm, who may not be able to write anymore.
>>
>> I thought residential users were allowed a few free calls until I
>> found out the hard way they are not. This annoyed me since it was a
>> changed number not available in the phone book. But I agree [users]
>> should have a few free DA calls.
>>
>> I suspect the Baby Bells realized their competition cut costs and
>> prices by not offering any DA at all and the Bells were losing
>> customers, so they decided to go down to that level. I suspect the
>> number of Baby Bell telephone operators still around is a small
>> fraction of those in service right after Divesture.
>>
>> Anyway, later they must have realized there's money to be made by
>> charging a premium fee for 411 and providing yellow pages (ie
>> restaurants) and other services.
>>
>> As an aside, Verizon sold off its directory publishing business to
>> something called Idearc (sp?). I understand it went bankrupt. Anyone
>> know more?
>>
>> [public replies please]
>>
> It was spun off not sold. From the start it was under funded and would
> fail. Also retired employees were moved to the new company, now there
> is a major legal battle.
>
The article is in the summer issue of Belltel Retirees newsletter at
www.belltelretirees.org, then search IDEARC.
--
The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2009 I Kill Spammers, inc, A Rot in Hell. Co.
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 (13 messages)
|
or 