|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 271 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Re: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Verizon strips murals from N.E.T. HQ at 185 Franklin St. in Boston
====== 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, 1 Oct 2009 19:36:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Message-ID: <170b134f-03bb-4730-ac03-018cfd5798e1@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 1, 10:44 am, Steve Stone <n2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The wiki entry says Loyds of London would not pay for the satellite loss
> because it was NOT an act of God.
I saw that and was quite surprised. At first I thought LofL should've
paid but then I realized it was a technical problem, not something
like a hurricane, earthquake, lightning, etc.
Of course, the question then becomes why they didn't insure themselves
against a technical malfunction, provided such insurance was
available. Maybe it was seen as too high a risk. From time to time
launches do fail.
As an aside, WU leased out channels on a satellite that it didn't have
need for, and the income nearly paid for the satellite, yet they still
had their channels to use. I am curious as to how much of their
microwave network they used in the 1980s, how much of their own pole
lines were still in use, and how much they had to lease from AT&T.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 22:09:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: USDOT seeks to discourage distracted driving
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.00.0910012207440.1011@Calculus.local>
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, David Kaye wrote:
> 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.
One of the reasons I haven't been on misc.transport.road much lately.
Between my penchant for bicycling and walking and now agreeing we need
distracted driver laws, I'm not too popular.
I'm usually the last to say "the government should do something". But as
I've said before, people simply aren't policing themselves so the state is
stepping in. I think we should be ashamed of ourselves instead of being
angry these laws are moving forward.
John
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 03:06:35 -0400
From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Message-ID: <op.u05vc9neo63xbg@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:34:18 -0400, <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote, in part:
> ... [snip] ...
>
> 5) Telex was very important in 1980 but soon lost lustre as companies
> got their own inexpensive fax machines and personal computers.
Telex was important enough to me throughout the '80s, at least
for quick communications across multiple time zones into eastern
europe (Bulgarian universities, Polish travel agents), that its
availability, through bidirectional email-telex gateways made
available by MCI Mail and ATT Mail was one of the big reasons
I retained both those services as long as I did in those days.
While other universities had adopted email by then, it wasn't 'til
quite late in the '80s that one Bulgarian university finally got
a (flaky) Bitnet connection for email, and Polish travel agencies
-- at least the one Warsaw WagonsLits Cook place I had to deal with --
never did get email before they finally went under sometime in the '90s.
These days, of course, some 20 years later, they all have both fax
and email (though they tend to think it important to save electricity
by turning their fax machines off while the shop is closed overnight).
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:11:28 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss
Message-ID: <5YCdnTbPhe8juFvXnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@posted.visi>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> 5) Telex was very important in 1980 but soon lost lustre as companies
> got their own inexpensive fax machines and personal computers.
Telex remained important throughout the 1980s for communicating to the
undeveloped world (Africa, Central America). Even into the early
1990s it could be difficult to fax even a place as developed as
Turkey, because their phone systems were so bad. I still remember the
poor guy in Turkey we kept waking up, because the fax number for the
consultant we were dealing with kept ringing to this guy's home phone.
To this day the only words of Turkish I know are "'Allo? 'Allo?"
Dave
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 16:23:45 +0000 (UTC)
From: Lee Choquette <leec@xmission.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Message-ID: <ha59eh$d3p$1@news.xmission.com>
In article <p06240812c6ea55331269@[10.0.1.5]>, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:
> DRIVEN TO DISTRACTION
> At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
> ...
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/technology/01distracted.html
In the linked article:
> he delegates more authority to subordinates so they can deal with
> problems when he is on the road.
What did his subordinates do before the invention of the cell phone? Or
if he didn't have his business then, what did front-line workers do in
similar businesses? I worked a couple of minimum-wage jobs before cell
phones were common, and did just fine without being able to call my boss
any time something went wrong.
> He has trained employees to send concise messages so that he can read
> them while driving on the highway as he visits stores.
> "With the BlackBerry, you can hold it up over the steering wheel," he
> said. "I just hit 'open' and see what the issue is." [...]
> "I've done it my whole life, so I know how to multitask," he added.
I don't want to share a highway with Mr. Vered. Yet I think there's
a grain of truth in Mr. Hudson's protest:
> "You'd think we could have some leeway on the highway -- when you're on
> open road and you're wide awake," he said. "It's a little over the top
> to have a 100 percent ban. But then, where do you draw the line?"
While I don't think it's safe for a driver to ever text or email, or do
anything that requires eyeballs, no matter what the traffic conditions
are, I think that hands-free talking would be OK in light traffic. After
all, if this is true:
> researchers say [...] the brain can effectively perform only one
> difficult task at a time. [...]
> The researchers concluded, "Don't multitask while you are trying to
> learn something new you hope to remember."
then you certainly don't want to be negotiating an important business
deal with a tough adversary while also negotiating a four-deep
cloverleaf exchange in rush-hour traffic (both difficult tasks), even on
a hands-free headset.
On the other hand, I don't see the grave danger of using a hands-free
headset on an empty rural highway or back road to chat with a
sympathetic friend (both easy tasks) who will understand if you pause or
break off the conversation because you see brake lights up ahead.
Therefore I don't think there should be a statewide, much less
nationwide, ban on using hands-free headsets. Instead, any such
restrictions should be tailored to local traffic considerations.
But I don't mind if texting and emailing by drivers is verboten
everywhere, provided such restrictions do not interfere with non-driving
passengers.
Lee
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:12:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Message-ID: <43f09413-d80e-4a28-9c5a-4a9ee9f7e194@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 2, 1:43 pm, Lee Choquette <l...@xmission.com> wrote:
> What did his subordinates do before the invention of the cell phone? Or
> if he didn't have his business then, what did front-line workers do in
> similar businesses? I worked a couple of minimum-wage jobs before cell
> phones were common, and did just fine without being able to call my boss
> any time something went wrong.
Telephones were handled differently before the cellphone.
--There were payphones in a great many places. Most businesses had
one or more for the use of employees and guests.
--When a manager was out he frequently called into the home office to
check for messages.
--There were more secretaries. One of their duties was to keep track
of where the bosses were and call around to find them if needed. The
Bell System and others offered pagers for many years.
--There were more telephone operators. When an operator answered a
call at a business, she would track down guests or managers if need be
by calling around or using a PA system. This was one of their duties.
--Managers carried telephone Calling (credit) cards so they could make
calls from other locations without the host incurring a charge.
One could argue that in the old days if a manager was out of touch for
the brief while he was on the road problems could wait. The problem
is that competitors, seeking a jump, made use of cellphones to make
decisions quicker. The business that can make accurate decisions the
quickest and get back to a customer or vendor wins out. So, once one
business got a cellphone to stay in close touch, its competitors had
to get one as well.
Business were structured a little differently back then and more labor
intensive. Again, when one competitor streamlines to save money (by
using better telephone techniques like cellphones), the others must do
so as well to keep up.
The same issues applied in the early days of telephones. Should a
business get keysets, extra lines, a fancy PBX? Yes, it did, to keep
up.
> While I don't think it's safe for a driver to ever text or email, or do
> anything that requires eyeballs, no matter what the traffic conditions
> are, I think that hands-free talking would be OK in light traffic. After
> all, if this is true:
. . .
You'd be surprised the disruptions a cell phone yakker does to traffic
even on small streets. They're not paying attention, sometimes
stopping dead at a green light.
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:39:47 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Message-ID: <ha5hdj$gu$3@news.eternal-september.org>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>--There were payphones in a great many places. Most businesses had
>one or more for the use of employees and guests.
You're saying that the lack of pay phones requires you to use your cell phone
while driving. Nonsense. Simply pull over to the side of the road and use
the cell phone. That's what I do. That's all that the state is asking you to
do.
>--There were more secretaries. One of their duties was to keep track
>of where the bosses were and call around to find them if needed. The
>Bell System and others offered pagers for many years.
When I'm driving I let my phone ring and voicemail gets it. If it's important
enough they leave a message or at least leave caller ID and I phone them back.
I also mention as part of my message that I do not take calls while driving.
This hasn't resulted in any lost conversations that I can recall.
--
"You're in probably the wickedest, most corrupt city, most
Godless city in America." -- Fr Mullen, "San Francisco"
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:22:34 -0400
From: Eric Tappert <e.tappert.spamnot@worldnet.att.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: At 60 M.P.H., Office Work Is High Risk
Message-ID: <7ikcc59fd6tevmhjk87uk1lpes4smte6jr@4ax.com>
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:20:55 -0400 (EDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>You'd be surprised the disruptions a cell phone yakker does to traffic
>even on small streets. They're not paying attention, sometimes
>stopping dead at a green light.
I think it is curious to note that over half of the handsets for cell
phones in the Bell System's Chicago service trial (1978) were in the
back seat....
That was the nature of mobile phone service prior to the explosion of
handheld phones. Just this morning I saw a lady fly through a stop
sign because she was on the phone. Hands free is a small, very small,
improvement, the real problem is distraction.
Eric T.
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:59:21 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Verizon strips murals from N.E.T. HQ at 185 Franklin St. in Boston
Message-ID: <XYOdnU-k4oyzP1vXnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
(Sorry, I fat-fingered the first one. This is the full version.)
According to the Boston Herald, Verizon has outraged preservationists
by removing the mural paintings that were shown in the lobby at 185
Franklin St. in Boston. The paintings, which showed linemen,
switchboard operators, horses, trucks, switches, and various examples
of poles, wires, etc., were the centerpiece of the lobby at the former
headquarters of New England Telephone and Telegraph, where I once
worked.
The building, which is to be sold, is a classic example of "art deco"
design, and it was updated to remove more recent changes and return it
to the art deco motif during the 80's. It's unclear if Verizon will be
donating the murals to a museum, reusing them in another building, or
selling them: I've seen different opinions or whether the removal was
done to preserve the murals or not, but given the extensive (and
expensive) work done to restore West Street in New York post 9/11, I
think Verizon's motives are proper.
"Boston Franklin" was a major toll cable interchange point during the
electronmechanical era, and held a lot of the "L" carrier and
microwave equipment for both N.E.T. and Long Lines, in addition to a
#4 crossbar tandem. It also housed the WADS office which served TWX. I
worked on the Radio Board there in the early 80's, and I was on the
team that maintained the ship-to-shore terminal, the paging equipment,
the air-to-ground telephone terminal, and the microwave systems, as
well as the broadcast tie lines that connected studios to transmitters
for most AM and FM broadcast stations in the city.
http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1201623
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from address for direct replies)
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 (10 messages)
**********
|
or 