30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for October 26, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 272 : "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: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:02:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Using Credit Cards to Target Web Ads
Message-ID: <p06240824cacc6390856a@[10.0.1.9]>
Using Credit Cards to Target Web Ads
By EMILY STEEL
OCTOBER 25, 2011
The two largest credit-card networks, Visa Inc. and MasterCard Inc.,
are pushing into a new business: using what they know about people's
credit-card purchases for targeting them with ads online.
Their plans, if implemented, would represent not only a technological
feat-tying people's Internet lives with shopping activities-but also
an erosion of the idea of anonymity on the Web. It's an effort by the
two companies to profit by selling access to the insights they gather
about people with every credit-card transaction.
The technology is still evolving. According to ad executives briefed
on some of the ideas, a holy grail would be to show, for instance, a
weight-loss ad to a person who just swiped their card at a fast-food
chain-then track whether that person bought the advertised products.
Currently, Web ads generally are based on a person's online behavior
but not information tied to his or her identity or activities in the
brick-and-mortar world.
...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204002304576627030651339352.html
MasterCard's Talks with Madison Avenue
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/10/24/mastercards-talks-with-madison-avenue/
Visa's Blueprint for Targeted Advertising
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/10/24/visas-blueprint-for-targeted-advertising/
Excerpts from the MasterCard Documents
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/10/24/excerpts-from-the-mastercard-documents/
***** Moderator's Note *****
Does this mean that if I buy dinner at Runway 69 in New York, the
airline will offer to have a naked flight attendent serve me on the
way home, or just that I'll be offered a different movie?
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:40:20 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Cell Phone/Cancer
Message-ID: <pan.2011.10.25.06.40.15.327582@yahoo.com.au>
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:03:32 -0700, Thad Floryan wrote:
> On 10/23/2011 10:49 PM, David Clayton wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 11:52:27 -0400, Randall Webmail wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/3b4hp7b
>>> (Link is to Fortune magazine article).
>>
>> Interesting graph, I'd like to see the points on the time scale when
>> cell phone users began migrating from old analogue services to digital
>> ones, especially since digital systems are supposed to use less power
>> generally as well as using more base stations as the networks were
>> rolled out (which means less Tx power because of the closer base
>> stations).
>>
>> Perhaps "cell phone use has skyrocketed over the last twenty years", but
>> overall radiation exposure may well have not tracked on the same curve
>> to to these other factors.
>>
>> The "jury" may well and truly still be out on this issue.
>
> FWIW, GSM cellphones can transmit using up to 2+ Watts (33 dBm) and as
> high as 8 Watts (39 dBm) per:
>
>
> http://www.analogzone.com/hft_1206.pdf
>
>
> which is a document from Agilent Technologies (formerly H-P) describing
> how to control transmit power levels in a cellphone.
>
> Think how hot a 4 Watt nightlight feels to the touch. :-)
>
Yeah, but the point is that the overall average power by all these users
will be significantly reduced by a good tower network - and until we know
all of these factors then it is very tough to compare TX levels now to
ones 10 or 20 years ago even in the same locations.
Cell phone use and TX power/radiation absorption levels right now may (or
may not) be significantly different to times past and probably times to
come, so it may well be extremely difficult to use the past to make future
projections of risk - the technology just changes too much.
The nature of a GSM "pulse" of 8W peak may be significantly different to
an older analogue phone transmitting basically continuously at a different
power level. I don't know if all of these studies take these things into
account.
I do wonder how much the "experts" in human physiology that create
these reports are also expert in the changing nature of the radiation
sources they are studying?
> What was surprising for me to learn just now is the 35 km coverage radius
> of GSM cellphones; I suspect that's where the higher transmit power levels
> come into play.
That distance limit is due to the speed of light, where the return signal
only has a certain period to get back to the tower to remain in the TDM
slot. Some GSM proposals have doubled that range by using the next slot as
well.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:02:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Apple's Lower Prices Are All Part of the Plan
Message-ID: <p06240820cacc12038cda@[10.0.1.9]>
Apple's Lower Prices Are All Part of the Plan
By NICK WINGFIELD
October 23, 2011
Something unexpected has happened at Apple, once known as the tech
industry's high-price leader. Over the last several years it began
beating rivals on price.
People who wanted the latest Apple smartphone, the iPhone 4S, were
able to get one the day it went on sale if they were willing to wait
in a line, spend at least $199 and commit to a two-year wireless
service contract with a carrier.
Or they could have skipped the lines and bought one of the latest
iPhone rivals from an Apple competitor, as long as they were willing
to dig deeper into their wallets. For $300 and a two-year contract,
gadget lovers could have picked up Motorola's Droid Bionic from
Verizon Wireless, or they could bought the $230 Samsung Galaxy SII
and $260 HTC Amaze 4G, both from T-Mobile, under the same terms.
Apple's new pricing strategy is a big change from the 1990s, when
consumers regarded Apple as a producer of overpriced tech baubles,
unable to compete effectively with its Macintosh family of computers
against the far cheaper Windows PCs. But more recently, it began
using its growing manufacturing scale and logistics prowess to
deliver Apple products at far more aggressive prices, which in turn
gave it more power to influence pricing industrywide.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/technology/apples-lower-prices-are-all-part-of-the-plan.html
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:43:40 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Telegraph turns 150
Message-ID: <pan.2011.10.25.06.43.39.349220@yahoo.com.au>
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:02:47 -0700, HAncock4 wrote:
> LOS ANGELES - Long before there was an Internet or an iPad, before people
> were social networking and instant messaging, Americans had already gotten
> wired.
>
> Monday marks the 150th anniversary of the completion of the
> transcontinental telegraph. From sea to sea, it electronically knitted
> together a nation that was simultaneously tearing itself apart, North and
> South, in the Civil War.
>
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45007641/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/
>
By coincidence I am just about to finish watching the DVDs of that
magnificent Ken Burns documentary of the Civil War, and the telegraph
system was mentioned in the closing episodes of 1865.
That war certainly pushed a lot of technological innovation of that age.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
***** Moderator's Note *****
I've written about this subject before, but it bears repeating: the
greatest innovations that resulted from the telegraph were not
technical, but social. The ability to communicate by wire gave rise to
the commercial credit industry, to the modern system of livestock and
produce sales, and to meteorology as we know it today. The telephone
succeeded so well because telegraph-based commerce had laid the
groundwork for all the services that telephone users could
take advantage of.
FWIW, I think Edison chose to use 110 Volts for the commercial power
network in the U.S. because he had been a telegrapher, and telegraph
lines were powered by 110 volt battery plants.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 07:37:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Leatherock <wleathus@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Edison's powrer network (Was Re: Telegraph turns 150
Message-ID: <1319553461.472.YahooMailClassic@web111724.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
--- On Tue, 10/25/11, Telecom Digest Moderator wrote:
> FWIW, I think Edison chose to use 110 Volts for the commercial power
> network in the U.S. because he had been a telegrapher, and telegraph
> lines were powered by 110 volt battery plants.
With all due respect, I don't think Edison envisioned a commercial
power network, because it could not be achieved with his direct
current system. Nikola Tesla laid the groundwork for long distance
power transmission by conceiving alternating current, especially
polyphase A.C. which became the basis for a national power network,
along with many other advantages.
Wes Leatherock
wleathus@yahoo.com
wesrock@aol.com
***** Moderator's Note *****
I meant "system", but it was a network in the sense that any
commercial company needs to have a combination of people, plan, and
ability that makes it into a "network" of commercial interests.
I know that Edison didn't envision a power grid: he once said that the
only way to move electricity from city to city was to charge batteries
and load them onto railroad flatcars. My point was that he used the
same voltage he was familiar with from his days as a telegrapher, and
we in the U.S. are still using it, although it has been converted to AC.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 07:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Leatherock <wleathus@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Telegraph turns 150
Message-ID: <1319552696.71867.YahooMailClassic@web111718.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
--- On Tue, 10/25/11, David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> By coincidence I am just about to finish watching the DVDs of that
> magnificent Ken Burns documentary of the Civil War, and the
> telegraph system was mentioned in the closing episodes of 1865.
>
> That war certainly pushed a lot of technological innovation of that
> age.
Indeed it did. For the first time, a war was conducted almost in real
time with direction from the command in Washington. Troops were moved
around in response to information from the field, and in conjunction
with railroads to move those troops it had great effect on the outcome
of many battles, and of the war.
Wes Leatherock
wleathus@yahoo.com
wesrock@aol.com
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 03:32:02 -0500
From: rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Cell Phone/Cancer
Message-ID: <Yf2dnWanu6uf6TvTnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> wrote:
+---------------
| FWIW, GSM cellphones can transmit using up to 2+ Watts (33 dBm)
| and as high as 8 Watts (39 dBm) per:
|
| http://www.analogzone.com/hft_1206.pdf
|
+---------------
Remember that a standard-rate GSM voice call only transmits for one
576.9 [micro-second] slot out of the eight in a 4.615 [milli-second]
frame, which is a duty cycle of only 12.5%.
[Actually, due to the allowed switch-on/switch-off times, as noted in
Figure 1 of the document you reference, the phone might transmit at
(nearly) full power for up to 578.8 [micro-seconds]/frame, for an
effective duty cycle of 12.54%, but now we're just quibbling.]
So the heating effect is only one-eighth of 2 (or 8, for 850/900 MHz)
Watts, namely, only 0.25 (or 1.0) W.
For half-rate GSM voice calls [which only use one slot every other
frame], the heating effect would be smaller by another factor of two,
that is, only 0.125 W (or 0.5 W). The phone companies use half-rate
whenever they can get awy with it, since it doubles the number of
calls they can handle in a given channel.
Furthermore, the cell phone's output amplifier is controlled down to
the lowest power which gives good signal-to-noise at the receiving
cell tower [but not less than +5 dBm or 3 mW], so most of the time
the heating effect is much smaller still.
And that doesn't even account for the fact that only a small fraction
of the power transmitted from your phone goes into your head, else
you wouldn't be able to talk to the other end!! Most of it needs
to be radiated out into the world! So there's another factor of
*at least* 2 -- and probably 4-10 -- reduction in the heating effect.
In short, while knowing what the absolute worst-case peak instantaneous
transmit power your phone emits is good to know, by itself it gives
an unrealistically exaggerated impression of the energy that will be
absorbed by the body.
-Rob
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Rob Warnock <rpw3@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue
http://rpw3.org/
San Mateo, CA 94403
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:38:16 -0400
From: Curt Bramblett <CurtBramblett@cfl.rr.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: dugout phones--the plot thickens
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20111025123606.01467008@pop-server.cfl.rr.com>
Ironically, it was the dugout phone connection that got the credit for
Texas' win last night:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/sports/baseball/napoli-moves-rangers-one-step-closer.html?_r=1&ref=sports
Seems that the bullpen did not hear St. Louis' manager's call for another
pitcher. Twice! So how hard is it to get phones that can be heard above the
noise?
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:46:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: dugout telephones
Message-ID: <ee69ebd7-1061-4fc1-9888-c3c3e8285c08@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 24, 10:25 am, Curt Bramblett <CurtBramblett.remove-t...@and-
this-too.cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> Can someone here add some insight to this:
>"Eric Gagne, then the closer for the Los Angeles Dodgers, made the
>dugout phone at Pac Bell Park in San Francisco an outlet for his
>frustrations, snapping the cord in half while swiping at the receiver
>and in the process earning himself a $500 repair bill from the Giants."
How does a cut cord and broken handset cost $500 to repair?
Anyway, I would think such dugout phones would be part of the
stadium's PBX, with a restriction against making outside calls (a
standard long time PBX feature). I've seen pictures of dugouts and
there were often two wall phones. Phone service would be necessary
not only to call the bullpen, but also stadium security, stadium
management offices, team management offices, the locker room, PA
announcer, and first-aid. (Actually, I would think such phones should
have outside capability in case of an emergency; I'm surprised league
regulations would prohibit it.)
Because of noise, it may be helpful to have volume control handsets.
These have been available since the 1950s and easily available today.
The standard telephone set ringer is pretty loud on its highest
setting, but they also make extra loud auxillary ringers (gas stations
and school gyms used to have them).
"While landlines in homes collect dust and serve increasingly
decorative functions, the attitude among baseball clubs is a familiar
one in a sport tied tightly to old-fashioned ways: why change what
works? "
While wireless has increased its presence, I strongly doubt there
would be enough wireless bandwidth to support every household if all
homeowners dumped their landlines all at once. Likewise for the
business world.
Also, maybe the future will be different, but at this writing the
conversation reliability and quality on a wired landline phone, even
on an older Western Electric "G" handset, is far superior than that of
wireless.
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 18:35:48 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: The Lightsquared debate continues - unabated
Message-ID: <CAFY5RQK4Qs4oKZjDs-Fi0PzKhyp1yuoEQdn4P-qoAcYt0ygcMw@mail.gmail.com>
The blogspot "The Hill" has some more debate about Lightsquared Corp's
plan to coexist with the GPS system:
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/189041-lightsquared-harms-gps
The author might not be a disinterested party, as the comments
mention, but I'm curious what others think.
Bill Horne
(Filter QRM from my email to write to me directly)
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) 2011 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)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues