|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 282 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Blinkenlights
Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been...
Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
211 puts help on the line
Massachusetts' 2-1-1 system
Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
====== 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: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 06:02:42 GMT
From: Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Blinkenlights
Message-ID: <87pr8rg7mo.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>
Michael Grigoni <michael.grigoni@cybertheque.org> wrote:
> For years I had a version of the famous blinkenlights notice....
> [snip]
>
> Here is the version as displayed by Wikipedia:
>
> ACHTUNG!
> ALLES TURISTEN UND NONTEKNISCHEN LOOKENPEEPERS!
> DAS KOMPUTERMASCHINE IST NICHT FÜR DER GEFINGERPOKEN UND
> MITTENGRABEN! ODERWISE IST EASY TO SCHNAPPEN DER SPRINGENWERK,
> BLOWENFUSEN UND POPPENCORKEN MIT SPITZENSPARKSEN.
> IST NICHT FÜR GEWERKEN BEI DUMMKOPFEN. DER RUBBERNECKEN
> SIGHTSEEREN KEEPEN DAS COTTONPICKEN HÄNDER IN DAS POCKETS MUSS.
> ZO RELAXEN UND WATSCHEN DER BLINKENLICHTEN.
>
> This differs somewhat from my recollection and indeed the Wikipedia
> article states that a great many versions existed.
Here's what I have on file, source forgotten:
ACHTUNG - ALLES LOOKENPEEPERS
-----------------------------
Dies Machine is nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mitten-graben. Is
easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowen-fusen und poppencorken
mit spitzensparken. Is nicht fuer gewerken by das dumm-kopfen.
Das rubber necken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets -
relaxen und watch das blinken lights.
I'm sure the first instance I saw, at least as far back as sometime in
the 60s, did not contain the words "Turisten und Nonteknischen".
Wayyyy back, it was a cutsey squibb in Reader's Digest, at a time when
it was meaninful to speak of "the computer" at places like MIT.
FWIW,
- Mike
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:07:17 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been...
Message-ID: <QPednbCwIeQJhUnXnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@posted.visi>
Michael Grigoni wrote:
> In the late '70s and throughout the '80s I had exactly that
> (Northwestern Bell, Mpls) and there never was any hint of an objection
> or a problem; in fact this is the first that I've heard of any.
Something changed, then, because by the early to mid '90s (when I ran
a Fidonet BBS in Minneapolis) they would not let me have a mix of
flat-rate and measured service lines (obviously the idea of cheaper
service for incoming-only lines was attractive). I don't remember if
it was still NW Bell at that point, or USWest, or Qwest.
Dave
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:42:47 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Message-ID: <pan.2009.10.13.06.42.44.859064@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com>
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:39:36 +0000, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <p06240807c6f8f6b6b501@[10.0.1.4]>, Monty Solomon
> <monty@roscom.com> wrote:
>
>> So, how will these new tools change the way we communicate? Let's start
>> with the most obvious: They make our interactions that much faster.
>
> Huh?
>
> There is no earthly reason why any of these systems need be any slower
> than email[1] -- and email has the advantage that it's much easier to
> ignore people whose notion of "urgent" doesn't match up with one's own.
> (Some People seem to have the misapprehension that if you have an IM
> client open, for example, then you are paying exclusive attention to that
> application and have nothing else to do. Which may be true for
> twenty-year-old college students -- kids these days! -- but isn't true for
> too many people who have actual jobs.)
>
> -GAWollman
>
> [1] Last time I looked at the statistics, our email system here at
> work delivered 50% of all messages in six seconds or less, and the
> vast majority in less than ten minutes.
Yep, even though e-mail was designed as a store-and-forward system it
still works remarkably quickly when it doesn't have to "store" in any of
the components along the chain.
When you can click "OK" on a web side on one side of the planet and a
response arrives in your Inbox a second or two later, I don't think anyone
can complain about the optimum speed of the e-mail protocol.
I wonder how well these other "tools" perform when full
end-to-end connectivity is not always present?
--
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, 13 Oct 2009 06:38:31 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Message-ID: <sp%Am.142471$Y83.71449@newsfe21.iad>
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> In article <p06240807c6f8f6b6b501@[10.0.1.4]>,
> Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:
>
>
>>So, how will these new tools change the way we communicate? Let's
>>start with the most obvious: They make our interactions that much
>>faster.
>
>
> Huh?
>
> There is no earthly reason why any of these systems need be any slower
> than email[1] -- and email has the advantage that it's much easier to
> ignore people whose notion of "urgent" doesn't match up with one's
> own. (Some People seem to have the misapprehension that if you have
> an IM client open, for example, then you are paying exclusive
> attention to that application and have nothing else to do. Which may
> be true for twenty-year-old college students -- kids these days! --
> but isn't true for too many people who have actual jobs.)
>
> -GAWollman
>
> [1] Last time I looked at the statistics, our email system here at
> work delivered 50% of all messages in six seconds or less, and the
> vast majority in less than ten minutes.
>
If it needs to be quicker than email they can try to reach me via a
conventional telephone number.
I have texting blocked on my wife's and my wireless family plan.
Neither cell phone is on unless we are out of town. Having said that
I can understand why some business folks need a cell phone on much
of the time. Even with them, though, texting is often instrusive and
overused.
Email is essential to me in my consulting business. The ability to
send attachments is almost as important as the message itself. Those
are mostly PDF and Word documents.
We use Go To Meeting for sharing desktop applications, which is
occasionally invaluable.
With email I have long since learned to quickly identify and trash
spam. My biggest problem is a close relative who is retired and has
nothing better to do than send all the yesteryear and political
baloney.
***** Moderator's Note *****
I knew a Systems Analist who had his Mother-In-Law's email address
routed to an automatic response robot, which spat back a rotating list
of excuses that explained why he couldn't do anything until later. His
Mother-in-law sent him more emails after he installed the filter, and
the next time he saw her in person, she complimented him on how he was
the only one of her relatives who always answered her emails.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:40:32 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Message-ID: <l_9Bm.34677$tG1.16507@newsfe22.iad>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I knew a Systems Analist who had his Mother-In-Law's email address
> routed to an automatic response robot, which spat back a rotating list
> of excuses that explained why he couldn't do anything until later. His
> Mother-in-law sent him more emails after he installed the filter, and
> the next time he saw her in person, she complimented him on how he was
> the only one of her relatives who always answered her emails.
She will catch up with him in the afterlife. ;-)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 14:51:10 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Why Email No Longer Rules... / And what that means for the way we communicate
Message-ID: <pan.2009.10.14.03.51.07.694643@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com>
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:40:32 -0700, Sam Spade wrote:
>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>>
>> I knew a Systems Analist who had his Mother-In-Law's email address
>> routed to an automatic response robot, which spat back a rotating list
>> of excuses that explained why he couldn't do anything until later. His
>> Mother-in-law sent him more emails after he installed the filter, and
>> the next time he saw her in person, she complimented him on how he was
>> the only one of her relatives who always answered her emails.
>
> She will catch up with him in the afterlife. ;-)
Why?, that is only a step or two away from these call centers who are
basically staffed by humans only to give an outlet to the disgruntled and
confused (most of the time the "problem" isn't resolved, but people feel
better because they have talked to someone).
If you essentially automate the process of making someone feel like they
have communicated, what's the harm in that?...... ;-))
Of course, if the originator of these e-mails always got immediate
responses for each one then sooner or later they would twig that it was a
machine responding - better to have something only send the responses back
during sensible hours of the day......
--
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, 13 Oct 2009 08:16:25 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: 211 puts help on the line
Message-ID: <p06240825c6fa1e696b68@[10.0.1.4]>
211 puts help on the line
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
By GEORGE GRAHAM
SPRINGFIELD - Need food or shelter? Help with rent or utility bills?
Call 2-1-1.
Those three numbers, available 24 hours a day, tap into the United
Way's Mass 211 help line.
The service also provides employment support and support for seniors,
those with disabilities, youth and families.
Last year, nearly7,000 people within the United Way of Pioneer Valley
service area called for help with such things as emergency fuel needs
or food, rental assistance and health and social needs, officials say.
Statewide, that number is topped only by the United Way of
Massachusetts Bay and Merrimack Valley which received some 16,000
calls.
"Certainly the economy is a factor," said Ronald A. Copes, interim
president of the United Way of Pioneer Valley and chief executive
officer, adding that community leaders are being told about the
importance of the help line as a resource.
"We are hopeful that word is getting out," Copes said.
Statewide, more than 4,300 calls are made each month to the single
call center office in Framingham.
Gary R. Lever, who manages the service, said a call to 211 is, for
some people, like the last straw.
...
http://www.masslive.com/chicopeeholyoke/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-23/125541998880620.xml&coll=1
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:16:25 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Massachusetts' 2-1-1 system
Message-ID: <p06240826c6fa1fccbe6e@[10.0.1.4]>
What is Massachusetts 2-1-1?
2-1-1 is the national abbreviated dialing code for free access to
health and human services Information and Referral. 2-1-1 is an
easy-to-remember and universally recognizable number that makes a
critical connection between individuals and families seeking services
or volunteer opportunities and the appropriate community-based
organizations and government agencies. 2-1-1 makes it possible for
people to navigate the complex and ever-growing maze of human service
agencies and programs. By making services easier to access, 2-1-1
encourages prevention and fosters self-sufficiency. It also is hoped
that it will reduce the number of non-emergency calls inappropriately
made to 911.
...
http://www.mass211.org/Mass211About.html
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:23:16 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Message-ID: <MPG.253f002290771d77989ba9@news.eternal-september.org>
In article <5iv2d59i8es4bjr0gvlhu3e6f10oanl7u7@4ax.com>,
rng@richbonnie.com says...
> In the middle 1970's, I lived in southern New Hampshire, 20 miles
> north of Boston. One night, while watching TV Channel 2 from Boston
> of the air, the picture got strong interference. When the
> interference cleared, I was watching channel 2 from New York City,
> 200 miles away. The New York signal completely overrode the Boston
> signal. This lasted a couple of hours. I never saw the phenomenon
> again.
A nicely charged E layer no doubt. We're entering solar max again
which means that the layers are going to get a good dose of charge.
***** Moderator's Note *****
I hear this sunspot cycle is turning out to be a dud. That's really
too bad, since high sunspot numbers mean lots of unusual radio
propagation, which makes ham operators happy. Of course, it also
affects commercial, police, fire, and other public safety users in
certain bands, such as the 30 to 50 MHz band in the U.S., so there are
lots of non-ham users who'd just as soon do without sunspots entirely.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:52:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Message-ID: <1a947660-d352-425f-be24-6f05871de40d@j4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 9, 2:03 am, David Clayton <dcs...@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> wrote:
> These days the cost of storing data is trivial compared to even just a few
> years ago. In theory location registration data & call record data could
> be stored indefinitely - either on-line or in archives (somewhere).
Yes, the cost of storage is down relative to just a few years ago.
But there is still a cost to the hardware, power consumption,
security, a/c, and floor space. It still adds up.
Further, these days we store a lot more information about a
transaction as compared to the past since we have the room for it.
We also have cross references and indexing which take up space and CPU
cycles, not merely plain raw sequential files.
> It has since emerged that the base station antenna pattern of the GSM
> tower used in the court evidence could well have registered his phone
> at the location he said he was in - because of the characteristics of
> the radiation pattern that still has some functionality in the
> opposite direction that the main gain area is - but the court just got
> a simplistic technical explanation of how these things work.
Bummer.
I often originate cell phone calls from the exact same static physical
location. Yet on the bill three different tower locations (towns) are
shown for the various calls. That is, the same location is handle by
at least three different towers in different towns, and probably more.
On the road, I once made a call and it was shown as carried by a tower
in a town 30 miles away.
What troubles me is that skilled scammers will forge someone's
supposedly secure computer account ID so they get blamed for a
computer crime.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Message-ID: <eea6f5a1-f204-4fc6-ac93-df27f204b26d@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 10, 3:05 pm, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
> Well, if you mean the 1950's or so, that may have been correct.
> ANYTHING with 'Centrex'-type capabilities could generate SMDR-type
> records for every call, incoming or outgoing. If a switch can do it
> for Centrex service, it can do it for all users as well. And,
> historically, _did_. And still does. Only a small minority of
> land-line phone service is 'flat rate' based, even today -- business
> service is all 'metered'. and to 'audit' such a bill for accuracy,
> you have to show when, and _to_where_, each and every call was made.
The cost of a local call in my area has been and remains one message
unit--7c. Back in the days when all they had were line meters, 7c was
equivalent to 70c, and for a busy business, that added up. But back
then businesses had to accept the meter value (per line available in
Centrex, but still a meter). Suburban calls had multiple units,
again, only the meter value. I believe for special audits they could
add a special register tracking device, but this was not the norm.
Today, 7c isn't that much. Companies freely allow guests to make
local calls and even provide phones in reception areas for that
purpose; in the old days there would be a pay phone.
I find it hard to imagine a company auditing a bunch of 7c calls to
extract out the time and to whom called. They already know from
either Centrex or modern PBX records calls from a given extension.
(In the old days a PBX operator could log local calls if mgmt so
desired.)
The phone bills I have seen still only list message units, not
itemized local calls.
> There is an entire industry out there based on doing this kind of
> double- checking, for the purpose of keeping the telco 'honest' in
> their charges.
>
> Doing this for 'local' calling is as important for a business with a
> large local customer base as it is for one with a national base.
If one employee made 1,000 local calls a month, at $0.07 that would
come out to $70.00, which doesn't seem to be worth the expense of an
audit. Penny smart dollar foolish.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: NYPD knows who you've been talking to. And where you've been..
Message-ID: <969ae3b0-bc22-4751-ae5e-b8db264dc7ae@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 12, 10:41 am, Wesr...@aol.com wrote:
> I have never lived anywhere that 1FR and 1FB service were not
> available and made up the vast number of customers. 1MR and 1MB on
> the same premises as flat rate service were usually forbidden to
> prevent the obvious temptation to use the message rate service for
> incoming calls only and use the flat rate service for outgoing calls.
> Exceptions could be authorized in some cases where that potential did
> not exist.
I have one line as flat rate, which I use as my outgoing line, and one
line as message rate, which I use as my incoming line.
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 (12 messages)
|
or 