---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <20180204161209.GA3860@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2018 11:12:09 -0500 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Fraudulent purchases made on Verizon customer's account, police say BY Bret Pallotto Six Verizon Wireless cellphones and accompanying plans were fraudulently purchased from the account of a State College female, according to police. The offender reportedly gathered the female's account information and purchased the phones and plans before shipping them to an unknown location. State College police said the items cost about $3,000. http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/crime/article198295214.html -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <911e3724-7842-4b85-960b-9f98d1071051@googlegroups.com> Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 12:23:36 -0800 (PST) From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: Gmail has marked this morning's Telecom Digest with a warning On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 1:28:07 PM UTC-5, Bill Horne wrote: > Google doesn't reveal the way it rates emails, but I reviewed this > copy of the Digest with an eye toward "Spaminess," and I don't see > any reason for the warning. >From time to time, I would get such messages for personal emails but never could figure out why. Likewise, some of my emails would end up in my recipients' SPAM box. I learned to periodically check my SPAM in-box as sometimes important legitimate mail was in there. [In other news, yesterday I got a new recording from a credit card company claiming to be "my bank with lower interest rates".] ***** Moderator's Note ***** Well, Google's "Don't be evil" motto is all very nice, but they don't seem to have any problem being a pain in the butt. What the company appears to be trying to do is eliminate spam single-handed, not only by having tight spam controls, but also by dictating that any email service which they deign to accept connections from must have "SPF" records and a "DKIM" record in place, plus the "usual" DNS "PTR" record for any domain that they talk to. No problem for deep-pocketed multi-nationals, of course, but those of us who run personal servers seldom have the knowledge or time - or money - to implement such precautions. One of the privileges of being billionaires is that Sergei Brin and Larry Page can tilt at windmills, and even force others to do it, by seeking a Quixotic prize known as the FUSSP: the Final Ultimate Solution to the Spam Problem. Unfortunately, being billionaires also means that very few experts are willing to tell them that it's unobtainium. As John Levine once pointed out, a cut-rate telegraph service instituted over a century ago was quickly overwhelmed with advertising messages, and John also pointed out that any low-cost delivery method will be abused, and the spammers can't get any lower a cost than the one provided by having the victims pay for the transport themselves. Google is taking a risk: the classic trap of crying "Wolf!" so often than no one believes the warning anymore. Bill Horne Moderator ------------------------------ Message-ID: <f09ecbdd-6b0b-485a-b362-20dacfff2064@googlegroups.com> Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 12:28:14 -0800 (PST) From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: AT&T merger judge says 'no big issues' in trial preparations On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 12:45:53 PM UTC-5, Bill Horne wrote: > WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. judge who will decide if wireless and > pay TV provider AT&T Inc may purchase Time Warner Inc said on Friday > that he saw "no big issues" in pre-trial preparations. FWIW, in my humble opinion this sale should not go through. Indeed, I never liked that Time Inc. and Warner Bros. merged years ago, or that Comcast owns Universal and NBC. The dangers of very large companies are several: . too much power over the marketplace, causing prices to go up and selection to go down. * too much power over hiring, causing wages and working conditions to go down, and leaving workers with fewer options to change jobs. * too much power over purchasing, forcing suppliers to sell at tiny profits. Walmart, being the retail powerhouse, is known to do this to suppliers. * "too big to fail". If the company gets into trouble (more likely when it's oversized), there are so many people adversely impacted that a govt taxpayer bailout becomes necessary. ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Mon, 05 Feb 2018