30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for December 16, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 320 : "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: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 06:28:30 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Carrier IQ reactes badly to being caught with its hand in the cookie jar
Message-ID: <4EE9D9DE.40807@horne.net>
Carrier IQ reactes badly to being caught with its hand in the cookie jar.
In the December 15th edition of Crypto-Gram, Bruce Schneier has this to
say about Carrer IQ and the company's reaction to the recent publicity
about it's capabilities and customers:
Carrier IQ Spyware
Spyware on many smart phones monitors your every action, including
collecting individual keystrokes. The company that makes and runs
this software on behalf of different carriers, Carrier IQ, freaked
when a security researcher outed them. It initially claimed it
didn't monitor keystrokes -- an easily refuted lie -- and threatened
to sue the researcher. It took EFF getting involved to get the
company to back down.
Rest is at
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-1112.html
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:53:49 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: ARRL questions risk of cell phone use while driving
Message-ID: <jcdc7e$nhm$1@dont-email.me>
The American Radio Relay League, which represents many Ham Radio
operators such as I, has sent a letter to its members which questions
the accuracy of two studies that found increased risk of accidents by
those using cellphones while driving.
ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ, wrote about NTSB
initiatives to prohibit cellphone use, and questioned if the earlier
studies were accurate, citing a story by Amy Norton at Reuters which
questions the statistical methodology of the earlier works.
The Reuters story "Studies may have overestimated cellphone crash risk"
is at
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/12/us-studies-cellphone-crash-idUSTRE7BB1B720111212
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:35:58 -0800
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: ARRL questions risk of cell phone use while driving
Message-ID: <4EEA3E0E.2040906@thadlabs.com>
On 12/15/2011 9:53 AM, Bill Horne wrote:
> The American Radio Relay League, which represents many Ham Radio
> operators such as I, has sent a letter to its members which questions
> the accuracy of two studies that found increased risk of accidents by
> those using cellphones while driving.
>
> ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ, wrote about NTSB
> initiatives to prohibit cellphone use, and questioned if the earlier
> studies were accurate, citing a story by Amy Norton at Reuters which
> questions the statistical methodology of the earlier works.
>
> The Reuters story "Studies may have overestimated cellphone crash risk"
> is at
>
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/12/us-studies-cellphone-crash-idUSTRE7BB1B720111212
>
Anyone who isn't blind can easily observe that cellphone using
and/or texting drivers on the streets, byways, turnpikes, highways,
freeways and even in parking lots are as least as dangerous as drunk
drivers.
No study is even needed to confirm the obvious: distracted driving
(cellphone/texting usage) is dangerous.
My question: why are so many people, who should know better, in denial?
***** Moderator's Note *****
I doubt Mr. Sumner is in denial, but he is trying to make sure that
any new laws regarding cellular use have exceptions for ham radio
operators, so that "cell phone" bans don't affect those using two-way
(push-to-talk) radios on Amateur frequencies.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:30:39 -0700
From: chaniarts <chaniarts@nospam.yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: ARRL questions risk of cell phone use while driving
Message-ID: <jcdhsv$rgn$2@dont-email.me>
On 12/15/2011 11:35 AM, Thad Floryan wrote:
> On 12/15/2011 9:53 AM, Bill Horne wrote:
>> The American Radio Relay League, which represents many Ham Radio
>> operators such as I, has sent a letter to its members which questions
>> the accuracy of two studies that found increased risk of accidents by
>> those using cellphones while driving.
>>
>> ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ, wrote about NTSB
>> initiatives to prohibit cellphone use, and questioned if the earlier
>> studies were accurate, citing a story by Amy Norton at Reuters which
>> questions the statistical methodology of the earlier works.
>>
>> The Reuters story "Studies may have overestimated cellphone crash risk"
>> is at
>>
>> http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/12/us-studies-cellphone-crash-idUSTRE7BB1B720111212
>>
>
> Anyone who isn't blind can easily observe that cellphone using
> and/or texting drivers on the streets, byways, turnpikes, highways,
> freeways and even in parking lots are as least as dangerous as drunk
> drivers.
>
> No study is even needed to confirm the obvious: distracted driving
> (cellphone/texting usage) is dangerous.
>
> My question: why are so many people, who should know better, in denial?
This happened to me just this morning, around 5am so it was still dark.
Four lane divided road. I'm behind a large suburban, who suddenly comes to
a complete panic stop. I swerved around him to find a VW Beetle stopped
in the middle of the two lanes, the operator chatting away on a cell
phone. The Beetle driver had just slowed down, and stopped, in traffic.
I can't imagine that this [law] will ever come into effect, but it
would be a good thing.
Regards,
charlie
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:41:50 -0500
From: Pete Cresswell <PeteCress@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: OSHA: Two Federal DOT Agencies Ban Hand-Held Phone
Message-ID: <i9qke7tmd7c6ki8d55i25lhkg7egpsgrmf@4ax.com>
Telecom Digest Moderator said:
>It was, and you can't: there's no way to tell if it's a driver or a
>passenger who is using the cellphone.
I wasn't even thinking of discriminating between drivers/passengers.
Just something like turning off the part where towers hand calls off
to the next tower.
Yeah, totally completely politically unthinkable... But personally, I
could live with it.
--
Pete Cresswell
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 01:29:49 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Why is the FCC stonewalling Grassley on LightSquared?
Message-ID: <4EEAE55D.6010905@horne.net>
There's a piece on the HotAir.com site, written by Ed Morrissey,
that raises more questions about the LightSquared debacle and what
led up to it:
Most people probably missed this statement from Senator Charles
Grassley (R-IA) last week, announcing that he has put holds on
two Barack Obama nominees to the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC). With most of the political focus on the
Republican presidential race, and whatever focus is left
concentrated on budget negotiations in Congress, another Senate
hold can't really compete for attention at the moment. However,
the hold carries significant importance, as Grassley refuses to
release the nominees for confirmation until the FCC comes clean
on its correspondence with LightSquared and the White House on a
series of strange decisions by the FCC to allow politically-
connected donors to attempt to create a 4G network on the cheap -
and potentially at the expense of GPS users across the nation.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/13/why-is-the-fcc-stonewalling-grassley-on-lightsquared/
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
"'Twas in Ann Arbor, Michigan
The cradle of the weird
A middle aged revivalist
was shaving off his beard ..."
- Bob Franke
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 (6 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues