====== 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, 14 Dec 2010 16:25:26 -0800
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: USA broadband isn't broadband per FCC report December 2010
Message-ID: <3oudnczK59Fql5XQnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
John Levine wrote:
>> In regards to this subject PLEASE remember just "HOW LARGE"
>>America is in relation to other countries. Hell, most WHOLE countries
>>will fit in the state of New Jersey. So it's not that hard for most
>>countries to get over 50% broadband coverage and then to keep it
>>updated.
>
>
> Actually, there are about 150 countries bigger than New Jersey, and
> only 70 smaller. (Isn't Wikipedia great?) Make it Nevada or Arizona
> to be larger than the majority of countries.
>
>
>>This is one example where a percentage doesn't mean [anything].
>>Just how many square miles or Kilometers is covered and just how
>>many homes are covered.
>
>
> Indeed. Although the US is very large, our population is quite urban.
> About 80% of Americans live in a metropolitan area.
>
> http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2008/09/07/us-population-density-1990-and-2000/
>
> Even in those metro areas, the so-called broadband tends to be pretty
> poor. I am only three blocks from the local phone switch, and my DSL
> is still only 3Mb down/382Kb up. Two years ago when I lived in
> England, my DSL was 4Mb, which was by their standards considered
> fairly bad. But it cost less, too.
>
> R's,
> John
>
The decent cable companies do a lot better. My cable company has 4
tiers. I am on the next highest at 20Mb down/2 mb up. The new, highest
tier is 50Mb down/8Mb up, but isn't worth the price difference to me.
I believe both AT&T and Verizon do great with their fiber offerings, but
they cherry pick where they install that stuff; and it is pricy to get
the really high speeds.
DSL is a relic of the late 1990s, and is just a lousy offshoot of ISDN
(Is Still Doing Nothing).
Then again, the large companies in U.S. metro areas often go T3 to the
hub; that is very impressive.
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:16:37 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Australian phone book content not protected by copyright
Message-ID: <pan.2010.12.15.06.16.36.273982@myrealbox.com>
http://www.theage.com.au/business/telstra-loses-directory-copyright-appeal-20101215-18xgd.html
Telstra loses directory copyright appeal Lucy Battersby
December 15, 2010 - 11:21AM
Telstra has lost an appeal to keep telephone directories published by its
subsidiary Sensis copyrighted.
Chief Justice Patrick Keane this morning dismissed Telstra's appeal to the
full bench of the Federal Court to overturn a decision made earlier this
year. It is believed the decision was unanimous, which impacts Telstra's
chances of successfully appealing it through the High Court.
"Sensis is obviously disappointed by today's decision in the Federal
Court. We will now spend some time reviewing the judgement and considering
our options", a spokesman said.
In February, Justice Michelle Gordon decided the Yellow Pages and White
Pages directories were not protected by copyright laws because they were
not an "independent intellectual effort" and the work of computers rather
than authors.
The decision has ramifications for all creators of lists, such as
television schedules, classified listings, real estate directories and
other databases.
Chief Justice Keane said the directories were published using computerised
systems and Telstra had argued the information was copyrighted, but not
the database or software.
"The principal contention of the respondents (Phone Directories) is that
the directories were compiled, not by the individuals engaged to
facilitate the process, but by a computerised process of storing,
selecting, ordering and arranging the data to produce the directories in
the form in which they were published," his judgement said.
"In my respectful opinion, the principal contention of the respondents
should be accepted, and the decision of the trial judge should be upheld
for that reason."
Telstra originally sued Phone Directories Company, alleging it gleaned
information from the Yellow Pages and White Pages.
Justice Gordon's ruling against Telstra in the original case was based on
2009 case between IceTV and Nine Network Australia Pty Limited, where
IceTV was allegedly reproducing Nine's television guide.
Justice Gordon agreed that because the work was done by computers and not
individual humans or identifiable authors, it was not protected by the
Copyright Act.
Sensis contributed $2.3 billion in revenue to Telstra last financial year,
of which the Yellow Pages contributed $1.3 billion and the White Pages
$415 million.
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 10:56:06 -0600
From: "Michael G. Koerner" <mgk920@dataex.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Australian phone book content not protected by copyright
Message-ID: <daWdnQ3Uo6W7bpXQnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@ntd.net>
On 2010.12.15 00:16:37, David Clayton wrote:
> http://www.theage.com.au/business/telstra-loses-directory-copyright-appeal-20101215-18xgd.html
>
> Telstra loses directory copyright appeal Lucy Battersby
> December 15, 2010 - 11:21AM
>
> Telstra has lost an appeal to keep telephone directories published by its
> subsidiary Sensis copyrighted.
>
> Chief Justice Patrick Keane this morning dismissed Telstra's appeal to the
> full bench of the Federal Court to overturn a decision made earlier this
> year. It is believed the decision was unanimous, which impacts Telstra's
> chances of successfully appealing it through the High Court.
>
> "Sensis is obviously disappointed by today's decision in the Federal
> Court. We will now spend some time reviewing the judgement and considering
> our options", a spokesman said.
>
> In February, Justice Michelle Gordon decided the Yellow Pages and White
> Pages directories were not protected by copyright laws because they were
> not an "independent intellectual effort" and the work of computers rather
> than authors.
>
> The decision has ramifications for all creators of lists, such as
> television schedules, classified listings, real estate directories and
> other databases.
>
> Chief Justice Keane said the directories were published using computerised
> systems and Telstra had argued the information was copyrighted, but not
> the database or software.
>
> "The principal contention of the respondents (Phone Directories) is that
> the directories were compiled, not by the individuals engaged to
> facilitate the process, but by a computerised process of storing,
> selecting, ordering and arranging the data to produce the directories in
> the form in which they were published," his judgement said.
>
> "In my respectful opinion, the principal contention of the respondents
> should be accepted, and the decision of the trial judge should be upheld
> for that reason."
>
> Telstra originally sued Phone Directories Company, alleging it gleaned
> information from the Yellow Pages and White Pages.
>
> Justice Gordon's ruling against Telstra in the original case was based on
> 2009 case between IceTV and Nine Network Australia Pty Limited, where
> IceTV was allegedly reproducing Nine's television guide.
>
> Justice Gordon agreed that because the work was done by computers and not
> individual humans or identifiable authors, it was not protected by the
> Copyright Act.
>
> Sensis contributed $2.3 billion in revenue to Telstra last financial year,
> of which the Yellow Pages contributed $1.3 billion and the White Pages
> $415 million.
I recall a similar court ruling here in the USA from a couple of decades ago
that cited the reason "lacks requisite originality" in denying a phone book
copyright protection appeal.
Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that the general theory in the USA is
that the facts in a database cannot by copyright protected, only the manner
and format of their presentation can be. For example, the layout of the
streets and highways in your area is not copyright protectable, but a map that
you draw to describe them is. Same thing with the listings in a phone book.
--
__________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ___
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:09:27 -0500
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Australian phone book content not protected by copyright
Message-ID: <op.vnrrh1zaitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:56:06 -0500, Michael G. Koerner <mgk920@dataex.com>
wrote:
> Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that the general theory in the
> USA is that the facts in a database cannot by copyright protected,
> only the manner and format of their presentation can be. For
> example, the layout of the streets and highways in your area is not
> copyright protectable, but a map that you draw to describe them is.
> Same thing with the listings in a phone book.
Consistent with MGK's remarks above, the Copyright Office insisted, in
conjunction with our last two copyright applications, that the Index
portion of our books were simply not copyright-able, being not
original text but mere alphabetized data.
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 22:32:36 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Australian phone book content not protected by copyright
Message-ID: <iebfm3$1t7$5@news.albasani.net>
Michael G. Koerner <mgk920@dataex.com> wrote:
>>http://www.theage.com.au/business/telstra-loses-directory-copyright-appeal-20101215-18xgd.html
>>Telstra loses directory copyright appeal Lucy Battersby
>>December 15, 2010 - 11:21AM
>>Telstra has lost an appeal to keep telephone directories published by its
>>subsidiary Sensis copyrighted. . . .
>>In February, Justice Michelle Gordon decided the Yellow Pages and White
>>Pages directories were not protected by copyright laws because they were
>>not an "independent intellectual effort" and the work of computers rather
>>than authors. . . .
>I recall a similar court ruling here in the USA from a couple of decades ago
>that cited the reason "lacks requisite originality" in denying a phone book
>copyright protection appeal.
>Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that the general theory in the USA is
>that the facts in a database cannot by copyright protected, only the manner
>and format of their presentation can be. For example, the layout of the
>streets and highways in your area is not copyright protectable, but a map that
>you draw to describe them is. Same thing with the listings in a phone book.
This court decision is unlike the US decision. I've never heard of a court
ruling that classification of listings as in yellow pages isn't a
copyrightable activity.
I've used plenty of services that use automated classification assignments
on line. Even if they are copyrightable as compilations (as no court has
yet said that they aren't), that copyright is utterly worthless given
the typically bizarre results one gets. There is a real value to the user
with classifications performed by humans editing the database.
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:26:30 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Air wing finds iPhone
Message-ID: <pan.2010.12.15.06.26.30.105732@myrealbox.com>
Don't steal the GPS devices, kiddies....
http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/iphone/air-wing-finds-iphone-20101215-18x1i.html
Air wing finds iPhone
December 15, 2010
A helicopter was used yesterday to track down an iPhone thief after a
woman noticed her phone had been stolen from a hospital in Heidelberg,
Victoria about 3.30pm.
She reported the theft to Greensborough police and said it had a GPS
application.
Already flying in the area, police air wing tracked the iPhone to
Greensborough.
The thief, a 16-year-old riding a bicycle that was also stolen, noticed
police, ditched the bike and took a tram. Police arrested him soon
afterwards in Bundoora. They are now seeking the owner of a stolen men's
mountain bike, which has a green frame with ''PMAC'' written in black
texta.
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:04:02 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Satellite Phones -- Why Can't The Business Work?
Message-ID: <pan.2010.12.15.06.03.59.510081@myrealbox.com>
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:09:43 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote:
> http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/91197/20101211/sat-phones-why-can-t-the-business-work.htm
>
> Sat Phones: Why Can't The Business Work? By Jesse Emspak December 11,
> 2010 6:59 AM EST
>
> Satellite phones aren't as clunky as they once were, and technology has
> made them more powerful. Gone are the days when satellite phones had to be
> accompanied by a suitcase.
>
> Yet do date, the field is littered with bold attempts at a phone that
> could be used anywhere, without depending on earthbound cell phone
> networks.
Doesn't that sentence explain the basic problem? While it sounds like a
good idea to have a "phone that could be used anywhere", the obvious costs
of providing that versus the likely revenue would make such a thing pretty
well economically uncompetitive compared to those terrestrial networks
that can serve far smaller areas of the planet at a fraction of the cost.
A sat phone service could also never match the capacity requirements
delivered by the various ground based mass-market networks right now.
.........
> It's possible that satellite telephones are one of those markets that is
> simply not tenable by itself. It wouldn't be te first technology that
> didn't get much cheaper as time passed -- after all, in the 1930s there
> were visions of personal aircraft flying skyways in New York. Airplanes
> stayed expensive, while cars and roads got cheaper. Satellite phones may
> well be a similar phenomenon.
Sat phones serve a niche market due to the costs and other limitations of
the fundamental technologies involved, until these are resolved it will
always be a niche technology.
--
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: 15 Dec 2010 15:27:24 -0500
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Satellite Phones -- Why Can't The Business Work?
Message-ID: <ieb8bc$2i3$1@panix2.panix.com>
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:09:43 -0800, Thad Floryan wrote:
>
>> http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/91197/20101211/sat-phones-why-can-t-the-business-work.htm
>>
>> Sat Phones: Why Can't The Business Work? By Jesse Emspak December 11,
>> 2010 6:59 AM EST
>>
>> Satellite phones aren't as clunky as they once were, and technology has
>> made them more powerful. Gone are the days when satellite phones had to be
>> accompanied by a suitcase.
>>
>> Yet do date, the field is littered with bold attempts at a phone that
>> could be used anywhere, without depending on earthbound cell phone
>> networks.
>
>Doesn't that sentence explain the basic problem? While it sounds like a
>good idea to have a "phone that could be used anywhere", the obvious costs
>of providing that versus the likely revenue would make such a thing pretty
>well economically uncompetitive compared to those terrestrial networks
>that can serve far smaller areas of the planet at a fraction of the cost.
The thing is, very few people actually go everywhere, and so a phone that
works everywhere has a limited customer base.
Services like Thuraya, which limit themselves to wide but still fixed
geographical areas, are probably more profitable in the long run than
global systems.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:07:11 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: USA broadband isn't broadband per FCC report December 2010
Message-ID: <pan.2010.12.15.06.07.06.485971@myrealbox.com>
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:42:59 -0600, John Mayson wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2010, David Clayton wrote:
>
>> We currently use things like 3G, 4G etc for wireless data, surely we can
>> come up with something to use for other delivery media?
>>
>> If this group can't come up with some good suggestions, I don't know
>> where else can.... ;-)
>
> I have an idea, but I'm also cynical enough to know it'll never work.
>
> Nearly every country on earth has UHF television. Nearly every country
> uses roughly the same frequencies we use in the US. Use the white space
> to create a standard global wireless broadband network allowing people to
> take their laptops, tablets, and phones anywhere and they'll just work.
........
Something like this? (from the people that hold the WiFi patents):
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/352673/csiro_trial_wireless_over_analogue_tv_spectrum/
--
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: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:11 -0800
From: Richard <rng@richbonnie.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: USA broadband isn't broadband per FCC report December 2010
Message-ID: <2rqgg6dk7rnrf4ptnjcc474afhhce8phua@4ax.com>
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 07:39:07 -0500, Ray Fleischmann <rfleisch@mac.com>
wrote:
>Hello everyone,
> In regards to this subject PLEASE remember just "HOW LARGE" America is in
>relation to other countries. Hell, most WHOLE countries will fit in the state of
>New Jersey. So it's not that hard for most countries to get over 50% broadband
>coverage and then to keep it updated.
> This is one example where a percentage doesn't mean [anything].
>Just how many square miles or Kilometers is covered and just how many homes
>are covered.
>
>Just My 2 cents worth,
>
>Ray Fleischmann
Another difference between Europe and North America, at least in my
section of it (Nevada), is the wide-open spaces between quite small
communities, with large expanses of government-owned uninhabited land
in between. I live in Pahrump, NV, population 38,000. The next
settlement to the east is Las Vegas (yes, that Las Vegas), but in
between Pahrump and Las Vegas is uninhabited government-owned land.
The next settlement west of me, about 50 miles away, is Amargosa
Valley, pop. 1300. 50 miles further west is Beatty, pop. 1000. 30
miles south is Shoshone, CA, pop.50, and 50 miles beyond that is Death
Valley, pop.620 but really spread out. To the north of Pahrump is the
nuclear test site, also uninhabited.
Here in Pahrump, the cable TV company offers 1 to 3 Mb/s service, but
they only cover the relatively-small center of town, about a 3-mile
radius (the town is 35 miles long by about 10 miles wide). The rest
of us depend upon a point-to-point version of Wi-Fi. My ISP is
www.air-internet.com . I get about a 500 kb/s connection. Those in
the other outlying towns depend on satellite, like Hughesnet and
Wildblue, with speed and total throughput limitations. Hughesnet
offers speeds in the 1 to 2 Mb/s range, but with daily throughput
limits of about 200 to 400 MB. Can't watch much Youtube video with
those throughput limits.
It would take a lot of money to bring really high speed internet to
these small towns, probably too much to make it commercially feasible.
Or else, private industry would have already done it.
Dick
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 12:44:04 -0500
From: Randall <rvh40.remove-this@and-this-too.insightbb.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: HSI
Message-ID: <74C12990-1432-494D-93E9-857C21666023@insightbb.com>
> From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
> To: redacted@invalid.telecom-digest.org.
> Subject: Re: USA broadband isn't broadband per FCC report December
> 2010
> Message-ID: <op.vnn7gwcpitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
>
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:44:53 -0500, David Clayton
> <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> ...
>> How about we dump "Broadband" and use a nice little TLA like
>> "HSI" (High
>> Speed Internet)? ...
>
> You may have to fight at&t for rights to that "nice little TLA" --
> they're using "HSI" to name their at&t/Yahoo! DSL service (which,
> incidentally, starts at as low as 768 kb/s for DL speed, barely 15x
> 56k modem DL speeds).
>
> Cheers, -- tlvp (currently using just such at&t Yahoo! HSI :-) )
Don't know when Bellsouth/AT&T started using HSI (nor which entity
may have it trademarked), but Charter Communications was using HSI to
describe its "High Speed Internet" in 2006 (which also referred to
768K, up to IIRC 3M, prior to DOCSIS 2.0)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:16:23 -0800 (PST)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: History--Eight Digit US telephone numbers?
Message-ID: <f185b0a1-bc6c-43b1-b6f0-3d018d8fb12c@v12g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
I think I found examples of eight digit diable telephone numbers.
Several ads in the NYT in 1947 had HOllis 5-10nnn numbers (HOllis 5-
was in Queens, NY). Old Bell System literature says some large city
exchanges could have as many as 10,500 lines--this was the maximum
jacks within reach of an operator.
I was wondering how common this was in the US (presumably it was in
big cities), and how long it lasted.
Some background:
The Bell System developed the 'panel' dial exchange for big cities.
It was designed to have more capacity and switch more efficiently than
was possible with step-by-step gear; it utilized some basic common
control circuits.
A key feature of panel was compatibility with the many manual
exchanges a switch would connect to. For calls from manual exchanges
to a dial exchange, operators had a keypad to enter the number quickly
(either the originating operator or dedicated "B" operators* for that
function).
For calls from dial users to a manual exchange Bell wanted the
connection to be easy from the subscriber's point of view. Thus, dial
subscribers dialed all their city calls regardless of the type of
exchange they were calling--they did not have to know whether the
called exchange was dial or manual. In this way it was easier to
convert manual exchanges to dial.
To accomplish this, inward operators at manual exchanges had a display
panel indicated the desired number. The display was controlled by the
dial switch, which translated the called number into a signal to light
the appropriate signal lamps.
The literature on this notes that a manual exchange could have up to
10,500 lines (not merely 10,000). The display provided for this by
having a leading fifth digit of 0 or 1. Presumably callers to such an
exchange would dial eight digits.
(The inward operator display also accomodated the party line suffix
letter, but that is beyond the scope of this discussion.)
So, would anyone know if eight digits were actually dialable in New
York City or in other places, as the literature suggests? If so, how
long did it last? I presume as preparations for DDD came along the
eight digit subscribers got new numbers.
Thanks.
*In large cities, manual switching required two operators--an "A" and
"B" operator. The A operator answered the subscribers request. After
the subscriber gave the number "Main 1234", the A operator would plug
into the Main exchange where a "B" operator would take the call. The
A girl passed the "1234" to the B girl, who made the final
connection. Because in big cities most calls were out of the exchange
all calls were handled this way. Early dial automation continued this
pattern of A and B handling.
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 19:55:32 -0500
From: Ernest Donlin <ernest.donlin.remove-this@and-this-too.gmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Question about an old scrambler phone
Message-ID: <20101216005532.GB7645@telecom.csail.mit.edu>
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 02:43:39PM -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Ernest Donlin <ernest.donlin.remove-this@and-this-too.gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Now, I'm curious: is that kind of scrambling still possible? It seems
> >like it would be a neat way to keep the kids from picking up the phone
> >when I want to gab with the wife. I'm not going to build one, but I
> >wonder if there's anything I can buy online?
>
> It's possible, but it would be more effective just for you and the wife
> to learn French or even pig latin.
I've been around the block a few times, and I'm not likely to learn
another language at my age. My wife isn't going to do that, either. I
need a way to scramble our calls, so let's just stick to that.
> The Germans very quickly learned to decrypt voice inversion systems during
> the war, by ear. They called it "Krenkelcan" encryption because the English
> word "Telephone" sounds like "Krenkelcan" when inverted.
Well, rootie-toot-toot for them! I don't think that's going to hold
water in this day and age - kids today can't even spell "translate",
and the only special language the younger generation seems to know is
foul language.
Now to get back on the track: is there a phone I can buy that has a
built in scrambler? I really don't care if it's an "inverter" type or
if it's the same kind that the President uses: I just want to be able
to talk to my wife without worrying about who's snooping. I haven't
got the President's budget, mind you, but we're not out to hide any
nuclear secrets from the reds, either.
Ernie
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 (13 messages)
|
|
or 