|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 148 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Payphones Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Texting May Be Taking a Toll
====== 27 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: Sun, 31 May 2009 18:32:46 -0700
From: Richard <rng@richbonnie.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Payphones Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <7kb62517old5kiqneanv6nru213o5uji0n@4ax.com>
On Sun, 31 May 2009 19:13:42 -0400 (EDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>I haven't checked lately, but I think the cost of directory assistance
>these days is $1.00; even more from a cell phone ($1.50?). I don't
>know if 1+NPA+555-1212 works anymore or what the charge is for that,
>but local 411 often has national listings. In some places they're
>providing, for a fee, other information too such as yellow pages
>listing, such as restaurants in an area.
>
>I could understand charging when a listing is in the book, but often
>times someone has a new number that isn't available.
>
>(Last night on the train I heard someone use their cell phone to call
>Information, I wonder what it cost.)
I have not tried it, but Google has a 411 service which is free: http://www.google.com/goog411/
. The demonstration video on this site does not show any advertising
messages on the phone call. The FAQ says "At this point, we do not
have advertising opportunities for this service." which may mean that
after it catches on, they may place ads on it. I wouldn't mind ads if
the service is free to me.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 18:22:23 -0700
From: Richard <rng@richbonnie.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <l98625phk6ee940kk9onfgt4th8f1r8kl2@4ax.com>
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>Since you've had a lot of experience testing microwave equipment in
>the field, I'd appreciate your help to debunk some _very_ tall
>tales. I have heard hundreds of apocryplal stories about microwave
>failures due to utterly unbelievable causes. The list includes:
>
>1. Melted coax due to concentrated solar energy, one one
> particular day of the year.
I doubt this. Unless there was some kind of lens effect which would
focus the sun's energy on one point on the coax. Highly unlikely.
>2. Route switch looping, which turned out to be caused by cockroaches
> running up and down inside waveguide, searching for the warmest spot.
Impossible. Waveguide is a closed medium, and critters can't get
inside.
>3. Repeated failures at a hosptial STL link used for remote broadcasts,
> supposedly tracedto frequency detuning caused by the MRI affecting the
> magnetron in the STL.
A magnetron is a high-power oscillator, used for radars and microwave
ovens. They would not be used for comm equipment. But the Bell
System did use reflex klystrons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klystron#Reflex_klystron
in some of our short-haul radios (Bell System TJ, TL, TM) which could
be affected by external magnetic fields. And of course,
traveling-wave amplifiers have a magnet around the thin vacuum tube,
and it could be distorted by a strong magnetic field.
>supply a list of the most
>exceptional failures you saw during field testing, and the root
>cause(s) of each. TIA.
Here's a few:
1. Waveguide from equipment shelter to antenna. Transmission was good
at night, and high attenuation beginning in mid-morning. Cause: water
had leaked into the waveguide and collected at a low point. At night
the water froze, and ice is a good transmitter of radio waves. In the
morning the ice melted, and water absorbed radio waves.
2. The outside waveguide runs and antennas are pressurized to keep out
water. In the desert southwest, we got reports of the big square
horn-reflector antennas developing leaks. Buzzards were using the
antennas for a perch, and their poop was eating through aluminum skin
of the antenna.
3. Back before solid-state devices were used, power for vacuum tubes
in each radio bay was supplied from battery plants -- 24 volts for the
filaments and 130 volts for the plate supply. However, the TH-1 radio
system used traveling-wave amplifier tubes which required voltages
measured in kilovolts. It was not practical to distribute these high
voltages around the station. And this was the late 1950's, much too
early for practical DC-DC converters. So each TH-1 T/R pair was fed
by 230 volts AC, and conventional transformer-diode power supplies
generated all of the various voltages needed in the T/R pair. The
230 V came from motor-alternator sets, with an AC-driven motor, a
DC-driven motor and an alternator all of one shaft. Normally, the AC
motor was connected to the incoming mains. If the AC failed, power
was supplied to the DC motor from the station battery plant, and
during the switchover, the rotational momentum of the rotating
machines provided an uninterruptible power supply. There was one
motor-generator set per T/R pair. During the field trial, one of the
engineers was in a repeater station and was studying the schematic of
the console which controlled the entire arrays of motor-gen sets. He
said "It looks like this whole thing depends upon one 3 amp fuse. I
think if it fails, the whole station goes off the air." So he pulled
out the fuse, and sure enough, all of the motor-gen sets shut down,
and all three channels in both directions, went dead. Back to the
drawing board.
***** Moderator's Note *****
I think the premise behind failure #1 was exactly what you mention:
i.e., that the sun's rays were concentrated _by_ _the_ _parabolic_
_reflector_, and thus produced enough heat to melt the coax.
Here's another one: my brother told me that the radar set at French
Frigate Shoals used to kill Gooney birds who alighted on the feed arm
while it was rotating. He said that the Audubon Society got wind of
the problem and forced the Coast Guard (which ran the LORAN staion
located there) to install a radome. Sound possible?
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:20:08 -0500
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <e_adndJEDMNVkLnXnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <l98625phk6ee940kk9onfgt4th8f1r8kl2@4ax.com>,
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I think the premise behind failure #1 was exactly what you mention:
> i.e., that the sun's rays were concentrated _by_ _the_ _parabolic_
> _reflector_, and thus produced enough heat to melt the coax.
This is unlikely, but _plausible_. I've seen stranger things in other
fields of engineering.
> Here's another one: my brother told me that the radar set at French
> Frigate Shoals used to kill Gooney birds who alighted on the feed
> arm while it was rotating. He said that the Audubon Society got
> wind of the problem and forced the Coast Guard (which ran the LORAN
> staion located there) to install a radome. Sound possible?
This sounds *entirely* believable.
The energy-density off of a big transmitter' directional antenna, is
*substantial*. I was once told that military didn't run the radar on
an E-2 "Hawkeye" early-warning aircraft, never ran the radar when they
were on the ground. That _if_ they did, they would sterilize any
person outside the plane, within a 175 ft radius. I had no interest
in asking for a demonstration. <grin>
And, of course, the energy density immediately off the end of the feed
horn, towards the antenna, makes the density reflected off the
parabolic [antenna] look **positively** anemic. :)
***** Moderator's Note *****
Well, I guess it's _technically_ possible to have a Gooney bird killed
by a long-range radar transmitter, but it always sounded like the kind
of story that NCO's tell new recruits: I mean, why _would_ a Gooney
bird alight on a feed arm which is spinning, you know?
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:34:17 GMT
From: "Tony Toews \[MVP\]" <ttoews@telusplanet.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <1ml825p8231utrb4hgiidgfv1mi5fq38nh@4ax.com>
Richard <rng@richbonnie.com> wrote:
> Cause: water had leaked into the waveguide and collected at a low
> point. At night the water froze, and ice is a good transmitter of
> radio waves. In the morning the ice melted, and water absorbed
> radio waves.
Ah, that would help explain why a friend gets very good wireless
access from somewhere in his village during winter and not in summer.
I knew that leaves and such were a problem in summer. But I always
wondered how much the branches and twigs in winter would attenuate the
signal. Especially if you had a dense hedge.
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
Granite Fleet Manager http://www.granitefleet.com/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:24:24 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <pan.2009.06.01.08.24.23.57460@myrealbox.com>
.......
> Since you've had a lot of experience testing microwave equipment in the
> field, I'd appreciate your help to debunk some _very_ tall tales. I have
> heard hundreds of apocryphal stories about microwave failures due to
> utterly unbelievable causes. The list includes:
>
> 1. Melted coax due to concentrated solar energy, one one
> particular day of the year.
>
> 2. Route switch looping, which turned out to be caused by cockroaches
> running up and down inside waveguide, searching for the warmest spot.
>
> 3. Repeated failures at a hosptial STL link used for remote broadcasts,
> supposedly tracedto frequency detuning caused by the MRI affecting the
> magnetron in the STL.
>
> Please tell us why these are nonsense, and supply a list of the most
> exceptional failures you saw during field testing, and the root cause(s)
> of each. TIA.
>
I can tell you one that isn't "nonsense". Back in the 1980's a lot of
Telstra microwave links were continually interfered with by flocks of
cockatoos (large birds common in rural areas around Australia). This issue
was highlighted in internal and industry technical publications at the
time.
IIRC they took a liking to the particular plastic covers over the dishes,
and took delight in attacking them with their beaks at every opportunity.
I think the eventual solution was to change the type of plastic to
something less attractive to them.
--
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: Sun, 31 May 2009 18:41:31 -0700
From: Richard <rng@richbonnie.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Message-ID: <1vb6251hlku0qqc7ii413leiovijklvvj8@4ax.com>
On Sun, 31 May 2009 19:01:50 -0400 (EDT), Robert Neville
<dont@bother.com> wrote:
>Wow... I feel like I'm caught in a time warp. For the past few weeks, there's
>been nothing but technical discussions about network operations and telecom
>systems here. No political rants. No social appeals.Granted, mostly historical
>telecom systems, but still...
Are you complaining about no rants? :-)
My guess is that our moderator Bill Horne is doing his job keeping the
divisive stuff out of this newsgroup. He and I are two of the several
moderators for rec.radio.amateur.moderated, and we keep a tight rein
on that newsgroup.
Dick, AC7EL
***** Moderator's Note *****
I don't think of moderation as keeping a tight rein (sorry, Dick), but
rather as cleaning the dashboard: the idea is to keep the passengers
from getting manure on their clothes when it's not necessary, while
still getting them where they want to go. ;-)
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:19:05 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Message-ID: <pan.2009.06.01.08.19.05.215591@myrealbox.com>
On Sun, 31 May 2009 19:01:50 -0400, Robert Neville wrote:
> Wow... I feel like I'm caught in a time warp. For the past few weeks,
> there's been nothing but technical discussions about network operations
> and telecom systems here. No political rants. No social appeals.Granted,
> mostly historical telecom systems, but still...
And speaking of Telco issues, what is the situation in the US with people
using VoIP and getting the dial-tone cut from their ADSL link?
Such things are becoming quite popular here in Australia, and the
incumbent land-line telco here (Telstra) is starting to take a significant
hit to their revenues.
--
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 *****
At least in my area, it's still less expensive to have a modest level
of POTS service than it is to switch to VoIP, since the fees for ADSL
and the fees charged by VoIP providers add up to more than the lower
levels of residential service.
There is also a "Lifeline" service overing in many states, which
provides a few calls a month for a nominal fee.
At least where I live, unless someone can poach WiFi from a neighbor,
it's still cheaper to have POTS.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:38:33 -0500
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Message-ID: <hI6dnSPQD5GEj7nXnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <pan.2009.06.01.08.19.05.215591@myrealbox.com>,
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 31 May 2009 19:01:50 -0400, Robert Neville wrote:
>
>> Wow... I feel like I'm caught in a time warp. For the past few weeks,
>> there's been nothing but technical discussions about network operations
>> and telecom systems here. No political rants. No social appeals.Granted,
>> mostly historical telecom systems, but still...
>
>And speaking of Telco issues, what is the situation in the US with people
>using VoIP and getting the dial-tone cut from their ADSL link?
Actually _doing_ it can be a bit of a challenge, but it *is* doable.
The LECs _do_ try to discourage it.
If you get DSL and POTS dial-tone from the same company, it's -really-
difficult to drop *only* the dial-tone. The telco's entire system is
set up to do the book-keeping (not just billing, but the
physical-plant usage stuff as well) based on the land-line
_telephone-number_ as the key field. Shared-line DSL is tied to the
phone-number, which is tied to the physical pair (tail circuit). Try
to drop the dial-tone (phone number), and *all* the services on that
pair are cut, and the pair marked as 'free' for re-use elsewhere.
You get into 'games' like, order a _second_ DSL service, on a 'dry
pair', rather than shared with a POTS number. There is a 'premium'
for this kind of service, *if* the carrier offers it. Frequently this
added cost increment is almost as high as the basic dial-tone. Thus,
absent a compelling reason _not_to_, the current 'economic best sense'
approach is to keep the POTS dial- tone, because you don't save much
-- if anything -- by dropping it. WHETHER OR NOT you actually _use_
it.
> Such things are becoming quite popular here in Australia, and the
> incumbent land-line telco here (Telstra) is starting to take a
> significant hit to their revenues.
People are keeping the POTS dial-tone -- to minimize the cost of
having the DSL on the 'shared' cost-basis -- *and* using VoIP (or
CELLULAR!!) for almost all their 'billable' calling. They've
'effectively' switched to VOIP, but maintain the POTS line anyway,
because it's cheaper to have it than not have it.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:39:12 -0600
From: Robert Neville <dont@bother.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 1984 All Over Again?
Message-ID: <sso825tjvhk1o3ci5dqihou7crt67bj4g7@4ax.com>
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> And speaking of Telco issues, what is the situation in the US with
> people using VoIP and getting the dial-tone cut from their ADSL
> link?
>
> Such things are becoming quite popular here in Australia, and the
> incumbent land-line telco here (Telstra) is starting to take a
> significant hit to their revenues.
People cutting the copper line and going cell only in the US is a
significant drain on telco revenue, with most of the major wireline
companies reporting net line losses of 100K or more per
quarter. That's against a huge installed base, but a far cry from the
days when telcos were trying to find enough spare pairs for all the
second and third lines people wanted a few years back. The telcos with
solid wireless revenues are generally treading water, but companies
like Qwest (with no in house cell operation) are in serious trouble.
Residential consumer provisioned VOIP (as compared with digital voice
from a cable company, etc.) isn't large enough to be significant. The
single largest company offering that service is Vonage, which reported
only 2.6 million lines 4Q08. And that's essentially flat after a high
churn rate. Even with all the other wannabes, there's probably less
than 3M lines and you can bet at least half of those are riding over
cable company coax.
The market in the US has essentially decided that voice will be served
as a value added bundle with fiber or coax broadband. So, VOIP over
dry pair DSL is there, but won't be a major player.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 08:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <c6cf56a9-30c0-40ba-9bf0-c9813fef3c81@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
On May 29, 11:51 pm, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
wrote:
> "Proven reliable" software is *extremely* expensive. For critical
> high-reliability items, the _testing_ regimen -- to _prove_ that it
> "does what it's supposed to, _all_ the time", can easily exceed 95% of
> the total development cost.
That is true.
But on the other hand, the cost of this effort is amortized among the
thousands of switches deployed.
Further, software development for switches is not frozen due to the
high cost. They are continually developing new features or revising
existing ones.
> It's not a "problem" for the carriers, just for the _customers_.
> And the carriers are not in the business of making life
> simpler/easier/more- convenient for customers. They're in the
> business of making money. Making as much money as they can, while
> keeping the 'annoyance' level "just below" that which will run off
> customers. No need to reduce annoyances below that point, it doesn't
> affect their bottom line.
This is true.
But it is also true that due to the increased spoofing of caller-ID
plus failure to send anything ("111-111-1111"), subscribers will get
upset they're not getting what they've paid for. This will lead to
lost revenue as subscribers disconnect the service or disconnect the
provider altogether out of frustration. (It may not be the provider's
fault, but they'll get blamed for it just the same.) It's also
possible there could be nasty litigation against a carrier by a
subscriber or regulatory agency.
> I don't know _anybody_ that shells out hard dollars for it.
Many people pay a la carte for Caller ID.
> It isn't free. It just _looks_ that way, because the extra cost of
> providing it is "bundled" into the base price that everybody pays,
> whether they want it or not.
It is true many services are bundled today. But that has always been
the trend in many products and services, especially in technology.
Can one buy a black and white television set today? One without
remote control? These were once expensive premium options but are
standard today. In computers, things like floating point instructions
were once optional but are now standard.
In the pre-divesture days, it was public policy to offer the cheapest
policy bare bones phone service so as to make a phone affordable to as
wide a range of possible. Today many places won't even offer a party
line which was the way to save money; a private line is in essence
"bundled", along with other 'extras'.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 23:32:56 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <h01of8$56l$1@reader1.panix.com>
One thing I'm almost ashamed to admit to.... I'm confused where
911 reporting fits in. It's not CNID based; it's not ANI based
[or is it?] either.
I know large clients such as colleges must buy special trunkage
to the PSAP, and equipment that reports the physical building
that originates the call. But where's the database of same?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 21:12:12 -0700
From: "Al Gillis" <al.1020@hotmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <4a24a687$0$86441$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>
"T" <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.248b4d5a9cd35c4a989a32@reader.motzarella.org...
> In article <gvmut2$2a5$1@reader1.panix.com>, dannyb@panix.com says...
>>
>> In <de0e98d1-5cb2-4eb2-a1bb-3c1a681c7354@u10g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>
>> >On May 28, 12:12 am, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
>> >wrote:
>>
>> >> There are many _legitimate_ reasons for businesses to send 'caller ID'
>> >> info that is different from the actual line ID that the call is being
>> >> placed from.
>>
>> >Could you elaborate on those reasons?
>>
>> Sure. You'll hear all about the Abused Women's Shelters stuff, but
>> that's window dressing.
>>
>> A more valid real world situation is that a hospital, say,
>> would set up their system so that the calls from pretty
>> much anywhere in their facility,whether the admissions office
>> or the fourth floor nursing station, or, for that matter,
>> a patient's room... would all display the main number.
>
> When I worked for the State AG we had all our outgoing lines block CLID.
> This caused a few problems for me because I had turned on Anonymous Call
> Rejection (ACR) on my home phone because I want to know who the hell is
> calling. That's pretty much moot now with all the scammers playing with
> CLID data.
>
> The realy problem was that while our trunks were capable of unblocking
> CLID on a dial basis, our Definity wouldn't pass the star codes. And
> dialing 9+1182+NXX-XXXX would be the workaround but too unwieldly to
> deal with on a regular basis.
>
And here's another half-way legit reason for providing CLID that's NOT
the real DN of the calling phone: My employer's call center wanted
customers to call the ACD number for various reasons and NOT call the
individual agent's number. So we programmed our Nortel Meridian-1 to
do exactly that. The agent's ACD key (on the telephone) sent the ACD
pilot number; the personal DN key for that agent sent the actual DN of
his direct Inward Dial number, however. This arrangement worked well
for all hands, and for once I wasn't seen as a stick in the mud, old
fashioned, hard to get along with, set in his ways Telecom manager!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:28:39 GMT
From: "Tony Toews \[MVP\]" <ttoews@telusplanet.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: ANI vs. Caller ID
Message-ID: <gqk825111bm7doo18fc94j0fo0li9kekmh@4ax.com>
Wesrock@aol.com wrote:
>The number of pay phones certainly has declined, but I am surprised as how
>many times I see them in use outside of convenience stores.
One motel a family member stayed at in a small city in Saskatchewan a
few years back had a VOIP telephone on the end of the front counter.
Unlimited free long distance calling was the sigh. The sign also said
keep it short if there's someone waiting in line. Given that this was
a small office and there was absolutely no privacy I suspect folks
wouldn't be on very long. Besides us Canadians are generally polite.
<smile>
Given how cheap VOIP long distance, ie a few cents per minute, I
thought this was an excellent idea.
And free wireless Internet in a $60 per night motel room in Valemount,
British Columbia, a village with 1300 residents and ten motels/hotels.
Yet in downtown Seattle Microsoft pays $10 per night for Internet
access on my behalf whenever I'm there.
Which then leads to the exorbitant rates that hotels in city centres
charge for local and long distance phone calls. I wonder just how
much revenue they are really getting given that folks who are staying
in such almost certainly all have cell phones.
Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Tony's Main MS Access pages - http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/
Granite Fleet Manager http://www.granitefleet.com/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 00:17:26 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Texting May Be Taking a Toll
Message-ID: <p0624081fc64a57f4aa20@[10.0.1.3]>
Texting May Be Taking a Toll
By KATIE HAFNER
The New York Times
May 26, 2009
They do it late at night when their parents are asleep. They do it in
restaurants and while crossing busy streets. They do it in the
classroom with their hands behind their back. They do it so much their
thumbs hurt.
Spurred by the unlimited texting plans offered by carriers like AT&T
Mobility and Verizon Wireless, American teenagers sent and received an
average of 2,272 text messages per month in the fourth quarter of
2008, according to the Nielsen Company - almost 80 messages a day,
more than double the average of a year earlier.
The phenomenon is beginning to worry physicians and psychologists, who
say it is leading to anxiety, distraction in school, falling grades,
repetitive stress injury and sleep deprivation.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/26/health/26teen.html
------------------------------
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 Patrick Townson. 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 currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
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) 2008 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 (14 messages)
******************************
|
or 