29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

The Telecom Digest for May 23, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 130 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: any phone service offering pseudo-anonymous, throwaway, numbers?(Dave Garland)
Re: Letting it ring?(Adam H. Kerman)
Re: Apple's filing in Apple v. Samsung(AES)

====== 29 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 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: Sat, 21 May 2011 18:30:53 -0500 From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: any phone service offering pseudo-anonymous, throwaway, numbers? Message-ID: <ir9hvm$t1d$1@dont-email.me> On 5/21/2011 9:18 AM, danny burstein wrote: > Having my own internet domains I can simply make-up an > e-mail address and destroy it a month later. And there are > commercial services with similar options. > > But doing it with a phone number is trickier. > > I was thinking of... a system/company that offers > up phone numbers, and then lets you pick and choose > "extensions" in it, which you could either route > to your "real" number, to v-mail, or send back to > oblivion when no longer needed. > > For example, the company might have, among other > numbers, 808-555-1000. You could get "rights to", > for want of a better term, extensions "752-1000" > through "752-1999", and assign them as you chose. > > So getting back to that tire place where you want > them to reach you, you'd activate ext. 752-1222 > to call out to your real number (or go to v-mail). > Two months later, when you start getting marketing > garbage, you'd simply kill it off. > > Anyone know of any service that has this? (And yes, > I realize this would be almost practical for > anyone with their own "Asterisk" system, but > that requires the equipment, the set up, and > oodles of upfront money, effort, and maintenance). I'd expect most hosted VoIP will do this. I use voip.ms, and can order additional DID numbers for $0.99/month and a $0.50 setup charge, keep them as long as I want, and then cancel them (and they don't have to be in one of the local ACs). Handle calls differently depending on what incoming number they use. Or, set up "extensions" that are handled differently. Or, blacklist/whitelist to handle incoming calls differently, depending on their source. I manually enter spam callers to get the "that number has been disconnected" message. Except for the part about having different incoming numbers, you could do most of that with Google Voice, for free. Dave
Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 23:00:27 +0000 (UTC) From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Letting it ring? Message-ID: <ir9g6b$qni$5@news.albasani.net> Pete Cresswell <nobody-home@Invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote: >Per David Clayton: >>C'mon, 98% of people who have been brainwas.... trained to use phones have >>a Pavlovian urge to answer any ringing phone. >>With the way technology is set up these days (answering machines, >>diversions etc.) and people's general impatience it must be a rare thing >>these days for a call to time-out ringing. >I find that's part of the flaw in the logic of "screening calls" >via an answering machine. >The tension involved in waiting out four rings, sitting through >the announcement, and then listening for the voice on the other >end seems to outweigh just picking the thing up and answering it. The answering machine is set to answer after 4, 5, or 6 rings, depending on how long you give yourself to get to a phone, when you're NOT screening calls. It's set to answer immediately or 1 ring when you are screening calls. ***** Moderator's Note ***** To change the number of rings on my machine, I have to wade through a complicated setup menu, so that doesn't happen. If I don't want to get calls, I unplug my phone. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 18:17:35 -0700 From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Apple's filing in Apple v. Samsung Message-ID: <siegman-F30D18.18173521052011@sciid-srv02.med.tufts.edu> > > ***** Moderators Note ***** > > > > If torts were decided on the basis of hype, Applie would win easily: > > here's a snippet from the first page of the filing: > > > > The iPhone was radically different. In one small and lightweight > > handheld device, it offered sophisticated mobile phone functions, a > > multi-touch screen that allows users to control the phone with their > > fingers, music storage and playback, a mobile computing platform for > > handheld applications, and full access to the Internet. These features > > were combined in an elegantly designed product with a distinctive user > > interface, icons, and eye-catching displays that gave the iPhone an > > unmistakable look. > > > > Bill Horne > > Moderator > > > > The entire complaint is more advertising than a legal action. It looks > nice, though. I was more impressed -- or depressed, actually -- by another of Apple's filings, attempting to claim trademark protection for the term 'app store' and thereby block amazon and Android from using it, which stated that: Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps . . .
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
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

End of The Telecom Digest (3 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues