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

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

The Telecom Digest for March 8, 2013
Volume 32 : Issue 59 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Re: Smart Phones (Fred Atkinson)
Re: Re: Smart Phones (tlvp)
Re: Smart Phones (John Stahl)
FTC vs. phone text-spam. Maybe (danny burstein)

====== 31 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, 07 Mar 2013 02:30:30 -0700 From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Re: Smart Phones Message-ID: <20130307093005.6AE1273B851EC@gateway16.websitewelcome.com> At 10:12 PM 3/6/2013, you wrote: >>> (Another person on the forum) wrote: >>> The costs of smart phones are ridiculous. >> >> Sometime last year a major news organization (I think it was ABC) >> announced that the build cost of an iPhone is US$8, which if true >> means the markup is over 98% of the inflated price. >There is a far more important aspect than "mark up" on the price of >raw materials -- are we going to allow legal free markets to >flourish, with all their dynamism, or are we going to somehow dictate >"fair" prices? >It really doesn't matter whether the parts cost 80 dollars, 80 cents >or even 8 cents. (And there are many, many more costs than just the >parts.) >What matters is whether the market will support the asking price. Of >course, there are market distortions from government regulation, >intellectual property issues, unlawful price fixing by producers, and >many other items. There are also regulated monopolies for specific >purposes. >But on balance and all things considered, prices based on market >perceptions (those prices often soon corrected by market realities) >is far better than some central authority commanding a "fair" >price. We've seen how well that has (not) worked in various places. >Laws and enforcement protecting a free-as-practical market should be >the focus, not the percentage mark-up on parts. Those figures truly >mean nothing. Who is John Galt?
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 20:27:49 -0500 From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Re: Smart Phones Message-ID: <nzn2dvtz7c66$.w9xbf2l77qpn.dlg@40tude.net> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:30:30 -0700, Fred Atkinson wrote: > Who is John Galt? (Shrug!) Cheers, -- tlvp (aka Atlas :-) ) --- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP. ***** Moderator's Note ***** John Galt is one of the characters in Ayn Rand's famous book "Atlas Shrugged". There is a fairly good, two-part film adaptation of the book: although only Part 1 is available, it's a great way to pass an afternoon. Rand's work was from the time before air travel became common, when railroad monopolies were still a major economic force. However, the concepts and ideas Rand espoused are still earth-shaking, even though her critics tried to marginalize her. If you haven't read the book, I recommend it, but when you see "Taggart Transcontinental", think "AT&T". Dagny Taggart was the first feminist. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 05:24:47 -0500 From: John Stahl <aljon@stny.rr.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Smart Phones Message-ID: <13.26.06772.2FA68315@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com> Fred Goldstein wrote: >The build cost of $8 that you refer to is simply the cost of assembling >the parts at a Chinese factory. The itemized cost of the iPhone 5 is here.... <clip> I think there is some confusion in the article(s) quoted in this thread. On March 4, 2013, Smartplanet.com had an article titled "Feeling the pinch of China's labor shortage", by Channtal Fleischfresser, where the author stated in the fourth paragraph that Foxconn's margin on each Apple iPhone produced was $8.00! This maybe the confusion generated in the other articles as margin is the profit made on each of the tens of millions of units Foxconn produces for Apple and not their actual manufacturing costs which presumably would be higher. Here is the link to the Smartplanet article: http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/feeling-the-pinch-of-chinas-labor-shortage/14016?tag=nl.e660&s_cid=e660&ttag=e660 John Stahl Aljon Enterprises ***** Moderator's Note ***** The Smartplanet page cites a slate.com story from September, 2012, which is entitled "Foxconn Getting By On $8 Per iPhone" ... which may be the source of the eight-dollar figure that has been under debate. The Slate story is at http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/25/foxconn_getting_by_on_8_per_iphone.html Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 23:52:07 -0500 From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: FTC vs. phone text-spam. Maybe Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.1303072341410.7423@panix3.panix.com> [FTC press release] In eight different complaints filed in courts around the United States, the FTC charged 29 defendants with collectively sending more than 180 million unwanted text messages to consumers, many of whom had to pay for receiving the texts. The messages promised consumers free gifts or prizes, including gift cards worth $1,000 to major retailers such as Best Buy, Walmart and Target. Consumers who clicked on the links in the messages found themselves caught in a confusing and elaborate process that required them to provide sensitive personal information, apply for credit or pay to subscribe to services to get the supposedly "free" cards. ====== http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/03/textmessages.shtm - A question for our SMS mavens. Per the NY Times article [a]: "Spam waves have become much more frequent since phone companies began offering unlimited text-messaging plans. Now, spammers buy hundreds of SIM cards, the chips that make cellphones work, allowing them to send a flood of messages and then abandon the phone numbers." [a] https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/08/business/government-takes-legal-action-over-phone-spam.html - I'm wondering about that for a couple of reasons. First is that you'd (the spammer, that is) still have to type in each msg into the phone. That kind of limits it to a hundred or so per hour. - Now that's a big number, but it ain't a BIG number. Are there computerized phone/sms/SIMcard thingees? I've never seen one but that doesn't mean they don't exist. That being said, it should be trivial for any legit cellco to rate-limit a subscriber's SMS throughput. Pretty much all the phone-sms spam I've received has been through an e-mail-to-sms gateway. Which, of course, brings up that whole issue of why the (recipient) cellcos don't offer a "block" of those msgs while still allowing "from another cell phone" ones. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
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) 2013 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 (4 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues