33 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.
The Telecom Digest for Aug 3, 2015
|My grandfather just had a grade-school education. But in that country store he taught me more about equality in the eyes of the Lord than all my professors at Georgetown; more about the intrinsic worth of every individual than all the philosophers at Oxford; and he taught me more about the need for equal justice than all the jurists at Yale Law School.|
|William Jefferson Clinton|
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
|Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 08:43:48 -0400 From: Anonymous <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: AT&T responds to BBB complaint about Lumia 830 Message-ID: <elmop-F165D3.email@example.com> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> wrote: > AT&T responds to BBB complaint, Lumia 830 likely to never get Lumia > Denim update > > BY DANIEL RUBINO > > The Lumia Denim update has come and gone for many Windows Phone > owners. Announced back at IFA in September 2014, the update continued > to roll out to devices through early spring. One phone, however, > missed the update, and it was the Lumia 830 for AT&T. It is ironic, if > only because Denim was co-announced with the Lumia 830 at IFA yet it > was the AT&T Lumia 1520 that managed to snag the update instead. > > Fast forward to July 2015 and at this point it is a safe bet that the > AT&T Lumia 830 will not see Lumia Denim. A reader of the site, Noah M., > filed a complaint against AT&T with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) to > express his frustration. > > > http://goo.gl/jScoSg > And this is why I will never buy a phone from a carrier. Ever. I will buy an unlocked phone only, direct from the manufacturer with manufacturer OS support that's not tied to or dependent upon the carrier. That means Apple, Google Nexus, or Moto. And if Microsoft is to be believed, [not from] Microsoft, from this Fall forward. [Moderator snip] ***** Moderator's Note ***** Elmo, please contact me offline. Bill Horne Moderator|
|Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2015 21:44:03 -0700 From: Don Y <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: AT&T offers lower cost connnections if you let them snoop on you Message-ID: <email@example.com> On 8/1/2015 5:02 PM, Bill Horne wrote: > AT&T's plan to watch your Web browsing - and what you can do about it > > Want to opt out? It could cost up to $744 extra per year. > > by Jon Brodkin > > If you have AT&T's gigabit Internet service and wonder why it seems > so affordable, here's the reason - AT&T is boosting profits by > rerouting all your Web browsing to an in-house traffic scanning > platform, analyzing your Internet habits, then using the results to > deliver personalized ads to the websites you visit, e-mail to your > inbox, and junk mail to your front door. How does that differ from what Google does with every service it offers? Shame on them (AT&T) for disclosing what Google already does? [It's amusing, though, when you see the tradeoff -- privacy vs. $$ -- expressed so openly. I.e., AT&T values your privacy at $744! I wonder what valuation Google places on it?]|
|Date: 2 Aug 2015 19:50:38 -0000 From: "John Levine" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: AT&T offers lower cost connnections if you let them snoop on you Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> >How does that differ from what Google does with every service it >offers? Shame on them (AT&T) for disclosing what Google already >*does*? Because Google's at the server end of the connection, and in general you're not paying anything directly for what you get. AT&T is your end of the connection, you're paying them actual cash money every month, and now they want even more money to avoid being spied on. Phooey. There are plenty of outfits that will sell you VPN service for $10/mo which tunnels all of your traffic to a server somewhere else. I'd think that would make it pretty hard for AT&T to spy on you, and it's a lot less than AT&T's opt-out price. R's, John|
|Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:35:01 +1000 From: David Clayton <dc33box-usenet2@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: AT&T offers lower cost connnections if you let them snoop on you Message-ID: <pan.2015.08.02.03.34.58.469578@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au> On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 10:28:38 +1000, David Clayton wrote: > On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 20:02:46 -0400, Bill Horne wrote: > >> AT&T's plan to watch your Web browsing - and what you can do about it >> >> Want to opt out? It could cost up to $744 extra per year. >> >> by Jon Brodkin >> >> If you have AT&T's gigabit Internet service and wonder why it seems so >> affordable, here's the reason - AT&T is boosting profits by rerouting >> all your Web browsing to an in-house traffic scanning platform, >> analyzing your Internet habits, then using the results to deliver >> personalized ads to the websites you visit, e-mail to your inbox, and >> junk mail to your front door. > > > Given that technology savvy people can effectively obscure their > "browsing habits" by using things like encrypted DNS services and HTTPS, > I wonder if this is just another "Come on in suckers" offering that the > masses will take up just for the convenience? ........ > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > The fact that I pointed my browser somewhere is information in and > of itself: such "traffic intelligence" can be as useful as seeing > what I type. After all, a visit to www.islamicjihad.com tells a > watcher something about me, even with an encrypted connection. Many web servers have a single IP address that hosts thousands (millions?) of disparate websites with the traffic all separated by the HTTP header requests - which would be encrypted using HTTPS - so all they would "know" is that there was traffic to that host, but not which site was accessed. If the DNS was encrypted then they would also not have available that information either. > But, assuming that they want to know every word I read, and leaving > aside the fact that their software could simply parrot my browser's > GET requests to see it anyway, what if AT&T makes in impossible to > use your workarounds? What if the company demands that all users > give up encrypted connections entirely? > Bill Horne > Moderator Yep, that always a possibility which is why things like VPN services exist as the futile game of block and then bypass continues. - - 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 ***** Yes, some web servers are set up to present "virtual hosts", but that's not something that I can depend on to provide me security against corporate snooping. Sorry, but "Some" <> "Secure". In any case, AFAIK, there is no law preventing AT&T or any other ISP from demanding that all its customers install a "man in the middle" security certificate in order to get any website, and I'm afraid that most customers would comply. It is possible, with an election in progress, that Americans might get some of the privacy protections that European Internauts enjoy, but only if we get busy and demand it. Bill Horne Moderator|
|Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 19:16:34 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Struggling to Disconnect From Our Digital Lives Message-ID: <ED1E904E-C938-40DB-ABAD-931629C5A58D@roscom.com> The more time we spend swimming in digital waters, the shallower our cognitive capacity becomes and the less control we have of our attention. By Tony Schwartz It is nearly 11:30 p.m., and I'm lying in bed, way overtired. I ought to turn out the lights, but instead, my laptop is perched on my stomach. I have just finished reading email from earlier in the day. Now, I am surfing aimlessly, reading the latest news updates about Donald Trump and Bill Cosby, looking over sales on Gilt, watching videos on YouTube and perusing LinkedIn invitations from people I don't know. http://goo.gl/d5sN1Q ***** Moderator's Note ***** This article is, I think, an excellent illustration of the price we're all paying for "always on" and "always connected" access to the online world. It doesn't matter if the endpoint is a "laptop" or a "smartphone": what counts is the slavish devotion many users have to their online world, to the detriment of their actual lives. I've been saying for several years that smartphones and other portable Internet-ready devices are shortchanging us of the benefits which the net is capable of delivering. We have become a nation of electronic sycophants, chained to electronic leashes which are cheapening our perceptions of the world and our ability to deal with it in a natural way. Bill Horne Moderator|
|Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 19:15:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Airlines Give In-Flight Entertainment Options an Update Message-ID: <BB81B532-1060-4516-A803-8670EFD0C70C@roscom.com> >From Wi-Fi to "Game of Thrones" to touch-screen remotes, new options for passengers explode as the digital age comes to the cabin. With more in-flight entertainment than ever, the longest flights can often seem short these days. On a recent trip to Hong Kong on Cathay Pacific, for example, I could build a list of video favorites from more than 100 movies, with options ranging from new Oscar nominees like "American Sniper" and "Mr. Turner" to classics like "Casablanca." Late in the 14-hour flight, as I started watching the documentary "Life Itself," about the film critic Roger Ebert, the system alerted me that I wouldn't have time to finish the two-hour movie before landing. I was still watching when the plane came to a full stop at the arrival gate. http://goo.gl/dlDZGA ***** Moderator's Note ***** On a flight from North Carolina to Rhode Island on Friday, they announced that the airplane had WiFi and that we could purchase the service. Then, when they came around selling booze, I realized that the WiFi also gave the salespeople the capability to scan credit cards and get online approvals in real time. Bill Horne Moderator|
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 educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
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 © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself. Thank you!
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.