33 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.

The Telecom Digest for Feb 15, 2015
Volume 34 : Issue 29 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: History--Bell "Farm Interphone" (Anonymous)
Re: Seattle drafts new cable TV rules in CenturyLink's favor (Neal McLain)
How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco's Life (Monty Solomon)
Someone at Verizon hit "send" too soon ... (Bill Horne)

The question fairly stated is, Has the Constitution delegated to Congress the power to coerce a State into submission which is attempting to withdraw or has actually withdrawn from the Confederacy?  - James Buchanan

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.

Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 00:00:00 -0000 (UTC) From: Anonymous <anonymous@invalid.telecom-digest.org> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: History--Bell "Farm Interphone" Message-ID: <20150214prbb5anon@telecom-digest.org> On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:52:24 -0800 (PST), HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote; > I came across a 50 y/o article describing the Bell System's "Farm > Interphone". Would anyone have had any exposure to it or farm > telephones? http://doc.telephonecollectors.info/dm/512-515-100_i3_Aug64_2A_Farm_Interphone_ID_Desc.pdf
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 23:23:33 -0800 (PST) From: Neal McLain <nmclain.remove-this@and-this-too.annsgarden.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Seattle drafts new cable TV rules in CenturyLink's favor Message-ID: <e4673ffd-9a6b-40ac-b3c3-4f1fa544234e@googlegroups.com> On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 11:41:35 AM UTC-6, Bill Horne wrote: > Seattle drafts new cable TV rules in CenturyLink's favor > by Brier Dudley > Once again, the city of Seattle (Washington) is letting CenturyLink > decide how and where digital services will be upgraded on public > property. > At least that's what it looks like is happening at City Hall, which > last week floated a plan to basically give < CenturyLink carte > blanche to roll out a new TV service where it sees fit. http://goo.gl/gmffzx And then: On Sunday, February 8, 2015 at 11:22:46 AM UTC-6, Bob Goudreau wrote: > Separately, another valued contributor to the Digest, Neal McLain, > has wondered about the economics of wired broadband service, > specifically whether it qualifies as a natural monopoly. My area was > not a monopoly even before the Google announcement, as TWC competes > with AT&T (formerly BellSouth, nee Southern Bell) and their U-verse > service. But I will note that between the time that Google announced > about a year ago that our area was a candidate for Google Fiber and > the time they announced we would indeed be getting it, both TWC and > AT&T started promising significant upgrades to their local > offerings. In TWC's case, this included upping broadband rates in > existing service tiers without increasing prices. AT&T has started > rolling out "U-verse with GigaPower", with speeds an order of > magnitude faster than plain old U-verse. It seems that there's > nothing like a little competition, or even the mere threat of it, to > spur the incumbents to offer better products and prices. http://tinyurl.com/kujaww7 Wow ... "valued contributor" ... thanks, Bob! Yes, there are indeed situations where a second -- or third -- overlapping network can be financially viable. Especially if the local governing body changes the rules to make it easier for the new entrant. In the CenturyLink case cited on Bill's original post, the City of Seattle changed the rules: it removed the requirement that CenturyLink provide service to the entire city. As Dudley's article notes: > So instead of requiring cable companies to offer service to everyone > in their service area, the city would only require them to provide a > map showing where they opted to build out their service. I suspect that CenturyLink essentially gave the city two choices: remove the buildout requirement or "forget it -- we're walking away." Faced with this choice, the city agreed to CenturyLink's demands. I also suspect that the city may have relaxed other obstacles, particularly pole attachment fees, street-opening fees, street-level equipment cabinet rules, and permitting requirements. Of course these are just guesses on my part: I have no inside information about these negotiations. But an article about Google Fiber, written by the city's former Chief Technology Officer, bolsters my suspicion: http://tinyurl.com/ozppm28 And speaking of Google I have a further suspicion: the city may be laying the groundwork for Google to enter the market with Google Fiber. The city no doubt understands that if Google ever applies for a franchise, it will expect the same deal that CenturyLink got. As Google makes clear in its "Google Fiber City Checklist," it expects the city create a smooth process for such things as pole attachment permits ands street-opening permits. Although the checklist doesn't say anything about buildout requirements, that issue would certainly come up if Google ever applied for a franchise. http://tinyurl.com/q2zzxeo So why don't the incumbent cable TV franchisees sue the city if it changes the rules to make it easier for new competitors? Even if the city were to extend the same concessions to the incumbents, the incumbents would still have a case: their huge sunk costs resulting from compliance with the original franchise requirements. Stay tuned. We haven't seen the end of this story yet. Neal McLain
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:39:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco's Life Message-ID: <93052B86-2590-4363-8E07-9015E8832929@roscom.com> How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco's Life http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html -or- http://goo.gl/Ki4Nk5 The unique 21st-century misery of the online shaming victim. ***** Moderator's Note ***** Why am I not surprised? I guess I am getting old: the current crop of up-and-coming youngsters seems to think that their actions don't have consequences beyond their pampered existence, just because they assume it is so; just because they grew up with these magic boxes that they think of as "telephones", but which are really time-division-multiplex digital transceivers. Ha, ha, I'm "white" too. Oh, wait, that's not correct either: one of my great grandfathers was an African, who married a Cherokee and gave me the right to check the "two or more races" box on employment applications. Cherokees, to their credit, did not think skin color was something worth keeping track of, but there are other records, and other attitudes. I remember being at a computer club meeting, at the Heath store in Wellesley, Massachusetts, about 1988, and on the way out after the meeting, I heard one of the attendees tell his friend that "AIDS" stood for "Adios, Indecent Dick Sucker". I'm ashamed to say that, although I didn't laugh, I didn't call him on it, either. I've known men who died from Acquired Immune Deficiencies: it wasn't pretty, and it wasn't fair, and it wasn't because they were Caucasoid. A virus, unlike those it infects, has no prejudice. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:05:32 -0500 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Someone at Verizon hit "send" too soon ... Message-ID: <54DFB89C.4090904@horneQRM.net> I just opened an email from Verizon, which was sent to me, I assume, because I have "HSI" service, which AFAIK means "ADSL". Subject: Important storm-related updates regarding your Verizon HSI service Date: 13 Feb 2015 23:00:23 -0500 From: Verizon Notification <verizon-notification@verizon.com> To: bill@horneQRM.net Dear Valued Verizon Customer, There's no doubt that this winter has been one for the ages. As another major snowstorm approaches this weekend, rest assured that we are prepared to quickly resolve any potential issues. Whether brief or lengthy, a power outage is one of the most common storm-related occurrences. Knowing that, we'd like to provide you with some helpful information in preparation of a potential outage. *What should I do in the event of a power outage?* Visit verizon.com/outage (Long, individually identifiable URL censored - bh) from your computer, smartphone, or wireless device to: * Track current outages * Find answers to equipment repair and backup service questions * Create a "Repair Request" if needed Now, please note that whomever wrote the message worded the above, NOT ME. I quote - "... from your computer ..." I'll concede that a smartphone or even a "wireless device" might be able to visit verizon.com during a power outage, but my laptop won't be able to, AND they invited me to "Create a Repair Request if needed". After that, there was some more advice on how to reset my modem once the power came back on ... Most issues can be resolved by unplugging and plugging your Verizon equipment back in (Modem, Router, etc). ... so there was, at least to that extent, some recognition that things might have to happen AFTER the power is restored - but it's also clear that they were addressing home users, not just mobile ones. Which leads me to an important question: am I the only one that wants to pick up the handset of my genuine Western Electric 2500DM set, and call whomever entered this message, and ask "How will I create a 'Repair Request' ONLINE if the power is out"? Maybe the rest of the world has uninterruptible power supplies. Maybe there's a new kind of solar panel that works during a snowstorm. Maybe it's a not-so-subtle demand that I never bother the phone company by calling them on the phone. Maybe it's just me. :-( Bill -- (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)

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.
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 © 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.

End of The Telecom Digest (4 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues