From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Nov 4 02:29:07 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iA47T7t10428; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:29:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:29:07 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411040729.iA47T7t10428@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #529 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:29:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 529 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC to Decide VoIP Fate Next Week (Lisa Minter) VoIP Plays Big Role in Presidential Election Turnout (Lisa Minter) Qualcomm's Field Of Streams (Eric Friedebach) Nokia, Good Technology Ink Smartphone Deal (Eric Friedebach) Specs Finding Tool (Steve Hanov) Prepaid Questions [was Re: How to Make Call On Cell Plans] (Tom Horsley) Avaya S8100/G600 and MIBs for SNMP (Scott M. Foster) Microsoft TV Foundation Edition 1.7 (J.T. Srinivas) Does Anyone Make Portable Keyboard for Blackberry 7230 (Unknown) Re: Cut-Through Connection (Paul A Lee) Re: Semiconductors | The End of Moore's law? (Carl Zwanzig) Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal (Lisa Hancock) Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal (jared) Re: What Happened to Channel 1? (Neal McLain) Re: What Happened to Channel 1? (Mark Roberts) Re: How to Make The Right Call On Cell Plans (John Levine) Re: Home Phones Face Uncertain Future (kansasman) Re: Lever Voting Machines - What's Wrong? (John Hines) Re: Lever Voting Machines - What's Wrong? (Robert Bonomi) Last Laugh! was Re: Lever Voting Machines - What's Wrong? (Dave VanHorn) 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; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lisa Minter Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 19:34:27 -0500 Subject: FCC to Decide VoIP Fate Next Week http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.php/3430691 By Roy Mark The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced Tuesday it would rule Nov. 9 on whether Internet telephony is an interstate service and exempt from state and local regulation and tariffs. The decision is considered critical to the future development of the emerging Voice over IP industry, which hopes to avoid negotiating rates with 50 separate state governments. In particular, the FCC will be ruling on a request by independent Internet telephony provider Vonage that would classify the business as an interstate information service, which is no different from applications, such as e-mail. Such a ruling would put VoIP beyond the taxing and regulatory reach of the states. "The [Vonage] petition gives the commission an appropriate opportunity to immediately declare that VoIP services, whether traversing the public Internet or privately managed IP networks, are interstate in nature and subject to the commission's exclusive jurisdiction," 61 members of Congress stated in an October letter to FCC Chairman Michael Powell. Full story at: http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.php/3430691 ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:01:54 -0500 Subject: VoIP Plays Big Role in Presidential Election Turnout http://voxilla.com/voxstory114-nested-order0-threshold0.html VoIP Plays Big Role in Presidential Election Turnout By PHILLIP BRITT for VOXILLA.COM VoIP may have played a role in choosing the next president of the United States. Ravi Sakaria, chief executive officer of VoicePulse, said his company was seeing five times the normal call volume, with all of the spike due to calls from political volunteers in the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. Many political pundits have been saying the candidate that carries two of these states will win the election. Seeing the spike in traffic, Sakaria did a quick check of caller IDs and found that most of the calls from the Democratic party, though there were some VoIP calls from Republican volunteers as well. Full story at: http://voxilla.com/voxstory114-nested-order0-threshold0.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have a question about the election. On AP News Wednesday afternoon, Senator Kerry said in order to save the country the kind of debacle which occurred in 2000 when Mr. Bush was eventually declared the winner, he was going to concede the election to Bush, which he did. But later in the day Wednesday officials said they were still going to closely audit all the votes from Ohio. Now just suppose the Ohio audit showed the Kerry *had* won that state (although he and others said it was quite unlikely). But let's say it turned out he did win *that state's electoral votes*. In that case he might have won the election; but he has already conceded to Bush. What would happen in that case? Has a 'winner' of a presidential election ever conceded it to someone else? Just curious. PAT] ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Qualcomm's Field Of Streams Date: 3 Nov 2004 12:55:12 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com David M. Ewalt, 11.02.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - If you build it, they will come ... or so Qualcomm hopes. The wireless chip and technology vendor is betting that if it constructs a nationwide network to stream television over cell phones, cellular carriers will sign on and consumers will clamor for the service. But it remains to be seen whether anyone really wants a TV in his pocket. On Monday, Qualcomm said it would begin building a nationwide wireless network specifically designed to deliver high-quality audio and video programming to mobile phones. The endeavor is expected to cost about $800 million over the next four or five years, and begin commercial service in 2006. Eventually, Qualcomm says it intends to spin off the company. http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/02/cx_de_1102qcom.html Eric Friedebach /3D Monkeys From Monroeville/ ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Nokia, Good Technology Ink Smartphone Deal Date: 3 Nov 2004 12:59:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lisa DiCarlo, 11.02.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Nokia is developing a smartphone that will incorporate Good Technology's GoodLink wireless e-mail service, a deal that should broaden Good's penetration and boost its market share against leader Research in Motion. The people at privately held Good say that Nokia decided to use its service partly as a defensive play against RIM, which is increasingly getting into the handset business. Nokia also sells RIM's BlackBerry wireless e-mail service with its phones, as well as its own service. "RIM is aggressively targeting the market for smartphones," says Sue Forbes, Good's vice president of marketing, noting that hardware revenue at RIM has been increasing. "We do think Nokia is waking up to the reality of the marketplace, that it's growing and RIM is going after the market. Enterprise customers need a flexible, standard approach." http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/02/cx_ld_1102nokia.html Eric Friedebach /3D Monkeys From Monroeville/ ------------------------------ From: smhanov@hotmail.com (Steve Hanov) Subject: Specs Finding Tool Date: 3 Nov 2004 15:34:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com As a software engineer in the telecoms industry, I often have the problem of finding information in the 30,000+ pages of specifications stored on my computer. So one day I sat down and coded an application to solve that problem, and I'd like to share it with you. Before I had this tool it would take me close to a minute of clicking to find a specification, even if I knew where it was. This is a major pain when document 'A' refers to document 'B' to 'C' and then back to another annex in 'A'. Now I just type 4.18 and the relevant etsi standard pops up in acrobat reader. This tool is for Windows 95/98/XP/2000. It builds a list of all of the programs and documents on your computer, and when you hit a hotkey, you can type in part of the name and it will give you a listing of everything matching that name. It even works with media files. Give it a try: http://www.hanovsolutions.com/hj/ (Note that the license is shareware) Steve Hanov ------------------------------ Subject: Prepaid Questions [was Re: How to Make Right Call On Cell Plans] From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:17:34 GMT > I'm not sure the "pre-paid" phones are such a good idea because > some have expiration dates on the time whether you use it or not. > Plus you have to constantly recharge the time or you lose your number. I've been thinking about getting rid of my wired phone and going with pre-paid only because I make about 3 minutes of calls a year (only slight exaggeration :-). Even if I have to constantly "charge up" a pre-paid phone I don't use the minutes on, the minimum charge seems ("seems" is the rub) less than my monthly bill for the most basic possible phone service from BellSouth. The main obstacle is my total confusion when I look at the prepaid folks web pages -- I mostly can't understand a word they are saying or figure out what the actual minimum amount I'd have to spend really is (virginmobile.com is the exception -- it almost seems clear). I usually give up when I get past the first page that says prepaid has "NO CONTRACTS, NO PLANS, JUST PAY AS YOU GO!", then I see the next page which lists a huge matrix of "PLANS" for different kinds of prepaid phones (Aargh!). Just as a starting point for comparison, can anyone answer this question: If I never use the phone at all, what is the minimum per-year charge to keep it active for each of the prepaid providers "plans"? (I can start digging up other implications of each plan if I could just order them first by this criteria :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: scott_m_foster@yahoo.com (Scott M. Foster) Subject: Avaya S8100/G600 and MIBs for SNMP Date: 3 Nov 2004 21:59:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The Avaya S8100 can be configured to deliver SNMP traps as well as be polled by an SNMP host. I can't seem to find the MIB for my Network Management system that defines the OIDs for the Avaya S8100. I have been searching all over the Internet and can only find MIBs for the S8300 and S8700. Avaya isn't helping out very much either. Can someone email me the MIB(s) necessary and/or give me some assistance to find the MIBs? Thanks, Scott ------------------------------ From: srinivasjt@esntechnologies.co.in (jtsrinivas) Subject: Microsoft TV Foundation Edition 1.7 Date: 3 Nov 2004 22:18:14 -0800 Hello, I want to download Microsoft TV Foundation Edition 1.7 along with Microsoft TV: Tools Suite. Can any one let me know the details where I can download them? Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: Unknown Subject: Portable Keyboard for Blackberry 7230 Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:00:00 EST A message came into the Digest late Wednesday night or early Thursday morning asking if anyone knew who makes these portable keyboards for the Blackberry 7230. Unfortunatly, the message got mutiliated in processing. I do not have the name or email address of the sender, just that he was talking about Blackberry 7230's. If the person will resubmit the message I will run it again, and perhaps there will be some answers for you also by the next issue. PAT ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Cut-Through Connection Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:27:08 -0500 Organization: Rite Aid Corporation In TELECOM Digest V23 #528, ariel.burbaickij@gmail.com (Ariel Burbaickij) wrote (in part): > Could someone explain to me what does the term "cut-through > connection" mean? Are there several meanings? In general, "cut-through" is the action of connecting one circuit to another circuit (subscriber line, tie trunk, tandem trunk, etc.). In electromechanical switches, dial pulses were presented sequentially and acted on the switching equipment sequentially. The speed with which each incremental connection was cut-through affected the path of the subsequent dial pulses. With electronic switching and senderized (rather than individual) presentation of pulses or tones, "cut-through" has come to refer o the point at which a station-to-station or station-to-facility voice path is established, following the sending of pulses or DTMF or MF) tones. For example, when you dial a DID number served by an analog DID trunk, the connection between your phone and the DID trunk is not cut through until after the end office switch has DTMF'd the DID station number to the prem switch. That's why you don't hear the tones (or pulses, if it's an old prem switch) being sent. I have also heard the term "cut-through" used to refer to the opening of a voice path laid out by out-of-band signaling (SS7 or ISDN). Technically inaccurate, but conceptually plausible, so it will probably stick. (I know telco veterans' explanations will differ from mine on several points, but not fundamentally.) Paul A Lee Sr Telecom Engineer Rite Aid Corporation HL-IS-COM (Telecomm) V: +1 717 730-8355 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 F: +1 717 975-3789 P.O. Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3165 W: +1 717 805-6208 ------------------------------ From: zbang@radix.net (Carl Zwanzig) Subject: Re: Semiconductors | The End of Moore's Law? Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:05:55 -0000 Organization: RadixNet Internet Services Reminds me of a railroad executive in the '50s. When asked what the biggest problem the railroads faced, he said "Too many bankers railroading." The situation hadn't changed, it's difficult, if not impossible to manage what you don't understand. z! ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal Date: 3 Nov 2004 08:06:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com BobGoudreau@withheld on request wrote: > I hope that you didn't literally mean "pre-recorded phone calls, of > any kind", since there are plenty of cases where people actually WANT > to receive such calls and make arrangements to do so. > Perhaps you actually meant "UNSOLICITED pre-recorded phone calls, > of any kind". Even then (and leaving aside the constitutional issues of > political speech raised by campaign calls) it's not completely black > and white, since I can envision various emergency scenarios (storm > evacuation, water contamination, armed-and-dangerous suspect at large, > etc) where public safety might be aided via mass robo-calls to the > affected areas. In the case of a public safety emergency -- normally a very rare occurence -- I could see the use of pre-recorded announcements. However, these should not replace traditional sirens or radio announcements. As to other pre-recorded calls, I suppose in your example -- school messages that one has explicitly accepted -- it would be tolerable. But even this is questionable. When this issue came up before, Sears Dept Stores said they use pre-recorded announcements to notify customers of up-coming deliveries. That sounds ok, but there are many problems with that (esp from my experience getting something from Sears). First, sometimes the delivery time is not good and you need to tell a real person that. Second, answering machines could garble a pre-recorded message or skip it altogether -- the calling machine simply has no idea if it's talking to off-hook but dead air. As to constitutional issues, I don't see how that applies at all. If you put a sign up on your front gate advising visitors to KEEP OUT and that you will not tolerate being disturbed, anyone who disregards that sign is subject to arrest for trespassing and harassment. They may leave a note at your gate but may not enter your property, even for political reasons. There is no difference between such a "keep-out" sign and a do-not-call phone list. There is also such a thing as harassment and existing laws that restrict political telephone soliciting. If it was constitutionally protected, than there'd be no restrictions on nursing home and cell phone calls and late hour calls. Free speech does not include harassment. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 22:38:37 -0700 From: jared@nospam.au (jared) Subject: Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal Illegal would be lovely ... consider the following ... The Oregon Republicans called me repeatedly on my cell phone ... including election day. Calling cell phones costs the person called money, did they think about that? ... the number is in a cell phone exchange so they could have checked ... I asked them to stop ... they didn't ... one person could even tell me the next pre-recorded call to expect ... they said they got my number from the elections office ... certainly not under my name as I'm not registered ... maybe someone had my number years ago??? ... the Oregon voter registration form has phone number as optional entry ... no warning that the number will be given to third parties. The stupidest call was about going to polling places ... Oregon voted by 'mail', ballots came in the mail ... one voted by returning the ballot: either postal, taking it to the county offices or dropping off at official pick-up sites. Anyone in Oregon have a similar experience with junk political calls? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 19:46:14 -0600 From: Neal McLain Subject: Re: What Happened to Channel 1? PAT wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But this area did not have cable > TV (nor, for the most part) any over the air TV in 1954-55. > Coffeyville had that *one* station (channel 4) over the air in > that time period, Independence had nothing ... Pat, did you contact the College to see if they publish a program schedule for W04EJ? And were you able to get your TV set hooked up to a better antenna to try to receive W04EJ? > Coffeyville of course still gets channel 4 with its weather > dials, etc ... Is the College *still* using "weather dials"? It reminds me of a device that cable companies used to use back in the 1950s. It consisted of a monochrome vidicon camera clamped to a vertical shaft that rotated back-and-forth through an angle of about 180 degrees. There were six or seven dials, each about 6 inches in diameter, arranged in a semicircle around the camera; these dials displayed time, temperature, wind direction, wind speed, and I forget what else. Between the dials there were little slots where the cable operator could insert 3x5 cards for announcements or advertisements. It was a pretty primitive device, but in the days before electronic character generators, it was all we had. Besides, it filled a channel -- in those days, cable companies often didn't have enough video programming to fill even the 12 channels on the VHF dial. It's possible that the College could have used such a device back in the 1960s. But they certainly must be using something more up-to-date by now! Neal McLain [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not get a chance to call them or ask anything. I will try tomorrow (Thursday). PAT] ------------------------------ From: markrobt@comcast.net (Mark Roberts) Subject: Re: What Happened to Channel 1? Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 05:18:03 -0000 Organization: 1.94 meters Neal McLain had written: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But this area did not have cable TV > (nor, for the most part) any over the air TV in 1954-55. Coffeyville > had that *one* station (channel 4) over the air in that time period, I don't see how that is possible with full-power stations on channel 4 in Oklahoma City and in Kansas City. Low-power, non-translator stations were not authorized until the mid-1980s. Mark Roberts | "You'll know gas prices are hurting when you see headlines Oakland, Cal.| about plunging sales of sport utility vehicles." NO HTML MAIL | -- Floyd Norris, New York Times, October 23, 2004 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *do not know for sure* they were on channel 4 in the 1950's, or even that it was the same thing. I do know in the 1950's I stayed for a few days with my cousins who (still even today) live in Coffeyville. There was a 24 hour black and white station which continuously showed weather dials and a clock; nothing else. Neil McLain mentioned Coffeyville Junior College having something on Channel 4 *today*. I _assumed_ it was the same thing. Thursday I am going to call them and ask them (1) if they are on the air now, (2) if they have a program guide (3) if they were on the air fifty years ago doing continuous weather, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 3 Nov 2004 21:36:14 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: How to Make The Right Call On Cell Plans Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > In the short run, cell phone rates have dropped dramatically. But in > the longer run, long distance telephone rates and telephone set costs > have dropped dramatically, too. > I don't credit competition but rather technology. It was at least as much due to the Bell breakup. Before that, long distance was deliberately overpriced to subsidize local service, on the theory that it was an expensive luxury. (Well, it was back in 1920.) Prices would have dropped a lot anyway, but a big chunk of the drop is due to the access charges assessed on LD calls. They used to be on the order of 10 cents/min or more, now in most places they're just a penny or two. > Digital phones require more towers than analog. Cell phone companies > originally advertised digital as being superior quality, but it is > actually superior for them, not for us users. Not really. Digital in the 800 MHz AMPS band has about the same range as analog. But the 1900 MHz band, where everyone uses varieties of of digital does require smaller cells. Also, and more importantly in most places, there's a maximum of 100 analog calls per cell, while digital permits several times that, 3x for TDMA, for example. That means they don't have to subdivide cells as much to add more call capacity. > Analog phones had bigger batteries. The older analog phones -- either > in a bag or in a car, had much more powerful transmitters. Yes, that's true. Bag and car phones could transmit at 3W, digital top out at .75W unless you get an aftermarket signal booster to put in line with the antenna. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: dog4dogg@yahoo.com (kansasman) Subject: Re: Home Phones Face Uncertain Future Date: 3 Nov 2004 11:10:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > You think AT&T was not static? They attempted how many different > solutions justified by MBA concepts? They had no idea of how to put > VoIP on cable. They bought cable companies based upon spread sheet > analysis only to discover, after the fact, that entire cable company > infrastructure was built with the wrong cable -- using cost controls > to install wrong cable. For a third time, the entire cable network > had to be replaced again. Any product oriented thinker could see > that. But AT&T management is anti-innovative -- which means > anti-American. AT&T managers did not even sufficient technical > knowledge to even read the label on cable entering their own homes. > AT&T did not have the capital to replace the entire network. So AT&T > sold off those cable companies at a major loss. Was it a $500 million > loss? You call that trying a new business? I call it classic MBA > school management techniques where "a good manager can manage ANY > business" ... into the ground. > It gets more damning as we think more product oriented. AT&T did not > comprehend packet switching concepts. Too complex. You are right about AT&T. At&T has not changed its ways as a telcom conglomerate; with their VoIP service, customer service is still unresponsive, treating customers like numbers. I do not want that. You do not want that. I am ready for a new company that actually treats their customers like poeple, not like the next problem in line. Next! A friend of mine has been enjoying her SunRocket service, particularly because during the few times she did call customer service, SunRocket was extremely helpful and quick! There is nothing more agravating than waiting on hold only to hear an electronic non-human voice at the other end of the line. Have you looking into SunRocket service (SunRocket.com)? It is available in the DC and Boston areas now, and they are going national at the end of the year. ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Lever Voting Machines - What's Wrong? Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:15:51 -0600 Organization: www.jhines.org Reply-To: john@jhines.org > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In Chicago, many years ago we had those > mechanical things, where one large lever closed and opened the curtains > and you could not vote without that lever to close the curtains and > the vote(s) was cast when the lever opened the curtains. There were a > few 'medium size' levers inside on the panel (for 'straight ticket' > voting) and many smaller levers for individual candidate voting. Illinois got rid of the "straight ticket" option a decade or so ago. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can't just go vote straight Democratic any longer (which is what they always preferred to have you do.) I learn something new daily it seems. PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Lever Voting Machines - What's Wrong? From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 20:03:55 +0000 In article , Lisa Hancock wrote: > My county uses "lever" voting machines, which are wholly mechanical. > You simply push a lever for each desired candidate and when you open > the curtain (a big lever) the votes are recorded on counters. > The machines contain interlockings so you can only vote for the > prescribed number of candidates for an office. That's usually one, > but some offices you vote for three of five candidates (ie town > councils). I understand some newer machines have no such protection > and such overvotes ended up wasting a ballot. > Another advtg is that you enter the machine with an open curtain, pull > a master lever to close it and open the machine to accept your votes, > then pull the master again to record your final votes and open the > curtain. The curtains are large and fully enclosed -- it appears that > modern electronic machines have very tiny curtains or just a small > divider, limiting voter privacy. > Yet I understand these machines are very old and not made anymore. > Other counties went to punch cards and we know about their problems. > Many counties are going electronic but sometimes those machines fail. > Is there a reason mechanical machines are so out of favor? Sure, they > would require maintenance and setup and there is a cost to that, but > that is only twice a year. If the machines were in production, costs > would be lower. A modern generation would probably have newer > mechanical engineering and lighter better wearing gears. There are several reasons those mechanical machines have fallen out of favor: 1) they are *BIG* and *HEAVY* The cost for storage storage space is non-trivial. Ditto the cost of transport to/from each polling place. 2) They require a _lot_ of labor for set-up. This has to be done _before_ they are transported to the polling places; which means that you have to move them around in that storage space, to work on them. This adds to the space requirements for storage. Also, for a large/complex election, one person can service about *five* machines in an 8 hour shift. For a 'simple' election, productivity is only about 3 times higher. 3) There is a physical limit to the number of candidates/offices that the mechanical-lever voting machine can handle. With 'unified' general elections -- *everything* happens on that 'Tuesday' in November -- in many locales the capacity of the lever machines is simply insufficient. I don't remember what the actual numbers are, but if the lever machine has only 240 'individual vote' levers, and there are a total of 244 candidates running across all the positions being voted on, then, obviously, you =cannot= use the lever machine for that election. Now, for a concrete illustration: the State of Iowa has about 2100 polling places state-wide. You have to have an *absolute*minimum* of 2 machines at every polling place, and precincts in the larger cities typically have 4 or more per location. This works out to at least 6-8 _thousand_ machines, state-wide. 15,000-20,000 sq.ft of storage space needed, in roughly 100 different locations. Plus, call it four *thousand* man-hours for 'programming' the machines, per location. Plus delivery (and retrieval). A 24' straight truck can hold about 36 machines at one time. Which is about what can be delivered in an 8-hour shift, with a two (possibly three) man crew. Call it 200 truck-loads going out, and another 200 truck-loads coming back, Now, lets add up the costs. per election 20,000 sq ft storage @ $6/sq.ft/yr. $120,000* * assumes 1 general election and 1 primary every two years. same as 1/year 'programming' $30/hr, 30 min/machine $120,000 delivery $ 90,000* * 2 men at $25/hr ea, truck at $50/day return to storage $ 90,000 Throw in the costs of printing and inserting the lever 'labels', required repairs, amortization of the purchase price, etc. and you're easily over $500,000 per election. or $250/polling place. Compare that to the costs of using the 'punch-card' ballot machines -- like the (in)famous ones used in Florida, in 2000. voting machine storage (about 2% of the space required for lever machines) $ 2,400 'programming' -zero- delivery (100 _car_ loads, 1 man) $23,000 return to storage $23,000 To be fair, you have to figure in the cost of the punch-card ballots (about 1 cent each). Iowa votes around 1 million ballots,, so that's an extra $10,000.00. Oh my, we're up to a cost of circa $60,000/election. vs $500,000+ using the old lever machines. 'optical scan' ballots -- allowing the use of a cardboard, _throw-away_, privacy screen, can reduce the delivery cost even further. *and* eliminate the 'return to storage' cost, as well as the need for long-term storage. 'overhead' down to circa $15,000. Ballot consumables at around $20,000. And you wonder _why_ they don't use lever machines today ? ------------------------------ From: Dave VanHorn" Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Lever Voting Machines - What's Wrong? Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:08:38 -0500 > "I voted today in Independence, have you voted yet?" with a little > flag printed on it, and stuck it on your shirt or wherever. Someone should run around and put them on the tombstones. :) KC6ETE Dave's Engineering Page, www.dvanhorn.org Microcontroller Consultant, specializing in Atmel AVR [TELECOM Digest Editor's note: Very funny, indeed, but here they would be aghast at something like that. The judges of election and clerks here are expected to have a good idea of who each person is who approaches them to vote. On Tuesday when I went to vote, the three ladies at the table were all looking at me as I walked over to them. All three of those ladies live right there in my own neighborhood. I saw one of them a couple days before the election over at Marvin's store, and we said hello, and she reminded me to come over to Memorial Hall to vote; 'not the jailhouse where we had the primary election'. I told her I had gotten the notice in the mail from Charlotte telling us about the change in polling places. Believe me, if it ever came to light here that a person dead and buried had not been removed from the rolls and a vote had been cast in that person's name, the stink would be terrible all over town. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed 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. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org 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 Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 TELECOM Digest V23 #529 ******************************