For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:22:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 164

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Getting Serious About the War on Spam (Lisa Minter)
    India Moves to Silence Cellphone Spam (Lisa Minter)
    Congress Aims to Thwart Identity Theft (Lisa Minter)
    Web Censors In China Find Success (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Packet8 Joins 'Unfee' Trend (Jack Decker)
    Texting is Slower Than Morse (Colin)
    Re: Traditional Mail Discouraged? (FrazNor@gmail.com)
    Re: Traditional Mail Discouraged? (Henry)
    Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses (Supak Lailert)
    Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses (John Schmerold)
    Re: Comcast Sued for Disclosing Customer Information (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Can I Port an 800 Number Without the Old Carrier's Permission? (Tim)
    Re: Walkie Talkie (Jason)
    Last Laugh! Passenger Found Dead After Plane Lands at O'Hare (M Falco)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  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.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:29:57 -0400
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Getting Serious About the War on Spam


http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0414/p02s01-usju.html

Byline:  Patrik Jonsson Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

(RALEIGH, N.C.) From the outside, it was just another middle-class
tract house with a fountain in the front yard. Inside, it was anything
but homey. Instead of family pictures on the mantle, computer servers
were stacked in closets, 12 high-speed wires snaked into the house,
and monitors were stacked on top of one another.

Welcome to Exhibit A in the nation's intensifying fight against spam.

 From here, Jeremy Jaynes, a Raleigh businessman who rose to No. 8 on
a list of "spam kingpins," broke the nation's toughest spam law by
churning out more than 100,000 unsolicited e-mails a month. In fact,
he was moving closer to 10 million a day. He was sentenced late last
week in Leesburg, Va., to the stiffest penalty ever given to a
spammer: Nine years in a state prison.

'They're no longer ghosts'

In part, it underscores Americans' changing attitudes about the
sanctity of the inbox. And even as the unsolicited e-mail flows on,
experts say the case sends a potent message to would-be Internet
solicitors: We know where you live.

"If there's ever going to be a deterrent effect, it's not in the
potential for [a long] jail sentence, but the fact that spammers can
in fact be found, that they're no longer ghosts," says Anne Mitchell,
director of the Institute for Spam and Internet Public Policy in San
Jose, Calif.

Still, the junk keeps coming. In 2001, only 8 percent of e-mail was
junk; today, that number hovers near 75 percent, and could jump to 95
percent, thanks to new methods where "spam gangs" hijack servers to
churn out huge amounts of e-mail at one time.

The consequences are dramatic. One study from Nucleus Research, a
technology-research company in Wellesley, Mass., figures companies
lose around $1,934 per year per employee on spam. Even David Oblon,
Jaynes's lawyer, admits his firm had to hire an outside company to
sift through the thousands of daily spam messages.

A change in public attitudes.

Still, new spam-sifting programs, a slew of civil lawsuits, and
antispam activists are having an impact -- if not on the volume of
spam, on the stakes.

Michigan and Utah, for instance, will launch statewide registries this
summer that put children on "Do not spam" lists; a similar proposal is
on the table in Illinois.

And attitudes toward the Internet are changing, as revealed by a new
Pew Internet and American Life Project study that finds that fewer
Americans today are suspicious of the Internet because of spam than a
year ago. One reason: fewer pornographic messages. Though critics say
the federal CAN-SPAM law, signed into effect on January 1, 2004,
simply legitimized the practice by regulating it, the law has helped
dramatically curb the number of pornographic messages being sent.

Spam filters, which have become a competitive edge for the big
Internet-service providers, are vacuuming up a large chunk of
unwanted ads. Marketers, too, have grown more concerned about a
consumer backlash.

"There's been a huge paradigm shift in the direct-marketing community
when they finally got that there was a real spam problem, and that if
they didn't police themselves, their own business model would just go
away," says Ms. Mitchell.

The loss of anonymity -- and innocence.

At the same time, anonymity seems a little harder to maintain as
spammers appear in handcuffs on the evening news -- or, like Jaynes,
in squinty-eyed mug shots.

In Raleigh, he was just another young businessman riding a rising tide 
of technology investments. Millions knew him -- though they didn't know 
it -- because they'd seen his his web alias, Gaven Stubberfield, in 
their inbox.

A former restaurateur and direct mailer, he earned $750,000 a month as
a spam magnate. His lawyer insists his services were legitimate -- and
claims that the government broke interstate commerce agreements and
trampled on his First Amendment rights to speak freely.

The judge in the case allowed Jaynes to stay out of jail until the
appeals courts can sift through the case. One caveat: Jaynes has to go
back to using paper and stamps if he wants to write a note to someone.

"Without warning or a cease and desist letter, the government swept in 
and wanted to make a statement," says Oblon. "This prosecution is going 
to have no effect on email advertising around the world."

Much of the focus is on the Virginia case, because the state claimed
jurisdiction based on the fact that more than half of all Internet
commerce flows through servers in the Old Dominion. Florida just filed
a case against a spam house registered with 350 domains and 75
websites hawking cigarettes and pharmaceuticals. The two men were
caught by a Microsoft "trap" set up to identify and isolate spam
messages.

Earlier this year, Microsoft sued 213 alleged spammers, many of them 
anonymous "John Does," in 97 separate lawsuits -- all while a growing 
number of spammers are getting in touch with their lawyers.

Oblon says the Jaynes case is about a loss of innocence -- with plenty 
of blame to go around.

"There was a time, when e-mail first started being used, that there
shouldn't be any commercial activity, that it was all about exchanging
ideas, and let's all smell the roses," says Oblon. "Now it's all
commercial."

(c) Copyright 2005 The Christian Science Monitor. 

The Christian Science Monitor -- an independent daily newspaper
providing context and clarity on national and international news,
peoples and cultures, and social trends.  Online at
http://www.csmonitor.com

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, the Christian Science Publishing Society.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:26:16 -0400
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: India Moves to Silence Cellphone Spam


http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0414/p06s01-wosc.html
byline:  Vir Singh Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor

(NEW DELHI) Harsh Pathak was thrilled to get a cellphone. The young
corporate lawyer could stay in touch with friends and family while on
the move.  And he found it easier to schedule meetings.

Then he started getting calls from a lot of people he did not know. His 
number, it turns out, had been acquired by telemarketers -- thanks to a 
highly organized network devoted to collecting personal information -- 
who peppered him with calls. Banks wanted him to take out loans. 
Insurers wanted to send out sales representatives. Ironically, even 
cellphone companies called, asking him to switch to their service.

"They would call in the middle of a meeting when you were trying to
explain something to someone," he says. "Then, after the call, you
lost your thought and had to start explaining the thing all over
again."  What made these intrusions even more irritating were the
steep "roaming" charges he incurred for receiving calls outside his
local network.

As India's economy booms, the rising ranks of cellphone users find it
hard to enjoy something already rare in this country of 1 billion
people: privacy. But that may change after a landmark action by the
Supreme Court in February, based on a complaint Mr. Pathak filed.

That court asked the government and a clutch of major telephone
companies and financial institutions named as defendants in the suit
to take steps to protect cellphone users from unsolicited calls. The
suit called for a new law and asked that financial institutions and
telephone companies protect their clients from an "endemic invasion of
privacy." In his petition, Pathak suggested that India consider
adopting privacy-protection measures similar to those in other
countries, including the federal do-not-call registry in the United
States.

The Supreme Court can only advise the government on the need for
legislation, but India's parliament responds often to these requests.
Before it can, however, the government agencies and private parties
named as defendants will have to provide an official response to the
Supreme Court. That means a cellphone privacy law is at least two
years away. For now, though, the court's action is compelling
executives to consider the consequences of actions that have long been
a standard practice in the financial-services industry.

According to Vivek Tankha, the attorney who argued the case for
Pathak, one defendant, a cellphone service provider, has placed
full-page ads in newspapers assuring customers that it would help them
to block unwanted calls.

"I have never been thanked so much in my life as I have for this
case," he says.

Cellphone companies say they support customer privacy. The Cellular
Operators' Association of India said it is "in full support of the
Supreme Court's notice and will offer all cooperation."

The case received major media coverage in one of the world's
fastest-growing cellphone markets, where unwanted calls and text
messages are a nuisance for tens of millions of subscribers.

Cellphone users here in India's capital say the number of calls from
telemarketers has fallen a bit during the past year to about two or
three a week.

But Reva Singh, a magazine editor, still finds them "inexcusable."

"I don't know who gives them the right to claim my time," she says,
adding that she felt "obliged to listen and be polite" before saying
no to sales pitches.

In the absence of a law, privacy advocates say, there can be no
effective controls on telemarketers. Cellphone users risk having their
numbers leaked from the moment they sign up with a provider.

Banks deny that they share information about clients, yet they can
hardly be accused of going out of their way to protect privacy. One of
Mr. Tankha's encounters with a sales agent reveals just how serious
this problem can be.

"I was shocked when I got calls from a company stating that I should 
invest in mutual funds, as I had excess funds in my bank account," he 
says.

Some users don't allow themselves to get upset by the calls. "I'm sort
of indifferent, but I try to be polite," says Gitanjali Sethi, a law
student. "I'm not going to buy anything over the phone."

Ms. Sethi knows a thing or two about telemarketers, having worked for
one part-time. She says numbers are culled from forms filled out by
customers.

For example, someone opening a bank account provides a lot of personal 
information. Often, there is a box the person can check so as not to 
receive sales calls and promotions by mail. "But this is not always 
mentioned or displayed prominently."

She says even "respected companies" share information with one another. 
Businesses with complementary products -- such as a cellphone service 
provider and a cellphone maker -- often do this, because both firms gain 
from reaching each other's clients.

Stopping such practices will require a huge effort, even with the
Supreme Court's backing, and even if India adopts a law, acknowledge
Pathak and Tankha. But for now, they are happy that the top court has
set the ball rolling.

"At least the debate has started," said Tankha. "Once we start a
debate, the solutions also start to emerge."


(c) Copyright 2005 The Christian Science Monitor.

The Christian Science Monitor-- an independent daily newspaper
providing context and clarity on national and international news,
peoples and cultures, and social trends.  Online at
http://www.csmonitor.com

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, The Christian Science Publishing Society.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: 14 Apr 2005 18:23:50 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Congress Aims to Thwart Identity Theft


By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer

Responding to outrage from consumers whose personal information has
been stolen from companies, Congress is primed to pass new laws to try
to prevent break-ins and to require businesses to confess to customers
when private data is taken.

The government's new interest in requiring such embarrassing
disclosures reverses years of efforts by the FBI and U.S. prosecutors
to shield corporations that have been victims of hackers from bad
publicity by keeping such crimes out of headlines.

But now, consumers want to know if their private information has been
stolen.

The Senate is considering at least two proposals to crack down on
companies suffering breaches of private customer information. The
Federal Trade Commission's chairwoman has endorsed the idea and the
Senate Judiciary Committee's chairman hinted this week that a new law
might be inevitable.

"We may well face a necessity for some really tough legislation," said
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.

The new push for government action responds to frustrated constituents
who are among more than 10 million victims of identity theft each
year, some of them twice or three times. It comes after years of
reluctance by most companies to voluntarily report break-ins that put
customers' financial information at risk.

"Congress is primed to take a very serious look at this and pass
comprehensive legislation," said Sen. Charles Schumer , D-N.Y.,
sponsor for one bill. "Nobody has given this problem the focus it
deserves. This is a high priority."

A California law already requires disclosures to victimized consumers
who live there, and roughly 30 states are looking at similar laws.

"The last thing a merchant wants to do is tell all his longtime
customers he's been hacked and lost all their information," said Keath
Nupuf, chief technology officer for CardCops Inc. of Malibu,
Calif. The company monitors Internet chat rooms and other hacker
communications for stolen credit card numbers, then notifies merchants
and consumers to block bad purchases.

CardCops contacted 80 consumers earlier this week to report their card
numbers and other personal details were circulating among Internet
thieves, Nupuf said. The card numbers were pilfered from merchants
that range from mom-and-pop shops to Fifth Avenue retailers.

"One guy was blowing a blood vessel," he said. "He was going to drive
across country and kill the merchant."

Peiter "Mudge" Zatko, a computer expert who consulted for the White
House during the Bush and Clinton administrations, often is hired by
companies to tighten security and clean up the digital mess after a
data breach. Zatko said victim companies "almost never" tell the FBI
or customers when sensitive data is stolen.

"Maybe they have a government contract and it would look bad," Zatko
said. "Maybe they're trying to keep it quiet so they don't scare the
financial markets."

Sometimes companies warn customers. Howard Schmidt, a former White
House adviser, said thieves took a computer this year from the store
where he buys eyeglasses. The computer contained his credit and
medical information, Schmidt said, but the owner contacted his
customers and encouraged them to watch for fraudulent purchases.

"That was a good thing," Schmidt said. "I want to do business with
these guys."

In a twist, the FBI and Justice Department have worked aggressively to
shield the identities of corporations that have been hacking
victims. To encourage businesses to contact them after such break-ins,
U.S. investigators and prosecutors have publicly promised to seal
court records, keep top executives off witness stands and use
protective orders to keep details of these crimes out of the
headlines.

"There is still some reluctance to call law enforcement, some
hesitancy because of the negative impact on reputation," said Amit
Yoran, the Bush administration's former top cyber-security
official. He said requiring companies to acknowledge a break-in "may
be of value, but it should not be done as a knee-jerk reaction to the
handful of high-profile and significant disclosures of the past few
weeks."

The FTC chairwoman, Deborah Majoras, estimated consumers lost $5
billion and businesses lost $48 billion because of identity theft in
2003. The FTC is studying how it can use existing banking statutes and
laws against consumer fraud to prosecute companies that fail to report
serious breaches.

Majoras said  government should  consider requiring companies  to tell
customers about break-ins when thefts  put them at financial risk. She
also  endorsed  minimum  security  requirements  for  businesses  that
collect sensitive personal information.

"The challenge is to come up with a way of defining when notice should
be sent and when it doesn't make sense," said Joel Winston, associate
director at the FTC's division for financial practices.
    
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:08:04 -0400
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Web Censors In China Find Success


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51712-2005Apr13.html

Web Censors In China Find Success; Falun Gong, Dalai Lama Among
Blocked Topics

By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer

The Chinese government is succeeding in broadly censoring what its
citizens can read on the Internet, surprising many experts and denting
U.S.  government hopes that online access would be a quick catalyst
for democratic political reform.

Internet users in the world's most populous country are routinely
blocked from sites featuring information on subjects such as Taiwanese
independence, the Falun Gong movement, the Dalai Lama and the
Tiananmen Square uprising in 1989, according to a study to be released
today by a consortium of researchers from Harvard University, the
University of Toronto and Cambridge University in England.

The study, which evaluated China's Internet practices over the past
year, found the government employed an aggressive array of tactics,
including blocking certain keyword searches and whole Web sites, and
forcing cyber-cafes to keep records of users and the Web pages they
visit.

"China operates the most extensive, technologically sophisticated and
broad-reaching system of Internet filtering in the world," the study
said.  Researchers said they worry that China's censorship system
could become a model for other countries looking to keep the lid on
Internet use.

China's success at censorship is even more remarkable to researchers
because the country is promoting economic growth using technology. An
estimated 100 million Chinese use the Internet, nearly half of whom
who have high-speed connections.

"The Chinese are successfully developing a market economy at the same
time they are continuing to accomplish control over the Internet and
the media," said C. Richard D'Amato, chairman of the U.S.-China
Economic and Security Review Commission, which monitors and promotes
economic progress in China.

D'Amato said the jury "is not only out, it's way out" on whether the
Internet is playing the democratizing role the United States had
hoped.

The study also undermines the popular notion that the Internet is an
organism that is difficult to tame.

"The Internet is wildly misunderstood," said Rafal Rohozinski, director of

the Advanced Network Research Group at Cambridge, who participated in
the study. "It is built around very specific chokepoints" that can be
controlled.

Using tests conducted inside and outside China, researchers were able
to identify censorship at many of those points.

Filters are placed on the main "backbone" networks that carry Internet
traffic, the study said. A handful of licensed Internet providers also
perform their own filtering. Major Chinese search engines filter out
or block keywords that would enable surfers to see certain
sites. Providers of Web log, or blogging, services block certain
posts. Text messaging software has built-in forbidden lists of
keywords, which halt service temporarily if used.

Chinese authorities perform these tasks largely using U.S. hardware
and software.

For example, Cisco Systems Inc. routers, machines that move Internet
traffic around, are capable of recognizing individual portions of
data, a technology that helps battle worms and viruses. That same
technology can be used to distinguish certain content.

Companies such as Cisco and Google Inc. have been accused of aiding
China's censorship by tailoring their products to suit the
government's needs. The study did not confirm those allegations, which
the companies have denied.

Some reports on Chinese censorship also claim that the country has as
many as 30,000 "Internet police" dedicated to the task, but the study
did not confirm that estimate. Still, it identified 11 government
agencies that share responsibility for controlling Internet use in the
country.

Despite wholesale blocking of Web sites dedicated to news on Taiwan or
Tibet, for example, Chinese surfers still can get access to many
Western news and culture sites.

Researchers said the filtering efforts seem to shift regularly, so
that at certain times a CNN site on Tiananmen Square was accessible,
for example.

Rohozinski said the censorship efforts seem to primarily target sites
written in Chinese.

Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Washington Post Company. 

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder why it would not be feasible
to route all our internet traffic _through China_  and have them
adjust their filter mechanisms to censor out all spam. It would be a 
good way for Americans and Chinese people to work together on a very 
worthwhile, useful project.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld_on_request>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:54:28 -0400
Subject: Packet8 Joins 'Unfee' Trend


http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/62523

Packet8 Joins 'Unfee' Trend; $1.50 'Regulatory Recovery Fee' in May

Like the wireless companies and landline incumbents before them, the
VoIP industry has slowly succumbed to adding "regulatory recovery
fees" to their bills. These aren't official government mandated fees,
they're simply rate hikes disguised as fees so you'll blame Uncle Sam
instead of the company responsible. Packet8 is the latest to employ
this tactic, and will begin adding a $1.50 regulatory recovery fee on
your bills effective May 1.

[Comment: As many of you know, I think this is a particularly sleazy
tactic that allows companies to advertise one price but actually
charge another.  I think it is absolutely wrong and constitutes
deceptive advertising, and I wish that the attorney generals of some
of the states would get together and sue the companies that engage in
this practice.  If you want to raise your rates, then raise your
rates, but don't just make up bogus fees that you are not required to
charge and tack them on to get a defacto rate increase, while still
advertising the lower price.]

Article + reader comments at:
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/62523

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 23:33:07 +1000
From: Colin <colin@sutton.wow.aust.com>
Subject: Texting is Slower Than Morse


The Sydney Morning Herald reports on a challenge between 93 year old
telegraph operator transmitting morse code to an 82 year old with a
manual typewriter, and youngsters sending a text message. The text
message was received 18 seconds after the message was already on
paper.

http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/04/14/1113251739401.html

Regards,

Colin Sutton

------------------------------

From: FrazNor@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Traditional Mail Discouraged?
Date: 14 Apr 2005 19:25:43 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


> 2) Film studios used to have their addresses listed but some no longer
> do.  Particuarly, the WB TV network refuses postal mail and has
> everything returned to the sender.

Actors sending in pictures and resumes to film/TV studios often send
them in clear plastic envelopes.

Associated Bag makes a nice plastic envelope/bag that I have used
instead of #10 envelopes. I fold over open end and use the mailing
label and self-adhesive stamp to seal it closed.

------------------------------

From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry)
Subject: Re: Traditional Mail Discouraged?
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:45:29 +0300
Organization: Elisa Internet customer


<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> I get the feeling organizations no longer want the public to contact
> them via traditional postal mail.  (No more "Keep those cards and
> letters coming in").

> I suspect this is largely due to the antrax attacks of Sept 11 ...

'Largely'? I think that's silly. It is obviously an economic decision,
pure and simple.

Cheers,

Henry

------------------------------

From: Supak Lailert <supak.lailert@yipintsoi.com>
Subject: Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 16:56:57 +0700


Hi Pat,

I don't know about your current SpamAssassin set up but have you
updated the latest rules from http://www.rulesemporium.com/ regularly?
From my SpamAssassin installation I found that the spams "evolve" to
get around SpamAssassin and only the latest rules will be able to
catch those advance spam messages.

Cheers,

Supak

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Spam Hits Us Hard Today - Message Losses
Date: 15 Apr 2005 07:38:20 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

> There *has to be* a better way of sorting out the spam.

There have been several efforts to outlaw it, but none have passed.

Do the 'spam interest groups' have that powerful of a lobby to keep
such bills from passing?  Or are there other Internet activists who,
for their own reasons, are opposed to such laws and regulation?

Are there technical reasons of the Internet itself that prevents
restricting spam?

P.S.  The real "Spam" is a pork luncheon meat made by the Hormell
Company.  Been around for years.  During the WW II it was given to
soldiers who complained about it.  The problem was not with the food
itself -- people liked it -- but rather than monotony of the same food
served over and over again.

We take long lasting packaged food for granted these days, but during
WW II it was a difficult challenge for the army Quartermaster Corp to
preserve food made in the U.S.  to withstand long sea voyage to Europe
or Asia, keep in all sorts of climatic conditions, and be tasty.  The
official US Army history series ('green books') admit it was tough for
them to do.  Cooking stoves used gasoline, but required unleaded
because the lead would clog the gear.  BUT, leaded gas was needed for
vehicles and they didn't want to have to ship both leaded and unleaded
gasoline.  The logistics of supplying millions of men overseas were
incredible.  Take a look at the Quartermaster Corp WW II history
'green book'.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To address your postscript first, even
the Hormell Company likes to poke fun at what happened to their
product 'Spam' when the internet people got done with it. Have you 
seen those various commercials playing on TVLand? There are
variations on the theme but always with the same results. In one, a
houseguest is complimenting the family cook on the meal which has been
served, which consists of some spam. As the cook describes how she
prepared the meal, each time she speaks the word 'spam' we see her
mouth up close, speaking the word deliberatly. The houseguest asks if
a second serving might be available, whereupon the cook says. "oh
certainly, we always have more _spam_"; a very large delivery truck
crashes through the wall and dumps thousands of cans of the canned
meat product all over the table where they sit eating. 

In a second one, the family is sitting at the table eating dinner,
but one family member is sitting at the family computer typing 
something (appears to be the 'erase' key) with an angry, hateful look
on his face as he brays loud enough for everyone to hear him, "**M O R E
S P A M!!**, and the very same truck crashes the wall of the house and
dumps its load (several thousand cans of spam) all over the table and
the computer, completely burying the computer and the man who had been
doing the complaining. A very brief message at the end of both tells
us it came from Hormell Company. 

Now the first part of your message, summed up thusly: Can't *they* do
anything about it?  I can tell you that much of the software used in
email was constructed thirty years ago when spam was unheard of; it is
not easily adaptable for modern times. I can also tell you there was a
time many years ago when the very notion of censoring email and/or
Usenet messages was unthinkable. And some of us, myself at least, put
messages on Usenet saying, "when it eventually gets to the point that
the cesspool has to be cleaned out and censoring of email and Usenet
news becomes 'thinkable' by then it will be too late." And just think,
in the middle/late 1980's around here, we were shocked and offended by
that guy on Staten Island who sold magazine subscriptions on the net
posing as a foreign exchange female college student, and then 'Spam
King' if anyone still remembers him. But ... as offended as we were,
the idea of 'outing' them and violating _their_ privacy was still
considered 'unthinkable'. And for those of us who had all our wits
about us (yes, I used to be that way prior to the advent of my
diseased brain) to say it was 'thinkable' and proceeded to do
everything in our power to expose those a==holes with highly personal
messages giving their home addresses, home phone numbers, Social
Security Numbers and even (in one instance) their State of New York
Driver's Records (and yes, unnamed reader, I _do_ remember when you
graciously forwarded me the files on the internet magazine salesman)
all _we_ got for our efforts to expose these creatures was grief.

The magazine salesman and Spam King put tremendous heat on the
Trustees of Northwestern University, and in their horror that the
unthinkable had occurred, and one of the creatures had been (a)
censored and (b) had their 'privacy invaded' in turn put the heat on
the sysadmin at Northwestern to get my Unix accounts killed. Trouble
with that was, that like any good pre-ISP-days netter, I was a
'university Unix system account collector', between Boston University,
MIT, Harvard, University of Illinois at Chicago, University of
California at Berkeley and a few other places, I had more unix
accounts than you could number -- and still have a couple of them
around, even despite my brain disease, so the loss of Northwestern
only put a slight crimp in my schedule. The magazine salesman and his
friend Spam King did not put TELECOM Digest out of business as they
claimed.

So Lisa, to further elaborate on your question "can't anything be 
done", there are some politics involved with spam even today. There
are still some netters, that though they bitch and moan about all the
spam still don't want to get down to the real business of putting them
all to sleep once and for all. Thankfully, more and more people on the
net are getting to the point of 'thinking' about it.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:54:22 -0500
From: John Schmerold <john@katy.com>
Subject: Re: Spam Hits Us Bad Today - Message Losses


Pat,

We'd be happy to filter it for you. Our filter has been doing an
excellent job of cleaning up spam. We see what you see. On week-ends
10% of all mail is ham, 5% maybe spam (lunchmeat), rest is
spam. During the week ham goes to 20%.  There would be no charge,
however, we may end up putting a "Scanned by Katy Computer & Wireless"
banner at bottom of scanned messages.

All I need you to do is point your mx record for your domain to
mx1.schmerold.com

In addition, I need to know where you want me to send your mail, I 
assume that would be: mail2.iecc.com

One more thing, when we do this for you, your SPAM is deleted, we only 
send ham & lunchmeat.


John Schmerold
Katy Computer & Wireless
20 Meramec Station Rd
Valley Park MO 63088
636-861-6900 v
775-227-6947 f 

------------------------------

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Comcast Sued for Disclosing Customer Information
Organization: Symantec
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:22:55 -0400


In article <telecom24.163.2@telecom-digest.org>, Lisa Minter
<lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> But no court authorized Comcast to release names and addresses of its
> customers, or notified his client that her information had been given
> to an outside party, Lybeck said. "Comcast should respect the
> rights of privacy who pay them monthly bills," Lybeck said.
> Representatives from Comcast said they could not immediately comment
> on the lawsuit.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If, in fact, Comcast was legally subpoened
> for the information, then they _had_ to give it out, or face penalties
> themselves. I assume that is the case,

Why do you assume that, when the article clearly says "But no court 
authorized Comcast to release names and addresses"?


Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The reason I assume that, Barry, is 
because otherwise there are inconsistencies in the report. We know
that the recording industry is very fond of blind lawsuits; i.e.
John Doe 1 through John Doe 1^19 and every John Doe in between. They
say that is needed since ISP's will not help them without _first
suing and obtaining a subpoena_. I believe they did the same thing
in this case. If they didn't, how did they arrive at her name, by
asking Comcast 'pretty please'?  I know what the article said, but
somehow I feel the reporter was misinformed by the lady's lawyer and
did not investigate further. After all, the recording people had no
way of knowing that Comcast would just turn over; no other ISP's to
date have cooperated. And once the subpoena is there, that's all the
'authorization' Comcast needed, right?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Can I Port an 800 Number Without the Old Carrier's Permission?
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 05:40:13 -0700
Organization: Cox Communications


Indeed it's all about ownership.

And, some folks who have transferred vanity numbers to Vonage might be
in for an unpleasant surprise when they try to transfer that number
from Vonage.

------------------------------

From: Jason <cheanglong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Walkie Talkie
Date: 15 Apr 2005 07:07:27 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hi,

I refer to walkie talkie that being use in private company and just
within the company itself.

Any idea?

Thank you,

Jason


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Chances are likely that the radio you
refer to by its generic name 'walkie talkie' was actually a UHF radio
operating in something other than the traditional citizen's band
frequency. My clue is your reference to 'private company' and 'within
the company itself'.  Maybe like a radio a security service would use
in its work. Those will typically have two or four 'channels' which
is all they seem to need. I don't know why they don't have more channels
in them; probably they don't need more, and more would make the unit
too cumbersome.  Any other ideas, anyone?  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:13:42 -0400
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Last Laugh!  Passenger Found Dead Hour After Plane Lands at O'Hare


Nice to see they're alert in Chicago. I guess they wanted to make sure
he had time to vote.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-dead14.html

www.suntimes.com

Passenger found dead hour after plane lands at O'Hare

A passenger was discovered dead aboard American Airlines Flight 154 from
Tokyo to Chicago on Wednesday afternoon, police said.

The man apparently suffered a heart attack and was found by a cleaning
crew about 5 p.m., an hour after the aircraft landed at O'Hare
Airport, said Chicago Police Officer Matt Jackson. Authorities were
notified and the man was pronounced dead at the scene, a detective
said.

An autopsy is set for today.

The name of the 66-year-old man, whose passport shows he was a U.S.
citizen, was not being released by authorities pending notification of
his family. The passenger had been scheduled to get on another flight
to Indianapolis, his final destination, said Tim Smith, American
Airlines spokesman.

After the plane had been moved from Terminal 5 to another terminal for
cleaning, a crew found the man in a bathroom, Smith said.

Lisa Donovan

Copyright 2005 The Sun-Times Company

------------------------------


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 !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   ---------------------------------------------------------------

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 V24 #164
******************************

Return to Archives**Older Issues