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 ****************************** | |