|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 257 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Re: Sky-high travel phone bills nearly bust house payment
Re: Sky-high travel phone bills nearly bust house payment
Re: Sky-high travel phone bills nearly bust house payment
Re: Line Status Verifier (was Re: Heathkits P.S.)
Re: Line Status Verifier (was Re: Heathkits P.S.)
Re: Dr. James Marsters, TTY deaf service developer
====== 28 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
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, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:16:11 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Does "This call may be recorded" consitute consent?
Message-ID: <pan.2009.09.16.10.16.09.873071@myrealbox.com>
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:05:41 -0400, Wesrock wrote:
> In a message dated 9/15/2009 5:42:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
> stephen_hope@xyzworld.com writes:
>
>> I always thought the recorded messages used in this way are inherently
>> arrogant. Basically the logic is "our computer can talk to you and our
>> lawyers think that is enough for legal clearance".
>
> I always assumed that if you didn't want the call to be recorded you
> should hang up.
>
AFAIK most Call Centres now have automatic recording of calls for
"Training" (if you didn't buy anything - or enough things, they will pick
apart the whole conversation to train their agents to do "better" next
time) or for possible dispute purposes or to weed out agents that do not
"Perform" to the standards set by the Call Centre by taking too long on
calls, not selling enough etc etc.
I used to install these bulk digital recording systems when they first
appeared about 7 or 8 years ago (IIRC) - they link up the call with
"Screen Scrapes" from the Agent PC so the whole thing can be later
reviewed with the audio and video all synced up. It was a challenge to get
the telephone interfaces (Dialogic cards and analogue lines back then)
from the ACD all working correctly with the PC side of things, as not
every call was recorded due to capacity limitations in the ACD interface
and database.
If you don't want to be recorded you can usually request to be transferred
to a phone that is specifically not part of the recording system, if that
is not possible then you basically take your business elsewhere.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Sep 2009 11:17:31 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Sky-high travel phone bills nearly bust house payment
Message-ID: <20090916111731.30764.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>> spur-of-the-moment vacation to Indonesia.
>> Too bad she happened to be in one of the handful of countries that
>> has a mobile network compatible with Verizon's.
>
>That might have been the case years ago, but Verizon sells several
>devices (phones/smart phones)that are hybrid GSM/CDMA that will
>basically work anywhere there's a roaming agreement on CDMA or GSM
>networks.
Oh, sure, but considering that it was a spur-of-the-moment trip and she
clearly knew nothing about international roaming, I doubt she had one
of those hybrid phones. Also, if she'd bought a hybrid phone they would
surely have sold her an international roaming package to go with it
which would have brought her $8,000 bill down to a reasonable $5,000.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 19:58:33 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Sky-high travel phone bills nearly bust house payment
Message-ID: <h8rg18$a0m$1@news.albasani.net>
John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>>>spur-of-the-moment vacation to Indonesia.
>>>Too bad she happened to be in one of the handful of countries that
>>>has a mobile network compatible with Verizon's.
>>That might have been the case years ago, but Verizon sells several
>>devices (phones/smart phones)that are hybrid GSM/CDMA that will
>>basically work anywhere there's a roaming agreement on CDMA or GSM
>>networks.
>Oh, sure, but considering that it was a spur-of-the-moment trip and she
>clearly knew nothing about international roaming, I doubt she had one
>of those hybrid phones. Also, if she'd bought a hybrid phone they would
>surely have sold her an international roaming package to go with it
>which would have brought her $8,000 bill down to a reasonable $5,000.
Hahaha
I'm still using a GSM 850/900/1800/1900 (Quadband), one of the early
basic models with Bluetooth. It would have worked on any of the major
frequencies used by European, American, or Canadian systems. Basic GSM
phones sold in the US often came with only one of the European
frequencies. (Are any countries still using 400 or 450 MHz?) No, I wasn't
sold an international package.
I have leads on companies in Europe that would sell pre-paid service.
It's cheaper to buy it after arriving than before leaving, so not that
much planning ahead is required.
Never texted in my life. Hell, the phone doesn't even have a camera.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Sep 2009 23:16:01 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Sky-high travel phone bills nearly bust house payment
Message-ID: <20090916231601.83945.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>I'm still using a GSM 850/900/1800/1900 (Quadband), one of the early
>basic models with Bluetooth.
Oh, like the Moto V620 I have here in my pocket in England with an O2
SIM. Works great. Works OK with an AT&T SIM in the US, too.
>I have leads on companies in Europe that would sell pre-paid service.
They all do. Tell me where you're going and I can make some suggestions.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 05:13:18 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Line Status Verifier (was Re: Heathkits P.S.)
Message-ID: <yD4sm.40234$ec2.15638@newsfe13.iad>
jsw wrote:
>
> I received a very snotty phone call at work from a Ma Bell
> agent confronting me about unauthorized equipment. Of course
> I lied my @$$ off. (At the time, lying to Ma Bell inspectors
> was not only ethical, but the honorable thing to do.) ;-)
> They wanted to come over right now and inspect, but I told
> them that said inspection would be at my convenience, and
> they seemed to back off. (Knowing good and well that it
> was very easy for me to prepare for inspection and they
> would be wasting their time. Both of us knew the rules
> to the game.) ;-)
Hey, they were extremely polite next to the folks at General Telephone
of California. I moved from Bell territory to GT Land in 1969. When I
was with Bell I had a great 500 series phone that could handle two
lines, which I needed.
"The General" had no such equipment. But, they had tariffed a standard
1A2 key system without lights that was very reasonable. I set this all
up six weeks before the move. When the due date came, suddenly the
equipment wasn't "available." I called the PUC. The equipment became
available within hours.
A year, or so, later General filed a tariff change with the Cal PUC to
bundle the key system; i.e., do away with the special without lights
that was a lot less money. I went to a local hearing and said my
arrangement was just fine. I also testified how they ran me around
about equipment availability a year earlier, after 6 weeks notice, etc.
Finally, I testified that although the premise equipment was great the
central office service was lousy. The PUC examiner got really
interested so I gave him the whole nine yards about failure rates on
toll calls, etc. etc.
Two days later around noon there was very loud knocking on my front
door. I opened it and there were two of the meanest General Telephone
installers/repairmen from Hades or something like that. Very rude;
wanted in immediately to "check my equipment." I told them to take a
hike and slammed the door.
I called the PUC and explained that it had to be reprisal for my having
testified a couple of days before. Within a hour some excusative from
The General called and was Mr. Nice. But, he said they did have to
"audit" my equipment because of the hearing. I responded that would
usually involve notice, wouldn't it? "Absolutely," he said.
So, a couple days later, with appointment, the same two guys showed up
and were just as nice as could be. I told them there was no way they
were coming into my house after the way they were two days earlier. So,
they departed. Another appointment was made, and two nicer guys showed
up. And, one of them broke a component in the KSU so the system now
wouldn't hold one line. (It worked fine before they showed up.) They
showed me the broken part then "repaired" my equipment.
The General really made the Bell system folks look good.
We did battle for the next 8 years until I finally moved to Pacific Bell
territory.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 08:12:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: jsw <jsw@ivgate.omahug.org>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Line Status Verifier (was Re: Heathkits P.S.)
Message-ID: <200909161312.n8GDCCaU004350@ivgate.omahug.org>
>In N.E.T., the program was run with "DUE", a device which was supposed
>to Detect Unauthorized Equipment. It also measured capacitance, and I
>assume it was a software extension to the LSV.
A second chapter to this story (which does not really involve
me) was that this same person told me of a 'radar test set'
which COULD be used to detect unauthorized wiring and even
unauthorized sets which had ringers disconnected.
This was apparently a TDR device (I was familiar with the
technique of testing transmission lines using TDR) and their
unit only had one of them, which they usually used for such
things as finding opens, bad splices, forgotten bridge taps,
etc. on cables.
He said that they would occasionally use it to gather some
evidence on suspected hardcore Phone Phr^H^H^Hhobbyists, but
it was seldom done.
>One of the agents' favorite tricks was to call a "DUE" customer who
>was paying for one phone, right after school, and ask the kids to have
>their mom pick up the extension. With two voices on the line at the
>same time, they had an easy time collecting.
Good example of 'social engineering'! ;-)
My impression was that Ma Bell went for the low-hanging fruit
in cases of unauthorized sets, but was well aware that many
subscribers had them and that there really wasn't much they
could do about it.
'Phone hunting' was a frequent pastime among the Phone
Phr^H^H^Henthusiasts in those days, such things as seeking
out stray sets in recently-vacated apartments, hotel elevator
lobbies, etc. There was really no shortage of feral sets
out there in the wild !! ;-)
------------------------------
Date: 16 Sep 2009 10:55:38 -0400
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Dr. James Marsters, TTY deaf service developer
Message-ID: <h8qu9a$6hb$1@panix2.panix.com>
T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net> wrote:
>In article <76fc7$4aad356a$43e693f6$12935@PRIMUS.CA>, gwelsh@spamcop.net
>says...
>
>> The pieces from my story - the Amiga and the then-record low priced
>> modem - were significant stepping stones on the path to the
>> computers and communication facilities we're using to discuss them
>> today. They also taught me that it wasn't nearly as smart as I
>> thought it was to use ribbon cable and quick-snap DB-25 connectors
>> for quick and dirty RS-232 cables! Yes, I also interpreted the
>> RS-232 standard in a way that I thought suited me, and that makes me
>> as guilty as Commodore and that modem manufacturer. (Did I forget
>> to mention that part in the original recounting? <grin>)
>
>Remember too that the async ports on a Data General Eclipse swapped
>the xmit/rcv pins.
The ports on the Eclipse console and multiplexer boards were DCE, which
made sense since you normally plugged a terminal into them. If you want
to plug a modem in, you need a cable which swaps the signal lines.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
------------------------------
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. 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.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 The Telecom digest (7 messages)
**********
|
or 