28 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 


The Telecom Digest for September 03, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 238 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:

China Demands Real Names From Mobile Phone Users(Thad Floryan)
Re: College - home communications today article(Fred Atkinson)
Re: College - home communications today article(Steven)
Re: College - home communications today article(John Mayson)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(Thad Floryan)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(David Kaye)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(John Mayson)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(Lee Choquette)
Your Own Hot Spot, and Cheap(Monty Solomon)
Adults and Cell Phone Distractions(Monty Solomon)
Mobile Access 2010(Monty Solomon)
Cell phones and American adults(Monty Solomon)
Broadband 2010: A Big Slowdown(Monty Solomon)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(John Levine)
Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from?(John Levine)
Re: Time Warner Cable doubles fee to not list phone number(Lisa or Jeff)
Re: 911-only public phone(Lisa or Jeff)
Re: 911-only public phone(tlvp)
Re: 911-only public phone(danny burstein)
Re: 911-only public phone(Lisa or Jeff)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(Ron)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(David Kaye)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(tlvp)
Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from?(tlvp)
Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from?(Dan Lanciani)
Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from?(Joseph Singer)
Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks)(Lisa or Jeff)
Re: After BlackBerry, India now wants Google, Skype, & VPN data(PV)


====== 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, 01 Sep 2010 17:32:13 -0700 From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: China Demands Real Names From Mobile Phone Users Message-ID: <4C7EF08D.2020503@thadlabs.com> Found on Slashdot today (1-SEP-2010): Starting this month, mobile carriers in China are requiring people who set up new mobile phone accounts to register with their real names as part of a new government measure to reduce anonymity among the country's 800 million mobile users. And within 3 years, the carriers must also register the real identities of all existing users, said China Telecom spokesman Xu Fei. The new policy comes as China has been pushing users to register with their real names online. In August, online gamers had to begin real-name registration under regulations that are meant to protect minors from Internet addiction and 'unhealthy' content. More info here: http://www.itworld.com/government/119351/china-demands-real-names-mobile-phone-users
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:46:18 -0600 From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: College - home communications today article Message-ID: <20100902004650.75108.qmail@gal.iecc.com> At 02:16 PM 9/1/2010, you wrote: >An article in the Phila Inqr describes how college students today keep >in touch with their families at home. > >see: >http://www.philly.com/inquirer/magazine/20100901_At_college__still_talking_daily_to_Mom_and_Dad.html > > >How times have changed. Back when I was in college, it was considered >a nice new innovation for a student to get a telephone in his room-- >most dorms made do with a few pay phones in the hall and maybe a house >phone. Indeed, the Bell System history "Telephone" by John Brooks >describes the cutover work necessary in spring and fall to serve >dorms. > >Dorm landline phones were often part of the college centrex which >meant students had to dial 9 to call out and could directly dial other >college extensions internally. Students were charged the residential >rate. This takes me back to an old college prank that I pulled on my room mate in my dorm room. My room mate had a way to tell me if he had his girlfriend in the room. He put a little piece of tape on the door knob. The problem was, it was to the point that I couldn't go to my room without finding tape on the door. That included at night when I should be preparing for my night's sleep. So I complained to the hall advisor and his girlfriend was temporarily barred from visiting the dorm. My room mate was furious with me for doing that. He wouldn't speak to me. A couple of days later, he was in the next dorm room visiting with our neighbors. So I went to our old centrex wall phone, put shaving cream over the ear piece, and hung it up. I left the door to the room open and went next door. I told my room mate I was going downstairs but I was going to leave the door to the room open. He still wouldn't speak to me. I went to the front desk and dialed our extension. As luck would have it, the elevator was waiting when I got to it. I rode up to our floor, got out, and hid around the corner from our room. I saw my room mate walk into the room and I heard, "hello, hello?". Then the entire floor heard him scream. He got me back, but never as good as I got him. Everyone on the floor thought I had pulled the best prank all semester. Even he thought it was pretty funny. At any rate, he was over being mad at me. Fred
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:25:27 -0700 From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: College - home communications today article Message-ID: <i5muea$6vf$1@news.eternal-september.org> On 9/1/10 1:16 PM, Lisa or Jeff wrote: > An article in the Phila Inqr describes how college students today keep > in touch with their families at home. > > see: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/magazine/20100901_At_college__still_talking_daily_to_Mom_and_Dad.html > > > How times have changed. Back when I was in college, it was considered > a nice new innovation for a student to get a telephone in his room-- > most dorms made do with a few pay phones in the hall and maybe a house > phone. Indeed, the Bell System history "Telephone" by John Brooks > describes the cutover work necessary in spring and fall to serve > dorms. > > Dorm landline phones were often part of the college centrex which > meant students had to dial 9 to call out and could directly dial other > college extensions internally. Students were charged the residential > rate. > I remember being loaned to the service office with GTE in West LA in July one year and having to go over thousands of service orders for UCLA dorms, I hated paperwork and having to deal with a building full of woman who did not want us there -- The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot in Hell Co.
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:12:37 +0800 From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: College - home communications today article Message-ID: <AANLkTimbUd2=KVsVeGspADvAZ7Pn==G4_bcSi1yDO0ev@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > > How times have changed. ¬ Back when I was in college, it was consider ed > a nice new innovation for a student to get a telephone in his room-- ... > Dorm landline phones were often part of the college centrex which > meant students had to dial 9 to call out and could directly dial other > college extensions internally. ¬ Students were charged the residentia l > rate. Exactly. We could dial other dorm rooms by dialing "6" plus the 4-digit extension. Other campus numbers were reached in a similar fashion with a "4". Right about the time I left they created a special on-campus number: 6-0911 to reach the campus police. Previously it was necessary to dial their not-so-easy-to-remember 4-xxxx number. The running joke was to tell freshmen you could be reached by dialing 9911 to see if they'd fall for it. We were expected to get our own long-distance. I did that the first year and I remember the paperwork being a hassle. It involved the campus, Southern Bell (as they were then known), and the long-distance provider. I eventually went with a non-subscriber AT&T calling card because it was more portable. Changing dorm rooms meant moving the service and also risking service still being connected for the next person to use at my expense. The local dial tone was included in our housing fees. Throughout campus were call boxes that supposedly were for on-campus calls only. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out dialing "9" got an outside line. I demonstrated for someone how I could use my calling card to place long distance calls on the call boxes, which just blew his mind. We had a campus ham radio station with a phone patch. I called my then girlfriend from the library using a 2-meter handheld. The idea I could make a phone call without needing a pay phone was very strange. Some of the dorms still had the intercoms in place. They were disabled, but given we were a campus full of engineers they got used from time to time. They allowed people outside the dorm building to call into someone's room. Even then we had blank spots along the wall where the pay phones had been removed after phone lines were run into every dorm room. Five or six years ago my wife was in grad school. It was strange walking across a packed campus seeing nearly everyone on a cell phone. I don't think I saw two people walking side-by-side talking. My step-daughter is now in college. She has a phone jack, but doesn't own a land line phone and heck if we know what the number is. I really wonder what the usage is any more. I'm sure the campus administration still uses the PBX and it's probably more trouble than it's worth to remove the phone lines from the dorms. -- John Mayson <john@mayson.us> Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:08:32 -0700 From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <4C7EF910.7080903@thadlabs.com> On 9/1/2010 5:22 PM, Steven wrote: > On 9/1/10 4:42 PM, Sam Spade wrote: >> Joseph Singer wrote: >>> Bill Horne asked "whatever happened to travelers' cheques?" >>> [...] >>> ***** Moderator's Note ***** >>> >>> IIRC, Travelers' checks can be purchased in any currency. >>> Bill Horne >>> Moderator >> >> The big issue these days are the fear of forgeries, thus many merchants >> won't take them internationally. >> >> Remember the good old days when most of us were reasonably honest? >> > They forge almost anything. Oh, that's for sure. Several years ago here in Silicon Valley, two high school kids at, IIRC, Atherton High School made 100% perfect phony California drivers' licenses using equipment they purchased on eBay. Even the holograms on the licenses appeared legitimate. The purpose? "Fake" IDs to purchase alcoholic beverages. A quick Google search using "atherton counterfeit driver license" found this article describing what they did (longer ago than I thought): http://www.almanacnews.com/morgue/2002/2002_04_03.fake.html > The other day my wife went to the market > and had about $5.00 worth of Internet coupons and the market no longer > will take them since they got burned on forgeries, that is the fault of > the markets employees the coupons all have an anti-copy lines on them. Odd. Here I just print coupons from the local supermarket store's web site using my HP laser printer.
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:46:05 GMT From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye) To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <i5ordb$r4$2@news.eternal-september.org> Someone wrote: >>> Remember the good old days when most of us were reasonably honest? >>> I'm not sure that the Internet or any other modern advance in technology has made or allowed people to be more dishonest. I remember as a kid, pre-Internet, pre-computer, that dads lied about their kids' Little League runs, moms lied about the chores their kids did around the house to earn scouting merit badges, etc. Liberace lied about being gay (and won money from a defamation suit by a newspaper), our neighbor, Mr. Hall, lied to the tax authority about the kitchen addition he had made to his home. My uncle Art disconnected the bell on the illegal stolen Bell System phone he added to the illegal guest room he'd built in his home, so he wouldn't be charged for the extra phone on his line.
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 09:23:19 +0800 From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <AANLkTimz-FHfYgv9GwCCcjzmwEtABUB1gXvYzCUVhRMu@mail.gmail.com> I last used traveler's checks in 2001 during a trip to Calgary, Alberta, Canada. It was more trouble than it was worth. The hotel was the only place I could find where I could exchange them for cash and the rate they gave me wasn't very competitive. Also, for reasons I didn't understand, I was given checks in denominations of $20. That was a lot of signing. Money changers are more prevalent outside of the US and Canada (my experience has been they're everywhere in Europe, Asia, and Mexico). Being someone who's on an extended business trip to Malaysia I must say using an ATM to withdrawal local currency is the way to go. No hassles. The only fly in the ointment could be if the machine isn't programmed for English, or at least a language you understand. I also suggest using ATMs associated with a bank and not standalone, independent ATM. I don't trust those. I use the ATM at work which belongs to Maybank. I can even "top off" my pre-paid cellular at most ATMs. Getting currency in the US before your trip isn't always a good idea either. In the pre-Euro days a friend of mine went to Italy. He got lira at a local bank in the US. He arrived in Italy and stopped in a shop after leaving the airport, handed the woman his money, and she started shouting "Polizia". He had handed her money was very obviously counterfeit, but since he wasn't familiar with their money he had no idea. It turned out the thousands of US dollars worth of lira he had was all fake and by the sounds of it not much better quality than Monopoly money. About 12 years ago I returned from a business trip in Mexico. I had traveler's checks left over. On the way home I stopped at the local supermarket chain. I asked if they could accept traveler's checks. He navigated the menu on the register and I saw "Mexican Peso" was an option. I asked him to try that as I had leftover pesos. Sure enough it worked and it computed my change in USD. But he was then puzzled what to do with the pesos. For the record I live in Texas and this chain, H-E-B, has stores in Texas and northern Mexico. -- John Mayson <john@mayson.us> Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 21:46:50 +0000 (UTC) From: Lee Choquette <leec@xmission.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <i5p60a$a8d$1@news.xmission.com> In article <AANLkTimz-FHfYgv9GwCCcjzmwEtABUB1gXvYzCUVhRMu@mail.gmail.com>, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote: >[...] I also >suggest using ATMs associated with a bank and not standalone, >independent ATM. [...] I additionally suggest using the ATM while the attached bank is open. While in Norway many years ago I was using my U.S.-based ATM card when the ATM froze for several minutes, then rebooted, then retained my card. (Probably because the ATM doesn't know whether the customer has walked away in the interim.) As the attached bank branch was closed that Saturday afternoon, I had to return the following Monday to get my card back. Fortunately I wasn't moving on to another city; otherwise it would have been a major hassle. So perhaps another piece of advice would be to carry more than one ATM card. Lee
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 09:13:30 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Your Own Hot Spot, and Cheap Message-ID: <p062408abc8a5531ff94b@[192.168.1.70]> Your Own Hot Spot, and Cheap By DAVID POGUE September 1, 2010 Someday, they'll build wireless Internet into every building, just the way they build in running water, heat and electricity today. Someday, we won't have to drive around town looking for a coffee shop when we need to check our e-mail. If you want ubiquitous Internet today, though, you have several choices. They're all compromised and all expensive. You could get online using only a smartphone, but you'll pay at least $80 a month and you'll have to view the Internet through a shrunken keyhole of a screen. You could equip your laptop with one of those cellular air cards or U.S.B. sticks, which cost $60 a month, but you'd be limited to 5 gigabytes of data transfer a month (and how are you supposed to gauge that?). You could use tethering, in which your laptop uses your cellphone as a glorified Internet antenna - but that adds $20 or $30 to your phone bill, has a fixed data limit and eats through your phone's battery charge in an hour. Last year, you could hear minds blowing coast to coast when Novatel introduced a new option: the MiFi. It creates a personal Wi-Fi bubble, a portable, powerful, password-protected wireless hot spot that, because it's the size of a porky credit card, can go with you everywhere. The MiFi gets its Internet signal from a 3G cellphone network and converts it into a Wi-Fi signal that up to five people can share. You can just leave the thing in your pocket, your laptop bag or your purse to pump out a fresh Internet signal to everyone within 30 feet, for four hours on a charge of the removable battery. You're instantly online whenever you fire up your laptop, netbook, Wi-Fi camera, game gadget, iPhone or iPod Touch. The MiFi released by Virgin Mobile this week ($150) is almost exactly the same thing as the one offered by Verizon and, until recently, Sprint - but there's a twist that makes it revolutionary all over again. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/02/technology/personaltech/02pogue.html ***** Moderator's Note ***** I think it's still acceptable to tell my cow-orkers that I'll be out of the office and to send my calls to voice mail. I really don't understand the idea that I'm expected to be connected 24x7x365. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:06:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Adults and Cell Phone Distractions Message-ID: <p062408b1c8a55e6b9f1c@[192.168.1.70]> Adults and Cell Phone Distractions by Mary Madden, Lee Rainie Pew Internet Jun 18, 2010 One in four (27%) American adults say they have texted while driving, the same proportion as the number of driving age teens (26%) who say they have texted while driving. Fully 61% of adults say they have talked on their cell phones while they were behind the wheel. That is considerably greater than the number of 16- and 17-year-olds (43%) who have talked on their cells while driving. In addition, 49% of adults say they have been passengers in a car when the driver was sending or reading text messages on their cell phone. Overall, 44% of adults say they have been passengers of drivers who used the cell phone in a way that put themselves or others in danger. Beyond driving, one in six (17%) cell-toting adults say they have been so distracted while talking or texting that they have physically bumped into another person or an object. That amounts to 14% of all American adults who have been so engrossed in talking, texting or otherwise using their cell phones that they bumped into something or someone. ... http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Cell-Phone-Distractions.aspx http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Cell_Distractions.pdf ***** Moderator's Note ***** I'd like to see figures on what percentage of drivers resent others' expectations that they'll get an answer to any question within a few seconds of sending a message. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:06:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Mobile Access 2010 Message-ID: <p062408b2c8a55f22ca33@[192.168.1.70]> Mobile Access 2010 by Aaron Smith Pew Internet Jul 7, 2010 Cell phone and wireless laptop internet use have each grown more prevalent over the last year. Nearly half of all adults (47%) go online with a laptop using a Wi-Fi connection or mobile broadband card (up from the 39% who did so as of April 2009) while 40% of adults use the internet, email or instant messaging on a mobile phone (up from the 32% of Americans who did this in 2009). This means that 59% of adults now access the internet wirelessly using a laptop or cell phone-that is, they answered "yes" to at least one of these wireless access pathways. That adds up to an increase from the 51% who used a laptop or cell phone wirelessly in April 2009. The use of non-voice data applications on cell phones has grown dramatically over the last year. Compared with a similar point in 2009, cell phone owners are now more likely to use their mobile phones to: * Take pictures-76% now do this, up from 66% in April 2009 * Send or receive text messages-72% vs. 65% * Access the internet-38% vs. 25% * Play games-34% vs. 27% * Send or receive email-34% vs. 25% * Record a video-34% vs. 19% * Play music-33% vs. 21% * Send or receive instant messages-30% vs. 20% African-Americans and English-speaking Latinos continue to be among the most active users of the mobile web. Cell phone ownership is higher among African-Americans and Latinos than among whites (87% vs. 80%) and minority cell phone owners take advantage of a much greater range of their phones' features compared with white mobile phone users. In total, 64% of African-Americans access the internet from a laptop or mobile phone, a seven-point increase from the 57% who did so at a similar point in 2009. Young adults (those ages 18-29) are also avid users of mobile data applications, but older adults are gaining fast. Compared with 2009, cell phone owners ages 30-49 are significantly more likely to use their mobile device to send text messages, access the internet, take pictures, record videos, use email or instant messaging, and play music. ... http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Mobile-Access-2010.aspx http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Mobile_Access_2010.pdf
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:06:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Cell phones and American adults Message-ID: <p062408b3c8a55f7cdf3c@[192.168.1.70]> Cell phones and American adults by Amanda Lenhart Pew Internet Sep 2, 2010 Texting by American adults has increased substantially over the past year, but still does not approach the magnitude of text messages exchanged by adolescents. Some 72% of adult cell phone users send and receive text messages now, up from 65% in September 2009. Fully 87% of teen cell users text. Teens text 50 messages a day on average, five times more than the typical 10 text messages sent and received by adults per day. Still, for most adults, voice calling is their primary use of the phone. They make and receive about 5 calls per day on average. "Texting among adults has reached the mainstream and the charge is being lead by African-Americans, Hispanics and young adults," said Amanda Lenhart, Senior Research Specialist and author the report. "Of course, none of these adult groups hold a candle to teens when it comes to texting, who swamp adults in messages sent per day by a factor of 5." ... http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Cell-Phones-and-American-Adults.aspx http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Adults_Cellphones_Report_2010.pdf
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:19:13 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Broadband 2010: A Big Slowdown Message-ID: <p062408b5c8a562588ac0@[192.168.1.70]> Broadband 2010: A Big Slowdown by Aaron Smith, Research Specialist, Pew Internet & American Life Project August 11, 2010 After several consecutive years of modest but consistent growth, broadband adoption slowed dramatically in 2010. Two-thirds of American adults (66%) currently use a high-speed internet connection at home, a figure that is not statistically different from what the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project found at a similar point in 2009, when 63% of Americans were broadband adopters. The lack of growth in broadband adoption at the national level was mirrored across a range of demographic groups, with African Americans being a major exception. Broadband adoption by African Americans now stands at 56%, up from 46% at a similar point in 2009. That works out to a 22% year-over-year growth rate, well above the national average and by far the highest growth rate of any major demographic group. Over the last year, the broadband-adoption gap between blacks and whites has been cut nearly in half: * In 2009, 65% of whites and 46% of African Americans were broadband users (a 19-point gap) * In 2010, 67% of whites and 56% of African Americans are broadband users (an 11-point gap) By a 53%-to-41% margin, Americans say they do not believe that the spread of affordable broadband should be a major government priority. Contrary to what some might suspect, non-internet users are less likely than current users to say the government should place a high priority on the spread of high-speed connections. ... http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1694/broadband-adoption-slows-dramatically-except-african-americans-little-interest-among-non-users ***** Moderator's Note ***** I wonder why? Perhaps the "baby boomer" age bump has moved far enough through the population that more adults are seeking peace and quiet as they get older? Bill Horne Moderator
Date: 2 Sep 2010 10:02:22 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <20100902100222.15762.qmail@joyce.lan> >|IIRC, Travelers' checks can be purchased in any currency. Not really. You can get them in major currencies like UK pounds, Euro, and Japanese yen, but you won't find them in Argentine pesos. >If the Travelers' checks had been denominated in local currency I wonder >if I could have used them without a passport. Nope. You will also generally find that the rate you get when you buy TCs in anything other than your local currency is so poor that it negates any advantages. Personally, I haven't used them in a decade. ATM cards work better. R's, John
Date: 2 Sep 2010 10:05:32 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from? Message-ID: <20100902100532.16542.qmail@joyce.lan> >Various, non-authoritative, websites claim AT&T Wireless will unlock >phones for customers who have been in good-standing for more than 90 >days. Is this true? Sometimes. Some of their phones aren't even locked when you buy them. >If I were to walk in off the streets with an unlocked GSM phone would >AT&T Wireless necessarily support it? Would I still be able to buy a >data plan assuming the hardware is compatible? Yes. I've done it. >And finally... suppose one day I buy an iPhone to go with, say, my >Android phone. What would happen if I swapped the SIM back and forth >between the two phones, say iPhone on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, >Android the remaining days. Would AT&T Wireless care? In general no, but if you move your SIM that often you will probably find that the contact pads wear out and it starts going flaky on you. iPhones may be a special case, since AT&T has special plans for them. R's, John
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 18:30:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Time Warner Cable doubles fee to not list phone number Message-ID: <31d90b0e-4537-4df5-bc7e-b84367a6a54c@s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> On Sep 1, 3:33†pm, AES <sieg...@stanford.edu> wrote: > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > Ma Bell used to say that non-listed numbers cost extra because they > caused more calls to Information - oh, 'scuse me, "Directory > Assistance". > > Now, however, most Information calls are billed, so logically, > non-listed numbers should cost less. Then again, I'm not a PUC comish, > wondering if it's better to bank in the Channel Islands or Bermuda ... Heck, 411 calls aren't cheap--in our area they're $1.00 . But supposedly it includes national listings. The Philadelphia area Bell did not charge for unlisted numbers until relatively late (1980?). However, at the same time they put that charge in they eliminated the charge for one extra listing for a number. For years our family paid an extra 50c a month to list a member of our extended family who lived with us--then it became free. Would anyone know when any Bell company began to charge for unlisted numbers? I agree, given today's world, it is ridiculous to charge for unlisted numbers.
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 18:36:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: 911-only public phone Message-ID: <07fb590f-95fd-438c-92d9-bf22d5cd5a10@x42g2000yqx.googlegroups.com> On Sep 1, 10:38†am, Sam Spade <s...@coldmail.com> wrote: > The real security and reliability comes from switch-based protocol > rather than a auto-dialer in the telephone. †The auto-dialer requires > dial tone, which can be accessed through tampering with the telephone. > The switch-based protocol never provides dial tone, thus only the > intended destination can be reached. > > "Hot line" telephones should be considrably less expensive than coin > telephones, both as to the instrument and the tariffs. I can the understand the telephone set being simpler since it doesn't have to handle coins, but the set still must be rugged to be vandal resistant. I don't understand why the tariff would be considerably less expensive because it's still a wire pair like any other phone line and service by the switch. ***** Moderator's Note ***** I think a "911 only" phone should cost more than a regular pay phone. 1. There's no revenue to offset costs: no long-distance, no Information calls, no toll-free calls. 2. There's no ordinary usage to test the line and instrument, so any trouble calls would be on a priority basis, thus adding to costs. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 03:25:14 -0400 From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: 911-only public phone Message-ID: <op.vid9kchgitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:30:45 -0400, Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > ... airports had a large display box of nearby hotels and > services with a phone with an autodialer. (Some hotel lobbies had > them containing restaurants and tourist attractions). One selected a > particular establishment and the phone did the rest automatically. I > don't know if such devices are still in use. Certainly each arrival terminal at JFK and LAG has such an autodialing phone as part of its Ground Services kiosk, with local hotels and Airport Shuttles as the primary beneficiaries of the autodialer. Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 17:08:23 +0000 (UTC) From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: 911-only public phone Message-ID: <i5olm7$5un$3@reader1.panix.com> In <op.vid9kchgitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> writes: >On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:30:45 -0400, Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> >wrote: >> ... airports had a large display box of nearby hotels and >> services with a phone with an autodialer. (Some hotel lobbies had >> them containing restaurants and tourist attractions). One selected a >> particular establishment and the phone did the rest automatically. I >> don't know if such devices are still in use. >Certainly each arrival terminal at JFK and LAG has such an autodialing phone >as part of its Ground Services kiosk, with local hotels and Airport Shuttles >as the primary beneficiaries of the autodialer. Same at numerous highway "rest stops". In the Good Old Days I've heard it was possible, if you timed it just right, to lift the handset, tap a button in a way to just get you a dial tone but without the associated dialing (sometime Touch Tone, sometimes pulse). Supposedly, the stories went, you then had an unrestricted dial tone and could place your acousticly coupled tone generating pad over the mouthpiece and make your own calls. Or so I've heard. -- _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 14:01:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: 911-only public phone Message-ID: <07a85423-d57e-414f-9c3a-829f07bcde71@z28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> On Sep 2, 1:08†pm, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote: > >as part of its Ground Services kiosk, with local hotels and Airport Shuttles > >as the primary beneficiaries of the autodialer. > > In the Good Old Days I've heard it was possible, if you timed > it just right, to lift the handset, tap a button in a way > to just get you a dial tone but without the associated > dialing (sometime Touch Tone, sometimes pulse). > Supposedly, the stories went, you then had an unrestricted > dial tone and could place your acousticly coupled tone > generating pad over the mouthpiece and make your own calls. > Or so I've heard. I never heard of that, but given the technology involved it certainly seems possible. However, in the days of the older simpler technology the lines were probably rotary-pulse and a tone pad wouldn't work. (Yes, I know some lines supported Touch Tone even if the subscriber didn't pay for it, but that was hit or miss, and by the time that was common the kiosk technology was probably more advanced.) > Same at numerous highway "rest stops". Speaking of highway rest stops, Western Union once had its own public telegraph counters at major railroad stations and airports and they were busy locations. Would anyone know if WU had desks or direct line phones at major highway rest stops, especially back in the 1950s?
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:07:06 -0400 From: Ron <ron@see.below> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <o21u76t78stubltavqid7ud18ullk0tkha@4ax.com> Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com> wrote: >|***** Moderator's Note ***** >| >|IIRC, Travelers' checks can be purchased in any currency. >If the Travelers' checks had been denominated in local currency I wonder >if I could have used them without a passport. 1. When you buy Traveler's checks denominated in the target country currency, the not-so-great exchange rate takes place at the time of purchase. 2. No, you still need to show your passport when you cash them. -- Ron (user telnom.for.plume in domain antichef.com) ***** Moderator's Note ***** I don't think the "not-so-great" exchange rate matters: a couple of percentage points doesn't make enough of a difference when the alternative is to risk losing your money while travelling. Although ATM's might be more convenient, those who travel outside their native country on an occasional basis would, IMHO, do better to have the Travellers' Checks. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:50:01 GMT From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye) To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <i5orkn$r4$3@news.eternal-september.org> ***** Moderator's Note ***** > I don't think the "not-so-great" exchange rate matters: a couple of > percentage points doesn't make enough of a difference when the > alternative is to risk losing your money while travelling. Although > ATM's might be more convenient, those who travel outside their native > country on an occasional basis would, IMHO, do better to have the > Travellers' Checks. One of the things I've observed living in San Francisco where we have lots of tourists is how many people immediately cash out their travelers' checks once they arrive in town. Well, the trouble with theft is not going to happen on the plane or ship; it's going to happen in the hotel room, in the wallet, etc. So, a lot of people aren't using travelers' checks properly.
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 03:06:52 -0400 From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <op.vid8pqy4itl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 01:56:28 -0400, Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> wrote: > ... travelers' cheques ... they're not so > popular now ... if you use a bank check card/debit card generally > you'll have easier access to local cash and you'll also get a much > better exchange rate ... > And Bill Horne added > IIRC, Travelers' checks can be purchased in any currency. True. But trying to cash a Swiss France T/C at a Swiss bank or post office will bring you up against a fee as high as 10% for the privilege, as will trying to cash a Chinese Yuan T/C at a Chinese bank or PO, or ... ; whereas using an ATM/debit card at an ATM will trigger, at worst, a 3% fee on the part of your card issuer (and perhaps a $2.00 charge on the part of the ATM owner). Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 03:17:27 -0400 From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from? Message-ID: <op.vid87dqfitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 04:01:03 -0400, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote: > ... Various, non-authoritative, websites claim AT&T Wireless will unlock > phones for customers who have been in good-standing for more than 90 > days. Is this true? I believe the FCC requires that, for whatever phones can be so unlocked. > ... Does the 90 days start from when I first opened > my current account or when I bought the locked phone? I believe it starts from when you acquired the locked phone. > If I were to walk in off the streets with an unlocked GSM phone would > AT&T Wireless necessarily support it? Would I still be able to buy a > data plan assuming the hardware is compatible? Speaking not for AT&T WS but from my T-Mobile experience: yes; and yes. > And finally... suppose one day I buy an iPhone to go with, say, my > Android phone. What would happen if I swapped the SIM back and forth > between the two phones, say iPhone on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, > Android the remaining days. Would AT&T Wireless care? I suspect not -- I've done the analogous thing with two compatible handsets and a T-Mobile SIM without raising even a mumble from T-Mobile. One handset was an old VoiceStream (now T-Mobile) Nokia device that T-Mo had unlocked; the other was an old AT&T WS (now Cingular) Motorola device that Cingular had unlocked. None of the above is definitive, of course, but may be indicative. Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 17:03:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from? Message-ID: <201009022103.RAA19624@ss10.danlan.com> tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com (tlvp) wrote: |On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 04:01:03 -0400, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote: | |> If I were to walk in off the streets with an unlocked GSM phone would |> AT&T Wireless necessarily support it? Would I still be able to buy a |> data plan assuming the hardware is compatible? | |Speaking not for AT&T WS but from my T-Mobile experience: yes; and yes. | |> And finally... suppose one day I buy an iPhone to go with, say, my |> Android phone. What would happen if I swapped the SIM back and forth |> between the two phones, say iPhone on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, |> Android the remaining days. Would AT&T Wireless care? | |I suspect not -- I've done the analogous thing with two compatible handsets |and a T-Mobile SIM without raising even a mumble from T-Mobile. One handset |was an old VoiceStream (now T-Mobile) Nokia device that T-Mo had unlocked; |the other was an old AT&T WS (now Cingular) Motorola device that Cingular |had unlocked. I've read many complaints online that T-Mobile checks the handset's serial number to determine what type of phone you are using to see if you "should" be paying more. In particular, my understanding is that if I were to acquire an unlocked Android phone and swap in the T-Mobile SIM from my current WM-based smartphone, T-Mobile would soon cut off my data service because data on an Android is supposed to be more valuable/expensive. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 09:41:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Where, oh where, will my next phone come from? Message-ID: <190083.16176.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Wed, 1 Sep 2010 16:01:03 +0800 John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote: <<I have long been an easy cell phone customer. I've always taken the free phone, just used it for talking and texting, paid my bill on time, and the carrier & I just left each other alone. Then something happened. I traveled abroad. I'm considering trading in my Pantech C530 for a smart phone. But before I take the plunge I want run some things past the braintrust here. I am an AT&T Wireless customer and my first choice is the iPhone. However I need an unlocked phone, or at least one that can be unlocked. My understanding is Apple will not allow iPhones to be unlocked. Or is it AT&T? In any case, it can't (easily) be done. I can expect to spend time in Malaysia and Hungary for the foreseeable future and having a local number (i.e. a local SIM card) makes life much easier.>> In the US a "legitimate" unlocked iPhone is not possible. You can "jailbreak" your phone and then unlock it or you can get an iPhone from a country that sells them unlocked (such as Canada and some European countries.) <<Here are my questions. Various, non-authoritative, websites claim AT&T Wireless will unlock phones for customers who have been in good-standing for more than 90 days. Is this true? Does the 90 days start from when I first opened my current account or when I bought the locked phone?>> I can't speak for AT&T but T-Mobile's qualifications for unlock is that you need to have had service for 90 days with no faults on your payment record. You can request one unlock code every 90 days if you like. It's not how long you have had a device. That requirement; might be different with AT&T. Best advice is to call to (try) and get an answer on their policy. <<If I were to walk in off the streets with an unlocked GSM phone would AT&T Wireless necessarily support it? Would I still be able to buy a data plan assuming the hardware is compatible?>> It depends on what you mean by "support." If it's GSM and frequency compatible with AT&T's network it will work. If you mean will they trouble shoot for you if you have a problem with the device perhaps no unless they themselves sold that particular device. OTOH there might be some support. I've read in other mobile forums that T-Mobile tech support will help people who have iPhones on T-Mobile's network even though they do not sell the iPhone. <<And finally... suppose one day I buy an iPhone to go with, say, my Android phone. What would happen if I swapped the SIM back and forth between the two phones, say iPhone on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, Android the remaining days. Would AT&T Wireless care?>> I wouldn't think AT&T would care one whit. As long as your device isn't harming the network and AT&T's collecting whatever fees they normally do for your monthly voice and data service it shouldn't make any difference whatsoever. It's one of the nice things about GSM that you can put your SIM in any other GSM device. The only caveat there is though that the iPhone 4 uses a micro SIM and you'd need to use an adapter to use it in a regular GSM device or if you were using it in a regular GSM device you'd need to find a SIM cutter or be very skilled with an Exacto knife and cut the regular SIM down to the 'micro' size.
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 14:20:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Whatever happened to travelers' cheques (checks) Message-ID: <afc5f85c-903c-4f7e-a58d-4c241fc2d50b@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> On Sep 1, 1:56†am, Joseph Singer <joeofseat...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Bill Horne asked "whatever happened to travelers' cheques?" > They're still around (in fact when my 89 year old dad came to the > states in May he brought some with him.) †The reason they're not so > popular now is that if you use a bank check card/debit card generally > you'll have easier access to local cash and you'll also get a much > better exchange rate generally than you do exchanging travelers' > cheques. > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > IIRC, Travelers' checks can be purchased in any currency. I don't recall the original discussion. But for our younger readers, today Visa and Mastercard* credit cards are commonplace, accepted virtually anywhere and almost everyone has one. This is a relatively recent situation. It wasn't that long ago that only people with solid credit--having a good job for several years and living in one place for several years--could get such a card. The credit limits were much lower. Further, they were not accepted as widely as today. The other cards, such as American Express, Diner's Club, etc., were fairly rare. Accordingly, people who travelled purchased travelers checks as a way of protecting their cash. (I once lost some travelers checks and true to their ads they were great about replacing them.) Once Visa and Mastercard became commonplace, they were much more convenient and thus used instead. * I believe their names used to be Bank Americard and Master Charge. I should also note that years ago using the card was less convenient. They did not have the instant automatic validators they have now. A store clerk would first check a booklet, and for big purchases, telephone (slow rotary dial 10 digits) a service bureau and orally pass the information, wait, and then write down an authorization code. I believe the travellers check companies made their money mostly from the fact that you paid for the checks up front, but took time to use them; and in that time difference they could invest the money. There was also of course the service fees paid up front. In the days before widespread ESS, I wonder what kind of national telephone voice and data network "SCAN" the Bell System provided for American Express (one of the principal check companies). It must have been quite sophisticated. For large national organizations the Bell System provided special national networks of tie lines interconnecting various locations. A telephone set would have two numbers--the Centrex or outside number regular callers used, and a separate internal number for the special network. If memory serves, a former president of American Express became the president of IBM, one of the first outside people to lead the organization in a long time. He brought to IBM the perspective of a major customer. He had the challenge of turning IBM around from a "big iron" maker to one more suited for the modern era.
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:35:43 -0500 From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (PV) To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: After BlackBerry, India now wants Google, Skype, & VPN data Message-ID: <BJmdnZp6JPISYeLRnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@supernews.com> Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> writes: >The government is also targeting VPNs used by corporate employees >working remotely. Yeah, that's gonna work. Pft. * -- * PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews.
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 (28 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues