31 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for July 29, 2013
====== 31 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 Bill Horne 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 that person, or email address
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. 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: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:04:00 -0400 From: T <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Verizon telemarketers violating laws? Message-ID: <MPG.firstname.lastname@example.org> In article <20130724010739.GB10884@telecom.csail.mit.edu>, bill@horneQRM.net says... > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 04:49:32PM -0400, Fred Goldstein wrote: > > > I received a telespam today from someone identifying herself as being > > with Verizon. She asked if I was the person in charge of the RCN > > account. Well, yes, my phone comes from RCN. How does Verizon know > > this though? Telephone accounts are customer proprietary network > > information (CPNI), aren't they? RCN isn't selling its customer lists > > to its competitors. [snip] > > Telemarketing, like spam, is an arms race: the good nature of middle > class citizens provided the vermin with an easy living, until their > victims demanded action by the congresscritters, and the do-not-call > list worked until the marketeers realized that they are in the neutral > zone between congressional apathy and legal indifference. > > The next step is that everyone will buy an electronic butler. In a > way, the DNC worked: it gave ordinary people a taste of what privacy > and quiet enjoyment of our homes feels like, and now those same people > will get mad and take individual action. I get very few if any telemarketer calls on my cell phone. Probably because I call block the really egregious stuff and block a lot of 800/888/877 numbers.
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 22:41:15 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Verizon telemarketers violating laws? Message-ID: <20130729024115.GA15156@telecom.csail.mit.edu> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 02:04:00PM -0400, T wrote: > In article <20130724010739.GB10884@telecom.csail.mit.edu>, > bill@horneQRM.net says... > >> The next step is that everyone will buy an electronic butler. In a >> way, the DNC worked: it gave ordinary people a taste of what privacy >> and quiet enjoyment of our homes feels like, and now those same people >> will get mad and take individual action. > > I get very few if any telemarketer calls on my cell phone. Probably > because I call block the really egregious stuff and block a lot of > 800/888/877 numbers. It's not a problem that you can solve with blocking per se: that's the whole point. They want your ears on their pitchman's speech, and they'll break any law that seeks to slow them down, and they'll re-re-re-program their auto-dialers to use ever-more-obscure CID info so that you can't block it. The only way to eliminate abuses of the Do-not-call list is to force the violators to spend time talking to electronic butlers or real people before they can get to you, and thus to make their rate-of- return so low that they go out of business. They will, of course, rely more and more on pre-recorded pitches, but those have so small a "hit" rate that they'll still have to spend the time to get through to you if they want to sell you something. With an electronic butler guarding your phone line, and demanding a security code that they don't have and can't guess in time, their paradigm will, finally, be broken. Bill -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly) You can see their shadows wandering off somewhere They won't make it home but they really don't care - Fastball
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:05:32 -0400 From: T <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: This is interesting - or is it not? Message-ID: <MPG.firstname.lastname@example.org> Telcom Digest Moderator wrote: > If someone tries to sell me a Morse Code key based on my ham radio > license, I can't complain about the connection: my Amateur license is > a matter of public record. If a zealot comes to my door and tries to > convert me based on the fact that I use a TDD, I'm entitled to ask how > he got that information. Ah Bill, if you really want to have some fun with JW's - simply keep a small morse code oscillator near the door. When they knock and you answer, simply answer with code. That should throw them for a loop. ***** Moderator's Note ***** If a missionary is devout enough to bring a Morse operator with him, I'll listen to his pitch: as I said, my ham license is public info. If (s)he brings an ASL interpreter with him/her, I'm going to get really, really interested in who told him/her that I might understand ASL. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:00:29 -0400 From: T <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Google Said to Weigh Supplying TV Channels Message-ID: <MPG.email@example.com> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com says... > > >> If Google has its way, you might someday get cable television the > >> same way you get Gmail: through any ordinary Internet connection. > > > >Er - how many of us get our internet connection from our cable company? IIRC > >naked internet isn't a very attractive buy. > > Remember that Google is building its own fiber to the home network in > Kansas City and other cities. That makes it a lot more interesting > than it is here in T-W land. > > At least we can get IPv6. I so hope Google jumps into other cities, particularly on the east coast. I'd love to see Cox and Verizon with a viable competitor like Google. ***** Moderator's Note ***** I doubt they'll be able to. The existing LEC's, and the cable co's, have been busy locking up every available right-of-way for years. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 20:20:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Question about fax call-blocking (based on Station-ID?) Message-ID: <1374981615.74138.YahooMailNeo@web122306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> > ________________________________ > From: Telecom Guy <Telecom@Guy.com> > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 10:42 AM > > I understand that group-2 fax machines exchange some electronic > information when a fax is sent from one machine to another. This > information includes the phone number and company-name that is > pre-programmed into a fax machine and normally appears in small print > at the top of each fax page as printed by the receiving fax. > > I believe this information might be known as "Station Identification" > information or data. > > I want to know if there are any fax machines or fax-software (running > on a PC being used as a fax machine) that can block or drop incoming > faxes based on this phone/company (station-ID) data? [Moderator snip] > Are there any fax machines (specific brands/models) or PC fax software > that can do this? I used EFax to collect junk faxes without printing them out. Not perfect, but usable. Mark L. Smith firstname.lastname@example.org http://smith.freehosting.net Http://marksfolkmusicphotos.shutterfly.com
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.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
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) 2013 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.