Date: Sat, 27 May 2017 12:35:19 -0500
From: Anonymous Contributor <email@example.com>
Subject: Cancel Non-Published Service on landline?
I'm debating if I should cancel the Non-Published Service on my AT&T landline.
I've had this service since I got the landline and it's now $3.45 a month. I
get an estimated 12 junk calls on weekdays (if I stay home from work) and six
junk calls on Saturdays. I screen all my calls with an answering machine, and
most callers don't leave a message.
My number has been exposed in various data breeches. It's also on the second
page of Google search results, and I don't know if Google will take it down
as I requested.
So I'm wondering if it makes sense to save the $3.45, or if my junk calls will
spike if I do so? Thanks in advance for any thoughts from the phone experts
Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 13:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: HAncock4 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Verizon says no to FIOS in southern New Jersey towns with
Large parts of South Jersey will not be brought into the Fios era.
Ending more than a year of negotiations, public hearings, and
investigation into consumer complaints, Verizon Communications Inc.
has agreed to monitor more closely its fraying copper lines in rural
South Jersey and potentially expand DSL internet service to 2,000 new
homes or businesses.
But the telecom giant won't be wiring a wide swath of Cumberland,
Burlington, Salem, and Atlantic Counties with the high-speed Fios
service that has been extended to millions of residents in other parts
of New Jersey.
full article at:
In my personal opinion, Verizon and other large carriers like
Comcast, are trying to have it both ways: they want the power
to do whatever they want and maintain control like a public
utility, yet none of the responsibilities of a public utility.
Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 14:16:12 -0700
From: Astrid Smith <Astrid@xrtc.net>
Subject: Re: T-Mobile offers new "one number" plan
On 2017-05-25 at 6:06 pm PDT, Monty Solomon wrote:
> It might've taken a little longer than the company had hoped, but
> T-Mobile is finally ready to unleash its new "Digits" product.
> In a nutshell, Digits is a nifty service that combines the best
> features of services like Google Voice and AT&T NumberSync into a
> single product. It allows one phone number to work on multiple
> devices, and it also allows one device to support multiple phone
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
> I don't usually accept this kind of PR, but I find Google Voice
> usefull and I'm curious how Telecom Digest readers feel about this
> Bill Horne
I'm not quite sure how this will work exactly, but it seems very
interesting indeed. It could be an overlay with forwarding, kind of
like Google Voice is (the crowing about "works even with phones on
other carriers like Verizon!" suggests this might be the case). Or it
might could be a more-native solution, where phones with the same
number have different IMSIs but the same MSISDN. (can GSM accomodate
this configuration? my memory suggests that it is possible.)
Naturally, it could also be some kind of hybrid, using the latter
approach for T-Mobile native handsets and the former for externally
I have a SIM card in my laptop, which is billed as one of the lines in
my 4-line plan. It's a decent alternative to wifi, and also super
useful when I'm computering in the park or whatever. I wonder if I'll
be able to use that SIM to receive and respond to text messages on my
primary number, or if it'll be necessary to hit some kind of API
endpoint, or if it'll be website-only.
This will probably throw a wrench in things like iMessage, Signal,
Threema, WhatsApp, etc. I.e., just because you can send a message to
an iMessage account that's registered to that phone number, doesn't
mean it'll show up on all the devices that can receive texts for that
phone number. It attempts to turn phone numbers into nebulous contact
points for "a person or a group", rather than addressing a device, but
at the same time it takes a typical telco-mindset approach of "our
customers will only use the services that we give them".
Ughhhh. I remember when I used one IM client to connect to multiple
networks, each with their own naming scheme and friend lists. Now I
use multiple IM clients to connect to multiple networks, sharing the
same naming scheme and friend lists. They're disguised as SMS, but
they're really no different than ICQ. Everyone wants their little
slice of global message traffic, and they all try to become the owner
of everything. It's completely bogus and I hope that the Wheel Of
Messaging turns forward to the "federated" stage quickly.
I wonder if there's another progress-wheel thing that has the stages
"person-to-person call" and "station-to-station call". Robotic
attendants might get us there, if we can remember how to federate our
messaging traffic again.
***** Moderator's Note *****
Was someone channeling Ernestine for just a moment?
End of telecom Digest Sun, 28 May 2017