29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for May 11, 2011
====== 29 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 the recipients of the
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: Mon, 09 May 2011 21:30:29 -0700 From: John David Galt <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > I'd worry that eventually I'd encounter one of the extra-vindictive > ones who either dialed my number himself or can retrieve it from the > dialer and find some way to submit it to a system (or multiple > systems) that will call it at inconvenient times. Telecom equipment > question: surely there are at least some predictive dialers that can > provide the agent with the called number? They'd need that to comply > with do-not-call requests, no? Predictive dialers (at least when making their initial hangup call) never connect the callee to a live person, because that way (in their opinion) they're not required to comply with DNC requests. They're only obligated (in their opinion) if you make the request to a live human being, so if they can make it impossible for you to do that, it's your problem. I wish I could sic the Navy Seals on all the bozos who do this to me....
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 08:51:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Microsoft to Buy Skype for $8.5 Billion Message-ID: <email@example.com> Microsoft to Buy Skype for $8.5 Billion By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN and STEVE LOHR MAY 10, 2011, 8:19 AM Microsoft on Tuesday announced they would buy Skype Global for $8.5 billion in cash - the largest acquisition ever for the technology giant. http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/05/10/microsoft-to-buy-skype-for-8-5-billion/ Microsoft to Acquire Skype Software Giant to Pay $8.5 Billion in Cash for Company By ANUPREETA DAS And NICK WINGFIELD MAY 10, 2011, 8:46 A.M. ET http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703730804576314854222820260.html Press Release http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/may11/05-10CorpNewsPR.mspx Webcast http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/presskits/corpnews Media Alert http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/may11/05-10CorpNewsMA.mspx
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:33:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa or Jeff <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: History Early Data transmission technical considerations Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> An article in the November 1957 discusses the technical issues in the speed and accuracy of data transmission over private lines. It recognizes that the telephone network was built for voice, not data. Various modulating and carrier modes are considered such as "AM double sideband" and "frequency shift transmission". 1600 bits per second was deemed a good speed at that time. (and the term "bit" was used then.) Line noise, delay distortion, and required terminal equipment were critical issues that needed to be addressed. The article gets quite technical. http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol36-1957/articles/bstj36-6-1451.pdf
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|
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) 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.