30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for August 26, 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: 25 Aug 2011 05:48:50 -0000 From: "John Levine" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Email spam getting to me Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> I concur with the suggestion that you use gmail. You can either set up your Stanford account to forward to your gmail account, or you can tell gmail to poll your Stanford mailbox with POP. Either way, you can configure gmail to put your Stanford address on outgoing mail if you want. Gmail's filtering is likely to be better than Stanford's for two reasons. One is that the more mail you can look at, the better a job of filtering you can do, since you can look for more interesting patterns as well as just looking for lots of copies of stuff. The other is that university mail systems tend to do a fairly lame job of filtering, partly because they're small mail systems with limited budgets, partly because faculty members who know nothing about computers are paranoid about their mail being "censored" so it's politically hard to do the kind of hard blocks they need to do. You can demand a magic word in your incoming mail if you want, but I think you will find that you overestimate how many people are willing to jump through hoops to send you mail, so they just won't bother. R's, John
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:34:32 -0700 From: AES <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Why Shutting Down Cell Service Is Not Just Against The Law, Message-ID: <siegman-0C538F.email@example.com> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com (Rich Greenberg) wrote: > > BTW, the term "femtocell" is a registered trademark of (I think) AT&T. > I have one from Sprint and its called an "AirAve". > Optus in Australia calls it a "Home Zone", which I'd say is a reasonably neat descriptor: http://www.optus.com.au/dafiles/OCA/OptusHome/HomeRedesign/mobile-phones/homezone/ The video on that page is also a reasonably neat way of conveying to non-techie types what a femtoc... pardon me, a "Home Zone" device -- does.
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 07:53:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Email spam getting to me Message-ID: <email@example.com> [[ Moderatr note: Its time to call this subject closed. ]] > Thanks for suggestion. Haven't tried Gmail -- and, to be honest, > probably won't want to expend enough free time and effort to give it a > fair trial. Suit yourself. My email addresses have been posted on the Internet for years, and so attract a lot of email, which all gets delivered to Gmail. One recent 48-hour period saw 1244 pieces of spam caught by Gmail, and only two pieces of spam made its way through Gmail's filters, with no false positives (I looked). Those two pieces were unusual --- ordinarily I don't see any spam. I've got a few filters in place that label mail based on sender, but unlike when I used Yahoo Mail, with Gmail, I don't need to institute filters for spam, unless it's real email that I just don't want to get. As John said, Gmail is much better than a magic word (or the irritating email processing services which demand your correspondents go to a website and whitelist their email address). People rarely are going to bother with either if they're trying to communicate with you. If you really want to be old-school, you can forward all your Stanford email to a Gmail account, and then use Eudora to pop it off Gmail, sans spam. Sort of a silly way to do it, particularly with all the benefits that a Google account brings (photo storage, G+, personalized news, etc.), but it can be done, and Gmail wouldn't care if you read it with Eudora, since they allow POP both in and out of Gmail, and IMAP for messages housed on Gmail. It'll take just a few minutes to set up, and then you're spam-free. Tuning it to your own personal preferences may take a little longer if you use labels, but not that long. Daryl
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 07:25:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Hancock4 <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: New BART policy on cellphone shutdowns Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> SF Gate reported, "BART directors, slammed with criticism over the transit system's decision to shut down underground wireless service to stop a demonstration, agreed Wednesday (8/24/11) they should limit use of that tactic to extreme situations in which public safety is endangered." The ACLU acknowledged that a cellphone shutdown may be necessary, but "only in extreme circumstances such as a hostage situation or a bomb that could be detonated by a cell phone." For full article please see: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/25/BA3C1KRINF.DTL Another SF Gate article reports that BART passengers have lost patience with the protesters. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/25/BAB91KRBA5.DTL The San Francisco Examiner reports that the protest group, "Anonymous", was not satisfied with BART's new policy. "Anonymous said it would protest until BART fires spokesman Linton Johnson and police chief Kenton Rainey, apologizes for shutting down cellphone service and opens a new investigation into the July 3 shooting of Charles Hill by BART officers. Members affiliated with Anonymous posted a lewd photo of Johnson online on Wednesday." http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/08/activists-say-bart-protests-will-not-end-until-police-force-disbanded
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:43:26 -0500 From: Jim Haynes <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Should I be suspicious? Message-ID: <nbadnYonvK5DOMvTnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@earthlink.com> The phone rang a while ago, and a female voice said you have a message from [mumble] at 479-599-9999. And then a different voice said press 1 to hear the message. I have the plainest of POTS, no call waiting, no voice mail, no caller ID, nothing extra. I hung up the phone without pressing 1, as I was suspicious and anyway I was just leaving the house. Should I be suspicious, or is this a known OK service? [[ Moderator note: One can find a surprising amount of information by simply plugging a phone number into the Google search box. This was almost certainly a phoney marketing call. 479-599-xxxx is a cellular exchange in Siloam Springs AR. This can be any of a number of kinds of scams. It could tack charges on your phone bill -- claiming that the 'press 1' authorized them to do so -- just to name one possibility. It is remotely possible that this is a 'keep trying to deliver the message' from a phone company -- a service offered to customers of the 'offering' phone company when one of their subscribers calls a 'busy' number. I've run into such services once or twice. They identified up front who the phone company was; and there was none of theis 'press`' nonsense, There was the ID, then the message played, with an 'after the fact' option for a repeat play.
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.