Hacker Chronicles 2 (Alt)/The_Hacker_Chronicles_Volume_II-CD2.iso/td2/td14_07.txt

Text File | 1995-01-03 | 23.8 KB | 597 lines

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 5 Jan 94 02:18:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 7

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services (Feedlebom)
    Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services (C. Bongaarts)
    Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services (J. Carlson)
    Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services (Carl Moore)
    Re: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones (Thomas M. Godbold)
    Re: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones (Michael D. Sullivan)
    Re: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones (Steve Wood)
    Re: Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers (John R. Levine)
    Re: Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Fulcrum)
    Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Michael Jacobs)
    Re: Radio Religion (was 500 Channels...) (Gene Fornario)
    Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones (Ken Hoehn)
    Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones (Neil L. Kleeman)
    Re: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers (Toby Nixon)
    Re: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers (George Zmijewski)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Feedlebom)
Subject: Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279,714-539-0829)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 1994 23:10:15 GMT


Earl Vickers ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm putting together a list of phone numbers for bizarre recorded
> information services. I used to have lots of numbers like this, but
> they all seem to have disappeared. For example, there used to be one
> where you could leave whatever strange sound effects or messages you
> wanted, and they would periodically edit and splice them into their
> new outgoing greeting. And there used to be a number in San Francisco
> called the Earthquake Prevention Hotline, with a different oddball
> comedy bit every couple days.

Here in the Los Angeles area, there used to be a handful of such
"comment" lines, but unfortunately, they've all dissappeared.  A few
of the operators of them are running 976/900 services, but most just
got disinterested and took 'em down.

I was involved with the world-infamous NEEON-19 line in Orange County,
and I can tell you that running such a line takes money, patience, and
time, something most people don't have anymore.  It would take
anywhere from three to seven hours to edit the tape down, and
countless more assembling other bits for the program.  It's a bit like
running a radio show: for every hour of content, there's five hours of
work.  And then there's the equipment ...

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple of numbers I'll add to this
> list are 312-731-1100 and 312-731-1505. Both are operated by a fellow
> named Sherman Skolnick in Chicago who is a 'conspiracy buff'; you know,
> one of those people who believe that everyone but Oswald killed JFK.
> Both are five minute recordings, and he changes the two messages two
> or three times per week.   PAT]

Then there are the countless White Aryan Resistance and KKK lines
around the country ... if you have a pager, you've no doubt been paged
by one of them.  (None come to mind right now ...)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We had one from the American Nazi Party
here for quite awhile which was always good for a laugh, but I have
not heard it lately, and don't remember the number so I cannot say for
sure if it is stilll operating or not. Regards the amount of preparation
involved, you are quite correct that it takes much, much longer than the
presentation itself if you want it to be halfway decent. When I had my
phone news and information service back in the 1970's, these nincompoops
would ask me how could it possibly be a job which takes several hours
per day ... I had to investigate what I wanted to talk about; write it
down and edit it a few times; practice speaking it; then finally record
it. All that for a three minute recording. Of course I had bookkeeping
and maintainence to do on 35 phone lines; advertisers to contact regards
payment, etc.  I am reminded of the nincompoops of today -- the denizens
of Usenet who hang around news.groups (a really nasty place as newsgroups
go) who ask such questions as if 'all I do' is sort through some messages
and put out a couple dozen or so each day, how could it 'possibly' take
more than a couple minutes maximum ... I don't know if I should laugh
or cry when I read some of that stuff. As you well know from your own
experience, quality work takes time.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Chris Bongaarts)
Subject: Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services
Organization: University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 05:33:41 GMT


[e-mail] (Earl Vickers) writes:

> I'm putting together a list of phone numbers for bizarre recorded
> information services. I used to have lots of numbers like this, but

[...]

> All I have to offer so far is They Might Be Giants's Dial-a-Song
> number, [phone].

As those of you who may have tried calling this know, this number is
the incorrect one printed in the liner notes the TMBG's "Apollo 18"
CD.  The correct number (from "Flood", "Lincoln", and their
self-titled "19-track debut album") is:

718-387-6962

 From all of us at alt.music.tmbg, thanks...


===========================================   [e-mail]
Chris Bongaarts (Sir Taxi of the Wild Crew)   [e-mail]
Call the Game Center BBS! [phone]       [e-mail]
My opinions are my own, and they are right.   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (James Carlson)
Subject: Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services
Date: 4 Jan 1994 15:21:34 GMT
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Earl
Vickers) writes:

[...]

>> All I have to offer so far is They Might Be Giants's Dial-a-Song
>> number, [phone].

Hmpf.  Not so cool.  It's been disconnected!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As the message before this suggests,
try 718-387-6962.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 94 17:21:42 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: Post Cool Phone Numbers - Strange Recorded Info Services


718-963-6962 is disconnected (I just tried it).

But I did reach 410-337-FUNN (3866), the "Joke Du Jour" hotline of
"Rouse and company" on WQSR-FM 105.7 in Baltimore, Maryland.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Thomas M. Godbold)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones
Date: 05 Jan 1994 03:27:03 GMT
Organization: Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tony
Barnecut) writes:

> I am looking for information on a cellular phone called SIMON. I saw a
> picture of it in a recent issue of {InfoWorld} but it did not say who
> the manufacturer is or where it could be purchased. From the short
 ...

SIMON is a cellphone/pager/calendar/personal data device/fax/etc.  all
wrapped into one compact and versatile package.  Having never seen the
actual unit, I cannot vouch for its functionality.  However, it is
marketed (will be, anyway, as of 3/94) by BELLSOUTH CELLULAR
CORPORATION (my company, BTW) and I would be happy to do a brief
synopsis of the product here from the extensive (albeit a bit wordy)
pre-release literature we received, as well as the test period we will
have soon ... with the MODERATOR's permission.

Please address inquiries/etc to :
[e-mail]


My opinions are strictly my own and are not those of BellSouth Mobility,
BellSouth Cellular Corporation, BellSouth Corporation, or any of its
subsidiaries or entities.  Don't you just *hate* these disclaimers?

Tom Godbold   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones
Date: 05 Jan 1994 01:34:22 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


[e-mail] (Tony Barnecut) writes:

> I am looking for information on a cellular phone called SIMON. I saw a
> picture of it in a recent issue of {InfoWorld} but it did not say who
> the manufacturer is or where it could be purchased. From the short
> description that was included I found that it has an LCD panel where
> the keypad would be with interchangable cards that make it act as a
> phone, pager and other things. With different cards, different icons
> appear on the LCD panel for the functions for that particular card.
> Any information anyone could give me on this this product would be
> greatly appreciated.

The SIMON is made by IBM exclusively for BellSouth.  It is not just a
cellular phone but a "personal digital assistant" with a pen operating
system of some sort.


Michael D. Sullivan   [e-mail]        [e-mail]
Washington, D.C.      [e-mail]     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Steve Wood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 94 10:39:00 PST


In response to Tony Barnecut's inquiry about Simon on 12/29:

It is manufactured by IBM and marketed (I think exclusively at least for
now) by Bell South.


Steve Wood    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 Jan 94 13:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


According to a wire service account in the {Boston Globe}, AT&T is
changing their rates to be more like MCI and Sprint.  The list price
for calls goes up, but with a calling plan, you pay about what you
would have before.  AT&T characterized the changes as revenue neutral.
The i plan is going away, presumably because nobody could figure out
what it was.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers
Organization: CMC Network Products, Copenhagen DENMARK
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 94 22:01:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Paul Robinson writes:

> {Washington Post} 12/29 Pg B3:
> NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS

> Card Station               $2.05    $2.12
> Operator Station:
> -Collect                   $2.05    $2.12
> -Billed to Third Party     $2.11    $2.18
> -Sent Paid--Non-Coin       $2.05    $2.12

I wonder why they bother to have a special rate for third-party.  The
increment seems hardly worth the bother of explaining that it's
different.

> Effective February 10, 1994, AT&T USADirect* (R) Optional Calling Plan
> - Option A, institutes a 30-call restriction on the number of Plan
> calls eligible for discounted rates in a one month period.

I have never heard about optional calling plans for USA Direct.  I
have a Universal card, and occasionally use it for USA Direct.  Do you
have any information about this plan?


Lars Poulsen    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products   Phone: (011-) [phone]
Hvidovre Strandvej 72 B   Telefax:      [phone]
DK-2650 Hvidovre, DENMARK Internets: designed and built while you wait

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fulcrum)
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television
Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services -- [phone]
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 1994 16:33:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Todd D.
Hale) writes:

> wait, myself.  Imagine sitting down to local news and hitting some
> NEXT story button when you're ready to move on.  Or, select a set of
> stories from a table of contents and play it through.  Etc, etc ...

  Hmmm ... I think many of us already do this to an extent through
various news sources we get through on-line services or Internet. The
technology is incorporate the other aspects that television has (ie
video, sound, etc) is actually coming about as we speak.

  Personally, I've never liked what comes out of my TV News anyway.
They are slow, alarmist, and they always show the need to cut down
everything to 40 second blurbs. Right now, harder news is found in the
better newspapers (the ones that do more analytical news than fact
reporting) or shortwave radio where you can usually get the word out
from the mouths of the particular country.

  If the future is more 40 second blurbs, then there's really no point
for much news from these TV-Packages.


Mike
Fulcrum - That Sassy Sassy Style...
The Internet Experience: [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 Jan 94 22:38:12 EDT
From: Michael Jacobs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television


I think a lot of the problem that some people seem to have with
understanding the telephone/cable convergence is a tendency toward
linear thinking, ie-15 channels yesterday, 50 channels today, 500
channels tomorrow.  Rather, we are going to see revolutionary
(exponential) changes as the convergence of cable tv and telephony
progresses.  The concept that many RBOC's are working towards is video
dialtone.  This entails an available, dedicated high-bandwidth
connection between a subscriber and a software (programming) source
on-demand.  Each subscriber will be able to access common (ie-network)
programming or custom (on-demand) programming in real-time.

The keys to this are:

1) high-bandwidth subscriber loops;
2) ATM broadband switching; and
3)mass-storage programming systems (called video servers).

There will be no choice to make as to which of 500 different channels
to watch, rather it will be a choice as to what to program on the one
available video dialtone line, much as one chooses who to call on the
current voice telephone line.  ALL SOFTWARE WITH NETWORK ACCESS will
be available to the subscriber on demand!

The revolutionary concept here is that instead of some programmer in
NY or LA deciding what I should watch, it will be me choosing what to
watch , whether it is a movie from Paramount's library, episode #121
of Donna Reed, Howard Stern's latest special, or the current ABC
network program.  The telephone company will merely provide the
bandwidth from software provider to the residence, other vendors (and
RBOC subsidiaries) will compete for viewership.  The value of the
service will lie in the diversity of programming available to the
customer, much as the value of the current telephone network lies not
in the fact that there is a phone in your home, but that there is a
phone in every home!

If the cable companies think that they can compete with a fixed 500
channel system against on-demand video dialtone, they are doomed to go
the way of the dominant telecommunications company in the US of 100
years ago, Western Union, namely technological and competitive
obsolescence.


Personal Opinions Only
Michael Jacobs, [e-mail]
Service Technician, Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gene Fornario)
Subject: Re: Radio Religion (was 500 Channels...)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 05:51:20 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well by the middle 1960's all-religious
> stations were starting to be heard in a few places. WYCA-FM in
> Hammond, Indiana came on the air I guess about 1963; WMBI in Chicago
> started their FM affiliate station sometime in the early to middle

BTW, have you noticed that Canada doesn't not either have or license
all-religous stations?  I have asked why in rec.radio.broadcasting,
and most think it was because there was a lot of fighting going on
between such stations in the early days of radio ... can you add to
that?


Gene   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I really don't know anything at all
about the rules in Canada or how they can be be created; I'll take a
pass on this rather than second-guess my friend Bill Pfieffer with his
newsgroup and journal. I don't think there has ever been any rules oer
laws against it here in the USA simply because the government here
really cannot regulate speech, and technical requirements have to be
applied equally to all license holders regardless of the content of
their speech.  Other ideas or suggestions, anyone?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ken Hoehn)
Subject: Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones
Date: 04 Jan 1994 17:01:48 -0500
Organization: The w8hd Group


octela!![e-mail] (Michael Dimitrov) writes:

> A few months ago I saw an ad for a long range radio telephone -- it
> works like cordless, but it's range is about 100 miles (right, one
> hundred miles).  Of course, it said "Not for sale in the US".  A
> friend of mine from Eastern Europe would like to buy one of these, but
> I've lost the ad since then.  Could anyone provide information about
> similar telephone systems -- manufacturers, reteilers, technical
> details etc.

There are no such systems legal for operation in the United States.

They are merely interconnected business radio systems, utilizing low
band (30-50 mHz) radio facilities, and interconnect units to connect
the phone line to the unit.

You would get away with using for a few days, maybe a couple of weeks.
The co-channel users would complain up a storm, and the Commission
would get you.

They are intended only for surreptitious use in 'uncontrolled' (read: out
of control) countries.

Sorry.


[e-mail]
Ken Hoehn - Teletech, Inc.         Compuserve: 70007,2374
N8NYO       P.O.Box 924            FAX: [phone]
            Dearborn, MI  48121    VOICE: [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Neil L. Kleeman)
Subject: Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones
Organization: Solution Systems Inc.
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 1994 10:03:38 GMT


In Article <[e-mail]>, Mark W. Earle <0006127039@
mcimail.com> wrote:

> Michael Dimitrov wrote:

>> A few months ago I saw an ad for a long range radio telephone -- it
>> works like cordless, but it's range is about 100 miles ....


> These usually turn out to be nothing more than 1/2 duplex, two way
> radios (hand held or mobiles) with a telephone interconnect similiar
> to an amateur radio "autopatch". The reason they are not for sale in
> the US is that, to use such a device requires a business or other
> license; the gear must be FCC type accepted.

Thanks for all of that information. Can you give me any idea what
manufacturers might have this type of equipment available?

Please respond via email.

Thanks,

Neil L. Kleeman, President   Internet: [e-mail]
Solution Systems Incorporated   Voice:    [phone]
114 Forrest Avenue                Fax:    [phone]
Narberth, PA 19072


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As pointed out before, no one has this
type of equipment for sale if they know you intend to use it in the
USA. Something interesting I found out the other day about Radio Shack
is their corporate policy which states that if you discuss with their
clerk your intent to modify radio equipment you purchase from them so
it will operate in an illegal way, the clerk is supposed to refuse to
sell you the equipment. PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Re: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 1994 23:10:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Anthony wrote:

> What is the ITU reference for the standard method of writing
> telephone numbers?  I've noticed the following:

>           (plus symbol) (country code) (city/area code) (number)

This is described in Recommendation E.123. You have it basically
right.  A "+" and the country code, a space, the city code (optionally
enclosed within parenthesis to indicate that it is optionally dialed
if you're within the same city code), then another space, and the
local number.  It is preferred that if the local number is to be
broken up into segments (e.g., 555 1212) that a space character be
used, but other characters are permitted by local convention (e.g.,
period, hyphen).  E.123 (the title is something like "Representation
of Telephone Numbers in Printed Materials"; sorry, I don't have a copy
handy) includes guidance on how to differentiate different types of
lines, such as voice and fax, and how to indicate that an answering
machine may be in use, etc.


Toby

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 1994 22:24:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> What is the ITU reference for the standard method of writing

I don't know what the ITU decided but in UK we are told to use:

MYCOMPANY NAME                           [phone]
                        international   [phone]

This seems a bit stupid -- the American system (if there is any),
seems to be much better -- just the area code plus number. Everybody
knows when to add 1 or when to add 001 (if calling from another
country). In Europe 0 is being now used as prefix for area code
numbers and 00 as prefix for country codes.  With such a system in
operation is it sensible to include the first 0 in your number? Or
should we all use numbers with country code. Anybody inside the
country will know what digits to drop? But then some French idiots
come up with a stupid numbering system (for Paris *and* Greater Paris
+331 xxxxxxxx rest of the country +33 xxxxxxxx ). Is it a revenge for
changing CCITT to ITU?


George Zmijewski

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #7
****************************



******************************************************************************


Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253