The Hacker Chronicles - A…the Computer Underground/The Hacker Chronicles - A Tour of the Computer Underground (P-80 Systems).iso/phreak/teldig2.txt

Text File | 1992-08-30 | 82KB | 1,832 lines

*****************************
TELECOM DIGEST - Issue 890410
*****************************



Date: 23 Mar 89 08:23:00 EST
From: B CHURCHFIELD <[e-mail]>
Subject: C.O.C.O.T.'S

In the past couple of months I have seen a lot of people complaining
about what a rip COCOTs are. I think maybe not every one knows what a
COCOT is, especially based on some of the descriptions I have seen given.
A COCOT is a Customer Owned Coin Operated Telephone, I have seen some
complaints of ATT operated COCOTs which to me sounds like a conflict
of interest. Yesterday I couldn't spell COCOT, today I is one. When I
purchased my phone I was told I needed to go through an AOS (alternate
operator service) in order to get call supervision. Some people that
I have talked to since say this is not so, but the point is it is
the AOS that is overcharging on calls. In most states the AOSs are not
regulated therefore that can charge what they want or at least what ever
the traffic will bear. Most people get into COCOTs to make money but,
other than AOS I don't think one can get rich. I went into this blindly
based on articles I had read in trade publications, if anyone knows of
any good reading on COCOTs I would appreciate the info .


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

Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 09:38:13 EST
From: Jerry Glomph Black <@ll-vlsi.ARPA:black@ll-micro>
Subject: The dreaded AOS:Just when you thought it was safe....
Reply-To: @ll-vlsi.ARPA:black@micro
Organization: None discernable

In my regular monthly New England Telephone bill, received yesterday, was a
small nondescript insert entitled: "To our customers who use NE Tel coin phones
to make long distance calls". I'm not gonna type it in, but in effect, it says,
starting in April, the LD carrier pertaining to a given NE Tel payphone will
not necessarily be AT&T.  It will be determined by the owner of the premises
where the phone is installed.  Thus the last safe haven of COCOT/AOS haters
has fallen.  It really makes me barf, the lawyers win again.

They note in the flyer that you can get any carrier you wish on a NE Tel
payphone by dialing the appropriate 10XXX (10288 for ATT, 10777 for Sprint,
etc.), but I'll bet 98% of the phone-using public never heard of the 10XXX
codes for home, business, or coin-phone use.  I would guess that the guano will
hit the proverbial fan when the bills start arriving in a few months, with
those lovely AOS rates! "Thank you for using BumStench Communications!"

Oh, well, it takes your attention away from the CPID/ACLU cacophony!

Jerry G Black, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, 244 Wood St. C-120, Lexington MA 02173
Phone [phone]     Fax [phone]  black@[e-mail]


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


From: "David E. Bernholdt" <[e-mail]>
Subject: CLID for 911 - who pays?
Date: 23 Mar 89 23:11:05 GMT
Reply-To: "David E. Bernholdt" <[e-mail]>
Organization: University of Florida Quantum Theory Project



I've noted many mentions in the discussions of calling line ID that
911 get the number anyway.  Of course that's only true if the 911
equipment can handle CLID.

Here in Alachua County, Florida, they've recently upgraded their 911
equipment so that it can handle CLID -- and every subscriber in the
county gets an item like "E911 Upgrade" on their local service billing
to pay for it (at $0.50/month).

We're all familiar with the local BOC acting as a billing agent for
the long-distance carriers and the like, but is there any limit to
what (whom) a BOC can collect for?  Just out of curiousity, does
anyone know of other cases where the BOC is collecting "taxes" for a
local government?
--
David Bernholdt                 [e-mail]
Quantum Theory Project          [e-mail]
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL  32611          904/392 6365

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


Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 89 21:16:57 EST
From:   Jonathan Haruni <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Selling an Interesting Telephone Number?
Organization: University of Toronto

In article <[e-mail]> "Anthony E. Siegman" <sierra!
[e-mail]> writes:
>My residential phone number (415 area code) happens to spell a
>quite commercially interesting word.  During the 15-plus years I've
>had this number I've had a couple of inquiries from businesses wanting
>to take it over, paying me something for giving it up.  A recent one
>seems serious.

>Anyone have any thoughts on the dollar value of such a number?

If you're selling your phone number for the money and for no other reason,
(ie, I assume that you have not been eager for a career in phone number
 sales since the age of 12) then it is worth as much as the offering company
is willing to pay.  You'll have to figure it out yourself.  How much money
do they have ?  How much more would your phone number get them ?  How
good a bargainer are you, and how good is the guy who is your contact with
the company ?  Expect to get ALOT of money if it is a phone order company
with high profits and much competition.   That would be the ideal situation.

Jon.

[Moderator's Note: The Dominos Pizza people are trying to grab up all the
xxx-3030 and xxx-0030 combinations they can find around Chicago. Paying
off with pizza coupons and some money, I understand.  PT]
------------------------------


From: Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Some notes on the UK phone system
Date: 23 Mar 89 15:32:48 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


The advantage to the phone cards is that you don't have to waddle around
with a pocket full of coins on the off-chance that you might decide to
make a public call today.  You don't have to sit there and push them
into the slot.  We've got the same thing here at the University for the
photocopiers in the library.  If I go there and find an article that I
want to copy, I just pop this card into the machine and it just debits
the copies as I go.  Several mass transit systems here have the same
thing (Washington and San Francisco amongh others).  Rather than having
to carry change, or find an open token booth, you just zip the card into
the turnstile.  For the person who makes frequent use of these things,
the cards are an incredible convenience over coins or tokens.  For those
who don't, you can always revert to the hard money (except on the subways
where they force you to buy the card anyway).

-Ron

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

Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 89 11:10:19 EST
From:   Jonathan Haruni <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Some notes on the UK phone system
Organization: University of Toronto

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>This [phonecards] seems to be of dubious value.
>What is the difference between
>buying a phone card from a grocery store and then using it in a
>telephone, as opposed to just putting the money into the telephone
>directly?  This just seems to add an extra step.

In Britain, you pay by time for even local calls, so you tend to go
through alot of coins.  And the coins are bigger and heavier as well.
The phonecards save you the frustration of running out of coins during
a call, the frustration of having your calls interrupted every minute
by "more coins please" noises, and the frustration of
sewing up holes in your pockets.

>The only advantage I see is that you can user paper money to buy the
>phone card, while telephones will only take coins.  A little advance
>preparedness eliminates this advantage too, and you don't have to hunt
>for a place to buy the phone card before you use the telephone.

The cards come in denominations ranging from the equivalent of $3 to about
$100.  So you buy one which you know will last you a reasonable amount
of time.   They are particularly useful for long distance calls, because
you get the customer-dialled rate without feeding a continuous stream of
coins into the phone.

>--
>Rahul Dhesi         UUCP:  <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi
>                    ARPA:  [e-mail]

Jonathan Haruni
[e-mail]


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

Date: 23 Mar 89  8:50 -0800
From: laura halliday <[e-mail]>
Subject: British phone cards

While in London a couple of years ago the locals told me
that the rationale for phone cards (other than byuing a
20 pound phone card with paper money rather than coins)
was that card phones have no money in them, and are thus
much less likely to be vandalized.

- Laura

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

Date: 24 Mar 89 04:00:47 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Some notes on the UK phone system
Organization: Indiana University CSCI, Bloomington


I was introduced to the British Telecom debit card only recently,
and I am surprised at the pollution that the system generates:
depleted green cards littering the floors of call-boxes.
'Course, Telecom is not answerable to environmental interests. :-)

Instead of purchasing new green cards all the time, why can't one
go to one of a few secure coin-operated stations where
one's depleted card can be recharged (or replaced if defective.)
(Put them in post offices and the corner Boot's.)
In order to use these machines you *must* return your old card.
Viola: no litter.

The Washington, DC, Metro has a system like this that recovers
residual value from fare cards too depleted to buy any fare---but
it recovers the cards in the process!  Result is also reduction in litter.

Incentive:  Such machines might recharge to 100% of value for only 95% fee.
Like deposits on beverage containers, except no human handling is required.
I suspect that the 5% would be a good long-term investment.

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

Subject: Pulse Dialing
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 89 18:29:33 EST
From: "Dr. T. Andrews" <[e-mail]>

A year or three ago, the local phone co. switched from stepper relays
to electronic switching.  At the same time, they "cleverly" checked
phone lines for equipment which could tone dial, and quietly added
the $1/mo charge on such lines.  One item so detected was a plain old
telephone set (with pulse dial) at home.

After I made the proper noises, the charges were removed.  It might
be interesting to know how these "tests" are done: do they just add
the charge and hope no one notices?  The "test" is that if you yell,
then you don't get charged?

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

From: Ron Natalie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Possible Cancer Risk from Cellular Phones?
Date: 23 Mar 89 15:24:45 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


Carcinogenic?  Not quite.  There are serious problems that result from
microwave exposure.  The most widely known fo these is the increased risk of
cataracts.  There was quite a scare on this subject in the ham radio
community, more so than in the cellular field, since hams were frequently
using walkie talkies.  When you hold the thing up to talk into it the antenna
is sitting right there at your forehead.  The frequencies and powers are
approximately the same.  Nothing conclusive was established about the effects
of these relatively low power levels (<3 watts for cellular, 1-5 watts for ham
radios), but the ARRL (the largest association of ham radio operators in the
US) suggests that you try to keep the antenna away from your head.  Notice
that this would only correspond to hand held portable cellular telephones.
Most mobile units have the antennas (and for that matter the radio transmitter
itself) mounted away from the car occupants.

My personal opinion is that there is more of threat from people being
inattentive to their driving while operating their telephones than there are
from microwave radiation.

-Ron

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

Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1989 16:55:15 CST
From: Werner Uhrig <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Werner Uhrig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Highest German (FRG) court strikes down a telecommunications law

        the following msg posted to the German-branch of USEnet might be
        of interest to this group as questions about legality and feasabi-
        lity of modem use in Europe crop up repeatedly.

        the law in question reads:

Paragraph 15 section II of the law regulating telecommunication equipment:
        Person who install, change or use motifiable equipment
        in violation of the lending conditions will be punished with
        2 years imprisonment or fines.

        the (overjoyed) author of the article informs us that the German
        Supreme Court has declared this law unconstitutional and null-and-void
        in a decision of June 22, 1988.  He states that this has as a conse-
        quence that imported modems can no longer be confiscated (according
        to the guidelines of the Code of Criminal Procedures).

        the legislature has been called upon to pass a new law.
        However (the author believes that) because there exists such strong
        interest (and influence, presumably) of industry, users, and the
        European market-community against such a new prohibitive law, the
        author believes that there is reason for optimism (that no such
        prohibitive law will be passed).

I've been away from Germany for a while now, but my estimate of German
tele-buraucrats and their actions and motivations in the past do not have
me share Joern's optimism.  I hope I'm wrong ...

                       Ceers,         ---Werner

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


Date: Sun, 26 Mar 89 22:13:18 PST
From: Robert Horvitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Radio Hazards


Mike Trout asks if there is any truth to the assertion
that "cellular phones [are] extremely hazardous and probably highly
carcinogenic."

I am not a scientist, but research on the bio-effects of radio-frequency
emissions is something I follow closely.  In general, if you want the
lastest news, pointers to new published evidence of bio-effects (beneficial
or harmful), announcements of regulatory action, and pro/con debates among
experts, consult MICROWAVE NEWS, edited/published by Dr. Louis Slesin
(6 bimonthly issues for $250 in the US, $285 to Canada & elsewhere;  order
from P.O. Box 1799, Grand Central Station, New York, NY 10163;  phone
212-517-2800).  My only connection to this publication is as an avid reader
for 7 years.  (BTW, the title is misleading:  it doesn't just cover the
microwave part of the spectrum.  Increasingly, attention is focussing on
the magnetic fields surrounding powerlines and video display terminals as a
health issue.)

To make a long, unfinished story short, there's no definite evidence yet
that radio emissions from cellular phones cause cancer, but there is reason
to fear that over the long term there COULD be harmful effects of SOME sort.
Different parts of the human body resonant at different electromagnetic
frequencies.  When radio waves pass through the body, some of the energy
is absorbed - very little, usually, since we are highly "transparent"
to the waves.  In theory, the more closely resonant a body is with the
radio waves, the more energy is transferred to the body.  The human head
and neck are pretty close to resonance with the frequencies emitted by
cellular phones.  ("Hots-spots" in the body for radio absorption are
generally the narrowings - ankles, neck - and places with sharp angles -
armpits, groin.)

If the cellular transmitter and antenna are in the headset, and you hold it
right against your skull, your brain is probably going to absorb quite a bit
of RF energy - probably more than the safety limits set by organizations
like ANSI.  But most cellular phones DON'T have the transmitter and antenna
in the headset.  The little pig-tail on the roof or window is the radiator.
Depending how far away it is, and how much shielding is provided by the car
roof, frame and seat, your exposure will be less.  (Because the interior of a
car is a complex reflective cavity for radio waves, there may be invisible
"hot-spots" where energy of specific frequencies is concentrated.  It's hard
to generalize about particular ambient fields.  Direct measurement is the
best way to determine the field strength at specific points.)

Beyond that, little is yet known about the bio-effects of radio waves that
are below the threshold where living tissue is measurably heated by energy
absorption.  What your source was probably picking up on was a finding that
living DNA can absorb enough energy from pulsed microwaves to fracture.  Dr.
Bill Guy (University of Washington) demonstrated in 1985 that rats exposed to
pulsed microwaves had a significant number of tumors induced in their
endocrine systems.  Other researchers have confirmed this, and still others
have found pulsed microwaves can cause mutations (chromosome damage) in chick
and rat embryos.

But it is a very long reach from pulsed microwaves to frequency-modulated
UHF radio waves - that's what cellular emits - and from rats to humans
- the resonant frequencies and absorption/dissipation rates are different.
Intuition suggests that pulsing may be more stressful on tissue than FM,
and the longer wavelengths of VHF mean less resonance with the tiny
structures in membranes and cells.

To complicate things further, bio-effects have only been found in certain
COMBINATIONS of power-density, frequency and duration.  Unlike exposure to
toxic chemicals, say, exposure to a more intense radio field might actually be
LESS harmful than a less intense field of the same frequency.  Same goes for
the duration of exposure:  it may be that intermittent exposure is more
- or less! - harmful than continuous exposure.  We just don't know.

We live in a sea of man-made radio energy containing all sorts of frequencies
and modulations that we can't see or feel, and we know very little about the
long-term effects.  For that reason, it's a shame - willful negligence? -
that the Environmental Protection Agency disbanded its radio effects
laboratory (thank you Ronald Reagan!) and gave up trying to set safety
standards for human exposure (thank you Gramm-Rudman-Hollings!).

I wouldn't hold a walkie-talkie up to my head - or wear a rubber-ducky
antenna on my headband, as some hams do - until we understand more about
the effects.  As for cellular, there's much more certain harm being
caused to your privacy (as others have noted, cellular systems BROADCAST
your words over very large areas), and also to your wallet.  For those
reasons alone you're better off stopping to use a pay-phone.

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

Subject: California PUC pulls plug on egregious AOS gougers.
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 89 19:58:43 PST
From: the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow <[e-mail]>

According to a story in Friday's San Francisco Examiner, Business Section,
the Public Utilities Commission directed TPC (Pacific Bell) to disconnect
54 privately owned pay phones in its first enforcement action against
"price gouging by some operator services".

"Privately owned pay phones can charge no more than 10 cents above Pacific
Bell and AT&T rates for local calls or calls in California".

The 54 privately owned pay phones belonged to 12 owners, and their charges
were found to be at least 90% higher than the authorized rates, and
sometimes were up to three times as high.  All owners had been warned of
the overcharging in November.  Under the PUC orders, Pacific Bell has sent
letters to the owners notifying them that their plug will be pulled in
seven days.

The article also mentioned the FCC last month imposed some restrictions on
five AOS firms accused of egregious gouging that require the companies "to
identify themselves to each caller and disclose rates if computers asked."


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

From: Jeff Woolsey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pac*Bell, AT&T in cahoots?
Date: 26 Mar 89 00:57:41 GMT
Reply-To: Jeff Woolsey <[e-mail]>
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation


I walked up to a genuine Pacific*Bell coin phone in 408-738 this
afternoon.  It had a placard on it that proclaimed that 10XXX calls
could be placed from the phone, and that AT&T was the long distance
carrier for that phone.  I found out that they weren't kidding:   I
dialed 10333-1-700-555-4141 and got a recording saying that I had
reached the AT&T long distance network.  I dialed 10222-1-700-555-4141
and got the same announcement.   Evidently the CO routes any
10XXX-1-NXX-NXX-XXXX call to AT&T for coin collection (unless XXX is
not a valid carrier).  Seems mighty strange to me since the days of
free calls via this method are long gone, and most such calls got an
operator of some kind at the carrier of your choice, exactly like
10XXX-0-NXX-NXX-XXXX calls.

It seems you can't trust ANYBODY these days.
--
--
Qualify nearly everything.

Jeff Woolsey  [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 15:59:49 PST
From: "Anthony E. Siegman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Selling an Interesting Telephone Number?
Organization: Stanford University


My residential phone number (415 area code) happens to spell a
quite commercially interesting word.  During the 15-plus years I've
had this number I've had a couple of inquiries from businesses wanting
to take it over, paying me something for giving it up.  A recent one
seems serious.

Anyone have any thoughts on the dollar value of such a number?  Rumor
has it that someone whose all-digit dialing number was "AMERICA" got
$1000 for turning over this number during the Centennial".

My "commercially interesting" number, by the way, is 326-6669 =
ECONOMY.  Wasn't certain whether I wanted to publish it or not.

A. E. Siegman  [e-mail]

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


Date: Mon, 27 Mar 89 10:47 CST
From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Strange Territory That Will Be Area 708

[Moderator's Note: This is a letter I received from David Tamkin, a fellow
Chicagoan. We were discussing other things, and got into a discussion about
the odd-ball prefixes here which straddle the city/suburban boundary lines.
I asked David where they would be placed: 708 or 312. Here is his reply.  PT]

Patrick:

I already knew about those numbers.  I'd spoken to a live operator on one of
them, who admitted, when I brought up the mess in the Newcastle CO, that it
wouldn't really be possible to make it through without changing any phone
numbers.  (Had IBT not gotten sloppy they could have.)

The following twelve prefixes are, per the recording, to "be served by both
area code 312 and area code 708:"

200 340 411 555 611 796 911 950 958 959 970 976

These thirty-seven prefixes are invalid.  I imagine that 414 and 219 (which
match area codes in the LATA) and 217, 309, 312, 618, 708, and 805 (matching
area codes in Illinois) will remain invalid:

203 211 212 217 219 270 290 300 309 311 312 313 319 320 370 400 414 415 494
500 511 600 610 616 618 700 708 710 711 800 809 811 813 815 900 912 999

494 I'll get back to below.

All the dedicated mobile prefixes I knew of are, per the recording, to
remain in 312.  So are the dedicated FX prefixes such as BRoadway 3,
BIshop 2, and 569.  The ten prefixes serving the city from suburban CO's:

229 380 399 58(LUdlow)6 589 62(NAtional)5 693 694 714 992

will remain in 312.

The prefixes serving the suburbs from city CO's [well, only one city CO, now
that 494 has been dissolved: 45(GLadstone)7, 64(NIles)7, and 86(UNderhill)7]
will be switched to 708, meaning that 708 will cover three discontiguous
geographical areas.  UNderhill 7 has always been listed in the Chicago
directories (and the Jefferson Park local) and handled from the same city
business office as Chicago's parts of the Newcastle CO district, so that
will likely change when it goes into area code 708: Harwood Heights listings
will appear in the River Grove local and Near West Suburban regional books
instead and be served from the west suburban business office.

(The other two holes in the city are no problem: one is a small plot of land
with no phones, belonging to the state and condemned for highway purposes.
The other is filled by Mt. Greenwood Cemetery, where mail is addressed "Blue
Island, Illinois" but which has a city phone number.)

Unincorporated Norwood Park Township will be a mess.  If it had been up to
me, I'd have kept Elmwood Park, Harwood Heights, Norridge, and River Grove
in 312 so that 708 could be in one piece and there would be only one
boundary line, but it wasn't up to me.  UNPT is laid out like this: Sections
1 and 12 have 867 prefixes, section 11 has 457 prefixes, and section 2 has a
mosaic of suburban Park Ridge prefixes (692, 698, 823, 825, and maybe a 696
or two, but no 318's or 518's) and Chicago-service Park Ridge prefixes (380,
399, 693, and 714).  You see, up until 1976 Centel treated it as suburbia
and assigned suburban prefixes, charged at suburban rates; then, since it
had been surrounded by Chicago for fifteen years, they started assigning
Chicago numbers charged at Chicago rates but didn't make anyone who was
already there change numbers.  If the rest of UNPT were to have stayed in
312, Centel could have gone on as they have and eventually the remaining
suburban phone numbers would have been replaced with Chicago numbers as
people sold their homes or changed their numbers, but since the IBT parts of
UNPT are going to 708 it's a whole new story.

IBT was cleaning up its act in the Newcastle area but just assigned a 775-
prefix to a new store in Harwood Heights (Cosmetic Center in Holiday Plaza).
I wish I had a way to the ear of someone who'll listen.

Do you think that a discontiguous NPA is a bad idea?  I know I do, and I'm
sure that people in Harwood Heights, Norridge, and UNPT have a lot more
telephone conversations with Chicago locations than they do with locations
in suburbs that are outside the perimeter of the city.  Heck, that's
probably true of Elmwood Park as well, if not also River Grove!

Now, about what you were saying regarding the Cicero-Chicago border: I'm not
sure if you were talking about 24(BIshop)2 or 494.  Each is a separate story.

BIshop 2 is a dedicated Foreign Exchange prefix, used solely to provide city
numbers to west suburban businesses.  Until 1987 it was located in the
Cicero CO, but then it was moved to Chicago-Austin.  However, it is part of
the Chicago-Lafayette exchange and Chicago Zone 6 for when a call is charged
by exchanges or zones (such as calls from coin phones or from Centel
service) rather than by CO's.  It will remain in 312.

494 was in the Chicago-Lawndale CO.  It was part of the Cicero exchange.  I
couldn't figure out where it served, and every number I tried dialing on
that prefix got an intercept that the number was not in service or that the
number had been disconnected with no further information available.  The
recorded service for the area code change says 494 is an invalid prefix now;
if I try to dial 494-XXXX, the call is intercepted after only three digits.
It's been dissolved.

And I think IBT are once again out of their minds.  494 was the only
suburban prefix that was within an A call of Lake Shore, Illinois Dearborn,
or Superior (Franklin, Wabash, and the Canals are in the A zone from the
Cicero CO's three exchanges and ten prefixes; Lakeview is in the A zone from
Oak Park, Evanston, and Skokie).  They could have offered lower rates for a
708-494- number to downtown locations than for any other 708 prefix and
accordingly had much more of such traffic in Remote Call Forwarding from
business customers who won't pop for full-fledged Foreign Exchange service,
but they blew it by having it dissolved.

If I were in charge of this, I'd be aggressively promoting the 494 prefix
for Remote Call Forwarding, telling downtown businesses that they don't have
to make their suburban customers feel alienated by needing to dial eleven
digits.

David

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

From: Frank G Kienast <well![e-mail]>
Subject: Directory Assistance by Modem?
Date: 28 Mar 89 02:02:07 GMT


I am curious as to why the phone companies do not offer directory assistance
by modem.  Seems like it would cut down on the cost of providing this
service, especially when the directory assistance operator punches your
request into a computer anyway.  I realize that many people who call
directory assistance may not even know what a modem is, but wouldn't it
be worthwhile even if only a relatively small percentage of people used it?

What would be even better would be a single modem number that would provide
directory assistance for any city in the US.  This would save time, in that
you would only have to make one call to get all the numbers you need.  I
wonder why some private information company hasn't thought of this.  Seems
to me that people would be willing to pay for a service like this.  Or are
there major legal, etc. problems that would be encountered?

In real life: Frank Kienast
Well: well![e-mail]
CIS: 73327,3073
V-mail: 804-980-3733


[Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell has tariffed this service, known locally
as 'Directory Express' for about three years. They sell Directory Assistance
by the hour rather than by the call. The last I heard, they only had about
four or five customers using it: a couple of collection agencies and credit
services. They call via modem and get the same data base DA uses.  PT]

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

From: Daniel Senie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Yes! Directory Assistance via Modem
Date: 24 Mar 89 05:46:35 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., Marlboro, MA



Several people have made the argument that CPID does not reveal the caller's
name or other such information and therefore does not really provide
information which would violate privacy. I beg to differ:

A year or two ago NYNEX announced plans to distribute the white pages on
CD-ROM. They claimed to get all NYNEX market telephone listings on a single
disc. While this information would not necessarily be indexed by phone number,
building such an index is not difficult.

So, a person or company with CPID interfaced to a PC or minicomputer could
display the caller's name and address while the phone is still ringing.

Dan
=================================
Personally I wish NET would just get around to providing touch-tone in this
town! All of these services are just a pipe dream in this area. NYNEX doesn't
seem to feel that it is important to provide advanced services outside the
cities.

--
Daniel Senie               UUCP: harvard!ulowell!cloud9!dts
Stratus Computer, Inc.     ARPA: anvil!cloud9![e-mail]
55 Fairbanks Blvd.         CSRV: 74176,1347
Marlboro, MA 01752         TEL.: 508 - 460 - 2686

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


From: "John R. Covert" <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Mar 89 05:25
Subject: Cellular prefixes in Chicagoland

>All the dedicated mobile prefixes I knew of are, per the recording, to
>remain in 312.

How about 550 (Ameritech) and 659 (Southwestern Bell/Cellular One)?

As far as I can tell, these are dedicated -- in fact they are the "main"
prefixes for each company, containing the Chicago roamer access numbers.
Yet I would expect both of them to move, since they are currently listed
outside the city.  This will put both "Chicago" roamer numbers in 708.

It seems that 867 is the only exception to the rule that if the "name place"
for the prefix is "Chicago" it stays in 312, otherwise it moves to 708.  This
makes one suspicious about 867 -- will its "name place" change along with its
NPA?

/john

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

Date:     Tue, 28 Mar 89 9:52:28 EST
From:     Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  0+NPA+7D refused?!

Last night, I went to a Diamond State pay phone on 302-366-9xxx (Newark, Del.)
and tried to place a 0+ call to a Va. suburb of DC on 703-893 prefix.  It turns
out I would have to dial 10288+0+703-893-xxxx to get AT&T routing.  My attempt
to use 0+703-893-xxxx got a recording "Your call cannot be completed as dialed"
as did my attempt to use areacode 202 instead of 703.
Mind you, this is not a COCOT.

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

From: Piet van Oostrum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Some notes on the UK phone system
Date: 28 Mar 89 11:09:34 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, University of Utrecht, Holland


In article <[e-mail]>, dhesi@bsu-cs (Rahul Dhesi) writes:

 `In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ole J.
  Jacobsen) writes:
 `>My most favorite aspect of the British phone system is the PhoneCard.
 `>...Put one in the special PhoneCard phones
 `>and dial away *anywhere*. There is no minimum charge, and you can
 `>talk until the "money" runs out (1 unit = 10p).

 `This seems to be of dubious value.  What is the difference between
 `buying a phone card from a grocery store and then using it in a
 `telephone, as opposed to just putting the money into the telephone
 `directly?  This just seems to add an extra step.

It makes sense if you dial an international call. With coins you will
not do much more than pushing coins. Moreover, the British pay phones have
the terrible habit of disabling the voice channel momentarily while you
insert a coin (maybe they have better ones now?).

I think the major advantage is for the phone company. They don't have to
collect the coins and there is no chance of theft of the money from the phone.
--
Piet van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, University of Utrecht
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands
Telephone: [phone]. [e-mail] (mcvax!hp4nl!ruuinf!piet)

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

From: "Marc T. Kaufman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: COCOTs as an investment
Date: 28 Mar 89 16:29:04 GMT
Reply-To: "Marc T. Kaufman" <[e-mail]>
Organization: Stanford University


A boiler-room investment group called to offer my wife a sure-fire
investment, with 35% annual return -- GUARANTEED!

...in the form of secured corporate notes in U.S. Fiber-Line, who are
supposed to be in the AOS and COCOT business.

---I knew a guy once, who was so ticked off that a door-to-door salesman
sold him a set of encyclopedias, that he went to work for the company and
sold encyclopedias himself until he had recouped his losses.---

If you can't lick 'em, join 'em?

Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])


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

Subject: 900 service providers--who?
Date: Mon Mar 27 14:42:26 1989
From: John Boteler <csense![e-mail]>
Organization: Bote Communications, McLean VA

HELP!!! I'm lost in telecom.hell!!!

It is truly amazing that some carriers are still in business after
the rigamarole I just went through with AT&T, Bell Atlantic, Allnet,
et al.

All I wanted to know was whether or not they currently provide
900-xxx-xxxx service. Part of the problem was that I don't know
what name to call this service, which does present some problems
when the people I called don't know either! After describing what
I wanted in detail, then they checked to find out if they
offered the service. Five to eight departmental transfers/phone
calls later, the answer was: they don't know!

Do you? I have already retrieved the list posted to this newsgroup
listing three letter codes translating to 900 service providers. However,
I do not have any contact information for many of them.

I need, and would appreciate greatly, a list delineating:
1. The carrier's 900 offering name (so I can ask for it intelligently)
2. The carrier's phone number
3. Any additional info (rates, service quality, etc)

At this point, the query time spent per carrier has become prohibitive;
that is why I am counting on the renowned expertise of this
forum for guidance. Of course, thank you in advance!

email to:

Bote
uunet!cyclops!csense!bote
{mimsy,sundc}!{prometheus,hqda-ai}!media!cyclops!csense!bote


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

From: John Murray <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Directory Assistance by Modem?
Date: 28 Mar 89 21:41:22 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA


In article <[e-mail]>, well![e-mail] (Frank
G Kienast) writes:
> I am curious as to why the phone companies do not offer directory assistance
> by modem.

Isn't this what the French Minitel system was initially established for?
- J. Murray, Amdahl Corp.

------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 89 23:29:45 EST
From: "Nicholas J. Simicich" <bywater!scifi![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Yes! Directory Assistance via Modem
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Nicholas J. Simicich)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel
Senie) writes:
 (.....)
>A year or two ago NYNEX announced plans to distribute the white pages on
>CD-ROM.

Yep.  I've seen it running at a Long Island communication show last
year.  It allowed you to do lookups by region and name, or by phone
number.  It would probably take a ring or two to do a lookup.

Licensing policies didn't allow you to make wholesale copies of the
directory, or use it as a basis for sales calls.  The AT+T people
claimed that they had put "ringers" (as it were) into the database,
and that if they found a correlation between cold calls arriving at
those numbers and people who were getting this service, they would cut
off subscriptions.

They weren't telling you the format of the database, although figuring
it out and using it on a LAN as a server didn't violate their license,
according to the person I talked to, as long as you didn't copy data
from the database wholesale.  They also claimed that someone had done
it.

You got a new CD-ROM every month, as an update.  I seem to remember a
number of around $10,000/year for the service, plus the setup (AT
class machine and CD ROM drive, supplied by NYNEX).  As NYNEX sold it,
this was for a single station.


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


From: Bob Toxen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Possible Cancer Risk from Cellular Phones?
Date: 30 Mar 89 00:58:47 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., Marlboro, MA


Cellular phones DON'T cause cancer!  In order for electromagnetic
radiation to cause cancer and almost all other problems to the human
body it must be of a high enough energy (frequency) to ionize one's
atoms.

This is what is meant by the term "ionizing radiation", which you might
have heard.  The minimum frequency is that of ultraviolet.  These,
X-rays, and Gamma rays are the cancer danger.  Even these are not a
significant risk to the average person.

The main danger from lower frequencies is if the intensity is so high
that the heating from the absorbed radiation is excessive.  This is the
cooking effect of a microwave oven.  Another danger is induced electric
currents in older unshielded heart pacemakers since it takes only minute
currents flowing directly through the heart for problems.

The public cannot get close enough to radio towers to be at risk without
ignoring signs, climbing fences, and trespassing.  I have been within
600 feet of television antennas without harm without harm without harm :^)

Regarding the quoted "expert" claiming danger from them, many people have
irrational fears and being an technical expert does not protect someone
(from the fear.) People who are afraid to fly airplanes even though airlines
are 100 times safer per mile per person than automobiles and even "small"
planes are as safe as automobiles are an example.

Nikola Tesla, who invented radio and worked within a few dozen feet of
equipment producing millions of volts of electricity, was deathly afraid
of germs even though the chances of his being electrocuted were far
higher.  (He died of old age.)  [To avoid flames, Marconi did NOT invent
radio but he did infringe on Tesla's patents as determined by the U. S.
Supreme Court.  References available on request.]
--

Bob Toxen       {ucbvax!harvard,cloud9!es}!anvil!cavu!bob
Stratus Computer, Marlboro, MA

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

From: Rob Warnock <amdcad!amdcad.AMD.COM![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Possible Cancer Risk from Cellular Phones?
Date: 30 Mar 89 04:07:58 GMT
Reply-To: Rob Warnock <amdcad!amdcad![e-mail]>
Organization: [Consultant] San Mateo, CA


In article <[e-mail]> Ron Natalie writes:
+---------------
| of these relatively low power levels (3 watts for cellular, 1-5 watts for ham
+---------------

Note that all of the portable (handheld) cellulars I have seen are 600 mw max.
[It's the transportables (luggables) that are 3 watts.] Is this to keep down
the human exposure? ...or just to keep down battery drain?  ;-}

Also note that unlike ham and police radios, with handheld cellular the
antenna tends to be held not in front of your face but off to the back/side
of your head. [Given 1/R^2, a *lot* farther from your eyes...]


Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant

UUCP:     {amdcad,fortune,sun}!redwood!rpw3
DDD:      [phone]
USPS:     627 26th Ave, San Mateo, CA  94403


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

From: John Higdon <decvax!decwrl!apple!zygot![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Radio Hazards
Date: 29 Mar 89 20:35:09 GMT
Organization: ATI Wares Team


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert Horvitz)
writes:
> As for cellular, there's much more certain harm being
> caused to your privacy (as others have noted, cellular systems BROADCAST
> your words over very large areas), and also to your wallet.  For those
> reasons alone you're better off stopping to use a pay-phone.

Thank you for your opinion. Unfortunately we now live in the era of
COCOTs (or COPTs, as Pacific Bell refers to them), and it is quite
literally cheaper in many cases to use a cellular telephone. Putting
the inconvenience of trying to locate a pay phone aside, I know that I
can always send DTMF to my voice mail with my handheld. Also, I know
that long distance will be reasonably priced, that my party and I can
hear each other, that I can call anywhere from Napa to Monterey for the
same 45 cent charge.

I'm afraid, sir, that pay phones are cellular's greatest selling tool.
--
John Higdon
john@zygot   ..sun!{apple|cohesive|pacbell}!zygot!john

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

From: "John R. Covert" <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Mar 89 08:01
Subject: Cellular Power

>Most cellular phones operate in the 4-20 watt range, the low end being the
>very portable hand-held units.

The maximum allowable power for cellular in the U.S. and Canada is 3 watts.

Hand-held portables are not permitted to radiate more than 600 milliwatts.

/john

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

Date: 29 Mar 89 18:28:32 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Wayne Folta)
Subject: How big can a Local Dialing Area be?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wayne Folta)
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, gs

Since childhood, I have been amazed at the size of our local dialing area.
Being in the Washington DC suburbs, I (roughly) calculate that I can make
a local call to anywhere in a 500-square-mile area.  If you count DC as
a state, that includes three states (MD, VA, DC).

But is this really a very large area?  How large might a local call area be
in LA or NY?  Are all local dialing areas determined by distance, or might
there be an *enormous* exchange out in Montana somewhere that includes
thousands of square miles but only a few thousand people?

(It would be interesting to hear about maximal sizes in terms of: area,
number of people, and number of exchanges.)


Wayne Folta          ([e-mail]  128.8.128.42)

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


From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Leased Line Costs Versus Dial Up Line
Date: 29 Mar 89 15:49:02 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Organization: CBW, Columbia, MD 21046


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
writes:
[other stuff deleted]
>I'm not sure of your leased line statement.  The rates for a 3002 dedicated
>circuit are still cheaper than leaving a line dialed up if you're a business
>and hence have message unit service.
>
>-Ron

This depends entirely on whether the local telco has untimed business
service.  In the Balto/Wash area, business service is untimed.  Therefore it
is usually cheaper to leave a line dialed up than to pay the 3002 rate.


-brian

--
Brian D. Cuthie                                 uunet!umbc3!cbw1!brian
Columbia, MD                                    [e-mail]

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


From: David Tamkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Already Stung by Caller ID
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 89 11:31:56 CST


I live in the small corner of the city of Chicago not served by Illinois
Bell.  Our telco here (Central Telephone of Illinois) retains IBT for
directory assistance and operator services.

If I want to know where a prefix not listed in the directory's information
pages is located, the IBT operator I get by dialing 0 tells me to call IBT's
service office for business customers.  Centel can provide some of the
information but not all; IBT can provide the rest (but sometimes not the
part Centel can give me).

Accordingly I did that on Tuesday to find out what areas some new prefixes
serve.  The service representative at Illinois Bell started demanding my
name and my telephone number, and I said, "Nevermind!  This is information
that should be in the phone book coming out this summer, or maybe last year
or two years ago since your list there is so far out of date, and your
office has procedures to treat me like a criminal for asking!  I want to
have an idea of how much a call will cost before I place it, and you put me
through this grilling!"

I hung up and dialed IBT's headquarters to complain.  Someone in the General
Manager's office told me that *because I was calling from a Centel prefix*
it could be that the representatives there are under instructions to find
out what is going on.

So, they have Caller ID, and I'm supposed to *know* that they will treat me
accordingly; they have Caller ID, but they ask for my phone number to see if
I'll lie (not to see if I'm calling from my own number, as I'll explain);
they have Caller ID, and they use it to predetermine how to treat the
caller.  Yes, anyone dialing from a Centel phone gets the third-degree;
does anyone calling from a Chicago-Lawndale prefix get greeted in Spanish?
Does anyone calling from a Chicago-Kedzie or Chicago-Stewart prefix get
greeted in jive?  Does someone calling from a Chicago-Merrimac prefix hear
"Hail Mary, mother of God!  This is Illinois Bell, how may we help you?" on
the presumption that the caller must be Roman Catholic?

Because I was dialing from a Centel phone, the representative treated me
with suspicion.  Of course, everyone there *knows* that no one *ever* calls
from a phone other than his or her own and no one *ever* calls on behalf of
someone else (like an employer who hires the caller to do that very thing).
No, the number from which the call is placed tells all.  You can't fool a
service representative of Illinois Bell.

Friggin' incredible.  Next time I want to reach them I'll perform a feat
they believe impossible: I'll cross the street I live on and enter Illinois
Bell's territory, where I'll call from a pay phone.  Yes, they'll ID it as
such, but maybe I'll get someone with enough brainpower to understand my
protest that I don't spend my entire life at a single outdoor pay phone.

On the other hand, this is one more reason I'm glad to have Centel instead
of IBT.  The service representatives there have always been aware that
people might be away from their own telephones when they call or when they
are to be called back.

David W. Tamkin     Post Office Box 567542    Norridge, Illinois  60656-7542
[e-mail]    Jolnet Public Access Unix     GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN
...!killer!jolnet!dattier      Orland Park, Illinois         CIS: 73720,1570
                           /\/\/\/\/\/\/
[Moderator's Note: What about Chicago-Rogers Park? "Oy Vey! This is Illinois
Bell!"  And what about Chicago-Lakeview and Chicago-Edgewater? Would those
calls be automatically routed to one of those nice Young Men who work as
service reps under the assumption that they are of the same pursuasion as
the gentleman caller? Oh, I am getting in the mood for April Fool's Day!  PT]

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

Date: Thu, 30 Mar 89 12:32:51 -0200
From: infpve@utrcu1 (Peter van Eijk)
Subject: Phone numbers for chatting?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Peter van Eijk)
Organization: Utwente, Enschede


Who can give me information on telephone numbers around the world
that offer a sort of `chat' service?

Here in the Netherlands we have a so-called `Babbel Box'
also called `party-line' (i think its different from what the Americans
call a party line), dialled through e.g. 06-32033010 (?).
This number is extra priced, 50cts a minute (approx 0.25$).
When you call it you enter a conversation with approximately 10 other
people who did the same.  There are a number of numbers like this,
operated 24 hours a day (the conversation gets a little special after
midnight....).

I believe that in the US this would be something like a 1-900 number.

I'm interested in the names, telephone numbers and charges around the
world.  It is out of curiosity, we have a toy computerized version of it and i
would like to document my presentation of it.

Side remarks:
These pay numbers account for 5% of total telephone charges here, i read
in a news paper. Not surprising since there have been stories of people
getting addicted to it..

--
        Peter van Eijk University of Twente  Dept Informatica / IPS
        P.O. Box 217; 7500 AE Enschede The Netherlands
        [phone]   mcvax!utrcu1!infpve
My organisation is so paranoid that I don't even know if these opinions are
mine.


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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Selling an Interesting Phone Number?
Date: Thu, 30-Mar-89 19:03:11 PST

The last four digits of my phone number used to spell EXEC.  One day, someone
from Executive something-or-other called me and offered to buy my phone
number for $100.  I asked him to also pay for the conversion of my number
to a new number, making it a total of $126.50.  He promptly sent me a check
for this amount.

Roger Preisendefer

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


From: xrtll![e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Phones and Big Brother
Date:   Fri, 31 Mar 89 14:56:57 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: ISOTECH Computer Industries, Toronto, Canada

Yesterday I sat in my office and had a nice chat with a friend of mine
who called my from his truck while driving through Toronto.  We talked
for about 10 minutes and I noticed that handoff happened about 4 times.
In this 10 minutes he could not have driven more than 10 km. This seems
to imply to me that the cell areas are about 4 km apart.

Afterward I thought about this and relized that the cellular service
providers here have a VERY good idea of where you are with your phone.
There seems to be a potential here for the police department to locate
stolen vehicles with cellular phones in them by simply having the
service providers tell them where they are.  As well, the phones will
respond if polled so there does not have to be a conversation in progress
in order to do this.

With some fiddling about with the computers, I am sure that the
cellular network could easily report location within .5 km since each
transmitter maintains a record (or samples) of signal strength relative
to other nearby transmitters to decide when to handoff.  Unfortunately
I believe that if the general public was made aware of how well their
location was known if they owned a cellular phone there would be rage and
panic, not to mention there is not a thing that can be done about it.

I seem to remember that somewhere in the states a company offered a
service to find your stolen car.  You get this transmitter installed
in your car and some police car has a directional receiver that they
use to follow your car around if it has been stolen.  It never caught
on because everyone thought this made people too easy to find even if
the car is not stolen.

So how many people out there just decided to turn off their cellular
phone when they are not using it or expecting calls ?
After all, you ARE being watched......

                                        Richard Snider

Where: ..uunet!mnetor!yunexus!xrtll!rsnider    Also:  [e-mail]
"Hey !  Whats with all the blue lines on the RGB Monitor ???"
"Ummm.....Looks like.....well....Ethernet!"


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


Date: Fri, 31 Mar 89  12:46:43 CST
From: Paul Fuqua <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How big can a Local Dialing Area be?

    Date: Wednesday, March 29, 1989  12:28pm (CST)
    From: folta at tove.umd.edu (Wayne Folta)
    Subject: How big can a Local Dialing Area be?

    But is this really a very large area?  How large might a local call area be
    in LA or NY?  Are all local dialing areas determined by distance, or might
    there be an *enormous* exchange out in Montana somewhere that includes
    thousands of square miles but only a few thousand people?

    (It would be interesting to hear about maximal sizes in terms of: area,
    number of people, and number of exchanges.)

The local calling area in Dallas includes the city itself, plus most of
the first two rings of suburbs and DFW airport.  That's a rough square
25 or 30 miles on a side, so 600 to 900 square miles.  Between 1 and 2
million people, more than 300 exchanges.

Also, it's all "free" -- there's no measured local service here, except
for a couple of economy and business plans that charge per-call.
Southwestern Bell keeps trying to institute time-and-distance charging
for local calls (ie, message units), but the PUC keeps shooting them
down.

Paul Fuqua                     [e-mail]
                               {smu,texsun,cs.utexas.edu,rice}!ti-csl!pf
Texas Instruments Computer Science Center
PO Box 655474 MS 238, Dallas, Texas 75265

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

Date: Sun, 2 Apr 89 21:03:26 EDT
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>
Subject: Divestiture was not a mistake

The current state of COCOTS and the recent rulings regarding default
long distance carriers for pay phones can surely cause one to despair.
With regard to pay phones and AOS, divestiture *is* a joke.

I think it is mistaken to blame divestiture for these problems.  If
our pal Judge Hoo-Haa and his cronies had the public's best interest
in mind, we might see a few reasonable laws.  Allowing crappy AOS
companies to charge exorbitant prices without telling the dialer is
stupid.  There has to be some recourse against these thieves.

I don't think the answer is to allow any one company to monopolize
long distance service.  If the pay phones were required to display
or speak the rates being applied, the problem would be solved by the
free market.  The voice equipment necessary for such a task shouldn't
be too much -- especially for companies which charge megabucks per minute!

sincerely 10333,

steve elias
([e-mail])

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


Date: Thu, 30 Mar 89 11:53:31 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: British PhoneCard question

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In Britain, you pay by time for even local calls, so you tend to go
>through alot of coins.  And the coins are bigger and heavier as well.
>The phonecards save you the frustration of running out of coins during
>a call, the frustration of having your calls interrupted every minute
>by "more coins please" noises, and the frustration of sewing up holes in
>your pockets.

Almost all new BT coin-op phones are of the modern type that allow one
to accumulate a credit prior to and at any time time during a call thus
no longer are you prompted for coins every minute (as did the older
Pay-On-Answer types).

These phones take most British coins, including 50p and One Pound coins,
useful for long and international calls. Incidently, BT has recently
introduced a direct dial calling card service available from most payphones
and any touch tone compatable phone.

>The cards come in denominations ranging from the equivalent of $3 to about
>$100.  So you buy one which you know will last you a reasonable amount
>of time.   They are particularly useful for long distance calls, because
>you get the customer-dialled rate without feeding a continuous stream of
>coins into the phone.

The phone cards are not magnetic but rely on infra-red holograms printed
on the card. There is one hologram per unit and they are destroyed as the
units are consummed. There is no way a card can be recharged or prevented
from being erased (people have tried, painting the card with nail varnish
being one method used .. doesn't work). Mercury Communications have a range
of payphones in railway stations etc which take standard credit cards and
their own version of the pre-payed card. Their card does not seem to use
holograms or magnetic stripes. It stores credits as pounds and pence and
can resolve values exactly. Anyone know how this card works?

Britain is the world's largest user of holographic phonecards, but Japan
is by far the largest user of any type of phone card, which are in their
case standard magnetic. I read that in japan they are used as currency,
so much so that the government there is investigating phone cards effect
on the economy!


Peter Thurston


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

From: Bruce Oberg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: British PhoneCard question
Date: 30 Mar 89 16:53:39 GMT
Reply-To: Bruce Oberg <uw-june![e-mail]>
Organization: U of Washington, Computer Science, Seattle


The British Telecom PhoneCard is an interesting little gizmo. You buy
one for X pounds and the card is then "worth" X/10 ten pence pieces.
You insert it in a special PhoneCard phone and ten pence pieces are
"removed" from the card during your call. A display on the phone keeps
you informed of how much "money" is left. When you hang up, the card
is released by the phone.

As with other british phones, if you run out of money, your talk path
is disconnected then and there until you insert more. Unfortunately,
most PhoneCard phones do not accept coins (and usually don't have
lines waiting for them at the train station); you have to insert a new
card when yours runs out.

The way "money" is kept track of on the card is *not* through a
magstripe.  Special markings on the front of the card specify how much
the card was originally worth, and while you're using it, tiny tick
marks are made in the upper right corner of the front of the card.
I've always wondered how easy counterfeighting the cards would be;
I've never heard of anyone getting caught doing so.

Usually, ten pence lasts a couple of minutes on the phone. One time I
used my card to call back to the U.S. and it was real fun to watch the
ten pence pieces click down about one every five seconds.

bruce oberg

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


From: Rob Warnock <amdcad!amdcad.AMD.COM![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Radio Hazards
Date: 31 Mar 89 05:41:24 GMT
Reply-To: Rob Warnock <amdcad!amdcad![e-mail]>
Organization: [Consultant] San Mateo, CA


In article <[e-mail]> (John Higdon) writes:
+---------------
| > For those reasons alone you're better off stopping to use a pay-phone.
| Thank you for your opinion. Unfortunately we now live in the era of
| COCOTs (or COPTs, as Pacific Bell refers to them), and it is quite
| literally cheaper in many cases to use a cellular telephone...
+---------------

And your call might even go through! This morning I hit the situation
head on: I was at a breakfast meeting at Coco's in Sunnyvale, when I
wanted to call a later appointment to tell him the meeting was going
to run over and I'd be late. Being new to cellular, and still somewhat
cautious about costs, I dutifully went towards the payphones in the
back. Uh, oh, COCOTs! Well, trying the first phone gave me my party,
but then the channel was only 1/2 open: I could hear them but
on the other phone, but it kept spitting back
my coin and saying my number was "invalid" and I had to dial again.

So I went back to my table and picked up the handheld... The relief
from frustration was *worth* the extra 20 cents!


Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant

UUCP:     {amdcad,fortune,sun}!redwood!rpw3
DDD:      [phone]                         <=== *Not* the mobile!  ;-}
USPS:     627 26th Ave, San Mateo, CA  94403


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


From: "t.m.ko" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cordless phone that works within 10 miles
Date: 5 Apr 89 14:21:35 GMT
Reply-To: "t.m.ko" <[e-mail]>
Organization: AT&T, Middletown, NJ



I am looking for a cordless phone that would work even if the handset
is away from the base for up to 10 miles.
Is there such a product?

I need to use it in some rural area where cellular service is unavailable.

All recommendations and comments are appreciated.


******************************************************************************
Tsz-Mei Ko
ARPA:   bentley![e-mail]                    AT&T Bell Labs
UUCP:   [e-mail]                        LC 3N-P08
                                                184 Liberty Corner Road
{att-ih,decwrl,amdahl,linus}!ihnp4!bentley!tmk  Warren, NJ 07060-0908
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------

From: "John B. Nagle" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones and Big Brother
Date: 5 Apr 89 16:26:03 GMT
Reply-To: "John B. Nagle" <glacier![e-mail]>
Organization: Stanford University



      It's not all clear that the ECPA prohibits listening to the cellular
control channel.  There might be some potential for a business that monitors
all traffic on the cellular control channel in an area and reduces the data.
Not only could you locate stolen phones, but you could develop targeted
marketing information concerning heavy cellular phone users.

                                        John Nagle

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


Date: Mon, 3 Apr 89 16:34:26 EDT
From: Mark Robert Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller*ID betrays a crank caller

The other night, I got a call at 3am, that I wasn't expecting.  So, I let
the phone ring twice, and poof, the number 560-0846 appears on my CallerID
box.

I didn't recognize the number, but I answered anyway.  The person on the
other end proceeded to say any number of obscene things.  I interrupted,
saying:  "Did you know that your phone number is 560-08[click]".  He
hung up before I could finish.  So, I called him back.

Caller - "Hello?"
Me - " Why did you just call me?"
Caller - silence
Me - "I know your phone number, it's 560-0846, and if you ever call back
       here again, I'm going to report you to the police."
Caller - "All right [click]"

His "All right" was very sheepish-sounding.

I next called the operator, to see if she could do a reverse-directory
listing check.  She passed me to her supervisor, who told me that she
couldn't, and I should call either the police, or the business office on
Monday.  I told her the story, and heard a room full of people
laughing in the background, hysterically.  She said, "I wish I could
have seen his face when you called back...."

So, I called the business office on Monday.  They refused to do a
reverse directory lookup, because that information is private.  The
best I could have done, is pay $1 to do a Call*Trace, after which I
would have to contact the police and press charges, before I could
find out who it was.

Does anyone out there know of another way to do a reverse lookup?

Mark
----
Mark Smith (alias Smitty) "Be careful when looking into the distance,
RPO 1604; P.O. Box 5063   that you do not miss what is right under your nose."
New Brunswick, NJ 08903-5063    rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!msmith (OK, Bob?)
[e-mail]

[Moderator's Note: Try the Haines Criss Cross Directory; available in the
Business/Technology or similar reference department in many public libraries.
Sometimes if you call the library on the phone and ask for the reference
department the librarian will do the look up and give it to you; other times
they say you have to come in the library and do it yourself.  PT]

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


Subject: Cancer from cell phones ...
Date: 3 Apr 89 13:03:56 EST (Mon)
From: gmeeca![e-mail]


The recent comments produce concern -- ionizing radiation is clearly NOT
the only to get cancer -- there is  much  concern  about  low  frequency
radiation (previously thought to be safe), such  as  60  Hz.  There  are
several studies out that show  that  people  living  in  the  area  (not
underneath, not  sitting  on  the  wire)  of  high  voltage  lines  have
significantly increased chances of cancer (and I forget which type). For
infants, it is clearly stated that even the  minor  field  generated  by
electric blankets can induce cancer.

Having been in the EMC arena for a while, the topic of cancer  is  under
very heavy scrutiny in the 500W arena/60 Hz arena, to which we  are cur-
ently exposing people in relatively large quantities, as this is the std
power used to drive large magnetic (Helmholz coils).  As a safety  prec-
aution, we do require our people to be with the vehicle while it is sub-
jected to this EMR (as it is  on  a  dynamometer).  We  also  require  a
minimum of a yearly physical exam done by the company to catch any areas
of difficulty that could arise.  It is  important  to  understand,  that
while this field will seriously deflect a CRT beam at several  feet,  it
is nothing when compared to the field produced by a hand held razor.

As this applies to Cellphones (including those with internal mount  ant-
ennas), there is most likely a very small finite  probability  that  the
radiation will produce odd side effects in adults.  This probability  is
also vastly increased for infants (namely those under 2 years old). THIS
DOESN'T MEAN DON'T USE CELLPHONES! Dosage is the key factor -- no  human
being is exposed to hours of cellphone communication on end --  expense,
drop-outs, safety, and cauliflower ear prohibit such exposure.  Using an
electric blanket, a child gets 8 hours plus per day exposure.  Using our
coils - technicians get 2 min/day of whole body exposure  and  using  an
electric razor a persons exposure is less than three minutes per day.

In the future, there is going to be a significant amount  of  discussion
about radiation limitations in the low frequency and low power areas  of
operation.  These concerns have been troubling the EMC types for quite a
while.

                                        Bradley W. Smith
                                        [phone] @ GMPG
                                        lll-tis!gmeeca!sb
                                        umix!clip!hse001!sb

Disclaimer:  In consideration of the legal ramifications  of  the  above
             statements, consider the aforementioned statements to be my
             personal opinions and non-indicative of my employer.

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


From: Peter Kendell <mcvax!tcom.stc.co.uk![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: British phone cards
Date: 3 Apr 89 14:32:28 GMT
Organization: STC Telecoms, London N11 1HB.


From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (laura
halliday):
} While in London a couple of years ago the locals told me
} that the rationale for phone cards (other than byuing a
} 20 pound phone card with paper money rather than coins)
} was that card phones have no money in them, and are thus
} much less likely to be vandalized.
}
} - Laura

Plus, BT just *love* collecting your money from you before you make your
call. Think of all that extra cash it gives them. Plus you might lose
the card. Plus, a card telephone doesn't show you your money draining away
the way a cash one does so you are likely to spend more.

Do I carry a card? Yes, because money phones are disappearing fast and
the time I *really* need a phone will be the time there's only a card
phone nearby.

But I don't like it.
--

|                 Peter Kendell <[e-mail]>                      |
|                               ...{uunet!}mcvax!ukc!stc!pete              |


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

From: Paul Anderson <stiatl![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How big can a Local Dialing Area be?
Date: 5 Apr 89 00:49:32 GMT
Reply-To: Paul Anderson <stiatl![e-mail]>
Organization: Sales Technologies Inc., a Dun & Bradstreet Company


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Paul Fuqua) writes:
>    Subject: How big can a Local Dialing Area be?

>The local calling area in Dallas includes the city itself, plus most of
>the first two rings of suburbs and DFW airport.  That's a rough square
>25 or 30 miles on a side, so 600 to 900 square miles.  Between 1 and 2
>million people, more than 300 exchanges.

Hmmm.  In this light, I think that the Atlanta calling region -may- be
larger geographically (and I will take a stab at a population for that
region to be around 4 million people).  The Atlanta local calling area
extends from about 20 miles on one side of the 'perimeter' to 20 miles
out on the other side. The I285 ('perimeter') is conservatively 20 miles
across.  This yields a diameter of 60 miles or ~ 2826 sq miles.  Now,
while you are all coughing, I have made calls this distance regularly
and drive to these locations to do business!  I searched the phone
book for a listing of the exchanges and was unable to find
anything.  There are, however, 400 private residence listings per page
in the phone book for all 2004 pages of it yielding a total of 801,600
residence listings.  If the average household headcount of 4 per holds,
then this bears out an estimate of about 4 million people in the metro
area.  The business section averages 350 listings per page for 700 pages
for a total of 245,000 *listed* lines.  The real number is at least
probably double that, but more likely triple that, so lets say business
lines account for 600,000 more.   That yields a total of 1.4 million
lines.  This results in 495 lines per sq mile.  Big area, but not real
dense like in New York City.

Paul
--
Paul Anderson           gatech!stiatl!pda               [phone]
            X isn't just an adventure, X is a way of life...


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


From: Dave Levenson <westmark![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones and Big Brother
Date: 4 Apr 89 22:05:38 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, xrtll![e-mail]
 writes:

> There seems to be a potential here for the police department to locate
> stolen vehicles with cellular phones in them by simply having the
> service providers tell them where they are.


A few years ago, a friend had a cellular mobile phone stolen from
her car.  She called the local service provider to ask them to try
to locate the vehicle.  (She worked at Bell Laboratories, and was
involved in the development of the software that makes Cellular
Telephony work.)  They refused to do any kind of tracing, and
suggested that their equipment did not make the information
available.

They did offer to turn off the service (by causing their switch to
reject calls to/from the mobile number).  The stolen equipment
turned up on my friend's door step one morning a few weeks later!

--
Dave Levenson                   /-----------------------------\
Westmark, Inc.                  |  If you can't give me your  |
Warren, NJ USA                  |  Phone number, don't call!  |
{rutgers | att}!westmark!dave   \-----------------------------/


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


Date: Wed,  5 Apr 89 15:24:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Marvin Sirbu <[e-mail]>
Subject: Who is responsible for COCOTS?

You don't need divestiture to have a problem with COCOTS.  You don't even need
facilities based competition.  All you need are:

1) Authorization of resale of long distance, with no price regualtion for
resale carriers.

2)  Authorization to property owners that they may choose the AOS operator of
their choice, and receive whatever kickback that operator wants to give them.

Given these two propositions, both of which are strictly within the domain of
the FCC, you can create all the problems we have seen with AOS.

The solution therefore, is also within the domain of the FCC.  Either

a)  eliminate resale.  This of course would eliminate Telenet, Tymnet,
Compuserve and all other value added network providers.

b) compel the property owner to contract with only the lowest cost service
provider (likely to lead to low level of service quality.)

c)  limit the level of kickbacks to property owners, thereby reducing
(partially) the incentive for high AOS prices; or

d)  put price caps on what AOS operators can charge.

e) mandate that all carriers be reachable from every payphone and educate
customers to choose the lowest cost carrier.

f) do nothing.

I vote for d).



Marvin Sirbu
Carnegie Mellon University
internet:  [e-mail]
bitnet:    ms6b+%andrew@CMCCVB

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


Date: Wed, 5 Apr 89 17:16:40 PDT
From: David Gast <[e-mail]>
SubjectzT&Vcfn A>yXOs

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Paul Fuqua) writes:
>    Subject: How big can a Local Dialing Area be?

I think we went over this subject a few months ago.  Unfortunately, it
is not a very interesting question in itself.  In theory, a local
calling area could be all of a state, all of the country, or all of
the world.  One would just need the ``right'' tariff.

A much more interesting question is what is the cheapest phone service.
This question is also much more difficult to define because the cheapest
phone service depends on the calling pattern of the individual subscriber,
which clearly varies with the subscriber.

The point is:  There is an implicit if not explicit assumption that a large
calling area is equated with lower cost.  (Why else would it be an advantage
instead of just a question for trivial pursuits?) This assumption is not
necessarily true.  It is only likely to be true if the individual
subscriber makes a lot of calls to the outlying area of the local
calling area.  If GTE offered me a local calling area twice the size
for $2 more per month, I would not take it because I do not make $2
worth of toll calls to the expanded area per month.  Other people would
probably would take it.  In fact, I might even trade in some of my
local calling area in exchange for a lower base rate.  (Depends, of
course, exactly what areas they want to take away.  The ``Valley'', for
example, is a local call me for me, but I never call there because I
``like for sure can't totally understand any rad, bitchin' thing'' they
say.  :-) )

David Gast
[e-mail]
{uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!{ucla-cs,cs.ucla.edu}!gast

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

Date:     Thu, 6 Apr 89 1:17:04 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject:  976 WAKE - up Service in California

You don't have to be a hotel guest to get a wake-up call anymore.
People in California can now dial a service called '976-WAKE' and arrange
a telephonic alarm clock/reminder service for the next day.

From one of several area codes in California, the caller dials 976-WAKE,
then follows the instructions given, entering his own telephone number
on the touchtone pad, and the time for the wakeup call, etc. The system
is programmed so that only California area codes can be called; and no
calls can ordered for numbers such as xxx-555-xxxx, etc.

The charge is $2 for each wakeup/reminder call. You do not have to be in
California to hear how it works; just dial 213-976-WAKE. From outside of
California all you will pay is around 25 cents if you call at night, but
don't expect to be able to get a wakeup call, because it won't work without
a California area code entered.

Is this God's way of telling people they have too much money?

Patrick Townson


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


Date:     Tue, 4 Apr 89 2:09:32 CDT
From:     TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Obscene Caller Brought To Justice

The year was 1967. I was living in Hyde Park, one of the south side
neighborhoods in Chicago. A fellow living in my building worked for Illinois
Bell as a techician in the frames at the Chicago-Wabash central office
downtown.

Now this was long before ESS, of course, and in fact at the time, Wabash
was an ancient step by step office; one of the first converted to dial from
manual service in the early 1940's. Woody worked the 4-12 midnight shift
on Saturday and Sunday, and had just a single clerk working with him;
a woman who answered the calls to '611' repair service among other things.

You would have to know something about the area to fully appreciate the
story, but here goes anyway. The section of downtown Chicago where
that CO is located is on the southern edge of the financial section.
It is *dead* on Saturday evenings; no one is left in any of the offices
to call Repair Service at that time on the weekend; at least not back then.

So as often as not, the woman clerk taking 611 calls would sit there for
several minutes at a time doing nothing. There was one fellow though,
who *always* called at exactly 6:00 PM on Saturday, and would begin talking
dirty to the woman who answered the repair line. I assume this chap was
probably alone in his office, getting ready to go home for the night, and
liked to get his jollies by talking dirty on the phone. He apparently
assumed calls to 611 could not be traced; or at least he knew it was a
free call and would cost him nothing for a couple minutes of thrills the
way he liked to get them.

You could set your watch by this guy. Every Saturday night; always at
6 PM; always to the same woman answering 611 calls; always two or three
minutes of nasty talk while he was on the other end doing whatever it is
that guys do while they are making calls of this sort.

Woody the central office tech and the repair service lady always used
to laugh about it. Around five minutes to six every Saturday night Woody
would tell the woman, "oh, look at the time; its about time for your
boyfriend to call..."

One night Woody was feeling energetic, and he said to the clerk, let's
catch that silly old fool tonight.

The woman asked how, and Woody explained, thusly --

"You've got no calls now; when it lights up you know it will be him.
No one else ever calls Repair at this time of the evening from downtown
on Saturday night.

"What I want you to do is this: when he calls, make your voice sound like
a *recorded message*, and all I want you to say is 'Repair Service has a
new number. To call Repair Service, please hang up and dial 230'..."

In those days at least, '230' was a special test number which terminated
on the test board. Woody had a special treat in mind for their gentleman
caller that evening.

Sure enough, within a minute or two, 611 gets a call. The woman answers
and carefully recites, "This is a recorded message. Repair Service has a
new telephone number.

Downloaded From P-80 Systems 304-744-2253