HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 19:33:14 GMT
From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up!
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 648, Message 7 of 10

In article <telecom12.620.9@eecs.nwu.edu> msb@pegasus.att.com (Michael
Scott Baldwin) writes:

> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices. 

> There is a company, Emergency Response Systems, at +1 800 548 8805,
> that sells a device that is pretty much exactly that, but it is $410.
> Does anyone know of a more reasonably priced device, or have any
> suggestions on how I could make one of these things out of some cheap
> off-the-shelf parts?

I'd be a bit careful about this one -- you want very high reliability
to make sure she DOES get the help when needed, but also very low
falsing so she DOESN'T get help when the neighbors change channels on
their TV or open their garage door, turn on their baby monitor, key
the CB, etc.

Most alarm system suppliers have both remote-controls (which should be
good quality) and autodialers, but I wouldn't be too kludgy if I were
you.  North Supply is supposed to be wholesale, but they have
everything you could want in commercial-quality alarms and have sold
to me before -- they are also one of the largest telecomm wholesalers
in the US.

I would think the best solution is to have the autodialer go into
speakerphone mode after making the connection so the callee can try to
listen and/or talk to the caller.  Also I would want an alarm so your
grandmother knows when it's dialing, rather than silent operation, so
she can abort any false alarms.  You probably DO NOT want to directly
call the emergency services due to the "boy who cried 'wolf'"
syndrome.  It wouldn't surprise me if they start totally ignoring
automated calls and/or charging big bucks for false alarms.

Personally, I'm not sure I'd use a DAK or DAMARK quality product for
this, unless maybe you bought and installed two for 100% backup
coverage.  I guess how much you spend should be proportional to how
likely she will actually need this to save her life.

Do please follow up with your solution if you find a good one.
From: eiverson@nmsu.edu (Eric Iverson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard
Date: 15 Aug 92 02:45:04 GMT
Organization: Computing Research Lab
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 631, Message 10 of 13

Why don't y'all just go out and get a USAA card?  12.5% interest, no
annual fee, and a 30 day grace period.  Admitedly, some of you might
get turned down, but I'm not in the armed forces (dad was during the
50's though), I'm still a poor student with a barely perceptible
income, and I got one. 1-800-922-9092.


Eric Iverson				 Internet: eiverson@nmsu.edu
Computing Research Lab  Box 30001/3CRL	 New Mexico State University	
Las Cruces, NM 88003-0001  VOICE: (505) 646-5711  FAX:   (505) 646-6218
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 03:22:07 GMT
From: jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY))
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 647, Message 5 of 11

In article <telecom12.633.7@eecs.nwu.edu> dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET
writes:

> I'm not an attorney, but what could they prosecute Grundseth for?  The
> only lawbreaker (ECPA violations) I can see is the guy that actually
> listened to and taped the cellular call.  Possession of and/or
> distribution of copies of that recording wouldn't (to the best of my
> knowledge) be a violation of the law.  Any attorney types out there
> that can shed more light on this.  At worst, I'd say that Grundseth
> was "guilty" of unethical/dirty politics if he was involved in the
> passing around of the tapes, but that is all.

No, you're not a lawyer, neither am I. But lemme clue you in on some
of the law regarding intercepted communications ...

It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any
mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it.
This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even
covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time
to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one
else.

Various states have laws restricting scanner use and such, but these
are violations of federal law.

Of course, due to intense lobbying by the Cellular folks, and an
advanced state of imagination and fantasy by congress, the ECPA
explicitly forbids _any_ interception of Cellular telephones. 
Feh, Ha ....

We had a interesting case here in Virginia where somethin similar
occured with the Governor, and the person who intercepted, and
recorded, and then disclosed Cellular communications was convicted; I
forget what he was sentenced for.
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 02:42:19 GMT
From: DAVISM@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Michael T. Davis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Answering Machine Won't (Ans
Organization: The Ohio State University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 637, Message 6 of 7

	I have a single line coming into my apartment on which I have
two phones, a MODEM and an answering machine.  I only picked up the
answering machine this past weekend (Aug. 9, to be precise) and have
yet to have it work properly.  The problem is that it doesn't answer.

I have followed the directions explicitly and from what little
trouble-shooting advice is provided, the only thing that might be
hampering its answering ability is the number of devices I have on the
line.  I did discover that if I only have one phone and the machine
connected, it answers (albeit after five rings, instead of three, as
the manual states).  This would seem to reinforce my suspicion.  

Is there any way to determine if the devices I have connected are
generating too much of a load and/or is there a device which can boost
the ring signal sufficiently?  The model is a BellSouth 1175.  I
discovered a single variable resistor on its main PCB; could this by
any chance be a sensitivity adjustment for ring detection?


Thanks,

Mike   
Internet: davism@KCGL1.eng.ohio-state.edu  -or- DAVISM+@osu.edu 
BITNET: DAVISM+@OHSTMAIL.BITNET
Date: 16 Aug 92 07:10:00 GMT
From: gavron@spades.aces.com (Ehud Gavron 602-570-2000 x. 2546)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: US West Tries Again to Offer CLASS in Arizona
Reply-To: gavron@ACES.COM
Organization: ACES Consulting Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 635, Message 5 of 7

 From an article in this Digest and even talking to US West
representatives, it was my impression that US West had petitioned the
PUC to offer CLASS features in AZ and had been denied.

In fact, talking to the Arizona Corporation Commission Utilities
people yields the following information:

	1. US West had filed;
	2. The PUC had approved the filing except that
	   the per-line-blocking charge was limited to $5;
	3. US West had refused to provide these services,
	   claiming the PUC had turned them down.

Now, I understand that US West has refiled, with the request so close
to the previous that public hearings may not even be held [after all,
the commission already approved this schtuff].  The only difference:
They want the charge (#2 above) to be $8.xx.

On other notes, now that I know what my second dial tone on the
DMS-100 is I am sort of happy.  The sporadic failure of *70 (1170,
70[wait]) does't amuse me, but what can I do ...


Ehud Gavron    gavron@ACES.COM
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 01:28 PDT
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Ads For CLASS
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 628, Message 11 of 11

lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) writes:

> they don't explain that any calls from outside those codes
> cannot make use of those CLASS features, nor could calls to/from
> non-PacBell numbers (of major significance in areas like L.A. where
> GTE has a *very* large base of subscribers intertwined all around and
> through PacBell areas.

A distinct advantage to having a miniscule GTE presence if there ever
was one. Here in the Bay Area, non-Pac*Bell areas are insignificant to
say the least (Los Gatos, Morgan Hill, Novato, and Gilroy come to
mind), so the features more or less work universally. Of course, GTE
offers no CLASS features here whatsoever (after all, we are hundreds
of miles from Thousand Oaks so there could not be anyone worth
worrying about in this hinterland). So other than the GTE islands of
telephone hell, Pac*Bell's CLASS services in the Bay Area are
worthwhile.

> All in all, these CLASS features seem to be another attempt at getting
> money for semi-useless frills while the quality of "Plain Old
> Telephone Service" (POTS) goes down the tubes while the rates go
> through the roof.

Not to be argumentative, but in what way has POTS gone to hell? GTE
has always offered "hellish" POTS, but what else is new? I have not
noticed any Pac*Bell deterioration (only improvements) since the
Higdon Telco got "busted" back in the sixties! And remember, these
features are entirely optional. If you think they are worthless, do
not use them and save your money.

IMHO, with the exception of GTE, local telephone service has improved
dramatically since divestiture. It is faster, sounds better, is more
reliable, what trouble there is is repaired faster, is easier and
faster to order, and more flexible than ever before. What else do you
want? Of course, GTE may have deteriorated, but I cannot imagine how
it could get any worse.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115
    john@zygot.ati.com      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 00:03:57 GMT
From: rah@btr.com (Richard A Hyde)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 626, Message 5 of 15

> I wonder if Justin has an eel-skin wallet?  Strangely enough,
> they've been known to wipe the mag-stripe info off of credit cards.

There was an article in the {San Francisco Chronicle} last week on
Hagfish.  It seems that Hagfish skins are sometimes used to make
eelskin wallets ...

Anyway, the article contained a comment from a major eelskin wallet
manufacturer who claimed that a large batch of early wallets did
indeed erase credit cards ... the manufacturer ("unwisely", in his
words) had used magnetized metal for the catches!  This resulted in
the skins being blamed for the phenomonon ...


Richard Hyde   RaH@btr.com
From: andrew@jester.USask.ca (Derek Andrew)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: *69 and Call Waiting
Date: 13 Aug 92 23:46:55 GMT
Reply-To: andrew@jester.USask.ca
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 627, Message 2 of 16

In article <telecom12.620.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, by mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu
(Michael Rosen) writes:

> Do *69 and Call Waiting mix?  For example, say I'm on the phone and
> receive another call on call waiting.  I either ignore the call
> because maybe the call I'm on is important or the other caller hangs
> up before I can switch over.  Will *69 ring back the person calling on
> my call waiting or the person I'm talking to now (assuming they called
> me, of course).

In Saskatoon Saskatchewan, and maybe the rest of Canada, the *69 will
ring back the person calling you on the call waiting and not the
person you were originally speaking with.


Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0
Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808,  52 11 23N 106 48 48W
Date: 16 Aug 92 08:04:53 GMT
From: gt5878b@prism.gatech.edu (Eddie Maise)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: MCI Account Creation
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 636, Message 9 of 9

In <telecom12.623.10@eecs.nwu.edu> kovar@world.std.com (David C Kovar)
writes:

>  3) MCI requires a credit card and a SSN before opening a calling
> card account. No credit card was requested in this case, and the SSN
> was bogus.  No surprise there.

I worked as a temp in the credit approval department for MCI, at their
Atlanta office.  This information is over two years old, so it may
have changed.  A credit card was not "required" or "requested" to open
a stand-alone calling card account (as opposed to a calling card that
was billed to a local phone company account).  What was necessary was
that you pass a credit check.  Having a credit card that you make
prompt payments on will show up in the credit check and make it likely
that you will pass, but other forms of credit can show up as well and
can be enough to pass the check.

MCI could not "require" a Social Security Number (see the SSN FAQ in
news.answers).  The number was asked for on the credit application and
was used for two main purposes: to help with the credit check and to
use as an identifier in the customer accounts database.  If we
received an application without a social security number, we would try
to contact the applicant and ask them for it.  I never had anyone
refuse when I explained that it was for the credit check.  I was never
told what to do if someone refused to provide their SSN, and it never
came up.

Cards would sometimes be issued to persons with no established credit
history if they either had a full-time job or were a student and had
the approval of their parents.  These would be verified by phone.
Note that this was (is?) a wonderful opportunity for would-be
criminals to use "social engineering" a.k.a. lying to obtain an
account.


Eddie Maise   gt5878b@cad.gatech.edu   Serving Donuts on Another Planet


[Moderator's Note: While neither GTE or any other company may REQUIRE
an SSN, neither are they required to afford you an extension of
credit. Credit is a privilege, not an automatic right, so it works
like a trade-off. You make yourself easy to identify and locate;
they'll consider allowing you to pay later. Please note no SSN is
required when calling from a payphone and paying with coins.   PAT]
From: sanford@ascend.com (Curtis Sanford)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Cconnect Quicker?
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:35:21 GMT
Organization: Ascend Communications, Alameda CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 645, Message 5 of 17

Recently pounding off international numbers has produced dramatic
results.  Our Definity PBX is connected to ATT by a PRI line.
Dialling a UK number and ending with the # will result in a call setup
so rapid that the number is ringing as your finger comes off the key.
On the other hand, making a local Pac Bell call (our connection to Pac
Bell is by a T1 with robbed bit signalling) takes two or three seconds
to connect.  I understand that they have been bringing ISUP signalling
up on selected trunks to the UK, and this may be responsible for the
recent speedup in connections.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 21:18:43 GMT
From: mailrus!gatech!eecom!wberbeni@uunet.UU.NET (W. Berbenich)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Solicitation Slime
Organization: Georgia Tech
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 631, Message 2 of 13

In article <telecom12.621.5@eecs.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> This afternoon, my private line rang with someone who identified
> himself as being from the {Chronicle}. I said, "I'm sorry, I do not
> accept solicitation on this line", and hung up. The phone immediately
> rang back and I was greeted with, "Rude dickhead [slam]". Since then
> there has been a stream of one-ringers.

One thing that may work, in the absence of CLASS services in your
area.  Next time a solicitation call occurs like this, be very
cheerful and friendly and establish the identity of the caller.  Once
that is done, lower the boom and tell them not to call back.  You have
a name to go along with a date and time of the call now.

"This sounds very interesting!  What did you say your name is?"

> Needless to say, I have notified the {Chronicle} concerning this. And I
> have now been convinced that telemarketing is a practice that needs to
> be eliminated -- by whatever means.

Either that or just set up a data base of phone numbers for which the
subscribers are willing to accept 'cold calls.'  All other phone
numbers are off-limits.  Here in Atlanta, the big sequential-dial pest
(at least for me) is Olan Mills Photo Studios.  I am about to send
them a letter asking them to please not call me.


Bill Berbenich - School of EE, DSP Lab

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher)
Subject: Re: Procomm 2.01 strip 8th bit (How TO)
Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 02:38:51 GMT

Others said
# >For Procomm: set up the "translate table" such that the upper 128 bytes are
# >just like the lower 128 bytes, and turn "translate table _on_".  Then, keep
# >it set to 8-bits/no-parity and you'll be set.


I've been trying to follow this thread and I admit I'm getting
confused..

If you are working over a 7 bit-wide path, and the protocol needs 8,
what good does it do to play with a translate table?  Can it magically
guess what the 8th bit [if there WAS one] would be?


--
A host is a host from coast to coast..wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
From: lingy@marcus.its.rpi.edu (Danzig Frique)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra offer
Summary: Supra offer
Keywords: supra, modem, faxmodem
Date: 14 Aug 92 00:10:07 GMT
Reply-To: lingy@rpi.edu
Organization: Somewhere Special

Yo Supra owners,
		I read the one of the supra commercial on one of the
Computer rags and if you had a receipt dated around June-August, you could
send in your receipt with your registration and write "fun in the sun 
with supra" on your receipt. I thought it was a joke, but I did it anyways
and it paid off... just on the mail from UPS today, I got a Supra
Sun Visor, Sunglasses, T-shirt, Frisbee and also a water bottle
It's really nice 8-) This is what I call good customer service. Hope
that the new ROM they are releasing are great too 8-)
Right now my 1.200C ROMs work like a dream, not a single problem YET 
for 2 months of 24hour usage through SLIP

Dan

p/s I am in now way related to Supra except a very happy and satisfied customer
From: fnox@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Mark Margolis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra V.32bis FaxModems $290
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:37:22 EDT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cornell University

I recently ordered a bunch of Supra V.32bis FaxModems - I will have them next
week, and I will let them go for $290 each, which includes UPS 2nd day air
shipping in the US.

- Mark

-- 

******************************************************
*                                                    *
*   Mark Margolis     FNOX@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU      *
*                     FNOX@CRNLVAX5.BITNET           *
*                                                    *
*   Cornell University - Ithaca, New York 14853      *
*                                                    *
******************************************************
From: osyjm@cs.montana.edu (Jaye Mathisen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Place to order Zyxel with University PO?
Date: 20 Aug 92 02:17:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: coe.1992Aug20.021716.14133
Organization: Montana State University, College of Engineering

Do any of you University guys out there know of a place that will let me
order a Zyxel modem with a PO?  Purchasing here doesn't think that a
modem is important enough to get a special check cut in advance, so I'm
stuck ordering via PO.

01 apparently doesn't take them...

Any help appreciated, I'd love to order 3 of the little guys...

Or it's off to uunet to buy a worldblazer...

Thanks a bunch
-- 
 Jaye Mathisen, COE Systems Manager                (406) 994-4780
 410 Roberts Hall,Dept. of Computer Science
 Montana State University,Bozeman MT 59717	osyjm@cs.montana.edu
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:12186 biz.comp.telebit:827
From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
Subject: Re: New WorldBlazer ROMs, connecting to old TB+: Any success?
Date: 17 Aug 92 11:41:41 GMT
Organization: Resonex Inc., Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Aug13.083153.10619@resonex.com> I wrote:
>Has anyone received the new WorldBlazer ROMs (LA5.01), and used them
>to call out to an old TrailBlazer+ (ROM 4.00 or earlier)?

I just got the ROMs today, and upgraded one of our two WBs.  It can
now dial into an old TB+ with no problems.  Also, unlike the TB+,
this happens automagically --- I did not have to make any register
settings to get this behaviour.  (In the TB+, you have to set
S120=16 to connect properly to an old TB+.)

So LA5.01 seems to work fine for me.  I can now recommend changing
our new modem orders to WB instead of TB+.

-- 
Michael Bryan        michael@resonex.com                     |     ,_,
                                                             |    /oo \
"What the world needs now are some true words of wisdom,     |    <>__|
like 'La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la'."  -- Cracker           |    |  U|
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: CT61 <CT61@polytec1.polymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: 16550A UART VS BNU
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 23:21:12 GMT

>
>>By the way, what's the big diff. between a 450 and 550A?
>
>The only real difference is that the 16550A has a 16-byte buffer on
>both the send and receive. The 16450 only keeps the *last* byte. So if you
>don't fetch it before the next one comes in, it's gone...
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What's different if I use a BNU prog instead of this 16550A ???
======================================================================
From: gerrit@laosinh.stgt.sub.org (Gerrit Heitsch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: supra V.32bis and Caller-ID
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 16:18:10 MET
Distribution: world
Organization: Lao-Sinh project (private UUCP site)

Has somebody tried if the Caller-ID works with the supra and
the 1.200C-ROMs? I've tried the commands suggested in the
Modem Designer's Guide from Rockwell for the RC144DP and they give 
me an OK as a result. Caller-ID does not work in Germany because of 
the (ancient) network.

The Commands are:

AT#CID=0  Disable Caller-ID.
AT#CID=1  Enable Caller-ID with formatted presentation.
AT#CID=2  Enable Caller-ID with unformatted presentation.

I took a closer look at the ROMs and the Strings for Caller-ID
are present in 1.200C.

Can somebody with a network that supports Caller-ID try if it works?

Gerrit

-- 
         Gerrit Heitsch  Moenchweg 16  7038 Holzgerlingen  Germany
  Logical adresses: UUCP: gerrit@laosinh.stgt.sub.org FIDO: (2:247/706.9)
                 If you are from outer space, please use:
  universe!local-cluster!milkyway!solarsystem!terra!europe!laosinh!gerrit
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems