TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:42:37 EST Volume 20 : Issue 17
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Dick Aichinger)
SPAM: ADV: Search Engine Registration (Claire Pieterek)
Nortel Analog Switches (was Re: The DLC Epidemic...) (Steve Hayes)
Re: NXX by NPA (Clarence Dold)
Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe (A. E. Siegman)
IDT Adopts Cellular/Paging Calling Party Pays (Monty Solomon)
24/7 Europe Develops The World's First WAP Ad Server (Monty Solomon)
IEEE Statement Against UCITA (Monty Solomon)
Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Don Kimberlin)
Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Tony Pelliccio)
U.S. Wants to Trace Net Users (Monty Solomon)
Re: Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (Barry Margolin)
Desperately Seeking the Next DoubleClick (Monty Solomon)
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
611 Poplar Street
Independence, KS 67301
Phone: 805-545-5115
Email: editor@telecom-digest.org
Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/
mailing list on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
(or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)
Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org
Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
for archives files. You can get desired files in email.
* TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) *
* project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU. *
In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order
telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
From: Dick Aichinger <dickaich@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 18:46:55 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <telecom20.7.4@telecom-digest.org>, msb@vex.net wrote:
> Mike Pollock quotes Robert Guy Matthews in The Wall Street Journal:
>> The U.S. currently has about 90 million wood telephone poles. Steel poles
>> have tripled since 1997, but they still represent less than 2% of the
>> market. The key, the steel industry believes, is in the telephone-
>> pole replacement market: Four million wood poles each year need to be
>> replaced
>> because of routine maintenance, accidents, construction, and steel's
>> friend, the woodpecker.
> About two years ago Toronto Hydro, the local electric company, rewired my
> street and replaced the old wooden poles with concrete ones. Is concrete
> not a common choice of for utility poles in the US? Is there an
> important
> distinction for some reason between *telephone* poles and those for
> other utilities?
> Mark Brader, Toronto | Any company large enough to have a research lab
> msb@vex.net | is large enough not to listen to it. --Alan Kay
> My text in this article is in the public domain.
The use of concrete poles instead of steel or wood poles for utilities
in the US is very regional. Where there is a concrete pole facility,
concrete poles seem to be more readily used but for distribution line
construction concrete is still not used that much. The much heavier
concrete pole is a limiting factor for it acceptance for freight or
construction considerations.
I believe the authors use of the term "telephone pole" was a generic
representation of wood poles commonly seen along roads and along
neighborhood backyards. I believe his reference and statistics
represent the wood pole use for utilities in general.
Dick Aichinger, PE
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 13:50:52 PST
From: Claire Pieterek <pieterek@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: pieterek@pipeline.com
Subject: SPAM: ADV: Search Engine Registration
Hi, Pat -- I'm glad you're back! Here is another worthy entry for
the Telecom Digest Business Directory.
mike@yy3becker92181.net wrote:
> From pop_server."pilotgirl"@pop.pipeline.com Wed Mar 8 13:48:56 2000
> Return-Path: <mike@yy3becker92181.net>
> Received: from marci1.marcireau.fr ([212.208.179.3])
> by work.mail.mindspring.net (Mindspring Mail Service) with ESMTP id
> scdick.4lj.37kbi0t
> for <pilotgirl@pipeline.com>; Wed, 8 Mar 2000 16:43:47 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from computer [212.208.179.135] by marci1.marcireau.fr
> (SMTPD32-6.00) id A9243E590084; Wed, 08 Mar 2000 22:41:56 +0100
> To: <pilotgirl@pipeline.com>
> From: <mike@yy3becker92181.net>
> Subject: ADV: Search Engine Registration
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit
> content-length: 485
> Message-Id: <200003082241578.SM00311@computer>
> Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 22:41:59 +0100
> Removal instructions below.
> I saw your listing on the internet.
> I work for a company that specializes
> in getting clients web sites listed
> as close to the top of the major
> search engines as possible.
> Our fee is only $29.95 per month to
> submit your site at least twice a
> month to over 350 search engines
> and directories.
> To get started and put your web site
> in the fast lane, call our toll free
> number below.
> Mike Bender
> 888-532-8842
> To be removed call: 888-800-6339 X1377
Claire Pieterek
surfing on a wave of nostalgia for an age yet to come
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think instead of 'Mike Bender' his
name should be 'Bend Over'. Sadly, a lot of newcomers on the net
will probably bend over, at least to get their wallet out of their
pocket to hand him his money every month. I agree this is a good
entry for the Busines Directory, but decisions about that are
left up to the Editor of the same. I suspect we will see a new
issue of the directory before long. PAT]
From: Steve Hayes <stevehayes@compuserve.com>
Subject: Nortel Analog Switches (was Re: The DLC Epidemic...)
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:08:16 -0000
Hi Pat and everyone,
First, I should have already said Welcome back, Pat. We can see that
the old war-horse is still responding to the bugle call. Many thanks
for your efforts.
In Telecom Digest V20 No. 14 while contributing to the DLC Epidemic
thread, Ed Ellers speculated a bit about Nortel analog switches. I can
fill in a few more details which I hope will be interesting to a few
readers.
In the early 70s, Northern Electric (which became Northern Telecom and
now Nortel) made the Western Electric No. 1 ESS switch under
license. Northern's engineering department had the not very demanding
job of going through the Western documents with red and yellow
pencils, crossing out the word "Western" and replacing it with
"Northern". They also had to change the leading K on each part number
to a Q but that was about it.
As I heard it, Western refused to license the later ESS versions. I
suppose they hoped to get the business themselves. Northern rose to
the challenge and developed the SP1 switch (SP as in Stored
Program). This had more advanced CPU control then the No. 1 ESS but
used inexpensive and reliable mini-crossbar electromechanical switches
for the actual (analog) switching. It was a very successful switch in
its day - partly thanks to the captive Bell Canada market of
course. I'm not sure but I think that the No. 1 ESS used ferreed
switching elements - someone else is bound to know more about that.
Digital switching started to come in around the mid 70s and Northern
developed the DMS range which soon replaced the SP1. I wonder if any
of the SP1s are still in service - like their electromechanical
predecessors they had a 40 year design life.
It's interesting to speculate whether Northern would ever have
developed DMS if the licensing agreements with Western had continued.
Steve Hayes
South Wales, UK
From: Clarence Dold <dold@rahul.net>
Subject: Re: NXX by NPA
Date: 8 Mar 2000 22:06:30 GMT
Organization: a2i network
Reply-To: dold@email.rahul.net
Michael G. Koerner <mgk920@dataex.com> wrote:
> Clarence Dold wrote:
>> How strange. Those are incredibly out of date and incomplete.
>> Looking at WSUTLZD.TXT, I find 707-965 (my home) with no description.
>> Looking for NAPA, I find it listed as 415-217. I don't remember how
>> long ago Napa became the 707 NPA.
> That is interesting, as I am finding the NANPA 'Utilized' list printout
...
> NPA in Michigan and the 219 NPA in Indiana) to be EXTREMELY accurate and
My supposition, based only on the SF Bay Area, is that the table is
now being populated as NPA-NXX are assigned. The NPA-NXX that existed
at the start of the 'project' were filled in manually, and only for
important areas. The suburbs (most of NPA 707) is sparsely populated.
707-nnn is 644 entries, 365 of which are blank.
CA 707-968
for instance. No date, no ...
415-nnn is 693 entries, 34 of which are blank, and some of those are
nn/nn/2000 dates. Unassignable? 8 of them are N11. Most of 415, the
mature NPA in the area, is populated.
So, you might be able to use these tables casually, but you certainly
can't depend on them in California.
Clarence A Dold -
dold@email.rahul.net
- Pope Valley & Napa CA.
From: siegman@stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman)
Subject: Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 18:20:06 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
In article <telecom20.15.9@telecom-digest.org>, Andrew Green
<acg@datalogics.com> wrote:
> Seriously, we're developing a lot of stuff that obviously could operate just
> fine inside a car, but not all of it is necessarily a Good Thing there.
Based on a day's exposure to a colleague's car in Japan equipped with a
GPS system and CD-ROM-driven LCD dynamic map display, this particular
system is going to be the premier example of this unresolved dichotomy.
* The capabilities of the system for indicating where you are, where
you're heading, and what's around you are wonderful (especially in a place
like Japan), as well as near unbelievable.
* The driver obviously needs to see it.
* Yet the amount of information displayed is large (basically two
side-by-side maps, one showing immediate surroundings, the other a broader
area) and the level of detail involved is very distracting, almost
guaranteed to pull the driver's attention away from the road -- and the
display unit, at least in the van I rode in, is down low in the general
area where radio and heater controls are in most cars, so when you're
looking at it, the road ahead is barely in your peripheral vision.
In other words, the amount of visual and mental distraction from the
task of driving the car is way beyond any simple task like listening
to the radio, talking on a phone hands-off, or using an electric
shaver.
On the one hand, these things are wonderful; on the other hand it's
hard to believe they aren't going to lead to an epidemic of rear-end
collisions, running down of pedestrians, and similar accidents.
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 00:51:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: IDT Adopts Cellular/Paging Calling Party Pays
IDT Adopts Cellular/Paging Calling Party Pays 03/03/00
Newsbytes, 03/3/2000 08:11
NEWARK, NEW JERSEY, U.S.A., 2000 MAR 3 (NB) -- By Steve Gold,
Newsbytes. IDT Corp. [NASDAQ:IDTC] has become the first major US
carrier to offer calling party pays (CPP) services to its paging and
cellular service subscribers.
http://investing.lycos.com/lycos/story.asp?symbols=IDTC&startStory=13134897&mode=News
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 00:56:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: 24/7 Europe Develops The World's First WAP Ad Server
02/25/2000
24/7 Europe Develops The World's First WAP Ad Server
The advertising network 24/7 Europe (www.247europe.com) has developed
the world's first WAP ad server.
It enables WAP ad campaigns to be served into mobile content which
individual users can access using WAP or SMS enabled devices. The
system incorporates ad serving, management and reporting capabilities
allowing delivery, monitoring and control of campaigns.
http://www.bizreport.com/news/2000/02/20000225-2.htm
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 22:00:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: IEEE Statement Against UCITA
Forwarded to the Digest, FYI:
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 12:12:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Phil Agre <pagre@alpha.oac.ucla.edu>
Subject: [RRE]IEEE statement against UCITA
[UCITA, the bizarre set of proposed laws governing the sale of software
in the United States, is still undead. It is about to be considered
by the various state legislatures; if they approve it then it's a done
deal. IEEE has taken a strong position against it (enclosed, heavily
reformatted), and Slashdot has published a practical guide to lobbying
against it: <http://slashdot.org/features/00/02/17/0038235.shtml>.
You will recall that among UCITA's many alarming implications is the
very real possibility that software companies can prevent anybody from
ever publishing any critical reviews of their products.]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE).
Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below.
You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use
the "redirect" option. For information about RRE, including instructions
for (un)subscribing, see http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/rre.html
or send a message to requests@lists.gseis.ucla.edu with Subject: info rre
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 16:26:47 -0500
From: "Raymond Paul" <r.paul@ieee.org>
http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POSITIONS/ucita.html
The IEEE-USA Board of Directors approved the following statement on UCITA at
the meeting last Thursday.
[...]
Opposing Adoption of the
Uniform Computer Information
Transaction Act (UCITA)
By the States
Approved By the
IEEE-USA Board of Directors (Feb. 2000)
On behalf of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers --
United States of America (IEEE-USA) and its nearly 230,000 U.S.
members who are electrical, electronics, computer and software
engineers, we wish to reiterate to the state legislatures the concerns
regarding the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA)
that we previously expressed to the National Council of Commissioners
on State Laws (NCCUSL).
We believe UCITA should be rejected by the states. UCITA would have
a widespread, complex impact, including: (a) the provisions of the act
itself; (b) its interaction with the existing statutes, principles,
and interpretations of Federal intellectual property law; (c) the
provisions currently found in "shrink wrap" and "click-through"
software agreements -- many of them questionable or unenforceable
under current law -- that UCITA seeks to make enforceable; and
(d) UCITA's effect on existing business practices and reasonable
purchaser expectations. Into the existing and evolving legal and
business situation, UCITA would inject an ironclad statutory framework
that is very easy to abuse to the serious detriment of consumers,
large business users, and small business users of computer software,
software developers, computer consultants and the general public.
Many organizations, including 24 state Attorneys General, the staffs
of the Bureau of Competition, Bureau of Consumer Protection, and
Policy Planning Office of the Federal Trade Commission, professional
and trade associations, consumer groups, the American Law Institute
(originally NCCUSL's partner in drafting UCITA), and others have
expressed opposition or concern regarding UCITA In some cases the
concerns of these organizations parallel ours, and in other cases they
raise additional issues. Our concerns are in the following areas:
By changing what would otherwise be considered a sale into a licensing
transaction, UCITA permits software publishers to enforce contract
provisions that may be onerous, burdensome or unreasonable, and places
on the purchaser the burden and cost of proving that these provisions
are unconscionable or "against fundamental public policy". Examples
of these provisions include prohibitions against public criticism of
the software and limitations on purchasers' rights to sell or dispose
of software. The first provision prohibits the reviews, comparisons,
and benchmark testing that are critical for an informed, competitive
marketplace. The second issue could legally complicate transactions
including corporate mergers/acquisitions, sales of small businesses,
the operation of businesses dealing in second-hand software, and even
yard sales.
UCITA would undermine the protections provided by Federal intellectual
property law and upset the carefully achieved balance between owners
and purchasers of intellectual property. One major protection is
that "fair use" case law and statutory copyright law permit "reverse
engineering" for certain important purposes, such as development
of compatible (interoperable) software products and information
security testing. Reverse engineering is the examination of software
to identify and analyze its internal elements. Current shrink-wrap
agreements often contain strict provisions forbidding reverse
engineering. By making these provisions enforceable, UCITA would
stifle innovation and competition in the software industry, and
would straightjacket efforts of users to provide information security
protection for their systems.
UCITA allows software publishers to disclaim warranties and
consequential damages even for software defects known to the publisher
prior to sale, undisclosed to the buyer, and having damages that can
be reasonably foreseen. For example, under UCITA a software publisher
could not only prohibit publication of information on security
vulnerabilities that users identify but could avoid responsibility
for fixing these vulnerabilities. By legalizing the choices of law
and forum often included in software agreements, UCITA would allow
software publishers to make expensive and burdensome any efforts by
purchasers to protect their rights. This includes issues that for a
sale would be handled in local small-claims courts. The "self-help"
provisions of UCITA would allow software publishers to embed security
vulnerabilities and other functions in their software to facilitate
"denial-of-service" attacks (remote disablement or destruction of
the software) and to avoid liability for accidental triggering of
the attacks or exploitation of these functions by malicious intruders.
We urge the state legislatures to reject UCITA.
This statement was developed by the Committee on Communications
and Information Policy and the Intellectual Property Committee of
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - United States
of America (IEEE-USA), and represents the considered judgment of
a group of U.S. IEEE members with expertise in the subject field.
The IEEE-USA promotes the careers and public-policy interests of
the nearly 230,000 electrical, electronics, computer and software
engineers who are U.S. members of the IEEE.
Some Sources of Additional Information
General information:
http://www.4cite.org
Encompasses coalition of organizations opposing adoption of UCITA.
http://www.badsoftware.com
Includes or links to numerous opposition comments.
http://www.2bguide.com
Includes both pro and con comments. "Whatsnew" page has extensive
links to relevant UCITA and UCC-2B documents.
Specific:
http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POLICY/1999/99july20.html
July 1999 IEEE-USA letter to NCCUSL
http://www.2bguide.com/docs/citopp.html
Memo by Steven Chow, dissenting member of UCITA drafting committee
http://www.ftc.gov/be/v990010.htm
Letter by FTC staff to NCCUSL opposing UCITA
http://www.4cite.org/prinlng.html
Memo describing adverse impacts of UCITA on businesses (prepared by
Principal Financial Group)
http://www.2bguide.com/docs/50799dad.html
Memo from former ALI members of drafting committee declining further
participation
http://www.acm.org/usacm/copyright/usacm-ucita.html
Letter from the President of ACM to NCCUSL opposing UCITA
[...]
Last Updated: 15 Feb. 2000
Staff Contact: Deborah Rudolph, d.rudolph@ieee.org
Copyright (c) 2000 The Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Inc. Permission to copy granted for non-commercial uses
with appropriate attribution.
Raymond Paul
Legislative Representative
Technology Policy
IEEE-USA
1828 L Street, NW
Suite 1202
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-530-8331
Fax: 202-785-0835
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 22:23:38 -0500
From: Don Kimberlin <dkimberlin@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert!
In article (Tue, 07 Mar 2000 12:55:15 -0600 ) Ross McMicken
(mcmicken@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>In Houston, Tx, the utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for use
> of the city rights of way. I believe it amounts to about 4 percent of
> gross revenues. We periodically get big squabbles over how much of the
> fee can be charged to the consumer.
Oh my. Now we get into that realm of all the variables, in which
Texas is its own kind of unique case where Southwestern Bell managed
to keep the state from even having a Public Utilities Commission for
decades. As I recall the history there, the State Railroad Commission
tried after many decades, and even it suffered legal defeat at the
hands of Southwestern Bell taking the state government itself to
court.
My recall of the Texas situation was that each municipality wound up
having to negotiate its franchise deal with SW Bell. Sounds like
Houston fared well compared to many.
In article (Tue, 07 Mar 2000 15:41:08 -0600 ) John Hines
(jhines@enteract.com) wrote:
>> ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to
>> prove his
>> claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone
>> call
>> to an unnamed town or utility employee, please!
> http://www.ci.chi.il.us/Environment/EnergyManagement/ See the section
> on utility oversight.
> Or
> http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.westmont.il.us/government/village/manager/CompPlan/WebDocs/chapter_six.htm
> for another local village.
... Of which, the first mentioned only that Commonwealth Edison, the
electric company, pays a franchise fee. The telephone company,
originally Illinois Bell, but now part of Ameritech, has been
(:in)famous since the earliest days of the phone business for being a
wily political animal - especially one of the sort that will let
members of the public chase their tail over something others got
caught with, but which they avoided since Year Dot of "the business."
... The second reference got a failure to find whatever site was quoted.
... All of which is not to say there can be wide variance in the
situation. For example, in Charlotte, North Carolina, it wasn't found
out until way, way too late in the game to do anything about it that
Southern Bell had managed to "overlook" ever getting a franchise from
the City. What you gonna do? Throw the phone company out on its ear a
century later? Not likely!
... Thus, there may even be the odd town here and there where one could
find a firm reference to a fee being paid. However, I'll wager that
phone companies paying a fee are the exception, and that even if they
do, it's something that finally occurred since we broke up Ma Bell. She
was monolithic in more ways than most might imagine.
From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephone-Pole
Organization: Providence Network Partners
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:18:10 GMT
In article <telecom20.14.2@telecom-digest.org>, mcmicken@ix.netcom.com
says:
> In Houston, Tx, the utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for use
> of the city rights of way. I believe it amounts to about 4 percent of
> gross revenues. We periodically get big squabbles over how much of the
> fee can be charged to the consumer.
Uh -- couldn't that be considered a business expense? If so it could be
used to offset revenue thereby increasing the earnings of said utility.
Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR
Trustee WE1RD
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:43:09 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S. Wants to Trace Net Users
by Declan McCullagh
3:00 a.m. 4.Mar.2000 PST
WASHINGTON -- The ease of hiding one's identity on the Net is giving
police migraines and justifies providing broad new powers to law
enforcement, the White House says in a forthcoming report.
The federal government should take steps to improve online
traceability and promote international cooperation to identify
Internet users, according to a draft of the report commissioned by
President Clinton and obtained by Wired News.
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34720,00.html
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe you saw the headline story
today in {USA Today} entitled 'How Goverment failed to see or
stop largest denial of service attack in nation's history.' The
story said they had arrested someone named 'Coolio', I presume
since they no longer have Kevin Mitnick to kick around. PAT]
From: Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite
Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 22:50:18 GMT
In article <telecom20.14.12@telecom-digest.org>,
Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> Title : The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS)
> Author(s) : S. Christey
> Filename : draft-christey-imps-00.txt
> Pages : 18
> Date : 01-Mar-00
Wow, has IETF bureaucratic procedure become so entrenched that even an
April Fool's Day RFC has to be published as an I-D first?
BTW, Monty, you posted two "Last Laugh" messages -- which one is *really*
last?
Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, I receive a dozen articles at
a time from Monty Solomon; I pick a couple to use every day. The 'Last
Laugh' feature runs from time to time also; again it is my choice to
do it. I chose to run both of those messages as 'Last Laugh' in the
same issue. PAT]
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:27:19 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Desperately Seeking the Next DoubleClick
http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12675,00.html
After the fun it's had recently with DoubleClick, the press may have
become addicted to privacy stories. (In case you're just joining this
storyline: The Net ad giant, under fire, shelved plans to breach the
anonymity of visitors to the sites of its customers.)
This morning, three outlets ran almost identical stories about
Topica's plan to sell advertisers the qualified eyeballs Topica hits
with the thousands of e-mail lists it manages. ZDNet's tag invoked
DoubleClick angst, but Wired News won for Best Head: "Hot Topica
Conversation."
As it turns out, though, the Topica news had little in common with
DoubleClick's consumer-hostile plan. Topica's mailing-list clients
will remain anonymous to advertisers, and their participation in
particular mailing lists carries at least the odor of
consumer-friendly opt-in. The press may be flogging a dead privacy
pony.
The Wall Street Journal's Michael J. McCarthy found a much more
compelling privacy angle this morning. He turned in a long piece about
Silent Watch, a software package that businesses use to monitor
employees' keystrokes - all of them. McCarthy accurately reflected the
current legal consensus that an employee can have little expectation
of privacy when using his employer's computer. But McCarthy generated
goosebumps with his depiction of Silent Watch recording every
keystroke, typos and all, as an unwitting employee drafted an
application letter for an aviation scholarship. McCarthy quoted the
rhetorical question of a privacy-aware lawyer: "When else can you peer
into someone's raw thought process?" - Keith Dawson
Hot Topica Conversation
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,34772,00.html
E-mail List Maker Launches New Ad Service (Reuters)
http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/news/breaking/merc/docs/033713.htm
An Alternative to DoubleClick Angst?
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2456612,00.html
Keystroke Loggers Save E-Mail Rants, Raising Workplace Privacy Concerns
http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB952387732195636577.htm
(Paid subscription required.)
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had some corresponence with Topica
about a year ago, when they offered to buy TELECOM Digest's mailing
list from me. I told them thanks, but no thanks. At that time, I
thought maybe Topica was going to be a lot like DoubleClick, and
I still feel that way. PAT]
End of TELECOM Digest V20 #17
Visit the Crazy Atheist Libertarian
Visit my atheist friends at Arizona Secular Humanists
Some strange but true news about the government
Some strange but real news about religion
Interesting, funny but otherwise useless news!