For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
Classified Ads
TD Extra News
Add this Digest to your personal
or  
TELECOM Digest Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:18:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 570 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Icahn Says Deal With AOL/Google is Stupid and Outrageous (Erich Auchard) TXU amd Current Team Up on Internet Over Power Lines (Reuters News Wire) Web Site Emails the Future (Nahal Toosi) Re: Congress: Merry Christmas! We're Turning Off Analog Outs (C. Griswold) Re: Congress: Merry Christmas! We're Turning Off Analog Outs (panoptes) Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? (Scott Dorsey) Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? (Gordon Burditt) Re: Spam (was FTC Do Not Call List) (Seth Breidbart) Re: Letter From Russia (Seth Breidbart) Re: Congress: Merry Christmas! We're Turning Off Analog Outs (R.T. Wurth) Re: Wikipedia Becomes Internet Force, But Faces Crisis (Seth Breidbart) Re: Verizon/Yahoo ISP Service From Hell (Steve Sobol) Mexican Officials Say Bush Fence Blocking Plan is Stupid (William Weissert) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eric Auchard <reuters2telecom-digest.org> Subject: Icahn Says deal With AOL/Google is Stupid and Outrageous Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:23:06 -0600 Icahn seeks to derail Google as partner of AOL By Eric Auchard Dissident shareholder Carl Icahn on Monday labeled as "disastrous" a new deal set to be unveiled this week between Time Warner Inc.'s America Online unit and Web search leader Google Inc., as the billionaire investor argued that AOL could do better. "Not only stupid, but disasterous and outrageous," he claimed. Icahn said in a letter to Time Warner's board of directors that the company appeared to be on the verge of a "disastrous decision" following reports it is in talks to sell a 5 percent stake of its AOL Internet unit to Google Inc.. Icahn, whose group has a 3.1 percent stake in Time Warner, said he feared a Google pact may preclude a merger or other deals with the likes of eBay Inc., Yahoo Inc. IAC/InterActiveCorp, or Microsoft Corp. "Like all shareholders, I am not opposed to Time Warner entering into an AOL transaction that creates long-term value," Icahn wrote. "However, I am deeply concerned that the Time Warner board may be on the verge of making a disastrous decision concerning an agreement with Google," he said. In the past several months, Icahn has blasted Time Warner's every move as falling short of realizing the company's full value. He has hired investment bank Lazard Ltd to wage a campaign to replace a majority of Time Warner's directors. A Time Warner spokesman declined to comment. "There's nothing new here, and given that, we're not going to comment," spokeswoman Kathy McKiernan said. A Google spokesman was not immediately available to comment. Shares of Google, which traded to record intra-day high level of $446.21, up 3.7 percent on the day, turned tail and fell back on news of Icahn's opposition to the potential new search and advertising deal between AOL and Google. Google shares fell $5.55, or 1.3 percent, to close at $424.60 on Monday on Nasdaq. Meanwhile, Time Warner shares finished off 5 cents at $17.95 on the New York Stock Exchange. Icahn, who has said he is waging an "all-out proxy battle" to force Time Warner to step up asset sales and streamline, cited a recent report by Goldman Sachs that argued that Google may not be the best long-term partner for America Online. Wall Street analysts debated whether the $1 billion, which sources said Google was prepared to pay AOL for a 5 percent stake, was a meaningful calculation of the implied overall value of AOL -- $20 billion -- if it were spun-off. Some analysts groused that the investment could simply be an expedient way for Google to keep AOL as a key customer and thwart rival Microsoft from gaining a foothold in advertising. Citigroup analyst Mark Mahaney calculated that AOL's business declined to just 1.9 percent of Google's net revenue recently. Another financial analyst, who declined to be named, said Google may view the $1 billion stake as a small down payment to avert the loss of AOL as its biggest single customer and thereby defend its lofty $125 billion market capitalization. Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new articles daily. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html For more news headlines, please go to: http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/newstoday.html ------------------------------ From: Reuters News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org> Subject: TXU and Current Team up on Internet Over Power Lines Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:25:28 -0600 TXU Corp., Texas's largest utility, said on Monday it was teaming up with Current Communications Group to offer high-speed Internet access over power lines to about 2 million homes and businesses in the state. The companies also said they plan to use Current's broadband over power line (BPL) technology to allow TXU to more actively monitor and manage its electrical grid. TXU agreed to pay Current about $150 million over 10 years to use the "smart grid" capabilities of Current's BPL network. the companies said in a statement. TXU said the payments will not affect its previously disclosed financial forecasts. Privately-held BPL provider Current, whose investors include Google Inc. and U.S. utility Cinergy Corp., will provide broadband and wireless Internet services to TXU's customers under the agreement. TXU will also become an equity holder in Current as part of the agreement. The companies plan to start deploying the broadband network in 2006. Broadband service over power lines has been highly touted by equipment makers and federal regulators as a possible competitor to cable and telephone services that handle almost all of the roughly 40 million U.S. residential broadband connections. But until recently U.S. utilities interested in the service have faced various financial and technical problems. The signals used to carry data over electrical lines can cause interference with radio equipment, and can travel only a short distance before weakening, requiring repeaters in many areas. Some analysts have also said that most utilities don't have the skills to challenge companies that already have years of experience in the fiercely competitive Internet service business. Nevertheless several top U.S. power companies, including Cinergy and CenterPoint Energy Inc., have recently made investments in BPL. Aside from the draw of additional revenue from providing Internet services, the companies have been attracted by the possibility of cost savings from enhancement of their electrical grids. TXU said that it hopes to increase network reliability and power quality and efficiently implement automated meter reading through its partnership with Current. It said the technology should also help it prevent, detect and restore customer outages more effectively. TXU's electric transmission unit, TXU Electric Delivery, provides power to over 2.9 million electric delivery points. Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new articles daily. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html For more news headlines and stories, please to TELECOM Digest News Radio: http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/TDNewsradio.html ------------------------------ From: Nahal Toosi <ap@telecom-digest.org> Subject: Web Site Lets Users Send Email to the Future Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:27:44 -0600 By NAHAL TOOSI, Associated Press Writer In the year 2009, on the 25th of April, a man named Greg is supposed to get an e-mail. The e-mail will remind Greg that he is his best friend and worst enemy, that he once dated a woman named Michelle, and that he planned to major in computer science. "More importantly," the e-mail says, "are you wearing women's clothing?" The e-mail was sent by none other than Greg himself -- through a Web site called FutureMe.org. The site is one of a handful that let people send e-mails to themselves and others years in the future. They are technology's answer to time capsules, trading on people's sense of curiosity, accountability and nostalgia. "Messages into the future is something that people have always sought to do," said Paul Saffo, director of the Institute for the Future. "In a way, it's a statement of optimism." Matt Sly, 29, came up with the concept for FutureMe.org about four years ago. He was inspired one day after recalling how during his education he had been given assignments to write letters to himself. Sly, who partnered with 31-year-old Jay Patrikios of San Francisco on the project, said the site has made maybe $58 through donations. He is adamant that FutureMe.org is not a reminder service and that users should think long-term. The site lets people send messages 30 years from now, though Sly's numbers show most users schedule their e-mails to be sent within three years. "We want people to think about their future and what their goals and dreams and hopes and fears are," he said. "We're trying to facilitate some serious existential pondering." He said a large number of the messages sent do one of two basic things: tell the future person what the past person was doing at the time, and ask the future person if he or she had met the aspirations of the past person. "The tone of the past person is not always friendly," said Sly, now a Yale University graduate student. "It's often like 'Get off your lazy butt.'" Recently, Forbes.com jumped on the idea, offering an "e-mail time capsule" promotion. More than 140,000 letters were collected over about six weeks. Nearly 20 percent of the messages sent are supposed to land in the sender's inbox in 20 years; others requested shorter time frames. Forbes.com is partnering with Yahoo! and Codefix Consulting on the project. "A lot of people have kind of been freaked out by it," said David Ewalt, a Forbes.com writer who worked on the project. "It really makes you stop and think about your life in a way that you usually don't." Another type of future message service can be found at sites such as myLastEmail.com or LastWishes.com, which promise to send messages to loved ones (or less-than-loved ones) after you die. Paul Hudson, co-founder of the International Time Capsule Society, said e-mail time capsules were new to him. "Part of the value of time capsules are that they are thought processes in the present," said Hudson, a historian who teaches at Georgia Perimeter College. "You define yourself when you do a time capsule. It might be a good exercise in introspection." But sometimes the past is best left behind, said Saffo, who personally finds the whole thing "sad and really weird." "The lesson about all these things, it's the lesson from time capsules, is you have to be careful lest you set yourself up for enormous embarrassment in two decades," Saffo said. "Do you really want to be reminded that you thought ABBA was cool?" Service providers try to make the delivery process fail-safe through partnerships or back up software, and they urge people to hang on to their e-mail address, but there's no ironclad guarantee that the message will ever arrive. Technology changes. Companies go out of business. Spam filters might get in the way. Still, that hasn't deterred a sizable number of people from signing up. On FutureMe.org, where more than 112,000 messages have been written, many writers are confident enough to make their e-mails -- though not necessarily their names -- public. "I hope that I've learned to take responsibility for my actions -- to not be passive aggressive and to not avoid things that are scary for me," one wrote. "I hope I've changed a little." "Are you missing an eye? If so, I apologize." wrote another. And, of course, the cautious optimist: "Hell, I hope you're still alive." ___ On the Net: . http://www.FutureMe.org Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new articles daily. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html For more news headlines and audio from Associated Press go to: http://telecom-digest.org/tg-extra/AP.html ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net> Subject: Re: Congress: "Merry Chrismas! We're Turning Off Your Analog Outs" Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 17:10:57 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Just out of curiosity, do radio stations have to pay a royalty to > record companies when they play music? No & Yes -- There are three major "performance rights" agencies in the US. ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. These organizations collect royalties form radio stations and distribute them to the composer, lyricist and performer, but not to the record company. For reasons that escape me right now, but probably having to do with radio being a giant advertising medium for the record companies, no royalty is paid to the record company. > What are the rules, if any, for someone recording a song off the > radio or a tape off of TV? Depends on who's point of view is being presented. As long as its for personal use, most legal authorities would hold no foul. Hand the copy to a friend? Technically wrong, but you aren't likely to be tagged. Sell the copies on eBay? You'll get tagged quickly. ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net Subject: Re: Congress: "Merry Chrismas! We're Turning Off Your Analog Outs" Date: 19 Dec 2005 17:44:21 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Just out of curiosity, do radio stations have to pay a royalty to > record companies when they play music? Of course. http://www.ascap.com/licensing/radio/ ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? Date: 19 Dec 2005 10:11:31 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > Today customers own all their equipment that is supposed to be > certified. But what happens if the customer alters the equipment or > it is defective? What happens if a high voltage is sent out > accidently over a telephone line (ie house current, either 110 or 220, > or ringing current meant for an extension telephone of a PBX)? What happens is that my line starts getting noisy. It's true that crosstalk between lines is much lower than it was back in the days of paper insulation and less careful twisting of pairs. But high levels on one pair will leak into adjacent pairs. Getting someone from Qwest to understand that this is an issue, however, is difficult. > Further, is there any kind of high powered signal that could be sent > over a phone line that would result in crosstalk or service disruption > to the neighbors or other kinds of RF interference? Sure. Any of the above. Put a high pitched tone at a high level on the phone, and it'll turn up all over the place. Use a crappy answering machine that unbalances your pair and plays an outgoing message at +20, and your neighbors will hear it. Qwest doesn't care, though. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: gordonb.wvukh@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:27:10 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > I think I remember once seeing a little circuit board that did nothing > except guarantee Part 68 compliance. (It even had its own Ringer > Equivalence Number, a whole 0.0B.) It was designed for people who > wanted to attach their own homebrew projects to the phone line but not > worry about causing problems. I don't remember where I saw it, sorry, > but you could probably find something like it wherever you buy other > bare electronic circuit thingies. A long time ago, when they first started allowing other people to connect modems to a phone line, but NOT directly, there was the DAA ("Data Access Arrangement", I think). I worked with these in the late 1970's. You rented it from the phone company. It had a defined interface so you could pass voice through it, take the phone off the hook, pulse dial, detect ringing, etc. For tone dialing you'd just take the phone off hook and send tones. For pulse dialing you'd do the equivalent of rapidly jiggling switch-hook. Most of it was providing isolation between the phone line and your side so if lightning hit your gadget, it wouldn't get through to the phone line (much). It was also supposed to protect the other way. Typically there was transformer isolation for the voice signal and maybe relay or optical isolation for the ringing signal and switch-hook. Eventually they built these into modems, but I can still see a use for these as interfaces to one-off projects that aren't worth going through FCC certification for. Gordon L. Burditt ------------------------------ From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) Subject: Re: Spam (was FTC Do Not Call List) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:12:50 UTC Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless In article <telecom24.563.14@telecom-digest.org>, Jim Haynes <jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu> wrote: > One scheme that seemed to me to have some promise was to detect spam > in the SMTP receiving program and deliberately delay its responses > to the sending program. So that the transaction of sending a message > is stretched out far longer than normal. That's called tarpitting. It would work against spammers who use their own resources to send. Those who use armies of zombies wouldn't care. Seth ------------------------------ From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) Subject: Re: Letter From Russia Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:50:25 UTC Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless In article <telecom24.566.15@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to a message from Valentin <valent@mailrus.ru>: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought about this message for quite > a while, and although it would probably qualify as spam (by virtue of > how many copies were distributed, I personally do not think it is a > scam. It's spam. Spam is theft. Therefore, it's a scam. If he's so hard up, where did he get the resources to spam with? Wasn't there just a thread on why spam continues, because so many idiots send money to spammers? Some are suckers for bigger bodyparts, others for free money, others for helping the needy. All of those are reasons that spam continues. Seth [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suppose he probably got the resources to send the spam from the local public library, where he said he looked up other information. Many libraries are nto set up on their public terminals to block spam from going out. As far as 'why spam continues to be a success' the only reason (of the several you named) which I would consider at least a wee bit acceptable would be helping the needy. And do you consider the occassional 'call for papers' printed here and at other sites to be 'spam'? Or the monthly notices or minutes of meetings from the EFF, ICANN and similar? Those are unsolicited also, yet they keep coming out to the entire net. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Congress: "Merry Chrismas! We're Turning Off Your Analog Outs" From: R. T. Wurth <rwurth@att.net> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:01:17 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote in news:telecom24.569.15@telecom-digest.org: [...] > Just out of curiosity, do radio stations have to pay a royalty to > record companies when they play music? What are the rules, if any, > for someone recording a song off the radio or a tape off of TV? (IANAL, this is just my opinion, do not rely on this as legal advice. Furthermore, this reflects my understanding of the situation in the USA only. If you need legal advice, hire a lawyer.) Yes, and no. Radio stations pay a royalty to the composers and (lyric) authors (or, more correctly, to the publishing company to which they sold the rights) indirectly through license contracts with ASCAP and BMI (and sometimes a 3rd agency, SECAC, which represents a miniscule portion of the authors and composers). ASCAP and BMI license their entire libraries (and not just to radio stations, but also to stores that play music, bars, restaurants, and night clubs) for a single negotiated fee, take samples of music usage, and distribute their collections (less collection fees and profits) to the rights holders in proportion to the works' standings in the sample results. On the other hand, the actual performers (or the holders of their royalty rights) receive nothing from the radio stations. They are held to be fully compensated by the exposure they receive and the increased record and live performance ticket sales resulting therefrom. (Except, of course performer- author-composers, who still receive their author/composer royalties, but nothing extra as performers.) Record companies don't figure into the equation, unless you consider the illegal practice of payola, wherein they allegedly pay stations or DJs to play certain songs, but we all know that's illegal, so no one would actually to that (wink, wink; nod, nod). In fact, most folks in the radio biz would be "shocked! shocked!" (like the police chief in _Casablanca_), to hear that anything like that goes on. As to the 2nd question, IANAL, but my understanding is that under the Sony Betamax decision, a person has at least the right to record off the air for the purpose of time shifting, that is, a single viewing in their own home for the enjoyment of themself and their family. I think (with less certainty) one may also have the right to keep the recording around for more than one viewing. I certainly believe one does not have the right to sell (for cash or barter) the recording or charge admission to a viewing. I suspect trading or lending like for like with other enthusiasts to fill gaps in one's viewing is a gray area. -- Rich Wurth / rwurth@att.net / Rumson, NJ USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards the first part of your statement on paying royalties what about classical music stations, where a great deal of the music itself is in the public domain, owing to the age of the compositions, etc? PAT] ------------------------------ From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) Subject: Re: Wikipedia Becomes Internet Force, But Faces Crisis Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:55:02 UTC Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless In article <telecom24.568.6@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomni.com> wrote: > In article <telecom24.566.10@telecom-digest.org>, Thor Lancelot Simon > <tls@rek.tjls.com> wrote: >> In article <telecom24.565.7@telecom-digest.org>, Dave Garland >> <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: >>> The exercise revealed numerous errors in both encyclopaedias, but >>> among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not >>> particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained >>> around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three ... >> I'm astonished that a 25% difference is considered "not particularly >> great". > I'm astonished that something that can be explained by "jitter" of > "plus/minus one count" in 'ordinal' numeric data, would be considered > anything _other_ than "not particularly great". Well, unless they do > not really understand statistical analysis, that is. 3 vs 4 is jitter. 126 vs. 168 is a bigger difference, though it's the same 25%. (Unless you believe that there are a lot of off-by-one errors, _all_ in the same direction.) Seth ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> Subject: Re: Verizon/Yahoo ISP Service from Hell Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:37:46 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com harold@hallikainen.com wrote: > Why do communications companies "partner" with content companies? To compete with AOL, which for years provided content *and* access. They still do content, of course, but they don't do broadband access. They still do do dialup. Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Company website: http://JustThe.net/ Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/ E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307 ------------------------------ From: Will Weissert <ap@telecom-digest.org> Subject: Mexican Officials Say Bush Fence Blocking Plan is Stupid Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:21:00 -0600 By WILL WEISSERT, Associated Press Writer Mexico's foreign secretary Monday leveled his country's sharpest criticism yet at U.S. proposal for a fence along parts of its southern border, condemning it as "stupid" and "underhanded." In a radio interview, Luis Ernesto Derbez said U.S. legislators who approved the bill were turning a blind eye to the contributions millions of migrants from Mexico and elsewhere make to America's economy and culture. "It's a law that looks underhanded to everybody ... stupid," Derbez said. On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 239-182 in favor of an immigration enforcement bill, which includes a proposal to build 700 miles of border fencing along parts of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. Under the measure, soldiers and police would help stop people sneaking across, and employers would have to check the legal status of their workers. Derbez said he was confident the bill would not make it past the U.S. Senate, which he said was not as easily swayed as the House. Reacting Sunday to the bill's approval, Mexican President Vicente Fox said "this wall is shameful," and called the plan hypocritical for a country made up of immigrants. Fox has for years called for an immigration agreement with Washington granting some form of legal status to Mexicans who sneak into U.S. territory in search of work. President Bush proposed a new guest worker program with three-year work visas, but lawmakers refused to include the initiative in the immigration bill passed Friday. Authorities estimate there are about 11 million undocumented migrants in the United States, about half of them Mexican. There have also been suggestions to build a similar fence across the several thousand miles of Canadian border. Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new articles daily. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html For more news from Associated Press audio and headline stories, go to: http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/AP.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This reminds me of the feeble efforts by folks in the village of Evanston, IL (the immediate north suburb of Chicago) to try and discourage criminals and others from Chicago driving drunkenly, like bats out of hell coming from Chicago into the north suburb (where crime _was_ virtually zilch for many years.) The only part of Evanston in those day (late 1980's) and even today is the strip of (common street) 1400 to 2400 West Howard Street in Chicago. For many years, that three or four block area where city of Chicago dips north of Howard Street along Bosworth Street and Paulina Street past Juneway Terrace and Jonquil Terrace has been the 'wild west'. They don't call it 'Jonquil Jungle' for no reason. Village of Evanston usually is a straight east/west line north of Howard Street but in that little section behind the elevated tracks the boundary line gets irregular for a few blocks and runs east and in the alley behind Calvary Cemetery (Evanston) over to the lakefront. What the Village of Evanston did was turn _every one_ of the streets which intersect with Howard Street _one way_ southbound into Chicago. Although they left Sheridan Road alone the next two through streets (Clark Street in Chicago becomes 'Chicago Avenue' when it hits Evanston and Western Avenue in Chicago turns into some other street when it reaches Evanston. The only way to get into Evanston from Chicago along there in that crime-ridden area was a little two lane thing behind the elevated tracks where Paulina Street connects into Juneway Terrace. "Those snots!" proclaimed Mayor Daley the Second; "they don't want us in their village!" Either cross into Evanston on Sheridan Road (a nice neighborhood) or drive down Howard Street a number of blocks through the black area until they get to the white area of town again. Then Evanston decided to build a concrete barrier -- a little island -- on _their_ side of Howard Street a few blocks further west, and the Chicago alderman in that neighborhood (Bernie Stone) went to battle with Evanston officials about that. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecomm- unications 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, Yahoo Groups, 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@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 oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308 and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management (MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35 credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including data, video, and voice networks. The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum. Classes are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning. Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at 405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at http://www.mstm.okstate.edu ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V24 #570 ****************************** | |