Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #182937 > unrolled thread

OT: spam phone calls

Started byGraham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk>
First post2025-03-20 12:10 +0000
Last post2025-03-31 12:23 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 186 — 36 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10


Contents

  OT: spam phone calls Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-03-20 12:10 +0000
    Re: OT: spam phone calls "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-03-20 08:53 -0400
      Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-20 17:37 +0000
      Re: OT: spam phone calls Philip Herlihy <nothing@invalid.com> - 2025-03-21 12:08 +0000
    Re: OT: spam phone calls Philip Herlihy <nothing@invalid.com> - 2025-03-20 12:58 +0000
    Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-20 15:00 +0100
      Re: OT: spam phone calls Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-03-20 15:21 +0000
        Re: OT: spam phone calls D <noreply@mixmin.net> - 2025-03-20 16:16 +0000
        Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-03-20 18:53 +0100
          Re: OT: spam phone calls Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-03-20 18:39 +0000
        Re: OT: spam phone calls Jason H <jason_hindle@yehoo.com> - 2025-05-07 15:20 +0100
          Re: OT: spam phone calls David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> - 2025-05-07 20:39 +0100
            Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-13 22:48 +1000
          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-07 22:34 +0200
      Re: OT: spam phone calls David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2025-03-20 15:50 +0000
        Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-20 22:32 +0100
      Re: OT: spam phone calls Philip Herlihy <nothing@invalid.com> - 2025-03-21 12:18 +0000
      Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-09 12:50 +0200
      Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-13 15:09 +0200
        Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-05-13 16:08 +0200
          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-13 20:37 +0200
            Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-05-13 21:27 +0200
        Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-15 20:59 +1000
          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-15 13:40 +0200
            Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-05-15 17:05 +0100
    Re: OT: spam phone calls Invalid <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-03-20 16:31 +0000
      Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-08 21:42 +1000
    Re: OT: spam phone calls Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-20 12:59 -0400
      Re: OT: spam phone calls "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-21 04:41 -0700
        Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-21 13:51 +0100
          Re: OT: spam phone calls Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-21 11:23 -0400
            Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-03-21 12:32 -0400
              Re: OT: spam phone calls Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-21 18:52 +0000
                Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 08:00 -0400
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-03 12:14 +0000
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 14:22 +0200
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-01 09:17 -0400
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-02 19:53 +1000
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-02 12:35 +0200
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-02 22:09 +1000
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-02 20:20 +0200
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-03 19:28 +1000
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> - 2025-07-03 12:39 +0100
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-07-02 14:40 +0000
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-07-03 09:05 +0100
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-03 11:33 +0200
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-07-03 12:18 +0100
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-03 13:32 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls NY <me@privacy.net> - 2025-07-03 22:07 +0100
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-04 03:17 +0200
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-07-05 19:03 +0000
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2025-07-05 21:14 +0000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-07-06 13:21 +0100
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> - 2025-07-06 13:21 +0000
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2025-07-06 14:03 +0000
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-06 18:56 +1000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-06 19:49 +1000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk> - 2025-07-06 19:35 +0100
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls James Heaton <heatonandmoore@gmail.com> - 2025-07-06 19:57 +0100
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-07-06 13:18 +0100
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2025-07-06 14:04 +0000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-07 19:03 +1000
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-07 16:38 +0100
                                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-07-07 17:20 +0100
                                          OT: floppies (was: Re: OT: spam phone calls) "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-07 17:43 +0100
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Sam E <no.email@here.invalid> - 2025-07-07 17:11 +0000
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2025-07-03 16:26 +0100
                              Tap to pay [Was: Re: OT: spam phone calls] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-03 20:04 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-04 19:35 +1000
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-04 11:46 +0200
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> - 2025-07-04 11:12 +0000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-04 13:24 +0200
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-05 01:32 +0100
                                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-05 20:15 +1000
                                        Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-05 19:55 +0200
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-07-03 11:20 +0100
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-03 12:43 +0200
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-03 23:00 +1000
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-07-03 20:50 +1000
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-07-03 19:29 +0000
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-03 20:55 +0100
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-07-05 19:13 +0000
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-03 22:40 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-07-05 19:18 +0000
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls NY <me@privacy.net> - 2025-07-03 22:13 +0100
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 14:13 +0200
              Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-22 14:53 +0100
                Re: OT: spam phone calls Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-22 12:10 -0400
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-22 17:06 +0000
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-22 13:24 -0400
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-03-22 22:43 +0100
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2025-03-22 20:36 +0000
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 08:27 -0400
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 08:22 -0400
                Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 08:07 -0400
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 14:19 +0200
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 09:14 -0400
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 18:10 +0200
                Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-28 23:01 +1000
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-28 19:42 +0000
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-04-28 21:04 +0100
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-29 17:37 +0000
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-29 20:18 +0200
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 20:54 +0200
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-29 21:19 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-30 19:06 +0000
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-30 22:04 +0200
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-05-01 16:54 +0000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-05-01 19:01 +0200
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:30 +1000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> - 2025-05-01 18:06 +0000
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:26 +1000
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-03 14:11 +0200
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> - 2025-05-03 15:08 +0100
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-03 15:04 -0400
                                      Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-03 23:41 +0200
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-05-03 19:26 +0000
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-30 06:36 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-30 09:04 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-30 19:01 +0000
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:34 +1000
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-30 18:53 +0000
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-29 20:27 +1000
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> - 2025-04-29 15:03 +0100
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-04-29 16:21 +0100
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-29 17:58 +0000
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-04-30 10:13 +0100
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-01 00:07 +1000
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> - 2025-04-30 15:36 +0100
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-30 18:50 +0000
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:39 +1000
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-05-03 19:23 +0000
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 20:09 +0200
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-01 00:02 +1000
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> - 2025-04-29 18:30 +0100
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-29 17:48 +0000
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:44 +1000
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 11:57 +0200
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-04-29 11:09 +0100
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 12:36 +0200
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-04-29 11:48 +0100
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 13:14 +0200
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:54 +1000
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-29 20:29 +1000
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 12:39 +0200
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-30 13:36 +0000
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-03 21:56 +1000
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-05-24 10:17 +0100
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-05-24 17:05 +0000
          Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-21 18:11 +0000
            Re: OT: spam phone calls micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 08:28 -0400
              Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 14:37 +0200
          Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-08 21:55 +1000
            Re: OT: spam phone calls "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-04-08 08:10 -0400
              Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-04-08 13:52 +0100
                Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-08 20:33 +0000
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-04-09 11:45 +0100
                    Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-04-10 09:16 +0100
                      Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-04-10 09:33 +0100
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-04-10 14:40 +0100
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-04-29 21:23 +1000
                        Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-04-28 19:13 +0100
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2025-04-28 21:19 +0100
                          Re: OT: spam phone calls knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-04-28 16:51 -0400
                            Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 12:42 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> - 2025-04-29 11:35 +0000
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-04-29 15:35 +0100
                                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> - 2025-04-29 15:06 +0000
                                    Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 20:15 +0200
                                Re: OT: spam phone calls "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-29 20:17 +0200
                              Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-04-29 12:57 +0100
              Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-08 20:23 +0000
              Re: OT: spam phone calls bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2025-04-08 17:06 -0400
            Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-04-08 18:55 +0000
              Re: OT: spam phone calls David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> - 2025-04-09 14:16 +0100
              Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-13 22:52 +1000
                Re: OT: spam phone calls Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-05-13 17:04 +0000
            Re: OT: spam phone calls Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-09 12:21 +0200
              Re: OT: spam phone calls ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2025-04-09 19:54 +0000
                Re: OT: spam phone calls Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-09 17:07 -0500
                Re: OT: spam phone calls JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> - 2025-04-10 09:18 +0100
                  Re: OT: spam phone calls Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-04-28 19:10 +0100
              Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-05-13 22:55 +1000
    Re: OT: spam phone calls mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) - 2025-03-20 14:21 -0400
    Re: OT: spam phone calls Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-31 20:35 +1100
      Re: OT: spam phone calls Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-03-31 12:23 +0000

Page 8 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10  Next page →


#184145

FromRichmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com>
Date2025-04-29 11:48 +0100
Message-ID<86ecxb1bxa.fsf@example.com>
In reply to#184142
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:

> On 2025-04-29 12:09, Graham J wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
>>>> actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
>>>> give it a call. 😜
>>>
>>> I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
>>> country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
>>>
>> At least the phone system works when there's a power failure! 
>> Useful to know ...
>
> Mine did, but not everybody's.
>
> Just heard from someone that people had to physically go to the office
> of one known brand of elevators to go and rescue some trapped people
> in this or that lift. Phone at that office was off.
>
> On most places, the land line failed instantly, because the network is
> fibre and needs power at sites. Mine failed instantly, and it is on
> UPS. Mobile worked while towers had battery. It is possible that my
> tower was on the main exchange, so they had a big battery and a
> generator.

Did analog and digital landlines fail equally? or maybe there are no
analog lines left in Spain.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184146

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2025-04-29 13:14 +0200
Message-ID<pso6elxctr.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#184145
On 2025-04-29 12:48, Richmond wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
> 
>> On 2025-04-29 12:09, Graham J wrote:
>>> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
>>>>> actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
>>>>> give it a call. 😜
>>>>
>>>> I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
>>>> country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
>>>>
>>> At least the phone system works when there's a power failure!
>>> Useful to know ...
>>
>> Mine did, but not everybody's.
>>
>> Just heard from someone that people had to physically go to the office
>> of one known brand of elevators to go and rescue some trapped people
>> in this or that lift. Phone at that office was off.
>>
>> On most places, the land line failed instantly, because the network is
>> fibre and needs power at sites. Mine failed instantly, and it is on
>> UPS. Mobile worked while towers had battery. It is possible that my
>> tower was on the main exchange, so they had a big battery and a
>> generator.
> 
> Did analog and digital landlines fail equally? or maybe there are no
> analog lines left in Spain.

There are no longer POT lines in Spain (copper pair), at least with the 
majority provider, Telefónica. It has switched to fibre network. At 
locations with no fibre, they use some radio system instead.

I don't know the exact situation with other providers, I haven't heard 
about them.

For example, the old network of the cable company ONO, which now belongs 
to Vodafone, is fibre to the block, then coax to the home. On apartment 
buildings, they see a copper pair getting to their phone from the 
basement. But there is a fibre coming to the building, so service is 
down if there is no electricity. I do not know if they have their own 
power supply coming from their main exchange.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184257

FromDaniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org>
Date2025-05-03 21:54 +1000
Message-ID<vv505b$3fkjk$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#184146
On 29/04/2025 9:14 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:

<Snip>

> For example, the old network of the cable company ONO, which now belongs 
> to Vodafone, is fibre to the block, then coax to the home. On apartment 
> buildings, they see a copper pair getting to their phone from the 
> basement. But there is a fibre coming to the building, so service is 
> down if there is no electricity. I do not know if they have their own 
> power supply coming from their main exchange.
> 
Similar in Australia. We used to have twisted pair cable all over the 
place but, back in about 2010, the Federal Government set up the 
National Broadband Network (NBN) which would have Optical Fibre to the 
box in the street and then twisted pair to the premises .... unless the 
premises owner (i.e. Businesses) pays for Fibre.

Some Rural subscribers go Satellite Phone service.
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184141

FromDaniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org>
Date2025-04-29 20:29 +1000
Message-ID<vuq9n3$1j1v8$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#184138
On 29/04/2025 7:57 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
>>
>> Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I 
>> actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can 
>> give it a call. 😜
> 
> I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire 
> country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
> 
Well, with Power out, I guess you weren't doing anything else .... so, 
maybe, your spammer was wanting to give you something to do. '-P
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184143

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2025-04-29 12:39 +0200
Message-ID<trm6elxbpn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#184141
On 2025-04-29 12:29, Daniel70 wrote:
> On 29/04/2025 7:57 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
>>>
>>> Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I 
>>> actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can 
>>> give it a call. 😜
>>
>> I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire 
>> country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
>>
> Well, with Power out, I guess you weren't doing anything else .... so, 
> maybe, your spammer was wanting to give you something to do. '-P

I was bored. I answered, but got nobody saying anything, so I had to 
hang down.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184194

FromFrank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
Date2025-04-30 13:36 +0000
Message-ID<vutg1m.svo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
In reply to#184119
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
[...]
> Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I 
> actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give 
> it a call. ;-P

  That' SO (before-)last decade! :-) That's what my watch is for.

  Watch has 'Find Phone'. Laptop has 'Find Phone'. Google TV Streamer
has 'Find Remote'.

  Google TV Streamer is cable connected to the TV, so can not get lost.
Laptop can get lost, but not so easily.

  Mother's Day is coming up, but she will *not* get a 'Find Hubby'
gadget!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184258

FromDaniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org>
Date2025-05-03 21:56 +1000
Message-ID<vv508j$3fkjk$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#184194
On 30/04/2025 11:36 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
> [...]
>> Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
>> actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give
>> it a call. ;-P
> 
>    That' SO (before-)last decade! :-) That's what my watch is for.
> 
>    Watch has 'Find Phone'. Laptop has 'Find Phone'. Google TV Streamer
> has 'Find Remote'.
> 
>    Google TV Streamer is cable connected to the TV, so can not get lost.
> Laptop can get lost, but not so easily.
> 
>    Mother's Day is coming up, but she will *not* get a 'Find Hubby'
> gadget!
> 
Oh, you Hi-Tech person, You!!
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184541

FromJMB99 <mb@nospam.net>
Date2025-05-24 10:17 +0100
Message-ID<100s2s6$kemf$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#184119
Odd one this morning, phone rings with number withheld.

When I answered, they asked for me by my name.

I asked who was calling.

Someone with a local accent replied it was <a forename and surname> from 
<a Scottish bank>

I asked why he was calling me and he just hung up.


Unusual for them to claim to be calling from a named bank, it is usually 
'your bank' or 'bank security'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#184544

FromMark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid>
Date2025-05-24 17:05 +0000
Message-ID<6831fc4b$1$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
In reply to#184541
On Sat, 24 May 2025 10:17:57 +0100, JMB99 wrote:

> Odd one this morning, phone rings with number withheld.

[snip]

I got another one of those calls about "Comcast discounts". I suppose they 
don't actually care that Comcast isn't available here.

The message was also inconsistent, including both of:

"Your discount has expired."
"You can stop it from expiring."

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Why are they called apartments, when they're all stuck together?"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#182983

FromMark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid>
Date2025-03-21 18:11 +0000
Message-ID<67ddabcc$0$16738$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
In reply to#182978
On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 13:51:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

[snip]

> Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate
> their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not
> really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.

I've tried blocking numbers. If helps with some things (like charities 
that seem to think I'm an ATM) but doesn't help with spammers (too many 
numbers).

I seldom answer spam calls on my home phone because of caller ID NAME (the 
current usual pattern for spammers is the name is a copy of the number). I 
really wish cell phones would provide that. I probably miss some real 
calls by ignoring unknown numbers.

[snip]

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"They are not jackbooted Nazi thugs. They are merely German policemen in
spiffy uniforms here to help us." - Vichy government (1941 - 1945)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183222

Frommicky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com>
Date2025-04-03 08:28 -0400
Message-ID<cmvsujt7au6qn4rsppf3kdjeu36g3jt7kr@4ax.com>
In reply to#182983
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:11:24 GMT, Mark Lloyd
<not.email@all.invalid> wrote:

>
>I've tried blocking numbers. If helps with some things (like charities 
>that seem to think I'm an ATM) but doesn't help with spammers (too many 
>numbers).

Oh yeah, another advantage to not turning the cell phone on.  I don't
get many spam calls even when it's on, but I get none when it's off.  
>
>I seldom answer spam calls on my home phone because of caller ID NAME (the 
>current usual pattern for spammers is the name is a copy of the number). I 
>really wish cell phones would provide that. I probably miss some real 
>calls by ignoring unknown numbers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183223

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2025-04-03 14:37 +0200
Message-ID<91c2clx7i7.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#183222
On 2025-04-03 14:28, micky wrote:
> In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:11:24 GMT, Mark Lloyd
> <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>
>> I've tried blocking numbers. If helps with some things (like charities
>> that seem to think I'm an ATM) but doesn't help with spammers (too many
>> numbers).
> 
> Oh yeah, another advantage to not turning the cell phone on.  I don't
> get many spam calls even when it's on, but I get none when it's off.

We use "do not disturb" mode or airplane mode. Or, use features like do 
not ring if not in address book.

>>
>> I seldom answer spam calls on my home phone because of caller ID NAME (the
>> current usual pattern for spammers is the name is a copy of the number). I
>> really wish cell phones would provide that. I probably miss some real
>> calls by ignoring unknown numbers.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183359

FromDaniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org>
Date2025-04-08 21:55 +1000
Message-ID<vt32s7$2628d$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#182978
On 21/03/2025 11:51 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:

<Snip>

>> I add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped reduce
>> spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I won't answer a
>> call from a number I don't recognize.
> 
> Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate 
> their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not 
> really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
> 
> I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to block, 
> Truecaller.
> 
For some weird reason my Landline phone socket wasn't installed in the 
Lounge/Kitchen/Dinning-room but in the main bedroom instead!

After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom 
when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I 
brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built-in Answer machine.

Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer 
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine 
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183360

From"Alan K." <alan@invalid.com>
Date2025-04-08 08:10 -0400
Message-ID<vt33nb$24gb9$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#183359
On 4/8/25 07:55 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
> On 21/03/2025 11:51 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:
> 
> <Snip>
> 
>>> I add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped reduce
>>> spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I won't answer a
>>> call from a number I don't recognize.
>>
>> Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate their numbers, 
>> you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not really blocking the spammers. 
>> That said, I also block them.
>>
>> I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to block, Truecaller.
>>
> For some weird reason my Landline phone socket wasn't installed in the Lounge/Kitchen/ 
> Dinning-room but in the main bedroom instead!
> 
> After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom when the phone 
> rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built- 
> in Answer machine.
> 
> Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer Machine starts up 
> and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine starts up, the calling person/machine/ 
> whatever hangs up. ;-)
We do a similar thing.  Our phone/answering machine speaks the caller ID and/or number. 
If the person is in the built in phone book, the phone will speak their name as we entered 
it, and not some cryptic caller ID.  Still, if the ID is some 4 digit number and no name, 
we know it's a scammer.

-- 
Linux Mint 22.1, Cinnamon 6.4.8,  Kernel 6.8.0-57-generic
Thunderbird 128.9.0esr, Mozilla Firefox 137.0
     Alan K.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183362

FromDavey <davey@example.invalid>
Date2025-04-08 13:52 +0100
Message-ID<vt366j$28v73$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#183360
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 08:10:19 -0400
"Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> wrote:

> On 4/8/25 07:55 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
> > On 21/03/2025 11:51 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:  
> >> On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:  
> > 
> > <Snip>
> >   
> >>> I add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped
> >>> reduce spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I
> >>> won't answer a call from a number I don't recognize.  
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they
> >> rotate their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent
> >> person, and not really blocking the spammers. That said, I also
> >> block them.
> >>
> >> I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to
> >> block, Truecaller. 
> > For some weird reason my Landline phone socket wasn't installed in
> > the Lounge/Kitchen/ Dinning-room but in the main bedroom instead!
> > 
> > After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the
> > Bedroom when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller
> > calling, I brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built- in Answer machine.
> > 
> > Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the
> > Answer Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer
> > Machine starts up, the calling person/machine/ whatever hangs up.
> > ;-)  
> We do a similar thing.  Our phone/answering machine speaks the caller
> ID and/or number. If the person is in the built in phone book, the
> phone will speak their name as we entered it, and not some cryptic
> caller ID.  Still, if the ID is some 4 digit number and no name, we
> know it's a scammer.
> 

Recently, I have noticed that spammer calls tend to have my local area
code preceding the rest of the spoofed number, but I also let the
answering machine part of the DECT system offer to record the caller's
information, which indeed usually results in a cleared line. Serious
people leave a message.

-- 
Davey.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183380

FromMark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid>
Date2025-04-08 20:33 +0000
Message-ID<67f5882a$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
In reply to#183362
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:52:35 +0100, Davey wrote:

[snip]

> Recently, I have noticed that spammer calls tend to have my local area
> code preceding the rest of the spoofed number, but I also let the
> answering machine part of the DECT system offer to record the caller's
> information, which indeed usually results in a cleared line. Serious
> people leave a message.

I get spoofed numbers with a wide variety of area codes, although possibly 
more of my local area code. If the caller's name is given as a number, I 
NEVER have a message from those.

I've had very few junk callers leave a message. One way to tell is if the 
first couple of seconds are missing, since those robocallers seem to be 
unable to wait for the beep. You get something like "...ficer. You are 
being..." (The missing part was probably "This is of", and there was no 
officer's name). This is from a scam that claimed I owed the IRS, and need 
to pay with gift cards.

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Infidels in all ages have battled for the rights of man, and have at
all times been the fearless advocates of liberty and justice." [Robert
Green Ingersoll]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183414

FromDavey <davey@example.invalid>
Date2025-04-09 11:45 +0100
Message-ID<vt5j44$f311$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#183380
On 08 Apr 2025 20:33:46 GMT
Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:52:35 +0100, Davey wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > Recently, I have noticed that spammer calls tend to have my local
> > area code preceding the rest of the spoofed number, but I also let
> > the answering machine part of the DECT system offer to record the
> > caller's information, which indeed usually results in a cleared
> > line. Serious people leave a message.  
> 
> I get spoofed numbers with a wide variety of area codes, although
> possibly more of my local area code. If the caller's name is given as
> a number, I NEVER have a message from those.
> 
> I've had very few junk callers leave a message. One way to tell is if
> the first couple of seconds are missing, since those robocallers seem
> to be unable to wait for the beep. You get something like "...ficer.
> You are being..." (The missing part was probably "This is of", and
> there was no officer's name). This is from a scam that claimed I owed
> the IRS, and need to pay with gift cards.
> 

The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims to be
from some charge card company, and tells me that there are two charges
on the card, from businesses that I do not use. The message is always
the same. I let the outgoing message play, and then wait for the line
to clear, which takes longer than it should, and I cannot clear it from
my end using the buttons on the handset. It only clears when the caller
drops the line.

-- 
Davey.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183476

FromJMB99 <mb@nospam.net>
Date2025-04-10 09:16 +0100
Message-ID<vt7upq$2i6vb$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to#183414
On 09/04/2025 11:45, Davey wrote:
> The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims to be
> from some charge card company, and tells me that there are two charges
> on the card, from businesses that I do not use.


But never say which card!


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183478

FromDavey <davey@example.invalid>
Date2025-04-10 09:33 +0100
Message-ID<vt7vod$2joqk$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#183476
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:16:48 +0100
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

> On 09/04/2025 11:45, Davey wrote:
> > The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims
> > to be from some charge card company, and tells me that there are
> > two charges on the card, from businesses that I do not use.  
> 
> 
> But never say which card!
> 
> 
> 

Well, no, that would be too much information! It is always the same
message, with the same charges.
I have recently had a spate of: "Your package is ready for
pickup..." e-mail messages, and a couple of the "Thank you for renewing
your Norton 360 subscription." ones. Since I have been exclusively a
Linux user since 2010, that is well out of date!

-- 
Davey.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#183493

FromJMB99 <mb@nospam.net>
Date2025-04-10 14:40 +0100
Message-ID<vt8hp3$338qp$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#183478
On 10/04/2025 09:33, Davey wrote:
> Well, no, that would be too much information! It is always the same
> message, with the same charges.
> I have recently had a spate of: "Your package is ready for
> pickup..." e-mail messages, and a couple of the "Thank you for renewing
> your Norton 360 subscription." ones. Since I have been exclusively a
> Linux user since 2010, that is well out of date!


I have had some genuine ones, usually when there has been a foreign 
transaction.



[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 8 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-10


csiph-web