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

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #87133 > unrolled thread

Redundancy/Survival

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 02:21 -0400
    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 08:46 +0200
      Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-05-26 09:49 +0200
        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 04:47 -0400
        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 11:25 +0200
        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-05-26 09:53 +0000
      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 04:38 -0400
        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 11:35 +0200
        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-05-26 22:09 +0000
          Re: Redundancy/Survival John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-05-26 16:17 -0700
            Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-05-27 00:02 +0000
              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-27 00:11 -0400
                Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-05-28 10:32 +0200
              Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-27 08:41 +0100
                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-27 11:04 +0200
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:31 -0400
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 09:18 +0100
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-28 13:42 +0200
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 15:01 +0100
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 21:34 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 11:07 +0100
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 12:55 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 12:14 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 13:36 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 13:26 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:36 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 17:24 +0100
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:37 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:36 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 22:34 +0100
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-30 04:29 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-30 13:09 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-30 23:29 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-05-31 21:45 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:15 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-01 18:53 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-02 01:46 +0000
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-02 03:01 -0400
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:12 +0000
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 10:16 +0200
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:09 +0000
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 21:26 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-02 02:58 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-02 11:11 +0100
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-05-29 04:30 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 01:34 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:36 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-31 00:38 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-05-31 05:09 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-31 03:10 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-05-31 07:14 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-01 00:49 -0400
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-01 04:57 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 03:20 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 19:45 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 18:30 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:27 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 10:49 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 13:16 +0200
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:35 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:21 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 18:25 +0000
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 21:36 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-01 19:00 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-06-02 17:44 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 17:54 +0000
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 16:57 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 21:02 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 02:17 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 03:50 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-01 01:07 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:47 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 17:36 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:33 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:26 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 17:31 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:49 +0200
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-30 09:09 +1000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-30 13:17 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-31 07:33 +1000
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-31 00:14 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-31 12:09 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-01 00:51 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:28 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-31 12:58 +0200
                Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-05-27 20:51 +0000
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-05-27 14:02 -0700
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-28 08:54 +1000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-05-28 05:04 +0000
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:54 -0400
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-05-28 09:15 +0100
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:29 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-28 13:45 +0200
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-05-29 02:50 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 01:17 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:48 +0000
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-30 04:25 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-30 13:20 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-05-30 14:16 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-05-30 04:00 +0000
            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 23:41 -0400
              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-27 14:09 +0100
                Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:51 -0400
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-28 17:08 +0000
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 22:14 -0400
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 04:41 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 01:53 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:32 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:19 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:52 +0200
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:08 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:55 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-02 10:39 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 13:21 +0200
          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 22:39 -0400
            Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-27 14:10 +0100
              Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-28 09:05 +1000
                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 08:19 +0100
              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:52 -0400
                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 09:20 +0100
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 20:34 -0400
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-05-28 21:07 -0400
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:40 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-01 19:12 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 10:28 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 12:15 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 16:19 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:30 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:29 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 16:49 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-06-02 17:38 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 15:48 +0000
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 17:55 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 16:03 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 12:22 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 16:36 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:39 +0200
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 01:21 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 02:08 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:41 +0000
                Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:23 +0000
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 23:00 +0200
    Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-05-26 09:44 +0200
      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 04:45 -0400
      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 11:38 +0200
    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Worst Case" <fritz@spamexpire-202605.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2026-05-26 17:21 +0200

Page 1 of 8  [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

#87133 — Redundancy/Survival

Last year, one of my old ISPs, who I still get
SOME services thru, sent a message saying they
would no longer support DIAL-UP ... ie hardline
modem access.

Admittedly phone companies have been dumping
hard-lines as fast as they can of late ...
require actual HUMAN intervention, twisting
of physical wires and such.

DO still have a hardline phone, they keep raising
the price, trying to get me to quit. It works even
IF all the cell towers and such go down hard. Still
worth the money IMHO. And yea, HAVE had the experience
of all the towers going down. It's called HURRICANE.
The towers, IF still standing, have about three days
of generator power. Then ........

Admittedly dial-up is NOT good with modern, ultra-
cluttered bullshit-laden web pages. WILL usually
work though, if you're REALLY patient.

However you CAN at least do e-mail and a few other
things. In case of disasters SOME basic stuff will
still work.

But this back-redundancy is rapidly disappearing.
This leaves us with NOTHING in the event of
cyberwar or even natural disasters.

Cudos to the HAM radio operators ... they DO keep
at it. In many disaster zones THEY are the only
source of info in and out. It's early 1900s tech,
but STILL has a place - ultra robust.

Own one of the last AARL/HAM printed radio books,
like 400 pages. Details, in DETAIL, every kind
of circuit, all the equations, practical notes.
Covers from Morse code thru some digital. It's
incredibly complete. You COULD rebuild comm tech
starting from there - vac tubes to transistors
to chips. Think there's mention of mechanical
low-freq RF generators too.

HOW soon until we NEED this sort of info ?

How many still HAVE something like this manual
actually, physically, in their hands ?

I have enough transistors and shit on hand to
solder together a basic radio transceiver. Not
anything impressive, but sorta functional. But,
again, how many people DO ???

Nature and humans DO conspire against us all
the time. Sorry, your expensive iPhone can
become naught but JUNK overnight.

Then a 300-baud dial-up connection - amazing !

Just sayin'

When I was a kiddie, one of my teachers thought
it'd be interesting to do a tour of the local
Bell/ATT dialing center as a 'field trip'. It
was a pretty big, very plain, building. Aside
from a front office with human 'Operators', it
was entirely PACKED with mechanical dialing
machines. Big plexiglass tubes with long shafts
inside. When somebody picked up the phone there
was a mechanical device that'd move to a group
of physical circuit disks in the tube. This was
rotary-dial days. Then with each number dialed
some disks would rotate, relay-driven, to very
physically connect one phone to another. It was
Very Cool to watch :-)

What a wiring nightmare - but it WORKED and
no cyberwar could disrupt it. This was Cold
War era ... 'redundancy'/survivability WAS
a very practical, admitted, concern.

STILL have a 300/1200/2400 stand alone modem
in The Heap somewhere. Haven't used it since
the Compuserve Forum days when I plugged it
into a dumb terminal for fun - "ATTD...".

They don't ADMIT vulnerabilities anymore.
Why not ???

Again, just sayin'

Oh well, have gone on too long. But THINK
about this shit. Modern comms - FRAGILE
to the extreme.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#87137

On 2026-05-26 08:21, c186282 wrote:
> Last year, one of my old ISPs, who I still get
> SOME services thru, sent a message saying they
> would no longer support DIAL-UP ... ie hardline
> modem access.
> 
> Admittedly phone companies have been dumping
> hard-lines as fast as they can of late ...
> require actual HUMAN intervention, twisting
> of physical wires and such.
> 
> DO still have a hardline phone, they keep raising
> the price, trying to get me to quit. It works even
> IF all the cell towers and such go down hard. Still
> worth the money IMHO. And yea, HAVE had the experience
> of all the towers going down. It's called HURRICANE.
> The towers, IF still standing, have about three days
> of generator power. Then ........


You simply do not have a choice, copper pair land lines are being phased 
out. In some countries by laws. Here they did not raise the prices, they 
simply disconnected them one day. Like that. With warnings to migrate 
for months, of course, till one day, paff, disconnected. A few thousand 
people were just disconnected.

No arguing.

So, it is fibre now. If fibre is not feasible to your location (like 
isolated places), they they put you on some radio for the same price.

You may be on another provider who for years installed fibre to the 
curb, then coax to the home. It is copper, but not copper pairs. And 
goes down with power failures.


...

> Just sayin'
> 
> When I was a kiddie, one of my teachers thought
> it'd be interesting to do a tour of the local
> Bell/ATT dialing center as a 'field trip'. It
> was a pretty big, very plain, building. Aside
> from a front office with human 'Operators', it
> was entirely PACKED with mechanical dialing
> machines. Big plexiglass tubes with long shafts
> inside. When somebody picked up the phone there
> was a mechanical device that'd move to a group
> of physical circuit disks in the tube. This was
> rotary-dial days. Then with each number dialed
> some disks would rotate, relay-driven, to very
> physically connect one phone to another. It was
> Very Cool to watch :-)

I saw them in a museum in Britain back in 1976, during a visit when I 
was a kid. Birmingham Science Museum. At some point we were using large 
relays linear arrays of some sort. Pentaconta? I have never seen them 
close. Some of those were decommissioned recently.

<https://blogs.upm.es/museotelecomunicaciones/multiselector-pentaconta/>

There is a video of the system at work.

> 
> What a wiring nightmare - but it WORKED and
> no cyberwar could disrupt it. This was Cold
> War era ... 'redundancy'/survivability WAS
> a very practical, admitted, concern.
> 
> STILL have a 300/1200/2400 stand alone modem
> in The Heap somewhere. Haven't used it since
> the Compuserve Forum days when I plugged it
> into a dumb terminal for fun - "ATTD...".
> 
> They don't ADMIT vulnerabilities anymore.
> Why not ???
> 
> Again, just sayin'
> 
> Oh well, have gone on too long. But THINK
> about this shit. Modern comms - FRAGILE
> to the extreme.
> 


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87144

On 26.05.2026 08:46 Carlos E.R. wrote:

> You simply do not have a choice, copper pair land lines are being
> phased out. In some countries by laws.

Did they forbid land line phone service or copper cable (e.g. used for
DSL) at all?

> Here they did not raise the prices, they simply disconnected them
> one day. Like that. With warnings to migrate for months, of course,
> till one day, paff, disconnected. A few thousand people were just
> disconnected.

Didn't they cancel the contracts?

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

#87151

On 5/26/26 03:49, Marco Moock wrote:
> On 26.05.2026 08:46 Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> You simply do not have a choice, copper pair land lines are being
>> phased out. In some countries by laws.
> 
> Did they forbid land line phone service or copper cable (e.g. used for
> DSL) at all?

   NO more DSL of any kind.

   But the voice lines STILL continue, for now.

>> Here they did not raise the prices, they simply disconnected them
>> one day. Like that. With warnings to migrate for months, of course,
>> till one day, paff, disconnected. A few thousand people were just
>> disconnected.
> 
> Didn't they cancel the contracts?

   MY provider sez "No more NEW hardlines" - but
   they're not removing existing ones, yet.

   So ... I'll keep it for as long as possible.

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

#87152

On 2026-05-26 09:49, Marco Moock wrote:
> On 26.05.2026 08:46 Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> You simply do not have a choice, copper pair land lines are being
>> phased out. In some countries by laws.
> 
> Did they forbid land line phone service or copper cable (e.g. used for
> DSL) at all?

They approved the plan by telcos.


> 
>> Here they did not raise the prices, they simply disconnected them
>> one day. Like that. With warnings to migrate for months, of course,
>> till one day, paff, disconnected. A few thousand people were just
>> disconnected.
> 
> Didn't they cancel the contracts?

They sent a mail/email saying they could migrate to radio or cancel 
contract.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87155

Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
> On 26.05.2026 08:46 Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> You simply do not have a choice, copper pair land lines are being
>> phased out. In some countries by laws.
> 
> Did they forbid land line phone service or copper cable (e.g. used for
> DSL) at all?

In my area, it was the land line phone (old POTS copper pairs) that 
were retired.  Verizon 'sweet talked' the state regulators into 
allowing it to drop the old POTS service, and so for some number of 
months every bill included big 'warnings' about switching over to their 
FIOS phone service.  Which was really just their own, very high priced 
variant of VOIP.

The copper wires still hang from the poles, but they are no longer used 
for anything.

But as DSL needed the old copper POTS infrastructure to work, shutting 
down the copper infrastructure also meant no more option to obtain DSL 
service either (which Verizon actually liked, because the regulations 
required them to share, on fair terms, their copper wires with DSL 
providers, but they managed to /also/ 'sweet talk' the regulators into 
there being no such requirement for their fiber service.

>> Here they did not raise the prices, they simply disconnected them
>> one day. Like that. With warnings to migrate for months, of course,
>> till one day, paff, disconnected. A few thousand people were just
>> disconnected.
> 
> Didn't they cancel the contracts?

In much of the US phone service was not "contracted" but just paid 
month to month (at least for residental service).

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

#87148

On 5/26/26 02:46, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-05-26 08:21, c186282 wrote:
>> Last year, one of my old ISPs, who I still get
>> SOME services thru, sent a message saying they
>> would no longer support DIAL-UP ... ie hardline
>> modem access.
>>
>> Admittedly phone companies have been dumping
>> hard-lines as fast as they can of late ...
>> require actual HUMAN intervention, twisting
>> of physical wires and such.
>>
>> DO still have a hardline phone, they keep raising
>> the price, trying to get me to quit. It works even
>> IF all the cell towers and such go down hard. Still
>> worth the money IMHO. And yea, HAVE had the experience
>> of all the towers going down. It's called HURRICANE.
>> The towers, IF still standing, have about three days
>> of generator power. Then ........
> 
> 
> You simply do not have a choice, copper pair land lines are being phased 
> out. In some countries by laws. Here they did not raise the prices, they 
> simply disconnected them one day. Like that. With warnings to migrate 
> for months, of course, till one day, paff, disconnected. A few thousand 
> people were just disconnected.
> 
> No arguing.

   Well ... I'll keep The Choice for as long as I can.
   The Price is almost irrelevant.

> So, it is fibre now. If fibre is not feasible to your location (like 
> isolated places), they they put you on some radio for the same price.

   Fiber is STILL a direct-connect tech ... and
   the providers are AGAINST that. Requires HUMAN
   workers.

   They want 100% wireless - no matter how shitty.

> You may be on another provider who for years installed fibre to the 
> curb, then coax to the home. It is copper, but not copper pairs. And 
> goes down with power failures.
> 
> 
> ...
> 
>> Just sayin'
>>
>> When I was a kiddie, one of my teachers thought
>> it'd be interesting to do a tour of the local
>> Bell/ATT dialing center as a 'field trip'. It
>> was a pretty big, very plain, building. Aside
>> from a front office with human 'Operators', it
>> was entirely PACKED with mechanical dialing
>> machines. Big plexiglass tubes with long shafts
>> inside. When somebody picked up the phone there
>> was a mechanical device that'd move to a group
>> of physical circuit disks in the tube. This was
>> rotary-dial days. Then with each number dialed
>> some disks would rotate, relay-driven, to very
>> physically connect one phone to another. It was
>> Very Cool to watch :-)
> 
> I saw them in a museum in Britain back in 1976, during a visit when I 
> was a kid. Birmingham Science Museum. At some point we were using large 
> relays linear arrays of some sort. Pentaconta? I have never seen them 
> close. Some of those were decommissioned recently.
> 
> <https://blogs.upm.es/museotelecomunicaciones/multiselector-pentaconta/>
>
> There is a video of the system at work.

   I saw them in real-time/real-world operation.

   Fascinating.

   However the WIRING ... wow !

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

#87153

On 2026-05-26 10:38, c186282 wrote:
> On 5/26/26 02:46, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2026-05-26 08:21, c186282 wrote:


>> So, it is fibre now. If fibre is not feasible to your location (like 
>> isolated places), they they put you on some radio for the same price.
> 
>    Fiber is STILL a direct-connect tech ... and
>    the providers are AGAINST that. Requires HUMAN
>    workers.
> 
>    They want 100% wireless - no matter how shitty.


No here they put one fibre to the block, then they split the fibre to 16 
customers. Which one on each, is software config on the router, and 
maybe at the telco. The splitter is optical, no power needed.


>> I saw them in a museum in Britain back in 1976, during a visit when I 
>> was a kid. Birmingham Science Museum. At some point we were using 
>> large relays linear arrays of some sort. Pentaconta? I have never seen 
>> them close. Some of those were decommissioned recently.
>>
>> <https://blogs.upm.es/museotelecomunicaciones/multiselector-pentaconta/>
>>
>> There is a video of the system at work.
> 
>    I saw them in real-time/real-world operation.
> 
>    Fascinating.
> 
>    However the WIRING ... wow !

I have seen the wiring up close. And done wiring, but not for customers, 
but tiny coax that distributed 2 mbit transmission. With a 5ESSS.

No soldering, no connectors, no crimping. Just wrapping around a long 
pin. The wiring is methodical, just a long job. No failures.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87165

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> On 5/26/26 02:46, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> So, it is fibre now. If fibre is not feasible to your location (like 
>> isolated places), they they put you on some radio for the same price.
> 
>   Fiber is STILL a direct-connect tech ... and
>   the providers are AGAINST that. Requires HUMAN
>   workers.
> 
>   They want 100% wireless - no matter how shitty.

In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that 
POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability 
requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are 
free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or 
being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.

They don't mind at all sending a tech. out to drag in fiber, given that 
each one moves them from "regulated service" to "unregulated service".

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

#87167

On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that 
> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability 
> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are 
> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or 
> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.

Well *that* explains a lot :/

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

#87168

On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that 
>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability 
>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are 
>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or 
>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>
> Well *that* explains a lot :/

Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
goes out.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

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

#87175

On 5/26/26 20:02, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that
>>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability
>>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are
>>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or
>>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>>
>> Well *that* explains a lot :/
> 
> Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
> to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
> goes out.

   The entire south/east coast of America - from Honduras
   thru Texas and Florida and all the way up into YankeeLand -
   get huge hurricanes. They tear the shit out of infrastructure.

   Personal experiences ... cell towers, if still standing,
   only have about three days of reserve power. Then, 19th
   century again. Send yer texts with a heliograph or
   a pigeon.

   Copper landlines actually hold up better on the whole.
   Did have a spate where the VOICE didn't work, but the
   old DSL did. This is why I keep paying more and more
   for my old copper ... IT WORKS.

   StarLink isn't super-cheap, but IS literally "above"
   climate problems. Also isn't the Big-3 comms providers.
   Been looking into that. There ARE phones too. The main
   annoyance is the kinda low daily/monthly bytes allowance.
   You're not gonna be streaming 8K over StarLink.

   Musk keeps testing his StarShip by pooping-out FAKE
   SL sats. All-around costs, maybe he should be sending
   REAL ones instead. The new gen kinda look like the
   '2001' monoliths (intentional?) and deliver WAY above
   the 1st gen.

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

#87226

On 27.05.2026 00:11 c186282 c186282 wrote:

>    StarLink isn't super-cheap, but IS literally "above"
>    climate problems. Also isn't the Big-3 comms providers.
>    Been looking into that. There ARE phones too. The main
>    annoyance is the kinda low daily/monthly bytes allowance.
>    You're not gonna be streaming 8K over StarLink.

You are not gonna do that via POTS/ISDN either.

Aren't there plans with more allowed data transfer for Starlink?

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

#87185

On 2026-05-27, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that 
>>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability 
>>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are 
>>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or 
>>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>>
>> Well *that* explains a lot :/
>
> Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
> to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
> goes out.

POTS has in a way always seemed a sensible option to still have
everywhere for certain emergencies, in fact perhaps households should
always have access to such a line even without contracting any service,
for stuff like 112.

But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of operating
only with the line power.

-- 
Nuno Silva

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

#87189

On 2026-05-27 09:41, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2026-05-27, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> 
>> On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that
>>>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability
>>>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are
>>>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or
>>>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>>>
>>> Well *that* explains a lot :/
>>
>> Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
>> to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
>> goes out.
> 
> POTS has in a way always seemed a sensible option to still have
> everywhere for certain emergencies, in fact perhaps households should
> always have access to such a line even without contracting any service,
> for stuff like 112.
> 
> But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of operating
> only with the line power.
> 

Will not happen. Live on...

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87217

On 5/27/26 05:04, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-05-27 09:41, Nuno Silva wrote:
>> On 2026-05-27, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that
>>>>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability
>>>>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are
>>>>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or
>>>>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>>>>
>>>> Well *that* explains a lot :/
>>>
>>> Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
>>> to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
>>> goes out.
>>
>> POTS has in a way always seemed a sensible option to still have
>> everywhere for certain emergencies, in fact perhaps households should
>> always have access to such a line even without contracting any service,
>> for stuff like 112.
>>
>> But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of operating
>> only with the line power.
>>
> 
> Will not happen. Live on...


   Um ... works NOW - why not always ?

   Kind of agree with the sentiment that copper should
   always be at hand for 'emergency' communications at
   a minimum. Towers die, cell contracts expire, copper
   keeps on going.

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

#87224

On 28/05/2026 08:31, c186282 wrote:
> Kind of agree with the sentiment that copper should
>    always be at hand for 'emergency' communications at
>    a minimum. Towers die, cell contracts expire, copper
>    keeps on going.

Copper corrodes.
Copper gets stolen.
Copper gets broken
Copper gets struck by lightning.

Your argument is based on false premises.
Undersea fibre persists till the Russians trawl it up and cut it.


-- 
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"

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

#87230

On 2026-05-28 09:31, c186282 wrote:
> On 5/27/26 05:04, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2026-05-27 09:41, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>> On 2026-05-27, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that
>>>>>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability
>>>>>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are
>>>>>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or
>>>>>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well *that* explains a lot :/
>>>>
>>>> Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
>>>> to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
>>>> goes out.
>>>
>>> POTS has in a way always seemed a sensible option to still have
>>> everywhere for certain emergencies, in fact perhaps households should
>>> always have access to such a line even without contracting any service,
>>> for stuff like 112.
>>>
>>> But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of operating
>>> only with the line power.
>>>
>>
>> Will not happen. Live on...
> 
> 
>    Um ... works NOW - why not always ?
> 
>    Kind of agree with the sentiment that copper should
>    always be at hand for 'emergency' communications at
>    a minimum. Towers die, cell contracts expire, copper
>    keeps on going.
> 

The exchanges need maintenance. Would you have those monsters active all 
the time just to give signal to a few customers? That's too expensive. 
Exchanges will eventually all get garbaged, and perhaps a converter will 
be connected to the few that refused to migrate to fibre, so they are 
fooled into thinking they still have copper.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87233

On 28/05/2026 12:42, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> The exchanges need maintenance. Would you have those monsters active all 
> the time just to give signal to a few customers? That's too expensive. 
> Exchanges will eventually all get garbaged, and perhaps a converter will 
> be connected to the few that refused to migrate to fibre, so they are 
> fooled into thinking they still have copper.
> 
> 
The point is simple: if copper were that good and low maintenance 
compared to fiber, no one would install fiber.


-- 
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all 
private property.

Karl Marx

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

#87249

On 5/28/26 07:42, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-05-28 09:31, c186282 wrote:
>> On 5/27/26 05:04, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2026-05-27 09:41, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>>> On 2026-05-27, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2026-05-26, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 26 May 2026 22:09:35 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the US, the ulterior motive actually appears to be the fact that
>>>>>>> POTS service is regulated (price regulated and availability
>>>>>>> requirements regulated) whereas the "new fangled" fiber services are
>>>>>>> free of those pesky requirements for requesting price increases or
>>>>>>> being required to provide a particular availably (uptime) level.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well *that* explains a lot :/
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup.  Our telco (Telus) had a really big push to convert everyone
>>>>> to fiber.  Now we too can enjoy loss of dial tone when the power
>>>>> goes out.
>>>>
>>>> POTS has in a way always seemed a sensible option to still have
>>>> everywhere for certain emergencies, in fact perhaps households should
>>>> always have access to such a line even without contracting any service,
>>>> for stuff like 112.
>>>>
>>>> But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of operating
>>>> only with the line power.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Will not happen. Live on...
>>
>>
>>    Um ... works NOW - why not always ?
>>
>>    Kind of agree with the sentiment that copper should
>>    always be at hand for 'emergency' communications at
>>    a minimum. Towers die, cell contracts expire, copper
>>    keeps on going.
>>
> 
> The exchanges need maintenance. Would you have those monsters active all 
> the time just to give signal to a few customers? That's too expensive. 
> Exchanges will eventually all get garbaged, and perhaps a converter will 
> be connected to the few that refused to migrate to fibre, so they are 
> fooled into thinking they still have copper.

   The service - albeit a  bit speed limited - should
   be available to ALL, all of the time. Some emergency
   devices at minimum, but you may as well enable voice
   at the same time.

   In short, never throw away a good hardwire network.

   Some assert that fiber will (barely) need maint ...
   don't think that's entirely true. All sorts of odd
   things can happen to physical media. And yes if
   you're branching fiber to everyone there WILL need
   to be a lot of splitters, boosters/repeaters. The
   latter require electricity. No copper, no electric.
   A 50w PV+Batt thingie every few blocks with
   industrial ratings - MORE expensive than a few
   existing copper wires.

   Fiber is better for SPEED ... but I don't think it
   is nearly as ROBUST or SIMPLE as some here are
   selling it.

   For comm corps ... they HATE employing humans. They
   imagine they can get rid of 99.9% of the physical
   service people by going to fiber or (crappier) 5G.
   No more lift vans ! No more labor unions ! Yay !!!

   In short their motives are selfishness, cheapness,
   not "better customer experience". Just don't think
   they're gonna get what they imagine. Leave the fiber &
   support equip out in the elements for a decade+ and
   see what happens.

   Maybe a year ago, AT&T showed up, opened a manhole
   near my place, and proceeded to pull out a gigantic
   copper cable. The guy said 4000 pairs ... about six
   inches around heavily clad. Apparently it used to
   service the entire south end of the county. They
   were cutting and pulling - about half a mile's worth
   at a time. Trucks with HUGE spools attached.

   Thing is, it was perfectly good cable, not bothering
   anybody. At best they can sell the copper, make a
   quick little buck. But now all that cable COULD have
   done is GONE. I just see it as 4000 lost options.

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

Page 1 of 8  [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web