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 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> - 2026-05-29 02:17 -0400
                      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 "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 "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 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 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 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 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

#87265

Argue crap all you want - the providers are
generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
and I support that.

Note the theme here - "Redundancy".

Keep EVERYTHING that worked. Add on new stuff
all you want, but .....

Use the Laws. Hire class-action lawyers if needed
to kick ass.

Oh, and even TELEGRAPH service should be preserved
over a few copper lines. Slow, but WORKED and was
very robust. First comm network that could use
pre-Tube/Transistor amplifiers ... just relays.
Edison figured out how to record the traffic
even as a youth.

On the whole, "new" is MUCH more technically
complicated at every level. That complication
means MANY more ways for it to FAIL.

OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
LONG time.

So HOW do you call an ambulance ? Your bank ?

You AREN'T ... unless we've maintained some
lower-tech REDUNDANCY.

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

#87286

Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> 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.
> 
> The legacy copper phones only "kept on going" because POTS (copper) 
> phone service was a highly regulated utility with requirements for 
> upkeep and maintence so that it /would/ just keep on going.
> 
> Without that upkeep, it eventually falls into disrepair and stops 
> working just like the rest.

You bet, that's my POTS line here in Australia described exactly.
Even though I just learnt our government is paying $270 million a
year to maintain it (on top of the fees paid by customers) in
places not connected to fibre or "fixed wireless" internet. Money
straight into the telco's profits, no doubt. The exchanges even
look abandoned now with peeling paint etc. 

> It's only real difference from towers is fewer possibilities to go 
> wrong when the 'system' is just a long pair of copper wires vs. complex 
> electronics systems for a radio tower (i.e., no capicators to dry out 
> and fail in a long pair of copper wires).  Most failures were 
> mechanical (something physically tearing down the wires) or chemical 
> (water infiltration corroding the connection points).

Well here it's almost always the exchange that keeps going
wrong. Then they take between a few days to a few weeks to fix it,
which I think just means how long until someone gets around to
visiting it. Someone said they're required to fix it within 24
hours, but if that's true then they're completely ignoring that.

> But fail it did.  If the lines were above ground then tree branches (or 
> automobiles) would take out the lines.  If the lines were underground 
> then water infiltration into the conduits would result in noise or 
> nothing working.  I had this one myself on my pair once.  Line that had 
> been nice and quiet (and worked well for DSL) suddenly sounded like 
> someone was scraping a turntable needle over a vinyl record constantly.  
> Reported it to Verizon, they took some time to fix, but I eventually 
> learned the cause was an underground wiring vault a couple miles away 
> had flooded.

Yeah my old line rotted away completely after it was noisy for
years and they switched me to a spare which also gets noisy when
the ground's wet, but since we haven't had decent rainfall for
years that hasn't been a problem lately. Since that line switch
~5+ years ago I only had one other line fault late last year when
the council slashing grass on the roadsides cut the line. Amazingly
that _was_ fixed within about 24 hours, though when the exchange
died yet again later that week affecting everyone using it rather
than just people down my road, it took them 4-5 days to fix it. And
the exchange breaks far more frequently, in fact it was breaking
every time there was a power failure for a year or so, but it does
seem to be surviving those these days (except the obviously-dead
battery there means you still can't make calls while the power's
off anymore).

> But your individual experience dependend upon what happened with your 
> specific pair.  If you were lucky and no falling trees, drunk drivers, 
> or ice storms happened to pull down your copper pair, and no leaky 
> underground conduits soaked it, then to you it appeared to be 
> impervious to failure.  Reality from the other size (the phone company) 
> viewpoint is that something, somewhere, was always failing and needing 
> repair.

So apparantly our largest telco decided to just send the government
the bill, then it eventually realised the government didn't
notice/care anymore if they didn't fix things quickly or properly
in return for that money anyway. Then they stopped mobile phones
working properly here as well when they turned off 3G...

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

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

#87291

On 2026-05-30 01:09, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> 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.
>>
>> The legacy copper phones only "kept on going" because POTS (copper)
>> phone service was a highly regulated utility with requirements for
>> upkeep and maintence so that it /would/ just keep on going.
>>
>> Without that upkeep, it eventually falls into disrepair and stops
>> working just like the rest.
> 
> You bet, that's my POTS line here in Australia described exactly.
> Even though I just learnt our government is paying $270 million a
> year to maintain it (on top of the fees paid by customers) in
> places not connected to fibre or "fixed wireless" internet. Money
> straight into the telco's profits, no doubt. The exchanges even
> look abandoned now with peeling paint etc.
> 
>> It's only real difference from towers is fewer possibilities to go
>> wrong when the 'system' is just a long pair of copper wires vs. complex
>> electronics systems for a radio tower (i.e., no capicators to dry out
>> and fail in a long pair of copper wires).  Most failures were
>> mechanical (something physically tearing down the wires) or chemical
>> (water infiltration corroding the connection points).
> 
> Well here it's almost always the exchange that keeps going
> wrong. Then they take between a few days to a few weeks to fix it,
> which I think just means how long until someone gets around to
> visiting it. Someone said they're required to fix it within 24
> hours, but if that's true then they're completely ignoring that.

Someone visiting, finding someone that knows those exchanges (all old 
people and running out), then finding the spares of abandoned 
technology, shipping them...

> 
>> But fail it did.  If the lines were above ground then tree branches (or
>> automobiles) would take out the lines.  If the lines were underground
>> then water infiltration into the conduits would result in noise or
>> nothing working.  I had this one myself on my pair once.  Line that had
>> been nice and quiet (and worked well for DSL) suddenly sounded like
>> someone was scraping a turntable needle over a vinyl record constantly.
>> Reported it to Verizon, they took some time to fix, but I eventually
>> learned the cause was an underground wiring vault a couple miles away
>> had flooded.
> 
> Yeah my old line rotted away completely after it was noisy for
> years and they switched me to a spare which also gets noisy when
> the ground's wet, but since we haven't had decent rainfall for
> years that hasn't been a problem lately. Since that line switch
> ~5+ years ago I only had one other line fault late last year when
> the council slashing grass on the roadsides cut the line. Amazingly
> that _was_ fixed within about 24 hours, though when the exchange
> died yet again later that week affecting everyone using it rather
> than just people down my road, it took them 4-5 days to fix it. And
> the exchange breaks far more frequently, in fact it was breaking
> every time there was a power failure for a year or so, but it does
> seem to be surviving those these days (except the obviously-dead
> battery there means you still can't make calls while the power's
> off anymore).

Those exchanges are not designed to suffer a sudden power off. And 
rebooting is not automatic, it takes a human with special knowledge to 
do it, because it is something done once in life.

> 
>> But your individual experience dependend upon what happened with your
>> specific pair.  If you were lucky and no falling trees, drunk drivers,
>> or ice storms happened to pull down your copper pair, and no leaky
>> underground conduits soaked it, then to you it appeared to be
>> impervious to failure.  Reality from the other size (the phone company)
>> viewpoint is that something, somewhere, was always failing and needing
>> repair.
> 
> So apparantly our largest telco decided to just send the government
> the bill, then it eventually realised the government didn't
> notice/care anymore if they didn't fix things quickly or properly
> in return for that money anyway. Then they stopped mobile phones
> working properly here as well when they turned off 3G...
> 


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87294

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-05-30 01:09, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> Yeah my old line rotted away completely after it was noisy for
>> years and they switched me to a spare which also gets noisy when
>> the ground's wet, but since we haven't had decent rainfall for
>> years that hasn't been a problem lately. Since that line switch
>> ~5+ years ago I only had one other line fault late last year when
>> the council slashing grass on the roadsides cut the line. Amazingly
>> that _was_ fixed within about 24 hours, though when the exchange
>> died yet again later that week affecting everyone using it rather
>> than just people down my road, it took them 4-5 days to fix it. And
>> the exchange breaks far more frequently, in fact it was breaking
>> every time there was a power failure for a year or so, but it does
>> seem to be surviving those these days (except the obviously-dead
>> battery there means you still can't make calls while the power's
>> off anymore).
> 
> Those exchanges are not designed to suffer a sudden power off. And 
> rebooting is not automatic, it takes a human with special knowledge to 
> do it, because it is something done once in life.

That seems highly unlikely (more of your AI 'wisdom'?). These
exchanges are tiny huts littered throughout regional Australia, and
the last mechanical exchange was converted in the 1990s. If someone
designed their electronic exchange equipment to require manual
reset after power-off, they must have been nuts. In any case if
they replaced the battery, which used to work, it wouldn't get
powered off by every short blackout.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

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

#87298

On 5/30/26 17:33, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-05-30 01:09, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>> Yeah my old line rotted away completely after it was noisy for
>>> years and they switched me to a spare which also gets noisy when
>>> the ground's wet, but since we haven't had decent rainfall for
>>> years that hasn't been a problem lately. Since that line switch
>>> ~5+ years ago I only had one other line fault late last year when
>>> the council slashing grass on the roadsides cut the line. Amazingly
>>> that _was_ fixed within about 24 hours, though when the exchange
>>> died yet again later that week affecting everyone using it rather
>>> than just people down my road, it took them 4-5 days to fix it. And
>>> the exchange breaks far more frequently, in fact it was breaking
>>> every time there was a power failure for a year or so, but it does
>>> seem to be surviving those these days (except the obviously-dead
>>> battery there means you still can't make calls while the power's
>>> off anymore).
>>
>> Those exchanges are not designed to suffer a sudden power off. And
>> rebooting is not automatic, it takes a human with special knowledge to
>> do it, because it is something done once in life.
> 
> That seems highly unlikely (more of your AI 'wisdom'?). These
> exchanges are tiny huts littered throughout regional Australia, and
> the last mechanical exchange was converted in the 1990s. If someone
> designed their electronic exchange equipment to require manual
> reset after power-off, they must have been nuts. In any case if
> they replaced the battery, which used to work, it wouldn't get
> powered off by every short blackout.

   I do appreciate the "cutting grass" story ... in my case
   some distracted teen driver CRASHED into the big distro
   box down on the street corner, blacked out a quarter of
   the county :-)

   STILL think at least one layer of backwards compatible
   comm tech SHOULD be *mandated*. Fuck how much it costs
   AT&T or whomever (will also keep more humans employed).
   The big-L Libertarian perspective is good, but 'community
   utility' is also good. The best track is usually somewhere
   in-between.

   There ARE lawyers who live on 'class action' lawsuits
   to be found ... and the "Disabilities Act", which by
   default includes most "older people" like me, CAN be
   applied. IF they ever cut my land line it's gonna
   cost them a lot more than they thought they were saving.
   This is how it has to be. Corp -vs- Citizen IS often
   a sort of 'war' alas. Callous/hurtful extremes of
   'capitalism' AND 'socialism' have to be combatted.

   I agree with Ferris Bueler ... "-Isms are bad"  :-

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

#87315

On 31/05/2026 05:14, c186282 wrote:
> STILL think at least one layer of backwards compatible
>    comm tech SHOULD be *mandated*.

I hadn't penned you for a Libral...

They use words like 'should', and 'mandated'...
-- 
For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the 
very definition of slavery.

Jonathan Swift

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

#87314

On 2026-05-30 23:33, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-05-30 01:09, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>> Yeah my old line rotted away completely after it was noisy for
>>> years and they switched me to a spare which also gets noisy when
>>> the ground's wet, but since we haven't had decent rainfall for
>>> years that hasn't been a problem lately. Since that line switch
>>> ~5+ years ago I only had one other line fault late last year when
>>> the council slashing grass on the roadsides cut the line. Amazingly
>>> that _was_ fixed within about 24 hours, though when the exchange
>>> died yet again later that week affecting everyone using it rather
>>> than just people down my road, it took them 4-5 days to fix it. And
>>> the exchange breaks far more frequently, in fact it was breaking
>>> every time there was a power failure for a year or so, but it does
>>> seem to be surviving those these days (except the obviously-dead
>>> battery there means you still can't make calls while the power's
>>> off anymore).
>>
>> Those exchanges are not designed to suffer a sudden power off. And
>> rebooting is not automatic, it takes a human with special knowledge to
>> do it, because it is something done once in life.
> 
> That seems highly unlikely (more of your AI 'wisdom'?).

First hand knowledge, just not of AU.

> These
> exchanges are tiny huts littered throughout regional Australia, and
> the last mechanical exchange was converted in the 1990s. If someone
> designed their electronic exchange equipment to require manual
> reset after power-off, they must have been nuts. In any case if
> they replaced the battery, which used to work, it wouldn't get
> powered off by every short blackout.
> 


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87201

On 2026-05-27, Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> 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.

You mean like they all used to do?  I still have a couple around here
somewhere.  Too bad our telco recently "upgraded" us to VoIP phones...

-- 
/~\  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]

#87202

On Wed, 27 May 2026 20:51:49 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> > But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of
> > operating only with the line power.  
> 
> You mean like they all used to do?  I still have a couple around here
> somewhere.  Too bad our telco recently "upgraded" us to VoIP phones...

I think the implication was that, e.g., digital cordless handsets are
useless without power, even in a POTS setup - which *is* true, but that
was so all through the '90s - '00s and it was no great hassle to keep
an old Bakelite number in another room of the house or dig it outta the
closet in the event of an outage.

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

#87206

John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2026 20:51:49 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> > But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of
>> > operating only with the line power.  
>> 
>> You mean like they all used to do?  I still have a couple around here
>> somewhere.  Too bad our telco recently "upgraded" us to VoIP phones...
> 
> I think the implication was that, e.g., digital cordless handsets are
> useless without power, even in a POTS setup - which *is* true, but that
> was so all through the '90s - '00s

Plus some models have the feature of powering the base station from
the wireless handset battery when the power goes out. I still use a
corded phone though (with a spare handy for the regular routine of
confirming the problem's at the telco's end when it stops working).

However the battery at my local exchange seems to be dead these
days. When the power's out you just hear a whine on the line that
fades away quicker the longer the power's been off. $260 million of
government funding each year (plus line rental fees) well spent...

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

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

#87209

On 2026-05-27, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:

> However the battery at my local exchange seems to be dead these
> days. When the power's out you just hear a whine on the line that
> fades away quicker the longer the power's been off. $260 million of
> government funding each year (plus line rental fees) well spent...

Hey, it worked for GM...

-- 
/~\  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]

#87221

On 5/27/26 17:02, John Ames wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2026 20:51:49 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>> But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of
>>> operating only with the line power.
>>
>> You mean like they all used to do?  I still have a couple around here
>> somewhere.  Too bad our telco recently "upgraded" us to VoIP phones...
> 
> I think the implication was that, e.g., digital cordless handsets are
> useless without power, even in a POTS setup - which *is* true, but that
> was so all through the '90s - '00s and it was no great hassle to keep
> an old Bakelite number in another room of the house or dig it outta the
> closet in the event of an outage.

   I still have a few NON-digital phone sets.
   Plug in - they Just Work.

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

#87223

c186282 wrote:

>    I still have a few NON-digital phone sets.
>    Plug in - they Just Work.
Provided someone else is prepared to maintain the copper, the switch, 
the batteries, the gensets, the buildings and associated staff ... the 
end of that road is within sight.

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

#87231

On 2026-05-28 09:54, c186282 wrote:
> On 5/27/26 17:02, John Ames wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 May 2026 20:51:49 GMT
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> But that also requires that the handset is fully capable of
>>>> operating only with the line power.
>>>
>>> You mean like they all used to do?  I still have a couple around here
>>> somewhere.  Too bad our telco recently "upgraded" us to VoIP phones...
>>
>> I think the implication was that, e.g., digital cordless handsets are
>> useless without power, even in a POTS setup - which *is* true, but that
>> was so all through the '90s - '00s and it was no great hassle to keep
>> an old Bakelite number in another room of the house or dig it outta the
>> closet in the event of an outage.
> 
>    I still have a few NON-digital phone sets.
>    Plug in - they Just Work.
> 

Certainly, they work at my home. But they are connected to my router, 
which is connected with fibre upstream.

Simply the router includes a VoIP-POTS converter.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87254

On 2026-05-28, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>
>    I still have a few NON-digital phone sets.
>    Plug in - they Just Work.

Also, if you need private point-to-point phone capability
(without ringer), two old-style phone sets and a 9V battery
suffice.  Just connect everything in series.

About 30 years ago, I did that with two very old rotary phones
and a 9V battery between the bedrooms of my two daughters.  They
decided knuckles knocking on the wall between the rooms would be
their signal to pick up the phone.  When either phone set (or
both) hung up, battery current was close enough to zero that the
battery would last a very long time.

-- 
Robert Riches
spamtrap42@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

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

#87258

On 5/28/26 22:50, Robert Riches wrote:
> On 2026-05-28, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>
>>     I still have a few NON-digital phone sets.
>>     Plug in - they Just Work.
> 
> Also, if you need private point-to-point phone capability
> (without ringer), two old-style phone sets and a 9V battery
> suffice.  Just connect everything in series.
> 
> About 30 years ago, I did that with two very old rotary phones
> and a 9V battery between the bedrooms of my two daughters.  They
> decided knuckles knocking on the wall between the rooms would be
> their signal to pick up the phone.  When either phone set (or
> both) hung up, battery current was close enough to zero that the
> battery would last a very long time.

   Hmmm ... can you render a simplified schematic ?

   Sounds like a basic "intercom" system, but might
   have wider uses. A mere PI or Arduino might expand
   the horizon considerably.

   If the Big Providers won't run their copper network
   then maybe we mere proles can find uses for what's
   still connected ?

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

#87270

On Fri, 29 May 2026 01:17:02 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Sounds like a basic "intercom" system, but might have wider uses. A
>    mere PI or Arduino might expand the horizon considerably.

My uncle had a setup where he used the house AC wiring for an intercom. It 
was homegrown and may or may not have been particularly legal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-line_communication

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

#87288

On 5/29/26 02:48, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2026 01:17:02 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     Sounds like a basic "intercom" system, but might have wider uses. A
>>     mere PI or Arduino might expand the horizon considerably.
> 
> My uncle had a setup where he used the house AC wiring for an intercom. It
> was homegrown and may or may not have been particularly legal.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-line_communication

   Hmm ... you CAN run a much higher freq over
   the 50/60hz power wires. I think "X-10" works
   that way.

   "Legal" ... ummm ... depends. However the high
   freq isn't likely to make it past yer big pole
   transformer.

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

#87292

On 2026-05-30 10:25, c186282 wrote:
> On 5/29/26 02:48, rbowman wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 May 2026 01:17:02 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>
>>>     Sounds like a basic "intercom" system, but might have wider uses. A
>>>     mere PI or Arduino might expand the horizon considerably.
>>
>> My uncle had a setup where he used the house AC wiring for an 
>> intercom. It
>> was homegrown and may or may not have been particularly legal.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-line_communication
> 
>    Hmm ... you CAN run a much higher freq over
>    the 50/60hz power wires. I think "X-10" works
>    that way.
> 
>    "Legal" ... ummm ... depends. However the high
>    freq isn't likely to make it past yer big pole
>    transformer.

Here they use data transmission over the AC network to read the meters 
remotely. I suppose they add something to bypass transformers, which 
here are big and not sitting on poles. Probably the transformers are 
connected to internet for monitoring and control.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

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

#87293

On 2026-05-30, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> On 5/29/26 02:48, rbowman wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 May 2026 01:17:02 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>> 
>>>     Sounds like a basic "intercom" system, but might have wider uses. A
>>>     mere PI or Arduino might expand the horizon considerably.
>> 
>> My uncle had a setup where he used the house AC wiring for an intercom. It
>> was homegrown and may or may not have been particularly legal.
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-line_communication
>
>    Hmm ... you CAN run a much higher freq over
>    the 50/60hz power wires. I think "X-10" works
>    that way.
>
>    "Legal" ... ummm ... depends. However the high
>    freq isn't likely to make it past yer big pole
>    transformer.

Yes, X-10 uses/used power-line communication.  So does/did
Insteon.  IIRC, the carrier frequencies were 125kHz and 130kHz.

Side note: Anyone who used Insteon's servers as part of their
home or business automation (via their "router" if I remember the
term correctly), had their Insteon equipment bricked when the
bean counters and vultures moved in to "preserve company assets"
in the bankruptcy circus.  Those of us who used and/or still use
the serial or USB-to-serial modem and local compute resources
were not impacted.

-- 
Robert Riches
spamtrap42@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

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

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

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

csiph-web