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

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

Redundancy/Survival

Started byc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
First post2026-05-26 02:21 -0400
Last post2026-05-26 17:21 +0200
Articles 20 on this page of 146 — 16 participants

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 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8  Next page →

#87298

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-05-31 00:14 -0400
Message-ID<mRWdnVw6O9g4KIb3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87294
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

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-05-31 12:09 +0100
Message-ID<10vh4tk$1fsuq$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87298
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]

#87322

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-01 00:51 -0400
Message-ID<aqCcneAQrL5skoD3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87315
On 5/31/26 07:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 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'...

   Um ... think "national security" - which SHOULD
   transcend 'right'/'left'/LP/etc.

   And yea, I meant *mandated*.

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

#87332

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-06-01 12:28 +0100
Message-ID<10vjqdk$26505$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87322
On 01/06/2026 05:51, c186282 wrote:
> On 5/31/26 07:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> 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'...
> 
>    Um ... think "national security" - which SHOULD
>    transcend 'right'/'left'/LP/etc.
> 
Always the last refuge of the fascist

>    And yea, I meant *mandated*.
> 
Why would I think you didnt?

-- 
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

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

#87314

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-05-31 12:58 +0200
Message-ID<irgtemxmjm.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87294
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

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2026-05-27 20:51 +0000
Message-ID<FPIRR.2$XSac.0@fx03.iad>
In reply to#87185
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

FromJohn Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com>
Date2026-05-27 14:02 -0700
Message-ID<20260527140256.00006742@gmail.com>
In reply to#87201
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

Fromnot@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev)
Date2026-05-28 08:54 +1000
Message-ID<6a177631@news.ausics.net>
In reply to#87202
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

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2026-05-28 05:04 +0000
Message-ID<J1QRR.871$N9we.719@fx16.iad>
In reply to#87206
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

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-05-28 03:54 -0400
Message-ID<O-CdnbSPFZ9AaYr3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87202
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

FromAndy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
Date2026-05-28 09:15 +0100
Message-ID<n7qbsuFjc0nU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#87221
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]

#87333

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2026-06-01 12:29 +0000
Message-ID<10vjtuc$27ab8$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87223
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> 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.

This is exactly the point that c186282 appears to be missing (either 
intentionally in order to troll the group, or unintentionally because 
the nick simply does not understand).

The *only* reason any old POTS copper still "works" and/or "just 
worked" in the past was that huge amount of investment in ongoing 
maintence and support that was put in by the company providing all the 
hardware and effort to make sure his POTS copper almost always had 48V 
feeding it and almost always had a dialtone when a handset was picked 
up.

Some of c186282's posts here seem to imply that the nick simply 
believes that somehow, possibly magic, that copper phone pair "just 
worked" to provide him service.

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

#87231

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-05-28 13:45 +0200
Message-ID<egmlemx3qh.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87221
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

FromRobert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net>
Date2026-05-29 02:50 +0000
Message-ID<slrn111hvoh.1js.spamtrap42@one.localnet>
In reply to#87221
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

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-05-29 01:17 -0400
Message-ID<UYicndOFJtzCvIT3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87254
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

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-05-29 06:48 +0000
Message-ID<n7sr5bFu3pfU6@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#87258
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

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-05-30 04:25 -0400
Message-ID<4aGcnZBN6dWLAof3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87270
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

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-05-30 13:20 +0200
Message-ID<sotqemx854.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87288
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

FromRobert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net>
Date2026-05-30 14:16 +0000
Message-ID<slrn111ls9h.ope.spamtrap42@one.localnet>
In reply to#87288
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]

#87287

FromRobert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net>
Date2026-05-30 04:00 +0000
Message-ID<slrn111ko6h.q66.spamtrap42@one.localnet>
In reply to#87258
On 2026-05-29, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> 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 ?

A simplified schematic?  I don't have a picture handy or a
convenient way to draw one.  However, the circuit is simple
enough that the topology is limited by the solution space.  I can
describe it in a lot fewer than a thousand words:

1. Draw a circle in pencil so you can erase it later.

2. Put the phones and battery at points about 120 degrees apart
   on the circle.

3. Draw the terminals on or near the circle.  There should be two
   terminals per element.

4. Add three wires, one connecting the closest terminals of each
   pair of elements.

5. Erase the circle, but leave the rest.

At least with old carbon-mike-type phone sets, the circuit will
operate independent of polarity, as long as the three elements
form a ring (no pun intended).

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

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

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

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

csiph-web