Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #87133 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-05-26 02:21 -0400 |
| Last post | 2026-05-26 17:21 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 182 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
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 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-02 22:15 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 22:32 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 02:33 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:57 +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 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 00:00 -0400
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 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:06 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:32 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:43 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 13:05 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:14 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:13 +0100
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 "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:41 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:13 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:47 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:49 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:10 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 22:29 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:52 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:49 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:56 +0100
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 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:25 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 02:12 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:03 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:06 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:02 +0100
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 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:37 +0000
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> - 2026-06-03 02:46 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-03 00:27 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 03:26 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 03:03 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:12 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:08 +0100
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 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:57 +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 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 "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:18 +0200
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 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 00:39 -0400
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 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 00:48 -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 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 6 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 10 Next page →
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 17:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vkfmd$2ci6m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87324 |
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: >> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are >>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running >>> and I support that. >> >> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was >> mostly "always working". The "providers are generally required" part >> is why. >> >>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off >>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the >>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a >>> LONG time. >> >> Sadly, I have bad news for you. Your wonderful copper POTS line that >> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to >> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects >> to at that switch now in 2026? >> >> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical >> crossbar switches? Nope. Those were, mostly, long gone by the early >> 70's. > > Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat ! > >> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on >> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy >> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and >> bytes around. >> >> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP >> be exploded? >> >> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the >> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications, >> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local >> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service >> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital >> computerized circuit switching (i.e. ATM)). > > Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL > manually connect at least a sub-portion of the > copper. No, they can't. The copper ends at a pair of screw down lugs attached to a digitizer board in what is, to use a word you might be familiar with, a computer server rack. There's no longer any copper interconnecting anything, other than your handset in your home to the screw down lugs on that digitizer board. Every thing else beyond that point, that allows "communication" out from the switch, is all digital computer networking (usually TDM or ATM, but still, in effect, WAV files being transmitted over TCPIP). None of the "copper" routing interconnect that made the old Ma-Bell AT&T the "phone company" exists anywhere other than on display in a museum somewhere. It is all digital computer networking, and it has pretty much been all digital networking since somewhere around the early 70's. The *only* "copper" parts left of the old pre-computer system are the star lines from the switch building out to each building which happens to still have old copper POTS service. > Most tech fried ... hey ... telegraphy works :-) > Simple relay-based line amps. Worked in 1850 and > can work now over remaining POTS lines. Find a > neighborhood 'telegraph guy'. And can only possibly work to another copper pair terminating in the same switch building as yours. And even then, this requires someone running back and forth inside the building connecting the pairs that want to "telegraph" with each other via other long connecting patch cords (which don't exist at the switch waiting to be used). Want to contact the hospital a couple miles up the street? Is it wired to a different switch building? If yes, then you can't do morse code over copper wires to the hospital no matter how much you want to do so, because there is simply no copper between the switch buildings anymore. If the digital computers that handle the telephone networking are fried/out/dead, there's no communicating via those POTS copper pairs to anyone.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 22:49 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <0r71fmxjks.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87338 |
On 2026-06-01 19:31, Rich wrote: > c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: >> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL >> manually connect at least a sub-portion of the >> copper. > > No, they can't. The copper ends at a pair of screw down lugs attached > to a digitizer board in what is, to use a word you might be familiar > with, a computer server rack. > > There's no longer any copper interconnecting anything, other than your > handset in your home to the screw down lugs on that digitizer board. > Every thing else beyond that point, that allows "communication" out > from the switch, is all digital computer networking (usually TDM or > ATM, but still, in effect, WAV files being transmitted over TCPIP). The basic idea is very simple. You take the wire and connect it to an 8 bit DAC. The output of that DAC is presented to a microprocessor there as one memory address. If you have worked with microprocesors, you will know that this is simple. Only, that you scale this so that you have thousands of those DACs mapped into the microprocessor memory. Now, to connect subscriber A to subscriber B, you simply copy memory position A to position B about 8 thousand times per second. The DAC is synced to this speed. Now, imagine the microprocessor just running thousands of those copy operations from thousand of output positions to input positions. Not simultaneously, but in sequence. When a subscriber phones another subscriber, you simply change the table, read from C, write to D. Just add the complication that you actually have a DAC and ADC on each circuit, because there are signals going and out in the same copper pair. This is the basic idea of digital switching in POTS technology. There are no metal contacts that move. On a 5ESSS that microprocessor is a single 68000. But there can be several units. And each unit on a city exchange occupies several big racks. Think you need thousands of ADC/DAC units. Improvement: remove the DAC/ADC, and you have ISDN. EMP bomb, all gone. You can shield the switch, but the switch has miles long antenas going out to the city... it fries. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 02:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vo40k$3b3aj$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87344 |
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > On 2026-06-01 19:31, Rich wrote: >> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: > > >>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL >>> manually connect at least a sub-portion of the >>> copper. >> >> No, they can't. The copper ends at a pair of screw down lugs attached >> to a digitizer board in what is, to use a word you might be familiar >> with, a computer server rack. >> >> There's no longer any copper interconnecting anything, other than your >> handset in your home to the screw down lugs on that digitizer board. >> Every thing else beyond that point, that allows "communication" out >> from the switch, is all digital computer networking (usually TDM or >> ATM, but still, in effect, WAV files being transmitted over TCPIP). > > The basic idea is very simple. > > You take the wire and connect it to an 8 bit DAC. The output of that DAC > is presented to a microprocessor there as one memory address. If you > have worked with microprocesors, you will know that this is simple. > Only, that you scale this so that you have thousands of those DACs > mapped into the microprocessor memory. > > Now, to connect subscriber A to subscriber B, you simply copy memory > position A to position B about 8 thousand times per second. The DAC is > synced to this speed. > > Now, imagine the microprocessor just running thousands of those copy > operations from thousand of output positions to input positions. Not > simultaneously, but in sequence. When a subscriber phones another > subscriber, you simply change the table, read from C, write to D. > > Just add the complication that you actually have a DAC and ADC on each > circuit, because there are signals going and out in the same copper pair. > > This is the basic idea of digital switching in POTS technology. There > are no metal contacts that move. On a 5ESSS that microprocessor is a > single 68000. But there can be several units. And each unit on a city > exchange occupies several big racks. Think you need thousands of ADC/DAC > units. > > Improvement: remove the DAC/ADC, and you have ISDN. That's a nice simplified description of the gist of how it works. > EMP bomb, all gone. You can shield the switch, but the switch has miles > long antenas going out to the city... it fries. Yep. And with a fried switching computer, you have thousands if *isolated* miles long antennas (for c186282: the copper pairs) going out into the city. A useless fried DAC/ADC board is wired to one end of the antenna, a 1960's all mechanical POTS phone connected to the other end. But nothing doing anything behind the DAC/ADC to be able to communicate with anyone. And no longer any way to "just add some more wires" and make connections between phones.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-30 09:09 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <6a1a1c98@news.ausics.net> |
| In reply to | #87255 |
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]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-30 13:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ojtqemx854.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87286 |
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]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 07:33 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <6a1b57c6@news.ausics.net> |
| In reply to | #87291 |
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]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 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]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 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 > Â 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]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 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 >> Â Â 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]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 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 >>> Â Â comm tech SHOULD be *mandated*. >> >> I hadn't penned you for a Libral... >> >> They use words like 'should', and 'mandated'... > > Â Um ... think "national security" - which SHOULD > Â transcend 'right'/'left'/LP/etc. > Always the last refuge of the fascist > Â 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]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-31 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]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-27 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]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-27 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]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-28 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. $260 million of government funding each year (plus line rental fees) well spent... -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-28 05:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <J1QRR.871$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]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-28 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]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-28 09:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n7qbsuFjc0nU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #87221 |
c186282 wrote: > Â I still have a few NON-digital phone sets. > Â 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]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 12:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vjtuc$27ab8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87223 |
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > c186282 wrote: > >> Â I still have a few NON-digital phone sets. >> Â 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]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-28 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]
| From | Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-29 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]
Page 6 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web