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 250 — 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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:48 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:35 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 17:25 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-04 03:51 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-04 04:30 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 09:34 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 16:06 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 20:20 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-04 18:27 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 09:30 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 19:24 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 20:04 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 22:25 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-04 04:15 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 07:36 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 02:19 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 08:34 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 10:26 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-04 08:18 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 09:48 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 10:36 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-04 17:58 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 14:56 -0400
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> - 2026-06-03 14:40 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 09:31 +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> - 2026-06-03 14:43 +0000
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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:31 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:43 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 19:28 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 20:10 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 22:27 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:13 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:48 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-03 18:58 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:46 +0000
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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 01:01 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-03 21:18 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-04 04:30 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-04 18:02 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 07:44 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 09:48 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 00:26 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 07:53 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:49 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 01:03 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 10:07 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 10:57 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 16:31 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 12:08 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-04 18:13 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 15:03 -0400
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 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-04 19:18 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 21:28 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:49 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 00:30 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 07:55 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-04 09:51 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:56 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 02:11 -0400
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 c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 00:46 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 08:09 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:02 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 22:31 +0200
Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-04 01:36 -0400
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 InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-03 21:30 -0400
Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-04 04:30 +0000
Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-04 08:13 +0200
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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:33 +0100
Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:45 +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 8 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 13 Next page →
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 00:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5oKdnYKvkdj2Yr33nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #87419 |
On 6/3/26 05:49, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-06-03 04:10, Rich wrote: >> InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote: >>> On 6/1/2026 2:30 PM, Rich wrote: >>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>> On 2026-06-01 05:20, Rich wrote: > > >>> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected >>> to bear. >> >> Also true. They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to >> replace it when it wears out over time. And both wear out over time. >> The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge. > > True lead acid batteries (not gel, ie, not maintenance free) last way > longer. 5 years easily, maybe 10. Yep ... 'maint free' do NOT have as much lifespan. The old Edison nickle-iron batteries (KOH electrolyte) are still popular for home PV systems. They can last a very long time - but YOU have to check/fill the electrolyte every so often. I suppose that COULD be automated for cheap these days. And Edison batteries don't EXPLODE like lithiums.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 07:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ijg7fmxhlm.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87471 |
On 2026-06-04 06:30, c186282 wrote: > On 6/3/26 05:49, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2026-06-03 04:10, Rich wrote: >>> InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote: >>>> On 6/1/2026 2:30 PM, Rich wrote: >>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> On 2026-06-01 05:20, Rich wrote: >> >> >>>> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected >>>> to bear. >>> >>> Also true. They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to >>> replace it when it wears out over time. And both wear out over time. >>> The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge. >> >> True lead acid batteries (not gel, ie, not maintenance free) last way >> longer. 5 years easily, maybe 10. > > Yep ... 'maint free' do NOT have as much lifespan. > > The old Edison nickle-iron batteries (KOH electrolyte) > are still popular for home PV systems. They can last > a very long time - but YOU have to check/fill the > electrolyte every so often. I suppose that COULD be > automated for cheap these days. > > And Edison batteries don't EXPLODE like lithiums. > Lead acid do: they release hydrogen. I exploded one when I was a teenager. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 09:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10vreb2$894o$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87481 |
On 04/06/2026 06:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> And Edison batteries don't EXPLODE like lithiums. >> > > Lead acid do: they release hydrogen. I exploded one when I was a teenager. Yup. boys on the shop floor did that too, when they remove the charger cables from a forklift that had been on charge for a day. -- Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are poor. Peter Thompson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 11:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10vp18e$3igml$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87397 |
The ultimate solution is of course a house wired for DC power fed to USB style outlets with a big $10,000 battery, in addition to normal mains. You simply feed your LV kit off that and Robert is a relative. Then when renewable energy takes your country's grid down you can still complain to politicians -- Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as foolish, and by the rulers as useful. (Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <NYZTR.139004$Grwb.24822@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #87426 |
On 2026-06-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > The ultimate solution is of course a house wired for DC power fed to USB > style outlets with a big $10,000 battery, in addition to normal mains. > > You simply feed your LV kit off that and Robert is a relative. > > Then when renewable energy takes your country's grid down you can still > complain to politicians And they can still ignore you. -- /~\ 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 | 2026-06-04 02:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5oKdnb2vkdixirz3nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #87453 |
On 6/3/26 14:00, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-06-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> The ultimate solution is of course a house wired for DC power fed to USB >> style outlets with a big $10,000 battery, in addition to normal mains. >> >> You simply feed your LV kit off that and Robert is a relative. >> >> Then when renewable energy takes your country's grid down you can still >> complain to politicians > > And they can still ignore you. WILL. They've already got their kick-backs. That's how realpolitik works - always has. Any other line of BS ... Machiavellian illusion. There was once hope for "moon bounce" comms - laser beams and reflectors. It HAS been done, but it's mostly impractical - you need dangerously strong lasers and the 2sec(x2) bounce time would be just AWFUL with any modern web apps. Oh, the moon has to be UP in your area :-) Despite limits, something like StarLink is probably the best backup approach. I'm looking into a subscription as a backup - not free, but it'd work so long as I could power the terminal somehow. DO have one large PV panel in the junk shed, about 200 watts @ 12v. There's a 12v->120v converter in there somewhere too with a little batt-charge plug, I think. That oughtta do it. Better check .... There's a 'local' microwave provider near me also, current page info is kinda iffy though. They can provide net to places outside the reach of Comcast or most ATT services into the countryside. Just call and they will screw an antenna thingie to yer house. Again, not a great volume-data provider, but it'd get ya past a disaster, could still do banking and such. Anyway, between NATURAL disasters, CORPORATE disasters and CYBER-WAR disasters... odd backup routes are now more important than ever. The older you get the more you realize how badly things can get FUCKED UP. Hmm ... maybe ought to buy an (unlicensed) HAM set ... in a disaster nobody's gonna be checking licenses. Doesn't have to be major, just 100 watts or so. That'll get you 50-100 miles, better than 'CB'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-05-29 02:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <97OcnWwzhIQAsoT3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #87255 |
Argue crap all you want - the providers are generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running and I support that. Note the theme here - "Redundancy". Keep EVERYTHING that worked. Add on new stuff all you want, but ..... Use the Laws. Hire class-action lawyers if needed to kick ass. Oh, and even TELEGRAPH service should be preserved over a few copper lines. Slow, but WORKED and was very robust. First comm network that could use pre-Tube/Transistor amplifiers ... just relays. Edison figured out how to record the traffic even as a youth. On the whole, "new" is MUCH more technically complicated at every level. That complication means MANY more ways for it to FAIL. OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a LONG time. So HOW do you call an ambulance ? Your bank ? You AREN'T ... unless we've maintained some lower-tech REDUNDANCY.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 03:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vivi4$1us3j$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87265 |
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. 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)).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 01:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <bIScnQGbw7sQjoD3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #87318 |
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. 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'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 12:47 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ni40fmxe5o.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87324 |
On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 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. Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing. > > 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'. > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 17:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vkfub$2ci6m$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87330 |
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 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. > > Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables > to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the > wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing. I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly not 4000 colors). So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non-trivial job for the non-expert.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-01 22:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <9u61fmxgao.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87339 |
On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 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. >> >> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables >> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the >> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing. > > I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of > 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly > not 4000 colors). So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000 > red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" > is a non-trivial job for the non-expert. Heh, absolutely. Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, possibly printed and stored in large binders. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 02:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <10vo3b2$3b3aj$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87343 |
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: >> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 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. >>> >>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables >>> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the >>> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing. >> >> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of >> 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly >> not 4000 colors). So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000 >> red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" >> is a non-trivial job for the non-expert. > > Heh, absolutely. > > Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the English name, > a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, connecting to 4000 at > the other side which go to the actual switch. These are labelled, but > you need to know the system. I have not wired these, so here I have to > guess, but the phone number is not written here. Rather wire number of > the bundle on the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You > need a table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, possibly > printed and stored in large binders. Given how many lines terminated in any given central office building, there has to be a labeling system. But it won't be something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small portion of customers to each other. And yes, no dialing. You get connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too). Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane. It's just not feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs connecting to dead phones.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 02:12 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <a9qdnfRK25e4W4L3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #87400 |
On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote: > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: >>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 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. >>>> >>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables >>>> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the >>>> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing. >>> >>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of >>> 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly >>> not 4000 colors). So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000 >>> red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" >>> is a non-trivial job for the non-expert. >> >> Heh, absolutely. >> >> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the English name, >> a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, connecting to 4000 at >> the other side which go to the actual switch. These are labelled, but >> you need to know the system. I have not wired these, so here I have to >> guess, but the phone number is not written here. Rather wire number of >> the bundle on the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You >> need a table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, possibly >> printed and stored in large binders. > > Given how many lines terminated in any given central office building, > there has to be a labeling system. But it won't be something that > anyone can just walk into and begin connecting random lengths of spare > copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small portion of customers to each > other. And yes, no dialing. You get connected to your Aunt Edna two > blocks over, but you two are the only two who get to talk (unless the > "fixer" starts wiring a party line, but then too many on a party line > makes for a mess too). > > Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross connecting > folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call the local > hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk to, by manually > wiring them up is rather insane. It's just not feasable to do manually > anymore, if the switching computers that usually do it are fried then > there's lots of useless copper pairs connecting to dead phones. Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required. NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/guessed. Fiber CAN be OK ... and fast ... but it's still a PHYSICAL system and that means Hardware Maint using HUMANS (for now). As mentioned somewhere, I still have a (now obscenely priced) COMCAST vid line. Unlike the phone company it comes in from 'the side'. Note SMALL trees/bushes eventually become BIG trees/bushes. You don't wanna know what the local trimming companies wanted to charge to clear a path for the Comcast wire. Fell around Covid time, they promised to come fix it all somehow, NEVER did. cheepo spice. Some fun Jamacian techs though. A lot is still ON THE GROUND under a lot of tree limbs. The rest, well, bungie cords on tree limbs. Into Covid a neighbor went wild with lawn tools and SHREDDED my spliced wire. After two+ weeks I finally found SOMEONE at Comcast who actually understood when I said the PHYSICAL CABLE was broken. They kept wanting to test my Box. NOT the problem at all. Guess it was Page #2 in their Hindi diagnostic manual. Anyway, when it dies again it's gonna have to be a DISH. DO love "channel surfing" ... price about 2/3rds LESS since they don't have to bother with wires. Dish is NOT good for internet - too much satellite latency. Learned that WAY back, even when web pages were simple. 33,000 miles UP, 33,000 miles DOWN, then all BACK again ... even the speed of light begins to SUCK. (where's "sub-space" comms ??? STILL waiting for my Flying Car and Atomic Batteries in everything too !!!) As for COMCAST ... time to go "semi-wireless". Run the cable down the MAIN lines in the Right Of Way along the real roads. Add a wireless "5G+" transmitter every block (a few more for 'country blocks'). Then you do not have to worry about weird trees/worse down back all the long driveways and dirt roads. You can get to the transmitters easily. MUCH less expense. "Comcast Business" ... well ... then you DO need a physical connection for the 1-10gbit link. However 'biz' tend to be easier to GET at. Did get 'biz' from them eventually for my office. Initially the install price was horrible. However called near Xmas and apparently there was a sign-up drive. Got the long cable across a road for NOTHING :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 12:03 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sna5fmxn6s.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87411 |
On 2026-06-03 08:12, c186282 wrote: > On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote: >> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: >>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote: >>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: >>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: ... >>>>>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL manually >>>>>> connect at least a sub-portion of the copper. >>>>> >>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and >>>>> rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, >>>>> because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no >>>>> dialing. >>>> >>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those >>>> "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 >>>> different colors (certianly not 4000 colors). So "working >>>> out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that >>>> terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non- >>>> trivial job for the non-expert. >>> >>> Heh, absolutely. >>> >>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the >>> English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, >>> connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual >>> switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I >>> have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone >>> number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on >>> the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a >>> table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, >>> possibly printed and stored in large binders. >> >> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office >> building, there has to be a labeling system. But it won't be >> something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting >> random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small >> portion of customers to each other. And yes, no dialing. You get >> connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the >> only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party >> line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too). >> >> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross >> connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call >> the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk >> to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane. It's just not >> feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that >> usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs >> connecting to dead phones. > > Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely > exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME > kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required. > > NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact > what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate > firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/ > guessed. By the 90's, it was digital exchanges. The working I explained in another post, it is not multiplexing. Simple concept, the difficulty is the scale, and the details. Here by the end of the 90's there remained a few (a hundred?) of electromechanical exchanges, some hybrid. Redoing a big exchange back from digital to electromechanical is a huge task, and requires expert knowledge that no longer exists. It would have to be reinvented. Assuming there is room in the building. ... -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 12:06 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10vp1r1$3igml$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87420 |
On 03/06/2026 11:03, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-06-03 08:12, c186282 wrote: >> On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote: >>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: >>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: >>>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > > ... > >>>>>>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL manually >>>>>>> connect at least a sub-portion of the copper. >>>>>> >>>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and >>>>>> rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, >>>>>> because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no >>>>>> dialing. >>>>> >>>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those >>>>> "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 >>>>> different colors (certianly not 4000 colors). So "working >>>>> out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that >>>>> terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non- >>>>> trivial job for the non-expert. >>>> >>>> Heh, absolutely. >>>> >>>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the >>>> English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, >>>> connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual >>>> switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I >>>> have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone >>>> number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on >>>> the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a >>>> table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, >>>> possibly printed and stored in large binders. >>> >>> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office >>> building, there has to be a labeling system. But it won't be >>> something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting >>> random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small >>> portion of customers to each other. And yes, no dialing. You get >>> connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the >>> only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party >>> line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too). >>> >>> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross >>> connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call >>> the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk >>> to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane. It's just not >>> feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that >>> usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs >>> connecting to dead phones. >> >> Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely >> exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME >> kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required. >> >> NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact >> what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate >> firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/ >> guessed. > > By the 90's, it was digital exchanges. The working I explained in > another post, it is not multiplexing. Simple concept, the difficulty is > the scale, and the details. > Time division multiplexing was used from the 60s to the 90s on backhaul. After that packet switching multiplexing like frame relay was used. the carriage of more than one circuit over the same medium is always multiplexing, it just gets done in different ways. -- There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 00:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dDmdndW0rKqgnrz3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #87420 |
On 6/3/26 06:03, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-06-03 08:12, c186282 wrote: >> On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote: >>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: >>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: >>>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > > ... > >>>>>>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL manually >>>>>>> connect at least a sub-portion of the copper. >>>>>> >>>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and >>>>>> rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, >>>>>> because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no >>>>>> dialing. >>>>> >>>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those >>>>> "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 >>>>> different colors (certianly not 4000 colors). So "working >>>>> out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that >>>>> terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non- >>>>> trivial job for the non-expert. >>>> >>>> Heh, absolutely. >>>> >>>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the >>>> English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, >>>> connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual >>>> switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I >>>> have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone >>>> number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on >>>> the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a >>>> table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, >>>> possibly printed and stored in large binders. >>> >>> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office >>> building, there has to be a labeling system. But it won't be >>> something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting >>> random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small >>> portion of customers to each other. And yes, no dialing. You get >>> connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the >>> only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party >>> line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too). >>> >>> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross >>> connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call >>> the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk >>> to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane. It's just not >>> feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that >>> usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs >>> connecting to dead phones. >> >> Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely >> exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME >> kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required. >> >> NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact >> what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate >> firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/ >> guessed. > > By the 90's, it was digital exchanges. The working I explained in > another post, it is not multiplexing. Simple concept, the difficulty is > the scale, and the details. Wasn't digital EVERYWHERE. Maybe in larger cities. 80s ... much more spotty - but they HAD to find ways to do more with a limited number of pairs. This is the kinda 'invisible', 'hybrid', period, mid 70s to mid 80s, I refer to. > Here by the end of the 90's there remained a few (a hundred?) of > electromechanical exchanges, some hybrid. > > Redoing a big exchange back from digital to electromechanical is a huge > task, and requires expert knowledge that no longer exists. It would have > to be reinvented. Assuming there is room in the building. As a kid, 60s, I saw some of those electromechanical tubes full of contact disks working. Super cool ! HOPE they saved a few for museum displays. Hell, I'd BUY one as a 'kinetic art' piece !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-04 08:09 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sdh7fmx0aq.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #87475 |
On 2026-06-04 06:46, c186282 wrote: > On 6/3/26 06:03, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2026-06-03 08:12, c186282 wrote: >>> On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote: >>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote: >>>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote: >>>>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: >> >> ... >> >>>>>>>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL manually >>>>>>>> connect at least a sub-portion of the copper. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and >>>>>>> rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, >>>>>>> because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no >>>>>>> dialing. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those >>>>>> "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 >>>>>> different colors (certianly not 4000 colors). So "working >>>>>> out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that >>>>>> terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non- >>>>>> trivial job for the non-expert. >>>>> >>>>> Heh, absolutely. >>>>> >>>>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the >>>>> English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, >>>>> connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual >>>>> switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I >>>>> have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone >>>>> number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on >>>>> the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a >>>>> table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, >>>>> possibly printed and stored in large binders. >>>> >>>> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office >>>> building, there has to be a labeling system. But it won't be >>>> something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting >>>> random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small >>>> portion of customers to each other. And yes, no dialing. You get >>>> connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the >>>> only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party >>>> line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too). >>>> >>>> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross >>>> connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call >>>> the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk >>>> to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane. It's just not >>>> feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that >>>> usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs >>>> connecting to dead phones. >>> >>> Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely >>> exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME >>> kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required. >>> >>> NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact >>> what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate >>> firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/ >>> guessed. >> >> By the 90's, it was digital exchanges. The working I explained in >> another post, it is not multiplexing. Simple concept, the difficulty >> is the scale, and the details. > > Wasn't digital EVERYWHERE. Maybe in larger cities. By 1998-05, I know first hand that electromechanical exchanges in Spain were in the hundred range; I actually had a list of them in paper. Purely electromechanical. A number were hybrid, with digital controllers. By 1990, many exchanges were digital in Spain. I asked ChatGPT: «A historical review of Spanish telecommunications states that in 1990, 28.4% of installed telephone lines were digital, rising to 56.7% by 1995.» <https://pdfcoffee.com/las-telecomunicaciones-en-espaa-del-telegrafo-optico-a-la-sociedad-de-la-informacion-pdf-free.html> «The first fully digital exchange was installed at the Atocha telephone exchange in 1980 using Ericsson's AXE system.» <broken link> «During the 1980s Telefónica accelerated replacement of electromechanical switching systems.» <https://www.telefonica.com/en/communication-room/blog/1980s/?utm_source=chatgpt.com> > > 80s ... much more spotty - but they HAD to find ways > to do more with a limited number of pairs. This is > the kinda 'invisible', 'hybrid', period, mid 70s to > mid 80s, I refer to. Limited number of pairs? Nope. In Spain a phone was always a copper pair to the exchange; we never had party lines. If you refer to long distance connections, that's different. They were limited and could saturate. > >> Here by the end of the 90's there remained a few (a hundred?) of >> electromechanical exchanges, some hybrid. >> >> Redoing a big exchange back from digital to electromechanical is a huge >> task, and requires expert knowledge that no longer exists. It would have >> to be reinvented. Assuming there is room in the building. > > As a kid, 60s, I saw some of those electromechanical > tubes full of contact disks working. Super cool ! > HOPE they saved a few for museum displays. Hell, > I'd BUY one as a 'kinetic art' piece ! > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 12:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10vp1kj$3igml$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #87411 |
On 03/06/2026 07:12, c186282 wrote: > Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected > customers surely exceeded the number of practical > wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME kind of multiplexing > scheme would have been absolutely required. > No. it never did. very few cistomers were ever multiplaxed. One pair per subcscriber line. > NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, > the exact what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden > behind corporate firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how > is kinda obscure/proprietary/guessed. > > Fiber CAN be OK ... and fast ... but it's still a PHYSICAL > system and that means Hardware Maint using HUMANS (for now). > Are you really that dim, or just a good actor? Mainteneance is not a function of anything other than failure rate, and physicality has no correlation with that. Cf the Moon. No-one maintains it. -- "An intellectual is a person knowledgeable in one field who speaks out only in others...” Tom Wolfe
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <MYZTR.139002$Grwb.21955@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #87411 |
On 2026-06-03, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > Into Covid a neighbor went wild with lawn tools and SHREDDED > my spliced wire. After two+ weeks I finally found SOMEONE at > Comcast who actually understood when I said the PHYSICAL > CABLE was broken. They kept wanting to test my Box. NOT > the problem at all. Guess it was Page #2 in their Hindi > diagnostic manual. BTDT. There was construction going on across the street and a dump truck tore out the fiber connection from the pole across the street to our house. It took days to find someone who understood the concept of physical damage to the wiring. The possibility didn't seem to be anywhere in their scripts. -- /~\ 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]
Page 8 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web