On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 02:15 PM, jet wrote:
At 12:08 -0800 2002/12/06, Tim May wrote:
If you don't wish to be telephoned, keep your number secret.
One word: wardialing.
Three words: screen your calls (as many of us already do).
Many of us have at least two phone numbers: one
On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
Don't worry about me sending private email in the future... You're not only
a complete idiot, but you're rude as fuck as well.
That's funny.
No, actually, for those of us who live in the real world, it isn't as
important as you make it out to be.
On Fri, 06 Dec 2002, Jim Choate wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Some poser wrote:
Jim, you post enough crap from Slashdot to know differently. People are
doing it. I have a whitebox machine (AMD, 256M ram, cheap TV card, 20G
disk, $300 a year ago) that does it. It isn't a big deal.
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Tim May wrote:
[At least 4-5 of Hettinga's e$/digibucks/qwatloos chat lists elided
from this distributioninstead of creating so many lists, ... well,
it's obvious what the instead of ought to be.]
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 06:17 PM, Peter Fairbrother
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 04:53 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Tim mentioned cell phones and the lack of telemarketing calls on
his, but
really that's only because, at this point at least, the cellphone
number lists
haven't been sold. This might change in the near future, as several
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Steve Schear wrote:
conditions deteriorate when the noise floor moves up. In busy locations
the radius of effective communication may shrink until the devices are
little more than wireless cable replacements.
That's all they are supposed to be. Strictly short-range
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Some poser wrote:
Jim, you post enough crap from Slashdot to know differently. People are
doing it. I have a whitebox machine (AMD, 256M ram, cheap TV card, 20G
disk, $300 a year ago) that does it. It isn't a big deal.
Speaking of posting crap...and don't send me private
Tim May wrote:
Many of us have at least two phone numbers: one that is widely
accessible, published even. Another that is private, often a
cellphone. In my 6 years of using a cellphone, whose number I do not
give out to many, I have only gotten two spam calls that I know of:
both were from a
OET's wireless item on the agenda for next week's Commission meeting is a
Notice of Inquiry, which will ask general, open ended questions about the
possibility of using 3650-3700 MHz, and using spectrum allocated to
television broadcasting, for unlicensed operations along some of the lines
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 05:49 PM, Adam Stenseth wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Tim May wrote:
If Bob wants to have a cellphone number that is not sold to others, he
should make arrangements with the cellphone company.
Just for my own edification, does this apply to landline service
as
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Tim May wrote:
On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 06:50 AM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
Jim Choate wrote:
No he didn't. He proved Mathematics is incomplete, ie that there are
universally valid but unprovable statements within it.
He proved that any system that
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Michael Cardenas wrote:
Of course, you could do this yourself with a $199 microtel box from
walmart and linux. Then you'd just have to add a $30 tv in card.
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 04:48:44PM -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
I was thinking of disabling all the ringers in my phones and setting up an
old Mac with a cid enabled modem to announce all calls. The unavailable
ones it would keep silent for. :) Getting wires all over the house and a
PA amp is the part I haven't done yet.
Could work well as an alarm clock
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
OK, suppose we've got a bank that issues bearer money.
Who owns the bank? It should be owned by bearer shares, of course.
So the only people who can use the bank are those who have invested in the
bank by purchasing shares? In other words the bank
On Sat, 07 Dec 2002, Jim Choate wrote:
No, actually, for those of us who live in the real world, it isn't as
important as you make it out to be.
Uh huh...
No comment needed.
--
Jamie Lawrence[EMAIL PROTECTED]
They [RIAA,MPAA] are trying to invent
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 09:31 AM, Steve Schear wrote:
http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,56742,00.htmlhttp://
www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,56742,00.html
Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool
By Paul Boutin
SANTA CLARA, California -- Attention, Wi-Fi users: The Department
This, with obligatory cameras in cybercafes, is just plugging the anonymity
holes.
Also, one of unmentioned consenquences is that any security will make
self-organising networks harder to implement. Guess who benefits.
But we will always have phone booths and acoustic couplers.
=
end
(of
At 10:56 AM 12/7/2002 -0800, Morlock Elloi wrote:
This, with obligatory cameras in cybercafes, is just plugging the anonymity
holes.
I haven't noticed any cameras in my neighborhood cafes. If they do install
them you can usually stand outside and use the link.
Also, one of unmentioned
http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,56742,00.htmlhttp://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,56742,00.html
Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool
By Paul Boutin
SANTA CLARA, California -- Attention, Wi-Fi users: The Department of
Homeland Security sees wireless networking technology as a
At 10:56 AM 12/7/02 -0800, Morlock Elloi wrote:
This, with obligatory cameras in cybercafes, is just plugging the
anonymity
holes.
Yep.
Also, one of unmentioned consenquences is that any security will make
self-organising networks harder to implement. Guess who benefits.
But we will always
20 matches
Mail list logo
