On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 05:12:18AM -0500, grarpamp wrote: > [Now using proper Subject tech...] > > If you have a line, you can still dial each other > and negotiate up to 33.8kbps v.34bis, > add better software compression (zstd) instead > of depending on v.44, and add encryption algos > on each end. v.92 56k needed an ISP end to work. > > Companies like US Robotics and Zoom might still > make v.34bis hardware modems... see USR5637. > Lots of modems on used market. > > Full hardware modem with PCM DSP is needed > to do elite first pass random phone scanning that > analyzes the analog instead of depending on > successful second stage "V." negotiation. > Plus you get as bonus all the WAV recordings of: > "Hello... Helloooooo?! WTF!!!" ;-) > > Anyone still have that analysis software? > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ITU-T_V-series_recommendations > > You could probably do just as well creating your > own modems with today's DIY hardware platforms > in your local Makerspace. Opensource it on Github.
I found my high school's SCO Unix system using Toneloc back in the day (and a ton of other shit too...) I'd leave that thing running on my 286 all day long, like 8am - 4pm, for weeks at a time. I understand that WarVOX is at least one of the more modern incarnations of Toneloc, uses VoIP to make a bunch of calls at the same time, other neat tricks. I haven't actually used it as I did with toneloc, when I was a kid :) > > > On 12/23/18, jim bell <[email protected]> wrote: > > You forgot that in 1992, typical dialup modems worked at 9600 bps. Now, > > most people have access to 25 megabits/sec Internet. > > I occasionally see people in discussion areas claim that "the U.S. > > Government" was responsible for making "The Internet".I shut that talk down, > > by pointing out "Do you think that The Internet would have 'worked' if a > > person, at home, had to connect up to his ISP at with a 300 bps modem? 1200 > > bps? 2400 bps?"I counter by pointing out that the people REALLY responsible > > for a usable Internet were those who developed the 9600 bps, 14,400 bps, and > > 28,800 bps modems. Rockwell, USR (US Robotics), Hayes, Telebit, and a few > > others. Had that not existed, it would have been hard to make the Internet > > available to most people. > > From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modem > > "V.32 modems operating at 9600 bit/s were expensive and were only starting > > to enter the market in the early 1990s when V.32bis was > > standardized. Rockwell International's chip division developed a new driver > > chip set incorporating the standard and aggressively priced it. Supra, > > Inc. arranged a short-term exclusivity arrangement with Rockwell, and > > developed the SupraFAXModem 14400based on it. Introduced in January 1992 at > > $399 (or less), it was half the price of the slower V.32 modems already on > > the market. This led to a price war, and by the end of the year V.32 was > > dead, never having been really established, and V.32bis modems were widely > > available for $250.V.32bis was so successful that the older high-speed > > standards had little to recommend them. USR fought back with a 16,800 bit/s > > version of HST, while AT&T introduced a one-off 19,200 bit/s method they > > referred to as V.32ter, but neither non-standard modem sold well." > > > > And: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modem > > > > V.34/28.8 kbit/s and 33.6 kbit/s > > > > × > > > > × > > > > > > "Any interest in these proprietary improvements was destroyed during the > > lengthy introduction of the 28,800 bit/s V.34 standard. While waiting, > > several companies decided to release hardware and introduced modems they > > referred to as V.FAST. In order to guarantee compatibility with V.34 modems > > once the standard was ratified (1994), the manufacturers were forced to use > > more flexible parts, generally a DSP and microcontroller, as opposed to > > purpose-designed ASIC modem chips. > > "The ITU standard V.34 represents the culmination of the joint efforts. It > > employs the most powerful coding techniques including channel encoding and > > shape encoding. From the mere four bits per symbol (9.6 kbit/s), the new > > standards used the functional equivalent of 6 to 10 bits per symbol, plus > > increasing baud rates from 2,400 to 3,429, to create 14.4, 28.8, and > > 33.6 kbit/s modems. This rate is near the theoretical Shannon limit. When > > calculated, the Shannon capacity of a narrowband line is {\displaystyle > > {\text{bandwidth}}\times \log _{2}(1+P_{u}/P_{n})}, with {\displaystyle > > P_{u}/P_{n}} the (linear) signal-to-noise ratio. Narrowband phone lines have > > a bandwidth of 3,000 Hz so using {\displaystyle P_{u}/P_{n}=1000} (SNR = > > 30 dB), the capacity is approximately 30 kbit/s.[7] -- GPG fingerprint: 17FD 615A D20D AFE8 B3E4 C9D2 E324 20BE D47A 78C7
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
