telephone hackers - can we upload something?

Tim Slattery wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

The whole thing was caught on video. To me, it looks like cold blooded
murder, but apparently they see it differently in that part of Florida.

Murder is allowed in Florida, under the rubric of "Stand your ground."
Look at Trayvon Martin. The whole thing is a crock of ****.

The law is also phrased as "no duty to retreat". So you're
proselytizing that we should all be cowards and do nothing when attacked
or trespassed and hope the law takes care of the aggressor ... and
AFTERWARD. Obviously you've never been the target of an assault and
never had to protect others.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 04:04:18 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 12:57:26 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Note that while some are ISPs provide voice service, they are not a VOIP
service.

If it's not POTS, it's a form of VoIP, and in the case of cable
providers, it's not going to be POTS, so it's a form of VoIP.

They operate as a telco.

True, but all that means is that they tend to hand off the digitized
VoIP traffic to the local telco exchange. If the destination is also
within that exchange, then it's routed directly to its destination,
converted back to analog within the exchange if the receiving customer
is on POTS or forwarded as VoIP packets if the receiving customer has an
eMTA or ATA. In that case, it'll be converted back to analog at the
customer's premises. However, if the destination is not within that
exchange, the packets will go out over the Internet to the exchange
nearest the destination. Once they arrive there, they're treated the
same as above, converted back to analog either at the exchange or at the
customer's premises, depending on the type of service that the customer
has.

In the case of an ISP with a large-ish footprint, if the calling party
and the receiving party aren't local to each other but both are
customers of the same ISP, it's possible that the VoIP traffic will not
be handed off to the local telco exchange but rather kept in-house, but
even then it would travel over the Internet, even though it might stay
within links controlled by that ISP.

Your voice traffic is NOT traversing the Internet.

It is unless the destination is also serviced by the exchange that the
ISP handed off to. How else would it get delivered?

For example, Comcast Voice is not a VOIP service.

Actually, it is. They use an eMTA (ATA) to digitize the analog signals,
then stuff the results into IP packets and send them on their way. It's
literally Voice over IP.

You
are using an eMTA with Comcast Voice, not a VOIP adapter. The eMTA
(embedded Multimedia Terminal Adapter) is an embedded ATA (analog
telephone adapter) incorported into the cable modem.

I'm not getting the distinction you're trying to make between a VoIP
adapter (ATA) versus an eMTA (which I agree has an embedded ATA). Both
are an ATA. One is a standalone device while the other is incorporated
into a cable modem. They do exactly the same thing in exactly the same
way.

magicJack is definitely VOIP.

Agreed.

I do sometimes, however, tend to lump the ISP voice
providers operating as telcos along with VOIP providers but I know I'm
being inaccurate. Visually both are using the cable modem but the user
may be unaware that a voice-capable cable modem has an eMTA.

There are minor differences, but essentially all are forms of VoIP.

VOIP

The acronym is VoIP rather than VOIP.

is Voice Over Internet Protocol

I'm nitpicking, but it's actually Voice over IP. The 'o' is always lower
case.

which means VOIP traverses the Internet

No, VoIP just means that the analog voice signals are digitized and
packetized, then carried over an IP protocol to their destination where
they will be converted back to analog. SIP is one such IP protocol, but
there are others. (For example, Sprint uses SIP. I helped to design that
portion of their data network way back in the day.)

VoIP calls may or may not traverse the Internet. In most cases, they do.
Local (intra-exchange) calls don't because they don't need to, but
almost everything else uses the Internet for transport.

What many people may be surprised to know is that virtually all
non-intra-exchange calls are now VoIP, and have been for well over 10
years. Sprint Long Distance, for example, completely converted to VoIP
somewhere around 2003 or 2004, (and the other telcos did likewise around
the same time). The exact timing is fuzzy since it's been so long, but
they use SprintLink, aka the Sprint backbone, aka the Internet, to
transport the digitized voice packets to wherever they need to go. At
some point, the packets are converted back to analog, either at the
exchange that's local to the destination in the case of POTS or at the
eMTA/ATA that's part of the customer's CPE equipment. (Yes, that's
completely redundant but I'm too lazy to fix it.)

hence why quality suffers due to routing through various hosts, and

VoIP has no real inherent voice quality issues. Did anyone notice when
switched analog circuits gave way to digitized voice packets? I'd say
no, not really. There were a few hiccups in the early years here and
there, but I'm not aware of any significant issues within the last 8-10
years or so. The technology is pretty fully baked by now. QoS is
implemented at each of the bottlenecks, for example. (I helped set that
up, as well.)

connecting to landlines using VOIP requires the VOIP provider have gear
at the telco exchanges to convert from VOIP to regular telephony (and
why it took years for magicJack to work everywhere in the USA while they
were implanting their converters at the telcos).

VoIP providers don't need to have gear there. They just need to have an
agreement in place, and that's often harder than it might seem. Every
exchange is already connected to the Internet, so no additional gear is
needed.

By your definition, all telcos (PSTNs) are VOIP providers even if the
user's connection is via twisted pair (POTS) because, gee, the telcos
then digitize the voice traffic.

Let's see, how nitpicky should we be? Local exchanges, ILECs and CLECs,
or what you call PSTN telcos, may or may not be involved in VoIP. In
most cases that I'm aware of, they hand off to LD carriers for the VoIP
backhaul, but there could be exceptions that I'm not aware of, so I
think you're mischaracterizing my definition.

ISPs, like Comcast, digitize the voice
traffic and may pass it to a telco exchange or across their their own
OCA6 trunks or across the Internet.

You just described a VoIP provider.

BTW, I'm not familiar with OCA6 trunks, but you've got the general idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optica...smission_rates

Might be analog equipment at the
user end but its all digital, even at the telcos.

Let's say that another way. If a call originates and terminates within
the same LEC and both customers are on PSTN, then no VoIP is involved.
There'd simply be no need for it.

If one or more of those two local customers uses VoIP, the LEC will
'translate' accordingly.

If two different LECs are involved, however, you can bet that VoIP is
involved, at least for the backhaul, even if neither customer uses VoIP.

All telephony is VOIP according to your definition.

No, not all. I think it's safe to say all LD and all local that involves
two LECs, plus all local that involves a single LEC where at least one
of the customers uses VoIP. Taken together, that's almost everything,
but not quite.

The technical
distinction is becoming muddied; however, most users still use VOIP to
mean Internet-only based connections and landlines to mean the old
telephony technology despite the two are getting mixed.

It's VoIP, not VOIP, and I can't speak for what "most users" may or may
not think. I don't think most users care in the least.

From your end at the voice-capable cable modem to Comcast, it is not
VOIP.

Technically, it's VoIP. Comcast calls it Digital Voice, but that's their
marketing name for their VoIP service. I think you know that.

With magicJack, it was VOIP at the user's end.

The same can be said for anyone using an ATA or eMTA, including Comcast
Digital Voice subscribers.

The user must have
Internet service so the magicJack dongle can not only digitize the voice
traffic but encapsulate it into IP traffic.

Right, just like any other ATA or eMTA.

And, no, the telcos did NOT have VOIP to landline converters and they
were not inspired by altruistic aims to provide free landline services
to callers who weren't even their customers.

You missed my point. The LECs installed VoIP equipment so they could
interface with their LD carrier partners. You're right that the LECs
weren't eager to work with the budget VoIP providers, but to do so
didn't mean more equipment had to be installed. The equipment was
already there; the only thing missing was the contract that enabled the
business relationship. There were even reports at the time that some of
the VoIP providers tried to insist that their interface costs should be
zero. That didn't fly, but the negotiations seriously held up some of
the contracts.

VOIP is data packet switching.

:-)


--

Char Jackson

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:03:14 -0400, Paul wrote:

I think I will be getting the "No Trust" calls. That's
the kind of call I really want. Did you know you
can never have enough duct cleaning ?

I don't get the duct cleaning calls. Mine used to be from "Rachel at
card services" but lately they're from some robo lady who says "We've
been trying to reach you regarding your vehicle's warranty." On the rare
occasions where I answer and stick around for the human to come online,
they always want to sell me an extended warranty for a vehicle I got rid
of nearly 4 years ago.

--

Char Jackson

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:27:45 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

The whole thing was caught on video. To me, it looks like cold blooded
murder, but apparently they see it differently in that part of Florida.

Murder is allowed in Florida, under the rubric of "Stand your ground."
Look at Trayvon Martin. The whole thing is a crock of ****.

The law is also phrased as "no duty to retreat". So you're
proselytizing that we should all be cowards and do nothing when attacked
or trespassed and hope the law takes care of the aggressor ... and
AFTERWARD. Obviously you've never been the target of an assault and
never had to protect others.

You're presenting a false choice. It doesn't have to be a decision
between running away or shooting to kill. There's a ton of middle ground
available.

--

Char Jackson

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 22:54:17 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 19:30:46 -0700, "David E. Ross"
wrote:

On 7/25/2018 5:59 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
Aside: telco.s? Is it something on my end that's replacing the usual
apostrophe with a period?

It is not only you. I too see a period instead of an apostrophe.

Thanks. Maybe it's a new thing that I'm slow to catch on to. :-)
I'm sure John (J.P.) will clue me in.

It may have been in my original post. I wouldn't write "telco's", as
that looks like a greengrocer's apostrophe. I suppose I could write
tel.co.s or tel'co's but those look very odd.

No problem, I was just curious. I'd probably just use telcos.
Thanks and apologies for the interruption.

--

Char Jackson

Char Jackson wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:27:45 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

The whole thing was caught on video. To me, it looks like cold blooded
murder, but apparently they see it differently in that part of Florida.

Murder is allowed in Florida, under the rubric of "Stand your ground."
Look at Trayvon Martin. The whole thing is a crock of ****.

The law is also phrased as "no duty to retreat". So you're
proselytizing that we should all be cowards and do nothing when attacked
or trespassed and hope the law takes care of the aggressor ... and
AFTERWARD. Obviously you've never been the target of an assault and
never had to protect others.

You're presenting a false choice. It doesn't have to be a decision
between running away or shooting to kill. There's a ton of middle ground
available.

Yes, there are choices - but most are cogitated after the event, like
what we could've or should've done. The flee or fight response is still
present in humans. In an instant, you don't have the luxury of time to
select from a myriad of choices. Could be Drekja thought there would be
further attacks. Was he supposed to crawl on the ground to get away?
If he rose to his feet, that could present another opportunity for
McGlockton to attack. Most folks don't know how to fight when prone,
like sweeping out the feet or rolling into the attack as a counterattack
to get closer to hit the attacker.

Hindsight is the only perfect science. We observers can make judgments
from our comfy chairs about what Drekja should've done. The law
recognizes the limitations in analysis DURING a crisis (but that doesn't
stop Drekja from being arrested, charged, and then acquited by a judge
rather than the police making those decisions). I suspect there was
some political pressure from the DA; that is, the police were likely
told not to arrest, especially since they already chose not to arrest at
the time of the incident or shortly thereafter.

I'm not sure the police should really be making the decision not to
arrest based on "stand your ground" aka "no duty to retreat" law. While
they make the initial decision to arrest or not, seems like something
that should've been decided in court. Quite often, and depending on the
locality, the police are granted wide latitude in interpreting the law.
I'm sure once the police decided not to arrest that the police chief or
commissioner or even the DA told them not to pursue a subsequent arrest.
From what I've read, so far, the police could not arrest and charge
Drekja. Their hands were tied by the law. They're not allowed to shoot
at the tires or driver of a fleeing suspect in a high-speed chase,
either, and they're supposed to capture alive, if possible, someone that
is shooting at them or coming at them with a knife.

Besides, it is not whether or not the police did the right thing. Seems
they complied to the law. That's there job. It's not to make up the
law at the time of an incident. It can be quite frustrating to them
when they know something is wrong but can't do anything about it. Some
guy is shooting at them and they're told to take them alive. Geez, not
only is the public and news against them but even their own regulations.
If the residents want the "stand your ground" law neutered or discarded
then it's up to them to pressure their representatives.

To me, it's not so much whether the law exists in Florida or not. It's
more about why those citizens decided to allow the enactment of that
law. Was it something they want but now, gee, a black guy is another
example of racist banner waving.

Seems "stand your ground" is an extension to the "castle doctrine" where
you are allowed use of lethal force to protect yourself in your home,
business, or even within your car where the occupants that have legal
right to reside on/in that property have no legal compulsion to retreat
(since they are already in their home, workplace, or car which would be
to where they would retreat). The castle doctrine says the assailed can
use lethal force against intruder without retreating. Seems the "stand
your ground" or "no duty to retreat" law extends that, so the assailed
are not required to retreat when attacked -- which does NOT guarantee a
reduction in an attack. Instead of protecting yourself, friends,
family, or others within your property (home, business, car), you are
allowed to protect yourself while in a public place.

The basic criticism is that the average Joe might interpret the law as
"shoot first, ask questions later". If Drekja was wearing a double
holster weilding a couple of semi-autos at his side, do you think
McGlockton would've attacked? While the police are trained and
educated, it's overreaching and ridiculous to expect the average citizen
to make the best decision in a crisis. I have to wonder why Drekja was
carrying a handgun in the first place. Was he provoking the
confrontation, so he could shoot someone, anyone? Drekja's history
hasn't been revealed, or McGlockton's. As the police have said, they
complied with the law and "stand your ground" doesn't seem to take into
consideration the history of the combatants.

Why did Floridians grant passage of the law if they don't agree with it?
Was the law enacted based on public pressure to permit better protection
of self while in public where castle doctrine doesn't apply? If they
don't like the law, why weren't Floridians lobbying and pressuring to
amend or annul the law before this incident? There were be more
incidents and the police can't arrest. Whether they like the law or
not, the police are stuck enforcing it. What pressures were brought to
bear to enact the law in the first place?

The sad part is that if McGlockton were a white neo-Nazi dude with a
shaved head and tattooed all over instead of a black militant and if
Drekja were a black woman carrying a child, this incident probably
wouldn't have made the news, or everyone commenting here would've
thought "Yeah, she should've unloaded the entire clip into him."

Justifiable Use of Force
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/...0776/0776.html

Don't expect the average Joe to know the law. Drekja would've shot
McGlockton whether 776.012, section 2 existed or not. He got lucky in
the law kept him from arrest and prosecution.

How do you compose a law that mandates the attacked have reasonable
composure during the incident to make calm and rational decisions
regarding long-term consequences to validate their belief regarding
their personal safety? The bitching by Drekja at Jacobs was probably
several minutes long, but McGlockton's attack was immediate and without
warning.

Did McGlockton overreact? Yes, very definitely. Did Drekja overreact?
Yes, but whether you like it or not he was protected by the law which
tied the police's hands. It's now up to the Floridians to decide
whether then let stand or get amended the law. The law is never
absolute. It cannot cover every situation, so it changes to compensate
for a deficiency. Personally, it seems a judge should've made the
decision regarding Drekja's overreaction; however, as the police have
stated, they have to comply with the law, so a judge would never see
Drekja in court.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 20:19:22 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:27:45 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

The whole thing was caught on video. To me, it looks like cold blooded
murder, but apparently they see it differently in that part of Florida.

Murder is allowed in Florida, under the rubric of "Stand your ground."
Look at Trayvon Martin. The whole thing is a crock of ****.

The law is also phrased as "no duty to retreat". So you're
proselytizing that we should all be cowards and do nothing when attacked
or trespassed and hope the law takes care of the aggressor ... and
AFTERWARD. Obviously you've never been the target of an assault and
never had to protect others.

You're presenting a false choice. It doesn't have to be a decision
between running away or shooting to kill. There's a ton of middle ground
available.

Yes, there are choices - but most are cogitated after the event, like
what we could've or should've done. The flee or fight response is still
present in humans. In an instant, you don't have the luxury of time to
select from a myriad of choices.

That probably applies to a small number of people, but most of us have
grown up in civilized society, where we learned at a very young age that
a transgression, any transgression no matter how slight, doesn't
automatically require the death of the transgressor. Your sibling
bothers you, you don't kill him/her. A kid at school bothers you, you
don't kill him/her. There are lesser alternatives and we learn them at a
very early age. We all make choices, even in the heat of the moment.

There have always been a few antisocials who'd respond with lethal
force, but these Stand Your Ground laws legalize it. It's obviously a
move in the wrong direction and will someday be looked at with shame,
but for now it's the law in those states. It's a complete shame, but
there it is.

--

Char Jackson

On 07/26/2018 04:03 PM, Paul wrote:

[snip]

And there is a 2017 proposal working its way through the CRTC
in Canada, to block the "easiest" ones (like, calling
yourself might be blocked).

Here, you used to be able to call yourself. There was a special number,
originally used for making local calls on a party line. I have used it a
couple of times as a quick way to check my phone.

IIRC, dial a 4-digit code and your own number (all 10 digits, it was
supposed to be someone else on that line) and hang up. The phone will
ring. That went away when we changed to an electronic exchange.

[snip]

Char Jackson wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 20:19:22 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:27:45 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

Tim Slattery wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

The whole thing was caught on video. To me, it looks like cold blooded
murder, but apparently they see it differently in that part of Florida.

Murder is allowed in Florida, under the rubric of "Stand your ground."
Look at Trayvon Martin. The whole thing is a crock of ****.

The law is also phrased as "no duty to retreat". So you're
proselytizing that we should all be cowards and do nothing when attacked
or trespassed and hope the law takes care of the aggressor ... and
AFTERWARD. Obviously you've never been the target of an assault and
never had to protect others.

You're presenting a false choice. It doesn't have to be a decision
between running away or shooting to kill. There's a ton of middle ground
available.

Yes, there are choices - but most are cogitated after the event, like
what we could've or should've done. The flee or fight response is still
present in humans. In an instant, you don't have the luxury of time to
select from a myriad of choices.

That probably applies to a small number of people, but most of us have
grown up in civilized society, where we learned at a very young age that
a transgression, any transgression no matter how slight, doesn't
automatically require the death of the transgressor. Your sibling
bothers you, you don't kill him/her. A kid at school bothers you, you
don't kill him/her. There are lesser alternatives and we learn them at a
very early age. We all make choices, even in the heat of the moment.

There have always been a few antisocials who'd respond with lethal
force, but these Stand Your Ground laws legalize it. It's obviously a
move in the wrong direction and will someday be looked at with shame,
but for now it's the law in those states. It's a complete shame, but
there it is.

When people become incensed, you can forget about what they were taught
in Sunday school.

I don't live in Clearwater to know what it is like living there
regarding racism; however, the percentage of blacks is pretty small
(https://statisticalatlas.com/neighbo...-and-Ethnicity)
which could mean (but doesn't mandate) that whites think they can get
away with more privileges regarding the law. Not all cities are as
serene as yours. More than being taught about being nice and not
transgressing against another which all sounds nice, we are more of a
product of our environment - and I (and probably you) don't know what it
means to live there. I've only driven through Tampa (Clearwater is
nearby) and my impression was that I wouldn't care to live there, but I
would care a lot less to live in NYC. Clearwater's population is dense:
4,308 per square mile - more than 13 times higher than the Florida
average and 47 times than the national average (NYC is 27K persons per
square mile - YUCK - and much higher is some of it burroughs). Yet
Clearwater has a low percentage of blacks in its population: 83% of
Clearwater is white and 10% are black. Over 12% of its population live
below the federal poverty income level. Clearwater is next to Tampa.
Tampa is home to the KKK and offshoots (Knights of White Disciples),
Nation of Islam (black nationalists), Black Panthers, and other hate
groups (SPCL has a map of hate groups). I don't what it is like living
there as either a white or black person and I'm not interested in
further research. The police did their job: uphold the law. Now it's
up to Floridians to decide if they want to amend that law.

More info about Drekja indicates he is considered a bit of a nut by the
locals. He has lambasted other drivers before at that same convenience
store about them parking in the handicap spots. He's a crusader on that
topic. However, I've seen lots of nuts that are yelling out some
prophecy, religion, doomsday, or other ravings when I've gone through my
city's downtown but I don't blindside to assault them to shut them up.

While the police's hands were tied due to the law which they are to
enforce whether they like it or not, seems Drekja's crusading history
might be cause for them to take him in for pysch evaluation, and perhaps
an opportunity to reinforce your thoughts about a civilized society.
I'm still curious if Drekja has a carry permit for the handgun or if the
police even checked.

Oh, and the case isn't over yet despite the news harping on the incident
and not with a followup. Drekja may not be off the hook. Sheriff
Gualtieri is sending the case to the Florida state attorney's office for
review to consider what actions, if any, might be taken against Drekja.
It is now up to the DA's office to apply the law to the facts and
determine if something should get charged against Drekja. Apparently
they don't consider Drekja a flight risk since they didn't arrest him.

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 23:19:36 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

A couple days ago I subscribed to NoMoRobo on my Spectrum Phone
landline website. Since then I've gotten 2 crap calls that NoMoRobo
didn't block. But that's not the worst, I enthusiatically put my
little TracFone number on the NoMoRobo site also. Alas they needed me
to d/l an App onto my TracFone. Here's my problem with that: it's a
$15 phone. No data plan. I pay about $7/month for my 'plan' to retain
my minutes. My phone doesn't do 'Apps'. So I took its number back off
NoMoRobo. Only thing is, somebody is apparently grabbing numbers off
that site. I used to get maybe 2 crap calls a day on my TracFone. [and
at the end of the month 15 urgent messages from TracFone to try and
make me buy more minutes] Today I got about 10 crap calls so far.
Only thing I can think of is to try and get TracFone to change my
number now. A daunting task.

John B. Smith wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 23:19:36 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

A couple days ago I subscribed to NoMoRobo on my Spectrum Phone
landline website. Since then I've gotten 2 crap calls that NoMoRobo
didn't block. But that's not the worst, I enthusiatically put my
little TracFone number on the NoMoRobo site also. Alas they needed me
to d/l an App onto my TracFone. Here's my problem with that: it's a
$15 phone. No data plan. I pay about $7/month for my 'plan' to retain
my minutes. My phone doesn't do 'Apps'. So I took its number back off
NoMoRobo. Only thing is, somebody is apparently grabbing numbers off
that site. I used to get maybe 2 crap calls a day on my TracFone. [and
at the end of the month 15 urgent messages from TracFone to try and
make me buy more minutes] Today I got about 10 crap calls so far.
Only thing I can think of is to try and get TracFone to change my
number now. A daunting task.

I wasn't aware that NoMoRobo's app was free. The app might download and
install for free but they charge a subscription fee to work with cell
phones using their app. They don't charge for the app but they do
charge monthly for the app to access their blacklist. You don't need
their app if your cell provider has simultaneous ring. Don't use
software if the hardware can do the job.

If your cellular provider has simultaneous ring, you don't need any
software. You need to enable (if not already) their simultaneous ring
feature (sometimes incorrectly named call forwarding) and then add
NoMoRobo's number as one of those it calls. With simultaneous ring
enabled, at a minimum your own cell phone number should be listed since
you want that phone to ring as before. You can then add other numbers
to ring at the same time whether that be your home phone, work phone, or
NoMoRobo.

My cell phone's service is through Tracfone which subleases network
services from other carriers. I've had them with Sprint, AT&T, and
Verizon (which is the current carrier to which Tracfone subscribes me).
I don't remember if it was through some voicemail prompting (you call
your own number from your registered phone with that same phone number
and go through some prompts on configuring your account) or it might've
been done via texting special codes to them. Once I got simultaneous
ring enabled in my Verizon account and added NoMoRobo's number, I was
done. No software got installed on my phone.

Only if your cellular provider does not support simultaneous ring (or it
costs extra when bundled in some higher-priced service tier) do you need
NoMoRobo's Android or iOS app; however, that route isn't free (cost is
$1.99 per month per device). Rather than was two bucks a month, see if
your cellular provider has simultaneous ring as a feature of your
existing plan with them.

As I recall, you don't need any data plan (aka Internet access). If you
configure your cellular account to simultaneously ring NoMoRobo, that's
done when you receving inbound calls. NoMoRobo is doing the lookup of
the caller's phone number on their server when your cellular provider
includes calling them. The lookup is not performed by an app on your
phone.

I doubt and cannot figure out how anyone could be harvesting phone
number from NoMoRobo. The spammers are calling your cell phone number.
They aren't calling NoMoRobo. Just like e-mail spam, the volume of spam
calls ebbs and peaks. There isn't a constant level of robodialing.
More likely your phone number already got harvested and later, which
happened to be after using NoMoRobo, you got nailed in the spammer call
list for his latest burst of spewage. Some calls will inherently be
sporadic, like when getting calls from charities operating a donation
drive which occur at specific times, not continually. Even Tracfone
will occasionally issue phone calls to you, like to remind you that your
subscription is about to expire (which means you lose all your rollover
minutes if you let the subscription lapse but they have a 30-day grace
period).

NoMoRobo ONLY handles robodialed calls. It does not eliminate spam or
scam calls made by humans. Only calls that have been detected as
originated by a robodialer are in NoMoRobo's blacklist, nothing else.
It obviously cannot detect robodialers whose numbers are not yet on its
blacklist. Just like your e-mail address, you need to protect your
phone number. Anyone to whom you dole out your phone number could pass
it on. Any number you call where that end uses ANI (Automatic Number
Identification) can record your phone number, like any 800, 888, or 900
number you call or you call anyone using ANI to log your phone number
when you call them. Credit bureaus give out your phone number and
spilling other personal information just for the asking.

I use simultaneous ring at the phone/cell providers. No software. So,
I don't have experience with using NoMoRobo's Android or iOS app (which
requires a $2/mo subscription). Alas, many "free" apps are adware
platforms. You sure you got more phone calls from spammers or instead
might you have gotten hit with an add (that might pretend it was a
call)? Some adware apps just use a banner to show their ads. This is
probably least intrusive but it isn't completely safe. I've seen ads
that tried to pretend (within the banner section) that my Back, Home,
and Recent buttons had suddenly moved into the screen (instead of the
real and dedicated buttons at the bottom of the phone). Some phones no
longer have buttons. They have touch points on the screen, and the fake
ads are trying to get you to tap on the wrong buttons. Some adware apps
present fullscreen ads. This interferes with your use of the app since
you have to somehow get out of the ad to get back to the app. For
those, usually pressing the Back button gets me back to the app. I
would never use the "X", "Close", or other pseudo-button presented in
the fullscreen ad since you really don't what script lies behind that
element. Some adware apps will present fullscreen ads when you are no
longer using the app. You think you exited the app but Android doesn't
work like Linux or Windows: exiting an Android app leaves it running in
memory in the background until the OS needs to reuse that memory for a
newly loaded app. So apps often remain running in the background, and
I've encountered some that would puke out fullscreen apps that interfere
with the use of my phone until you get rid of the fullscreen ad (e.g.,
ES File Explorer did that when I tried that file manager app). I don't
know if NoMoRobo's app qualifies as an adware app, especially since you
have to subscribe at $2/mo to use their app (if they're charging for a
subscription, they shouldn't be presenting ads as they are already
generating a revenue stream).

If your phone was more robust and could handle apps, there are some that
do client-initiated filtering but I'm sure they do require a data plan.
I don't like how TrueCaller works (they harvest your contacts list).
Whitepages Caller ID got renamed to Hiya and I used that before engaging
NoMoRobo. While NoMoRobo ONLY addresses robodialing callers, Hiya is
more like an e-mail anti-spam filter: Hiya has their blacklist of spam
and scam callers. As I recall, it can't do anything until after the
first ring. The Caller ID is sent between the first and second rings.
So, you will get bothered with one ring from a spammer (just as when
using NoMoRobo) but if the call survives to the second ring then it's
safer to pick it up. No blacklist is going to be perfect and spammers
are constantly altering their intrusion schemes.

Did you see my scheme of disabling ringtones on your cell phone (set to
silent for all calls) and enabling a ringtone on each contact or on a
group of contacts (if your phone supports groups of contacts)? That
way, the only time your phone will ring is when a contact calls you.
All other callers with either hangup (typical of spammers) or have to
leave a voicemail message (if they don't leave a message then their call
was not important). Since you have a very low-end (barely smart) phone,
you would have to see what control you have over ringtones either
globally (for all calls) or if you can assign ringtones to specific
contacts or groups of contacts. You don't need NoMoRobo with this
scheme, or blacklists at your provider (that you have to update), or a
smartphone app (e.g., Hiya). You just need to silence your phone for
all calls and then use ringtones ONLY for your contacts. Obviously you
do need a voicemail feature with this setup, so good callers can leave
you a message who aren't in your contacts list.

I don't see a $7/month Tracfone plan. The smallest smartphone plan I
can find at Tracfone's web site is $15/month (200 call minutes, 500
texts, and 500 MB for data). I cannot find a Tracfone smartphone plan
with no data quota. Their basic plans roll calls, texts, and data all
together into a minute quota for varying number of service days. The
smallest basic phone plan that I found is $9.99/month for just 30
minutes (talk, text, & web).

In message , VanguardLH
writes:
John B. Smith wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 23:19:36 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
[]
didn't block. But that's not the worst, I enthusiatically put my
little TracFone number on the NoMoRobo site also. Alas they needed me
to d/l an App onto my TracFone. Here's my problem with that: it's a
$15 phone. No data plan. I pay about $7/month for my 'plan' to retain
my minutes. My phone doesn't do 'Apps'. So I took its number back off
(I was going to say download it at home, but [a] your 'phone probably
doesn't have wifi [b] it doesn't do apps anyway.)
NoMoRobo. Only thing is, somebody is apparently grabbing numbers off
that site. I used to get maybe 2 crap calls a day on my TracFone. [and
at the end of the month 15 urgent messages from TracFone to try and
[]
I doubt and cannot figure out how anyone could be harvesting phone
number from NoMoRobo. The spammers are calling your cell phone number.
They aren't calling NoMoRobo. Just like e-mail spam, the volume of spam
calls ebbs and peaks. There isn't a constant level of robodialing.

No, he can't prove it; as you say, levels vary. But him now getting
about 10 instead of 2 a day, after he put his little 'phone's number on
their site, seems rather a coincidence. (I don't think he was suggesting
someone's figured out a clever way to harvest numbers by calling, more
just that their site/server [where he added his number] has been hacked,
or someone involved with it is selling, which I suppose is the same
thing.)

More likely your phone number already got harvested and later, which

Always could be the case.
[]
would never use the "X", "Close", or other pseudo-button presented in
the fullscreen ad since you really don't what script lies behind that
element. Some adware apps will present fullscreen ads when you are no

Same on webpages in a browser on a normal PC: I'm often very wary of
popups - especially "are you sure you want to leave this page" ones -
and don't trust their X. I use the back button. (And if possible avoid
ever again going to the site where the popup appeared.)

longer using the app. You think you exited the app but Android doesn't
work like Linux or Windows: exiting an Android app leaves it running in
memory in the background until the OS needs to reuse that memory for a

That's interesting! Thanks for the information. (Does it apply to iOS
too?) _Is_ there a way to exit such an app. terminally?

newly loaded app. So apps often remain running in the background, and

If OS demand/control really does work like that, maybe there's an
opening for an app that just eats memory! [I know, plenty do anyway, but
YKWIM (-:]
[]
If your phone was more robust and could handle apps, there are some that
do client-initiated filtering but I'm sure they do require a data plan.

I know what you meant, but I don't think "robust" was the right word: a
'phone that doesn't do app.s seems to me very robust (-:!
[]
I don't see a $7/month Tracfone plan. The smallest smartphone plan I
can find at Tracfone's web site is $15/month (200 call minutes, 500
texts, and 500 MB for data). I cannot find a Tracfone smartphone plan
with no data quota. Their basic plans roll calls, texts, and data all
together into a minute quota for varying number of service days. The
smallest basic phone plan that I found is $9.99/month for just 30
minutes (talk, text, & web).

I wouldn't be surprised if more or less every customer sees a different
set of options; many companies do this now, I presume maybe be use of
cookies, browser profiling, or whatever else they can get away with (or
in some cases whatever they think they won't get caught using). It's
always worth using your browser's cloak facility ("private browsing" in
my old Firefox; I don't know what it's called in other browsers) to see
what a new customer would see. I recently checked for Ancestry; a new
customer taking out a "World" subscription would have seen it available
as 89.99 pounds for the year; if I'd let mine auto-renew, it'd have been
179.99 - exactly twice, give or take a penny. Most insurances here do it
too, though I've never seen a _doubling_. Never let anything auto-renew!
But I'm not surprised you're seeing different options to what JBS is
seeing.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Quantity is no substitute for quality, but it's the only one we've got.

On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 01:42:56 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

John B. Smith wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 23:19:36 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

A couple days ago I subscribed to NoMoRobo on my Spectrum Phone
landline website. Since then I've gotten 2 crap calls that NoMoRobo
didn't block. But that's not the worst, I enthusiatically put my
little TracFone number on the NoMoRobo site also. Alas they needed me
to d/l an App onto my TracFone. Here's my problem with that: it's a
$15 phone. No data plan. I pay about $7/month for my 'plan' to retain
my minutes. My phone doesn't do 'Apps'. So I took its number back off
NoMoRobo. Only thing is, somebody is apparently grabbing numbers off
that site. I used to get maybe 2 crap calls a day on my TracFone. [and
at the end of the month 15 urgent messages from TracFone to try and
make me buy more minutes] Today I got about 10 crap calls so far.
Only thing I can think of is to try and get TracFone to change my
number now. A daunting task.

I wasn't aware that NoMoRobo's app was free. The app might download and
install for free but they charge a subscription fee to work with cell
phones using their app. They don't charge for the app but they do
charge monthly for the app to access their blacklist. You don't need
their app if your cell provider has simultaneous ring. Don't use
software if the hardware can do the job.

If your cellular provider has simultaneous ring, you don't need any
software. You need to enable (if not already) their simultaneous ring
feature (sometimes incorrectly named call forwarding) and then add
NoMoRobo's number as one of those it calls. With simultaneous ring
enabled, at a minimum your own cell phone number should be listed since
you want that phone to ring as before. You can then add other numbers
to ring at the same time whether that be your home phone, work phone, or
NoMoRobo.

My cell phone's service is through Tracfone which subleases network
services from other carriers. I've had them with Sprint, AT&T, and
Verizon (which is the current carrier to which Tracfone subscribes me).
I don't remember if it was through some voicemail prompting (you call
your own number from your registered phone with that same phone number
and go through some prompts on configuring your account) or it might've
been done via texting special codes to them. Once I got simultaneous
ring enabled in my Verizon account and added NoMoRobo's number, I was
done. No software got installed on my phone.

Only if your cellular provider does not support simultaneous ring (or it
costs extra when bundled in some higher-priced service tier) do you need
NoMoRobo's Android or iOS app; however, that route isn't free (cost is
$1.99 per month per device). Rather than was two bucks a month, see if
your cellular provider has simultaneous ring as a feature of your
existing plan with them.

As I recall, you don't need any data plan (aka Internet access). If you
configure your cellular account to simultaneously ring NoMoRobo, that's
done when you receving inbound calls. NoMoRobo is doing the lookup of
the caller's phone number on their server when your cellular provider
includes calling them. The lookup is not performed by an app on your
phone.

I doubt and cannot figure out how anyone could be harvesting phone
number from NoMoRobo. The spammers are calling your cell phone number.
They aren't calling NoMoRobo. Just like e-mail spam, the volume of spam
calls ebbs and peaks. There isn't a constant level of robodialing.
More likely your phone number already got harvested and later, which
happened to be after using NoMoRobo, you got nailed in the spammer call
list for his latest burst of spewage. Some calls will inherently be
sporadic, like when getting calls from charities operating a donation
drive which occur at specific times, not continually. Even Tracfone
will occasionally issue phone calls to you, like to remind you that your
subscription is about to expire (which means you lose all your rollover
minutes if you let the subscription lapse but they have a 30-day grace
period).

NoMoRobo ONLY handles robodialed calls. It does not eliminate spam or
scam calls made by humans. Only calls that have been detected as
originated by a robodialer are in NoMoRobo's blacklist, nothing else.
It obviously cannot detect robodialers whose numbers are not yet on its
blacklist. Just like your e-mail address, you need to protect your
phone number. Anyone to whom you dole out your phone number could pass
it on. Any number you call where that end uses ANI (Automatic Number
Identification) can record your phone number, like any 800, 888, or 900
number you call or you call anyone using ANI to log your phone number
when you call them. Credit bureaus give out your phone number and
spilling other personal information just for the asking.

I use simultaneous ring at the phone/cell providers. No software. So,
I don't have experience with using NoMoRobo's Android or iOS app (which
requires a $2/mo subscription). Alas, many "free" apps are adware
platforms. You sure you got more phone calls from spammers or instead
might you have gotten hit with an add (that might pretend it was a
call)? Some adware apps just use a banner to show their ads. This is
probably least intrusive but it isn't completely safe. I've seen ads
that tried to pretend (within the banner section) that my Back, Home,
and Recent buttons had suddenly moved into the screen (instead of the
real and dedicated buttons at the bottom of the phone). Some phones no
longer have buttons. They have touch points on the screen, and the fake
ads are trying to get you to tap on the wrong buttons. Some adware apps
present fullscreen ads. This interferes with your use of the app since
you have to somehow get out of the ad to get back to the app. For
those, usually pressing the Back button gets me back to the app. I
would never use the "X", "Close", or other pseudo-button presented in
the fullscreen ad since you really don't what script lies behind that
element. Some adware apps will present fullscreen ads when you are no
longer using the app. You think you exited the app but Android doesn't
work like Linux or Windows: exiting an Android app leaves it running in
memory in the background until the OS needs to reuse that memory for a
newly loaded app. So apps often remain running in the background, and
I've encountered some that would puke out fullscreen apps that interfere
with the use of my phone until you get rid of the fullscreen ad (e.g.,
ES File Explorer did that when I tried that file manager app). I don't
know if NoMoRobo's app qualifies as an adware app, especially since you
have to subscribe at $2/mo to use their app (if they're charging for a
subscription, they shouldn't be presenting ads as they are already
generating a revenue stream).

If your phone was more robust and could handle apps, there are some that
do client-initiated filtering but I'm sure they do require a data plan.
I don't like how TrueCaller works (they harvest your contacts list).
Whitepages Caller ID got renamed to Hiya and I used that before engaging
NoMoRobo. While NoMoRobo ONLY addresses robodialing callers, Hiya is
more like an e-mail anti-spam filter: Hiya has their blacklist of spam
and scam callers. As I recall, it can't do anything until after the
first ring. The Caller ID is sent between the first and second rings.
So, you will get bothered with one ring from a spammer (just as when
using NoMoRobo) but if the call survives to the second ring then it's
safer to pick it up. No blacklist is going to be perfect and spammers
are constantly altering their intrusion schemes.

Did you see my scheme of disabling ringtones on your cell phone (set to
silent for all calls) and enabling a ringtone on each contact or on a

My little TrakFone has a setting for 'Silent' which i use all the
time, But it is not silent, it means you are choosing the buzzer, or
vibration mode. I don't know if I could set ringtones for my real
contacts or not, never looked further since can't silence the phone.

group of contacts (if your phone supports groups of contacts)? That
way, the only time your phone will ring is when a contact calls you.
All other callers with either hangup (typical of spammers) or have to
leave a voicemail message (if they don't leave a message then their call
was not important). Since you have a very low-end (barely smart) phone,
you would have to see what control you have over ringtones either
globally (for all calls) or if you can assign ringtones to specific
contacts or groups of contacts. You don't need NoMoRobo with this
scheme, or blacklists at your provider (that you have to update), or a
smartphone app (e.g., Hiya). You just need to silence your phone for
all calls and then use ringtones ONLY for your contacts. Obviously you
do need a voicemail feature with this setup, so good callers can leave
you a message who aren't in your contacts list.

I don't see a $7/month Tracfone plan. The smallest smartphone plan I
can find at Tracfone's web site is $15/month (200 call minutes, 500
texts, and 500 MB for data). I cannot find a Tracfone smartphone plan
with no data quota. Their basic plans roll calls, texts, and data all
together into a minute quota for varying number of service days. The
smallest basic phone plan that I found is $9.99/month for just 30
minutes (talk, text, & web).

I looked and can't find my plan anymore either (basic phone, not
smart). But they've been charging me $6.50/month for a long time
now.Comes right off my credit card, and if they suddenly decide to
send you a new card you have to go thru hell to get hooked back up
with TrakFone (if you forget the billing arrangement) I've had 2 hours
worth of minutes for about 2 years now. Thinks it's down to 70-some
minutes now. They frantically try to sell me minutes at the end of
every month. Unless I"m expecting a call I just ignore the goddamn
thing. Apparently with all current plans available they force you to
buy minutes every month. Most of my friends have chosen Consumer
Cellular and a better quality phone for about 4 times what I'm paying.
Maybe that's in my future.

So far today I haven't gotten anymore crap calls on my cell. ???

"VanguardLH" wrote

|
| I don't see a $7/month Tracfone plan. The smallest smartphone plan I
| can find at Tracfone's web site is $15/month (200 call minutes, 500
| texts, and 500 MB for data). I cannot find a Tracfone smartphone plan
| with no data quota. Their basic plans roll calls, texts, and data all
| together into a minute quota for varying number of service days. The
| smallest basic phone plan that I found is $9.99/month for just 30
| minutes (talk, text, & web).

I use a Tracphone, which I only keep in my truck
as a portable phone booth, turned on as needed.
The phone was $10, I think.
I have to buy $20 worth of minutes every 3 months
to keep my minutes. That's it. I now have about
2,000 minutes stored because I rarely use it.

I can use data and a web browser, but it's
a limited, cheap flip phone and it's not meant for
that. I once made the mistake of reading a text
and I think it cost me something like $4 worth of
minutes! The message was from my niece,
announcing that she was at Starbucks and would
"be right over". Great. It cost me $4 for her to
tell me she's not here yet.

I can't see who sent a text without reading it,
so I just never read them. And despite turning
on the phone only once every couple of weeks,
on average, I do get some junk calls. But I don't
check my messages unless I'm expecting a call.
Though it's surprising how many people actually
don't believe that I'm not using my cellphone.
They think that's my "real" number because that's
how they use their cellphone. So once I give them
the number they insist on calling or sending texts,
then complain that I didn't call back. I have to
explain again that I really don't use my cellphone
much and that I *might* get their phone message
next month.

Awhile back I tried the camera on my Tracphone.
It works OK! But I can only get the images off with
bluetooth, and they seem to be blurry. I haven't
yet figured out whether that's a fault of the phone
or just a dirty lens.... Not as good as an iPhone, but
then again, it was 1/100th the cost.