If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
In article , 123456789
wrote: as a paying guest, you have permission, and if you put everything back the way it was, there's no damage. As a paying guest you still don't have permission to mess with the wiring or plumbing. Even if you put it back. Call any hotel and ask them. I can guarantee the answer. guarantees fail when there's an exception and plumbing is very different than a phone jack. i used to go to a conference where we did ask for access to the hotel's networking closet and got permission to do pretty much anything within reason. we ran networking cables to the various conference rooms, before wifi was a viable option. we also moved lots of furniture. at the end of the conference, everything was restored to how we found it. no issues whatsoever. these days, people connect their laptop, tablet or phone to the tv in the room and watch their own movies instead of the overpriced hotel movies. there are numerous how-tos online. reconnect everything and there's no issue. if there was, the hotel industry would go after such sites. people also set up their own wifi networks to avoid paying for the overpriced hotel wifi, in addition to privacy concerns. marriott didn't like that and illegally blocked it, up until they got caught. https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/03/trave...fine/index.htm l Marriott has agreed to pay a $600,000 fine after the Federal Communications Commission found the company blocked consumer Wi-Fi networks last year during an event at a hotel and conference center in Nashville. At the same time, Marriott was charging exhibitors and others as much as $1,000 per device to access the hotel's wireless network, the FCC announced Friday. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
On 2/16/2019 5:59 PM, nospam wrote:
123456789 wrote: as a paying guest, you have permission, and if you put everything back the way it was, there's no damage. As a paying guest you still don't have permission to mess with the wiring or plumbing. Even if you put it back. Call any hotel and ask them. I can guarantee the answer. plumbing is very different than a phone jack. We're not talking about a phone JACK. We're talking about a HARD WIRED phone (from years back). And your unauthorized unscrewing of the hotel wall cover and tapping into the hotel's internal phone wiring. Plumbing may be different than phone wiring but the principle of unauthorized messing with hotel property is the same. i used to go to a conference where we did ask for access to the hotel's networking closet and got permission to do pretty much anything within reason. Completely different. You got permission ahead of time for a big dollar generating conference event for the hotel. Not so for your pocket screwdriver and RJ11 unannounced shenanigans. Take my challenge. Call any hotel for a normal stay and say BTW can I mess with your in the wall phone wiring. I still guarantee what the answer will be... these days, people connect their laptop, tablet or phone to the tv in the room and watch their own movies instead of the overpriced hotel movies. Plugging an HDMI connector into a TV is quite different from unscrewing a wall plate and messing with the hotel wiring. people also set up their own wifi networks to avoid paying for the overpriced hotel wifi, Using your own WiFi is quite different from unscrewing a wall plate and messing with the hotel wiring. Marriott has agreed to pay a $600,000 fine after the Federal Communications Commission found the company blocked consumer Wi-Fi networks last year during an event at a hotel and conference center in Nashville. Marriott's transgressions have nothing to do with you unscrewing a wall plate and messing with the hotel wiring. Why don't you just say a few prayers and your sins will be forgiven and we can end this silly exchange... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256 Frank Slootweg wrote: 123456789 wrote: On 2/16/2019 11:15 AM, nospam wrote: 123456789 wrote: Putting the coupler in a suitcase was not a big burden ...you would have needed a laptop back then anyway. Is this/he for real!? When you were using/carrying the acoustic coupler around, did you have/use a *laptop*!? It was most likely a 'portable computer', FSVSVO 'portable'. ('Mine' had to be carried by two people and that was only the computer, never mind the peripherals.) BTW, I couldn't find an introduction date for RJ11, but I'm quite sure that our acoustic coupler didn't have it. IIRC, it was in the 70s, after AT&T lost the lawsuit that it was "their" wiring inside customer premesis. But its well before my time, so may be off by a few decades. In either evect, it seems that it'd be a bit supergluous to have a phone jack on an acoustic coupler. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAlxpSq 0ACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooHMJwgAnaJhBLM+ONzXaRQ5LT9TvgNKd45ZmrBrNtEU62WnKt HJmDNrvmEzPq2o LdkLZRYM1vCl3ZQFttW/wQtq1OwKpJcDDmS/fy9GSpGMwJTedXAl1eEgiw4tt9kM dH5/MnFOrjOIFu5oc6DvxeJYikAXZbFfhpp+vo+SRntqi1vYagDOlK brNzESygbi L1qq7BD+oNl6HH4Vp8rKEQ3gcyjzmKEZBDmdV+Ms03pj99Z6/jWXGPfjUuIbEVno vKWPBMgFjMi1NaSZ4LdUG2MUA8kmNtJxBvFifnewBjhYwwhq/fd8CXsjkQ4QSY9e PP0RyP1UENCoCwPJmj4QVWPr+rZBYg== =HAtQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
On 15/02/2019 21:42, Ant wrote:
Buffalo wrote: "Ant" wrote in message ... nospam wrote: In article , Ken Blake wrote: And don't forget Usenet, which started in 1979. If you were fortunate to have a connection. Here you had to be on university and have contacts with enough power to allow you time on a computer with that connection. I did not hear of Internet till the 90's, and it took me about a decade to get access at home. I got my first e-mail address in 1991 or 92. E-mail was the only access I had to the Internet then; it was through a BBS. I didn't have web access in my home until around 1994. newbie. Same for me, but later like in 1995 with TIA and SLiRP via my university's HP-UX shell account. Before that, it was BBSes, Prodigy, and my friend's university shell account (didn't know how to do that web stuff yet). All on dial-up, baby. :P Wow, you had dial-up and not a crank phone? Nice to have the latest stuff!! Hehe. http://zimage.com/~ant/antfarm/about/toys.html for my past and current stuff. Yeah, these days I use ancient stuff like my decade old PCs. I care not for the newer stuff anymore. Wow that's pretty impressive this past and current stuff!!! Congratulations!!! Best Regards @lex |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
Dan Purgert wrote:
123456789 wrote: On 2/16/2019 11:15 AM, nospam wrote: 123456789 wrote: Putting the coupler in a suitcase was not a big burden ...you would have needed a laptop back then anyway. Is this/he for real!? When you were using/carrying the acoustic coupler around, did you have/use a *laptop*!? It was most likely a 'portable computer', FSVSVO 'portable'. ('Mine' had to be carried by two people and that was only the computer, never mind the peripherals.) BTW, I couldn't find an introduction date for RJ11, but I'm quite sure that our acoustic coupler didn't have it. IIRC, it was in the 70s, after AT&T lost the lawsuit that it was "their" wiring inside customer premesis. But its well before my time, so may be off by a few decades. In either evect, it seems that it'd be a bit supergluous to have a phone jack on an acoustic coupler. Yup. Brain was mixed up. I meant, I don't think RJ11 existed at that time (very early 70s, maybe even late 60s), or at least was not (yet) in common use. The Wikipedia 'Acoustic coupler' page [1] indicates that commercial acoustic couplers started as early as 1968, maybe even 1964. I can't remember the name of the HP-owned brand we used, let alone a model number. The HP Computer Museum only mentions a much, much newer (1984) one [2]. BTW, while searching, I saw this neat page: 'Dear Modem from 1964, Welcome to the Internet' https://gizmodo.com/dear-modem-from-1964-welcome-to-the-internet-5272376 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_coupler [2] http://www.hpmuseum.net/display_item.php?hw=822 |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
On 2/17/19 10:33 AM, Alex Beauroy wrote:
snip Hehe. http://zimage.com/~ant/antfarm/about/toys.html for my past and current stuff. Yeah, these days I use ancient stuff like my decade old PCs. I care not for the newer stuff anymore. Wow that's pretty impressive this past and current stuff!!! Congratulations!!! Best Regards @lex +1 Great reading, fun to walk though time. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
Roger Blake wrote:
On 2019-02-16, Frank Slootweg wrote: When you were using/carrying the acoustic coupler around, did you have/use a *laptop*!? For a while I had a TI "Silent 700", a portable hardcopy terminal with built-in 300-baud acoustic coupler. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_700 Yup, I remember those. Thanks for the link. I see that the first datasheet (in 'External links') is of June 1972. That's about the era I was talking about. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
On 2/16/19 3:50 PM, nospam wrote:
[snip] BTW, I couldn't find an introduction date for RJ11, but I'm quite sure that our acoustic coupler didn't have it. no reason why it would have one. My first modem (300 baud*) didn't have either RJ11 or acoustic coupler. It had a smaller (4P4C) connector to connect to a telephone instead of the handset. This was in about 1984. * - I remember people saying it's not really 300 baud but 300 bits per second, although in that case they were the same numbers. However bps is what people really care about. 1200 bps modems were actually 600 baud (2 bits per signaling unit). -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "In view of the stupidity of the majority of the people, a widely held opinion is more likely to be foolish than sensible." -- Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
On 2/16/19 5:54 PM, nospam wrote:
[snip] as a paying guest, you have permission, and if you put everything back the way it was, there's no damage. It shouldn't be trespass if you're just doing something in your room, however if you made a mistake and damaged stuff outside your room it could be. I consider the above mistake much less likely than someone ASSUMING that's what you're doing. just don't steal the soap. they don't like that. I once knew someone who had a large collection of little soap bars, from hotels everywhere; as well as sugar packets from the restaurants. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "In view of the stupidity of the majority of the people, a widely held opinion is more likely to be foolish than sensible." -- Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote: as a paying guest, you have permission, and if you put everything back the way it was, there's no damage. It shouldn't be trespass if you're just doing something in your room, however if you made a mistake and damaged stuff outside your room it could be. damage is a separate issue. this isn't about damage. I consider the above mistake much less likely than someone ASSUMING that's what you're doing. just don't steal the soap. they don't like that. I once knew someone who had a large collection of little soap bars, from hotels everywhere; as well as sugar packets from the restaurants. yep. it's quite common. sometimes people even take the utensils, especially on planes, and you don't even need to fly to own some: https://www.ebay.com/bhp/airline-cutlery |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote: BTW, I couldn't find an introduction date for RJ11, but I'm quite sure that our acoustic coupler didn't have it. no reason why it would have one. My first modem (300 baud*) didn't have either RJ11 or acoustic coupler. It had a smaller (4P4C) connector to connect to a telephone instead of the handset. This was in about 1984. that's unusual, but it just replaces putting the handset into a cradle. it can't auto-dial nor can it auto-answer. * - I remember people saying it's not really 300 baud but 300 bits per second, although in that case they were the same numbers. However bps is what people really care about. 1200 bps modems were actually 600 baud (2 bits per signaling unit). yep. people misused the term. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
Big Al wrote:
On 2/17/19 10:33 AM, Alex Beauroy wrote: snip Hehe. http://zimage.com/~ant/antfarm/about/toys.html for my past and current stuff. Yeah, these days I use ancient stuff like my decade old PCs. I care not for the newer stuff anymore. Wow that's pretty impressive this past and current stuff!!! Congratulations!!! Best Regards @lex +1 Great reading, fun to walk though time. Yep. Fun to record what I had, share, and reread it. -- Quote of the Week: "As a thinker and planner, the ant is the equal of any savage race of men; as a self-educated specialist in several arts she is the superior of any savage race of men; and in one or two high mental qualities she is above the reach of any man..." --Mark Twain Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail. | |o o| | \ _ / ( ) |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
In article , 123456789
wrote: the box on the wall is called a phone jack, There's no phone jack on a hard wired phone. i said wall, not phone. there is no tapping into anything. Then why did you need the screwdriver? to remove the cover. sometimes there was a four prong jack, in which case no screwdriver is needed, just an adapter, such as this: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/21lr9t%2BvSVL.jpg the room comes with use of the phone and that's exactly what happens What does the hotel manager think of your phone use definition? he wont know, and in the off chance he finds out, he likely won't give a **** unless there is damage. if there is damage, no matter what kind, additional fees will be charged. standard practice. after rj11 became common (and before hotels went digital), all that was needed was to unplug the cord and connect it directly to a laptop. Unplugging an RJ11 jack is quite different from rooting around with the hotel's phone wiring inside the wall. it's not inside the wall and unplugging a phone cord is still modification of the wiring. there was once a time when you couldn't do that in your own home. the phone company only allowed their phones, even with rj11 jacks, and they could tell if there were additional extensions you weren't paying for, which is why many phones were designed to not be detectable. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
On 2/17/2019 8:56 PM, nospam wrote:
there was once a time when you couldn't do that in your own home. the phone company only allowed their phones, even with rj11 jacks, and they could tell if there were additional extensions you weren't paying for, which is why many phones were designed to not be detectable. I guess after harassing you about your electric trespassing I'll come clean and confess to a couple of mine: I used to directly hook a homebrew ham phone patch up to those sacred telephone lines. I made many phone patches to the troops in Vietnam during that time period. After making contact with the overseas military base I was given a stateside phone number to call. I called it collect and the family picked up the tab. The long distance phone operator had to explain it was a phone patch to the person who answered so that they would accept the charges. It was obviously not a well kept secret from the phone company, but I never heard anything from them. Also one end of my 160 and 80 meter wire antennas were attached as high up as I could get them on a telephone pole... 8-O And of course we hams made many patches in country between ourselves to beat the phone company out of their long distance charges. After finding a ham in the city where your relative lived, he made a local call and you could then talk for free. The relative just had to learn to say "over" so we knew when to throw the transmit/receive switches. Ah, those were the days. This internet stuff is so easy it's boring... |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
The internet is no longer any fun
123456789 wrote in :
On 2/17/2019 8:56 PM, nospam wrote: there was once a time when you couldn't do that in your own home. the phone company only allowed their phones, even with rj11 jacks, and they could tell if there were additional extensions you weren't paying for, which is why many phones were designed to not be detectable. The ringer on each phone/device puts a load on the line. If that load gets too big the ringers won't work properly and other bad things micht occur. That's what the big fuss was about with Ma Bell. They decided that the best way to keep that from happening was to control the devices connected to the line. These days, every landline device has a ringer equivalence number on the label. The sum of all connected devices should not be greater that four, if I remember correctly. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|