2nd Unit for $6.95?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be added
to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which includes all the
older units like the 2020s)
However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up and the
other uses internet?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:31:50 -0400, "MC Pee Pants" <mcpee@pants.com>
wrote:

>Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
>According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be added
>to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which includes all the
>older units like the 2020s)
>However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
>residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up and the
>other uses internet?
>
>

With the dial-up one, they could confirm the address by caller ID.
With the internet one, they could confirm address by IP.

Maybe it's just the billing address they check now, but that could
change at any time.

--
60 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Seems to be almost impossible. If they update from different sources
there would be no way to check unless the units were looking for
listings from different cities. For example if one unit is dialup at a
vacation home in Denver and looking for Denver listings and the other is
IP from Boston looking for Boston listings that would be a givaway but
if both were in the same city it would be hard to enforce.

From:MC Pee Pants
mcpee@pants.com

> Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
> According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be
> added to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which
> includes all the older units like the 2020s)
> However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
> residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up
> and the other uses internet?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

MC Pee Pants wrote:
> Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
> According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be added
> to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which includes all the
> older units like the 2020s)
> However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
> residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up and the
> other uses internet?
>

I don't beleive that they really CAN verify this. How do you verify my
address by my IP? My IP will show up as the IP address that a local
business uses (which also uses a wireless router and has given me access
to it).

I don't think they can verify caller id from dialup accounts either
since 1) caller id isn't supported everywhere & 2) my understanding is
that the dialup is not even their phone, but a gateway dialup "leased"
from an isp or similar organization that may have more than one service
using that phone in order to connect people to the internet (thus not
giving them much access to that information since all they see is an ip
connection through an isp)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Arcade Freaque wrote:

>
> I don't think they can verify caller id from dialup accounts either
> since 1) caller id isn't supported everywhere & 2) my understanding is
> that the dialup is not even their phone, but a gateway dialup "leased"
> from an isp or similar organization that may have more than one service
> using that phone in order to connect people to the internet (thus not
> giving them much access to that information since all they see is an ip
> connection through an isp)
>

By Federal (FCC) regulation Caller ID is required to be supported
everywhere for the last couple of years, The requirement was supposed
to be in place for many years but the phone companies wined and cried
and said "Oh we can't afford to put all that hardware in place this
fast" and got something like a five year extension on the old rules

But that extension is now expired and if your phone company does not
support caller ID here in the united states.... Write the FCC.

Also.... There are accounts where blocking caller ID does not work, It
is possible for Replay to have such an account

(800 type numbers and 9-1-1 are two where I'm sure caller ID info can't
be blocked)

When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler room

I've gotten calls from Germany and the caller ID info was present (My
daughter had the good international long distance card... Others with
her took hours to get through to the US, she did it... 1st try)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 02:27:12 GMT, "BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com>
wrote:

>Seems to be almost impossible. If they update from different sources
>there would be no way to check unless the units were looking for
>listings from different cities.

Forgot about the IP? Internet communications require the client to
identify itself to the server. The IP itself just identifies the ISP,
but the ISP can tell who has it. They are often more "cooperative"
than you'd wish.

> For example if one unit is dialup at a
>vacation home in Denver and looking for Denver listings and the other is
>IP from Boston looking for Boston listings that would be a givaway but
>if both were in the same city it would be hard to enforce.
>
>From:MC Pee Pants
>mcpee@pants.com
>
>> Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
>> According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be
>> added to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which
>> includes all the older units like the 2020s)
>> However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
>> residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up
>> and the other uses internet?
>

--
59 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

John in Detroit wrote:
> By Federal (FCC) regulation Caller ID is required to be supported
> everywhere for the last couple of years, The requirement was supposed
> to be in place for many years but the phone companies wined and cried
> and said "Oh we can't afford to put all that hardware in place this
> fast" and got something like a five year extension on the old rules
>

Regardless, there are still places where caller id is not sent from the
calling town - Delta, Iowa is one that comes to mind quite certainly.
There must be others, because it's still a common complaint in my office
when I bring up the issue that I have probably 25% of my calls come in
without caller id info.

I highly doubt that DNNA is going to have a setup that refuses blocked
caller id's (as in your example of E911) since they don't even own the
phone lines that are being used to receive the dialup calls. They
simply see a dialup call as another IP request once the local vendor's
dialup gets you on the net.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:59:36 GMT, Arcade Freaque
<arcadefreaque@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>John in Detroit wrote:
> > By Federal (FCC) regulation Caller ID is required to be supported
>> everywhere for the last couple of years, The requirement was supposed
>> to be in place for many years but the phone companies wined and cried
>> and said "Oh we can't afford to put all that hardware in place this
>> fast" and got something like a five year extension on the old rules
> >
>
>Regardless, there are still places where caller id is not sent from the
>calling town - Delta, Iowa is one that comes to mind quite certainly.
>There must be others, because it's still a common complaint in my office
>when I bring up the issue that I have probably 25% of my calls come in
>without caller id info.
>
>I highly doubt that DNNA is going to have a setup that refuses blocked
>caller id's (as in your example of E911)

911 doesn't use caller ID. It uses ANI, which can't be blocked.
Toll-free calls are like that too.

> since they don't even own the
>phone lines that are being used to receive the dialup calls. They
>simply see a dialup call as another IP request once the local vendor's
>dialup gets you on the net.

--
59 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Unless they are investigating some sort of fraud , I really doubt they would
go through the trouble of contacting an ISP to get this information. I
doubt even the ISP would "freely" give out these details unless law
enforcement was involved.

"Mark Lloyd" <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> wrote in message
news:chjvn05e68amfpksi0k5fq3p1sugo2tnr2@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 02:27:12 GMT, "BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Seems to be almost impossible. If they update from different sources
> >there would be no way to check unless the units were looking for
> >listings from different cities.
>
> Forgot about the IP? Internet communications require the client to
> identify itself to the server. The IP itself just identifies the ISP,
> but the ISP can tell who has it. They are often more "cooperative"
> than you'd wish.
>
> > For example if one unit is dialup at a
> >vacation home in Denver and looking for Denver listings and the other is
> >IP from Boston looking for Boston listings that would be a givaway but
> >if both were in the same city it would be hard to enforce.
> >
> >From:MC Pee Pants
> >mcpee@pants.com
> >
> >> Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
> >> According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be
> >> added to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which
> >> includes all the older units like the 2020s)
> >> However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
> >> residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up
> >> and the other uses internet?
> >
>
> --
> 59 days until the winter solstice celebration
>
> Mark Lloyd
> http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:42:16 -0400, "MC Pee Pants" <mcpee@pants.com>
wrote:

>Unless they are investigating some sort of fraud , I really doubt they would
>go through the trouble of contacting an ISP to get this information. I
>doubt even the ISP would "freely" give out these details unless law
>enforcement was involved.
>

Probably not. Of course you never know.

>"Mark Lloyd" <mlloyd@5xxxmail.com5xxx> wrote in message
>news:chjvn05e68amfpksi0k5fq3p1sugo2tnr2@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 02:27:12 GMT, "BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Seems to be almost impossible. If they update from different sources
>> >there would be no way to check unless the units were looking for
>> >listings from different cities.
>>
>> Forgot about the IP? Internet communications require the client to
>> identify itself to the server. The IP itself just identifies the ISP,
>> but the ISP can tell who has it. They are often more "cooperative"
>> than you'd wish.
>>
>> > For example if one unit is dialup at a
>> >vacation home in Denver and looking for Denver listings and the other is
>> >IP from Boston looking for Boston listings that would be a givaway but
>> >if both were in the same city it would be hard to enforce.
>> >
>> >From:MC Pee Pants
>> >mcpee@pants.com
>> >
>> >> Ok, I've been holding back getting a 2nd unit for a while.
>> >> According to the Replay web site, a 2nd unit for $6.95 a month can be
>> >> added to an existing unit that already has a lifetime sub (which
>> >> includes all the older units like the 2020s)
>> >> However, they state that the units paying $6.95 must be in the same
>> >> residence. How can they confirm this? if one unit uses dial-up
>> >> and the other uses internet?
>> >
>>
>> --
>> 59 days until the winter solstice celebration
>>
>> Mark Lloyd
>> http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com
>

--
59 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:35:34 GMT, John in Detroit
<Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Arcade Freaque wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't think they can verify caller id from dialup accounts either
>> since 1) caller id isn't supported everywhere & 2) my understanding is
>> that the dialup is not even their phone, but a gateway dialup "leased"
>> from an isp or similar organization that may have more than one service
>> using that phone in order to connect people to the internet (thus not
>> giving them much access to that information since all they see is an ip
>> connection through an isp)
>>
>
>By Federal (FCC) regulation Caller ID is required to be supported
>everywhere for the last couple of years, The requirement was supposed
>to be in place for many years but the phone companies wined and cried
>and said "Oh we can't afford to put all that hardware in place this
>fast" and got something like a five year extension on the old rules
>
>But that extension is now expired and if your phone company does not
>support caller ID here in the united states.... Write the FCC.
>
>Also.... There are accounts where blocking caller ID does not work, It
>is possible for Replay to have such an account
>
>(800 type numbers and 9-1-1 are two where I'm sure caller ID info can't
>be blocked)
>

That has nothing to do with caller ID. Toll-free (it's incorrect
tocall it "800" now, there's several other codes used) and 911 calls
use an older system called ANI. THAT can't be blocked.

>When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
>either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler room
>

Most of what I get seem to be the latter.

>I've gotten calls from Germany and the caller ID info was present (My
>daughter had the good international long distance card... Others with
>her took hours to get through to the US, she did it... 1st try)

--
59 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

From:John in Detroit
Blanked@sbcglobal.net

snip>
> When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
> either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
> room

....or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:58:09 GMT, "BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com>
wrote:

>
>
>From:John in Detroit
>Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>
>snip>
>> When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
>> either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
>> room
>
>...or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
>office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."
>

And there's these VoIP companies that let you pick what area code you
want. It doesn't have to be related to where you actually are.

--
59 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Arcade Freaque wrote:

> Regardless, there are still places where caller id is not sent from the
> calling town - Delta, Iowa is one that comes to mind quite certainly.
> There must be others, because it's still a common complaint in my office
> when I bring up the issue that I have probably 25% of my calls come in
> without caller id info.

There are two options for caller id blocking

1: Block by call (you dial a prefix, I think *73, and it blocks the
caller ID for this call..... Or unblocks it if you have option 2)

2: Line blocking, ALL calls go out marked as "Private"

Some phone companies have opted to make Option 2 the default, thus all
calls go out as "Blocked" or "Private"

However if your phone company does not at least offer to unblock it (For
free ) you should write the FCC (www.fcc.gov) and complain.

They can and will encourage the phone company to come of age

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

BruceR wrote:

> From:John in Detroit
> Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>
> snip>
>
>>When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
>>either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
>>room
>
>
> ....or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
> office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."
>
>
Right, this means that the caller is operating his or her or their own
"Mini phone company" and are thus, required to pass along caller ID info
like everyone else... In short, they are violating the caller id reg and
should be put out of business (Unless, of course, they comply)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Nope. There's no requirement to provide it on those circuits. Even if
there were, I doubt that the penalty for failing to provide CID data
would justify shutting down a business.

From:John in Detroit
Blanked@sbcglobal.net

> BruceR wrote:
>
>> From:John in Detroit
>> Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>>
>> snip>
>>
>>> When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
>>> either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
>>> room
>>
>>
>> ....or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
>> office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."
>>
>>
> Right, this means that the caller is operating his or her or their own
> "Mini phone company" and are thus, required to pass along caller ID
> info like everyone else... In short, they are violating the caller id
> reg and should be put out of business (Unless, of course, they comply)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Nope, and there is a company that will let you program ANY number you want
on your Caller ID. I can make it look like YOUR grandma is calling you.

"BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com> wrote in message
news:RkZfd.24768$hN1.5792@twister.socal.rr.com...
> Nope. There's no requirement to provide it on those circuits. Even if
> there were, I doubt that the penalty for failing to provide CID data
> would justify shutting down a business.
>
> From:John in Detroit
> Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>
> > BruceR wrote:
> >
> >> From:John in Detroit
> >> Blanked@sbcglobal.net
> >>
> >> snip>
> >>
> >>> When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
> >>> either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
> >>> room
> >>
> >>
> >> ....or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
> >> office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."
> >>
> >>
> > Right, this means that the caller is operating his or her or their own
> > "Mini phone company" and are thus, required to pass along caller ID
> > info like everyone else... In short, they are violating the caller id
> > reg and should be put out of business (Unless, of course, they comply)
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

BruceR wrote:

> Nope. There's no requirement to provide it on those circuits. Even if
> there were, I doubt that the penalty for failing to provide CID data
> would justify shutting down a business.
>
> From:John in Detroit
> Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>
>
>>BruceR wrote:
>>
>>
>>>From:John in Detroit
>>>Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>>>
>>>snip>
>>>
>>>>When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
>>>>either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
>>>>room
>>>
>>>
>>>....or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
>>>office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Right, this means that the caller is operating his or her or their own
>>"Mini phone company" and are thus, required to pass along caller ID
>>info like everyone else... In short, they are violating the caller id
>>reg and should be put out of business (Unless, of course, they comply)
>
>
>
Personally, I feel that the phone company's privacy manager should be
provided free of charge to all customers, but callers who block their
caller ID or who use "out of area" systems such as the T-1 system you
describe should be required to pay $1.00 to get through to callers who
choose the free privacy manager,,, and of course are required to provide
caller ID info.

I also think predictive dialers should be banned

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:49:28 GMT, John in Detroit
<Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>BruceR wrote:
>
>> Nope. There's no requirement to provide it on those circuits. Even if
>> there were, I doubt that the penalty for failing to provide CID data
>> would justify shutting down a business.
>>
>> From:John in Detroit
>> Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>>
>>
>>>BruceR wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>From:John in Detroit
>>>>Blanked@sbcglobal.net
>>>>
>>>>snip>
>>>>
>>>>>When you get a call and your caller ID says "Out of area" it is thus
>>>>>either coming from off planet or it is an illegal 3rd class boiler
>>>>>room
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>....or from an outbound dedicated T1 span. LD calls from my Houston
>>>>office always show up on CID as "Unavailable."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Right, this means that the caller is operating his or her or their own
>>>"Mini phone company" and are thus, required to pass along caller ID
>>>info like everyone else... In short, they are violating the caller id
>>>reg and should be put out of business (Unless, of course, they comply)
>>
>>
>>
>Personally, I feel that the phone company's privacy manager should be
>provided free of charge to all customers,

Yes. It would be even better is telemarketers were reasonable people
who limited calls to those who ASK for them, but people aren't like
that.

> but callers who block their
>caller ID or who use "out of area" systems such as the T-1 system you
>describe should be required to pay $1.00 to get through to callers who
>choose the free privacy manager,,, and of course are required to provide
>caller ID info.
>
>I also think predictive dialers should be banned

--
58 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

arcadefreaque@gmail.com shaped the electrons to say:
>I don't think they can verify caller id from dialup accounts either
>since 1) caller id isn't supported everywhere & 2) my understanding is
>that the dialup is not even their phone, but a gateway dialup "leased"

1. In the US CID is ubiquitous, but you can block it on most calls you
make.

2. It depends on the outsourcer. The network access server almost
certainly supports collection of CID (the ones I worked with did),
and RADIUS, the most common AAA protocol, supports logging it. The
question is if the outsourcer bothers - and, if so, if they provide
that information to their customers.

-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762
--
<URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.
"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098
<URL:http/www.megazone.org/> <URL:http/www.eyrie-productions.com/> Eris