TELECOM Digest     Wed, 5 Oct 94 11:02:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 387
 
Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. 
Townson
 
     US Cellular/Poughkeepsie Added to NACN? (Douglas Reuben)
     Re: Cell Phones froom Airplanes (Steve Cogorno)
     Infobahn CD-ROM (Ronald Luitwieler)
     Frame Relay vs. ISDN vs. T1 vs. ???? (Stew Pelegan)
     Re: British Telecom Caller ID (Martin Cook)
     Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud (Greg 
Monti)
     Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud (Jason
Hillyard)
     Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud (Tim 
Gorman)
     Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not? (Paul J. J. 
Harrington)
     Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not? (Yves Blondeel)
     Paper Released on Costing Residential Broadband Networks (Steven 
Byrne)
     Re: Telecommuting Law (Eric Adamson)
     Re: Telecommuting Law (John E. Lundgren)
 
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the 
moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.
 
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:
 
                  * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu *
 
The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                     9457-D Niles Center Road
                      Skokie, IL USA   60076
                        Phone: 708-329-0571
                         Fax: 708-329-0572
   ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu **
 
Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.
 
**********************************************************************
*
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              
*
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    
*
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   
*
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as 
represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 
*
**********************************************************************
*
 
Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your 
help
is important and appreciated.
 
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. 
Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies)
Subject: US Cellular/Poughkeepsie Added to NACN?
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 20:44:07 PDT
 
 
After the recent additions of the Vanguard Cellular northeast (and
other?) properties to the NACN, I noted in passing that the
Poughkeepsie, NY system (00503) still did not have automatic call
delivery, even though it had Cell One/NY's "home rate" roaming (where
you pay only your home airtime package's rates, no surcharges or daily
charges, etc).
 
This weekend I was in the Poughkeepsie system, and noticed that the
standard NACN codes for Do Not Disturb and Call Forwarding are
working, and that there is indeed automatic call delivery!
 
All features like forwarding and call waiting work fine, and what I
welcome as an increasingly common feature with CO/NY's partner
systems, all unanswered calls have redirect (bounce back) to
voicemail. (CO/NY for some reason doesn't offer No Answer Transfer,
unfortunately, but if your NACN system does and Poughkeepsie IS indeed
on the NACN, then NAT should also work the same way.)
 
Call-delivery time is also excellent, with only a few extra seconds
required to send your call to Poughkeepsie after someone dials your
CO/NY number. In almost all cases, callers will not even be able to
tell that your call is being sent to another system -- it's quite
seamless to them. Compare this to the B side auto call delivery
system, where as a NYNEX customer it can take from *35 to 40 seconds*
from the time someone dials your local number to the time your phone
starts ringing! Many callers complain about the delay, and/or the
"Please hold on ... your party is being located" time-killer message,
and a lot of them just hang up. I really don't like using the B side
delivery system because it is so unecessarily slow (its not really a
DOJ issue which causes the delay, SWBell/DC, an A-side B-owned company
with the same switch that NYNEX, BAMS and SNET uses doesn't have this
delay, nor does GTE/SF, so WHY on earth do NYNEX,BAMS, and SNET want
to make callers wait so long just to get a hold of a roaming mobile?).
 
But anyhow, I'm not sure if USCell/Poughkeepsie is truly on the NACN
because I haven't gotten any NACN-type error messages from them yet.
CO/NY may have just set up call-delivery there to be competitive with
NYNEX (and to get me to stop whining! :) ). If anyone else from the
NACN ventures there, please let me know if your calls are delivered to
you too.
 
Presently, you need to be careful in downtown Poughkeepsie, as the
next system to the north, Vanguard/Kingston (01513), does not have a
"home rate" program with CO/NY. If you receive a call and you
accidentally register on the Kingston system, and you answer it, you
will pay a daily $3 charge and $.99 per minute.
 
As an aside, I noticed that the Kingston 01513 system is STILL giving
you error recordings when you enter valid NACN codes, like *350, *710,
etc.  These codes to work and do effectuate a change on your home
switch, yet Kingston is returning "KI-32" error recordings instead of
correctly returning confirmation tones.
 
I also noticed that McCaw's Cell One/Albany (00063) still is not
doing redirects for unanswered calls. If your phone goes unanswered or
for some reason you can not be paged but are still registered in
Albany, then callers gets 3 or 4 rings, and then a weird tone, and
then a standard "Not in Vehicle" NACN message. If the non-McCaw
systems in the Hudson Valley can do redirects, why can't the McCaw
system in Albany? I was under the impression that it's a matter of a
software upgrade. I'd think they'd want to get Albany set up for this
as quickly as possible!
 
Finally, on a totally non-Telecom related note (sort of), did anyone
else see the aurora over the mid-Hudson area of Sunday night? I saw it
from about 12:30 to 1AM (and then had to get moving). It was a bright
green color and spread all over the sky, from east to west, more or
less. I've only seen it once before in my life (February 1989 in
Greenwich, CT and Westchester County, NY), and each time it was a
truly impressive sight.  Hope a few others caught it!
 
 
Doug      dreuben@netcom.com / CID Technologies / (203) 499 - 5221
 
------------------------------
 
From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones From Airplanes
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 22:00:25 PDT
 
 
Linc Madson said:
 
> I was under the impression that using a cellphone from any sort of 
an
> airplane was a bad idea, if not outright illegal.  Certainly a 
little
> Cessna isn't likely to be up at 39,000 feet, but there are "small
> planes" that can go well above 10,000 feet, from which altitude they
> could easily reach a good many cells in a populated area like San
> Francisco.  Even from an altitude of just 3,000 feet, you're clear 
of
> all the hills and buildings in most of the Bay Area.
 
I have used a cell phone from a plane on occassion, and it wasn't very
pretty.  It worked OK, but the last time I was coming over the
Altimont Pass, where cell coverage is fairly light.  The cell handoffs
were brusk; I got cut off a couple of times.  The other party heared
me fine, and I had a bit of static with occasional bursts of noise.  I
assume that the cell phone would not affect the plane's instruments,
as the pilot gave me the phone to use :-)
 
BTW, it was a Cessna King Air 8 Passenger.  The main purpose of the
cell phone is to control runway access.  Our runway is FAA registered
(Wallom Field, CA) and to ensure safety, access must be restricted.
However, we needed to allow cross traffic, because there is a service
road that crosses the runway.  Believe it or not, when preparing for a
landing, someone uses the cell phone that is present in all of the
planes, and dials a special number.  The PBX bridges this line right
to the automatic gate, and we can control it remotely to close the
access road.  There are also warning lamps that go on at each
entrance.
 
 
Steve   cogorno@netcom.com
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 1994 11:45:59 GMT
From: 104836@pc-lab.fbk.EUR.NL (Ronald Luitwieler)
Subject: Infobahn CD-ROM
Organization: Faculteit Bedrijfskunde, Erasmus University Rotterdam
 
 
Dear reader, give me the opportunity to introduce myself. I am a
student at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and I am currently working
on a CD-ROM project. The goal of me and my group is to develop a
marketing strategy for a new CD-ROM product (which is briefly outlined
below). This CD-ROM offers the possibility to research the impacts of
the 'Infobahn' on the environment (businesses, changing markets etc.).
The CD will be on the US market early next year, and will be
available in Europe (in a modified version) some time later.
 
Our problem now is to get contacts throughout Europe who can help us
with this project -- because somehow we have to research the 'market'
(which we don't know at this point of time). So if you know people
working in this area or people who may be interested in the product,
PLEASE CONTACT ME!
 
Brief description of the product:
 
The NII Report is a CD-ROM project covering all aspects of US
developments in broadband communications. A CD-ROM published 3 times
annually, and accompanied by a book of articles with a overview/exec-
utive summary. The book of articles will be around 250 pages. The
CD-ROM will be structured around 4 levels of analysis:
 
      LEVEL 1: The overview - A summary of all the key
      developments, based on input from a number of commissioned
      expert studies. The overview will be around 50 pages of
      text.
 
      LEVEL 2: Commissioned reports - covering both analytic
      aspects of the NII and specific industrial sectors:
 
      (markets, regulation, government policy, technology,
      corporate strategy, costs/financing, telcos, cable TV,
      entertainment, nonprofit sector, satellites, drivers.)
 
      These commissioned reports will be provided by experts in
      each of these areas. Each report will be around 20 pages.
 
      LEVEL 3: Published articles - on the recommendation of the
      experts involved providing commissioned reports, there will
      be but reprint rights to the key articles in each of the
      twelve areas. In the beginning there will be a base of 100
      articles, more in each edition.
 
      LEVEL 4: Sources - the huge capacity of the CD-ROM means
      that large number of key sources can be included in the
      publication. Key sources will include:
 
      Government reports and statements - Congressional papers,
      including bills, legislative records, reports, testimony -
      Corporate publications and speeches - Nonprofit reports and
      documents
 
The report will include a paper publication to act as a portable
reference manual and guide. However, its power and usefulness will
come from its use as a CD-ROM product. This approach allows the
simultaneous development of a powerful menu-driven structure, which
allows even neophyte researchers easy access to any part of the
report; and massive searching capabilities, both within and across
issue areas. It also offers export capabilities: ties to the 'Write'
program, cutting to the clipboard, pasting into other applications, or
saving to file, or printing.
 
------------------------------
 
From: spelegan@csc.com, [Stew Pelegan]@csc.com
Subject: Frame Relay vs. ISDN vs. T1 vs. ????
Date: 5 Oct 1994 14:52:28 GMT
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation - System Sciences DIvison
Reply-To: spelegan@csc.com
 
 
We have a commercial customer who's asked us to setup a BBS system for
them.  They've asked us to recommend a telecom option for them to
use that best suits their needs.  They'd like to start out with 8
lines going into the BBS with the ability to move up to 16, 24, etc.
They'd like their customers to have one 800 number to call to reach
this BBS, no matter where they are in the US.  Their customers will
have off-the-shelf modems, ranging from 1200-14.4 baud.
 
My initial recommendation was for T1 if they expected heavy usage
(>$3K/month in long distance charges).  But I've seen enough articles
recently about ISDN and frame relay to be hesitant in putting my
recommendation in stone.
 
I know very little about telecommunications, only what I've picked up
during conversations with long distance carrier sales people.  My
brief education on ISDN tells me that if I wish to implement this
scenario, people who want to call into our customer's BBS will have to
have a special terminal and their local Ma Bell has to offer ISDN.
I'm even more cloudy on Frame Relay.  Can I have one 800 number with
Frame Relay?  Do you need a special terminal/modem to dial into a
frame relay network?  How does it compare to T1?  vs. T1 cost?  vs.
T1 reliability?  Please correct any assumptions that I've made T1,
ISDN, and Frame Relay.
 
Any help would be appreciated.
 
 
Thanks,
 
Stewart Pelegan    Environmental Services
Computer Sciences Corporation  (301) 572-3784
 
------------------------------
 
From: cook@SHAGGY.gfms.bt.co.uk (Martin Cook)
Subject: Re: British Telecom Caller ID
Date: 5 Oct 1994 12:20:13 GMT
Organization: BT Development & Procurement
Reply-To: cook@gfms.bt.co.uk
 
 
Julian Thornhill (jth@ion.le.ac.uk) wrote:
 
> Does anyone know how the caller ID system that British Telecom is
> going to introduce in November works? More specifically, how is the
> information delivered to the phone? I am told that it differs to the
> US system.
 
The following is an extract from part 3 of the uk.telecom FAQ, which
is in turn based on an earlier posting to that group my myself:
 
Q: How does Caller Display work? {*}
 
[For a more detailed discussion see 'Caller Display and Call Return'
by William Dangerfield, Simon Garrett and Melv Bond in British
Telecommuncations Engineering; Volume 12 part 3 (October 1993).  Also
See Supplies Information Note (SIN) 227.]
 
The system described here is that developed by BT for use on the UK
PSTN. It is based on the Bellcore 'CLASS' standard. This has the
benefit of allowing CPE manuafacturers to base their UK models on
those developed for the North American Market.
 
Most of BT's customers are connected to System X, AXE 10 or TXE4
exchanges and these exchanges are digitally interlinked using CCITT C7
signalling. C7 provides a way of passing the number of the calling
number to the distant exchange (this information is used during call
tracing).
 
When a call is made to a customer with Caller Display the distant
exchange requests the number of the caller originating the call from
the exchange at the other end of the C7 link.
 
If the call is not routed totally over C7 links (e.g. the caller is on
an old analogue exchange), or the caller is on an interconnected
network for which no agreement for the exchange of additional call
information is in force, the number will not be complete. In this case
customer with Caller Display will get a 'Number Incomplete Message'
 
If on the other hand the caller has deliberately withheld the number,
by use of the 141 prefix the Caller Display Customer will get a
'Number Withheld' Message.
 
If the number is complete, and not withheld by the caller the number
is routed on to the Caller Display customer over the local access
network.  For this purpose a V.23 sender has to be installed at every
exchange concentrator.
 
When a line is about to receive a call the polarity of the line is
reversed prior to the ringing current being applied. If the customer
has Caller Display additional messages are interspersed between the
polarity reversal and the application of the ringing current.
 
First a tone alert signal is sent and then an alternating series of
'0's and '1's lasting 250ms is sent by the V.23 sender to assist the
CPE in detecting the imminent arrival of the Caller Display message.
 
The Caller Display message itself contains the following information:
 
- The number of the caller
- Reason for absence of number (e.g. number withheld)
- Time and Date (Can be used to auto-set CPE clocks)
- Caller/Name Text (Intially only used for designating calls from 
payphones)
- Reason for absence of caller name
- Call type
 
The Caller Display message takes roughly 0.75 seconds to send, after
which the normal ringing current is applied to the line.
 
 
Martin Cook, E-mail cook@gfms.bt.co.uk Tel +44 1473 224594 Fax +44 
1473 255130
Software Engineer, Test Management Applications, BT Development & 
Procurement.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 18:43:41 EDT
From: Greg Monti <GMONTI@npr.org>
Subject: Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud
 
 
On page C1 of the October 4, 1994, {Washington Post} is a story noting
that Ivy James Lay (aka "Knight Shadow") was arrested in connection
with the theft of 50,000 telephone calling card numbers.  The card
numbers were sold and were eventually used to make $50,000,000 worth
of free calls.  He's out on bail.

The Secret Service said that Lay had used software which he installed
at his workplace, a telephone switching facility in Cary, North
Carolina, to capture calling card numbers as they were dialed.
Numbers of Sprint, AT&T, and local company cards were stolen along
with MCI card numbers.  Some of the stolen numbers were ordinary
credit cards that allow calls to be charged to them.
 
The story says that other search warrants were served and that further
arrests (of 9 to 12 others) are expected.  The story implies that
AT&T, Sprint and MCI all noticed an increase in fraud charged to cards
that had been used in Spring, 1994, from phones in the Charlotte,
North Carolina, area.  The companies reported the fraud pattern to the
Secret Service in May.
 
 
Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    +1 202 414-3343
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      +1 202 414-3036
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: gmonti@npr.org
 
------------------------------
 
From: upsetter@mcl.ucsb.edu (Jason Hillyard)
Subject: Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud
Date: 5 Oct 1994 00:08:25 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara
 
 
> But a hundred thousand calling cards and fifty million dollars in
> traffic????  At what point are certain publishers/editors on the
> Internet going to wake up? Computer crime is growing expotentially.
> I think it is time to have another massive crackdown, similar to
> Operation Sun Devil a few years ago.  Let's start getting really
> tough on hackers and phreaks.
 
I wonder if the long distance companies will ever wake up.  This kind
of crime is only possible because of the utter lack of security
inherent in calling cards.  Why are the long distance companies so
cheap when it comes to implementing secure billing systems?
 
In your reference to Operation Sundevil, which part of the crackdown
would you like to see repeated?  The illegal Secret Service raids?
People having their equipment seized without any charges pressed?  The
insignificant number of convictions?
 
 
Jason
 
------------------------------
 
Date: Wed,  5 Oct 94 07:18:00 PDT
From: Tim Gorman <tg6124@ping.com>
Subject: Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud
 
 
TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:
 
> traffic????  At what point are certain publishers/editors on the
> Internet going to wake up? Computer crime is growing expotentially.
> I think it is time to have another massive crackdown, similar to
> Operation Sun Devil a few years ago.  Let's start getting really
> tough on hackers and phreaks.
 
While I am very, very disappointed that a fellow telecommunications
employee would stoop to such crime, I must also point out that the
problem here is not the amount of crime but the amount of this
individual crime. Any response to this type of crime should be
tempered by this realization.
 
 
Tim Gorman   tg6124@ping.com
 
------------------------------
 
From: phrrngtn@dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk (Paul J. J. Harrington)
Subject: Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not?
Date: 5 Oct 1994 14:37:13 GMT
Organization: University Of St. Andrews
 
 
sp@questor.org writes:
 
> Why not make all the Usenet newsgroups available on a sub-carrier on
> local tv-cable systems?
 
I don't know if it has been done yet, but cable may be a good place to
use multicast IP and there is a mechanism for getting Usenet via
multicast: Muse (archie for usenix-muse.ps).
 
for more details/objections c.f. endless past discussions on Usenet
over radio, teletext, satelite, CD ...
 
Pat wrote:
 
> different called the (lowercase 'i') internet, but it seems to be a
> hard concept for many people to grasp. The Internet is one of 
several
> networks cooperating on the internet. The internet is all of us no
> matter what site or network (i.e. Fidonet, Bitnet, UUCP -- is it 
still
 
To which I respectfully say 'Bzzt, wrong answer'.
 
An internet is a network of networks.  The Internet is an internet
which runs IP.
 
The 'internet' which which you mention is usually called 'The Matrix'
(or is that 'the matrix') -- a term coined by John S. Quarterman.
 
 
Paul Harrington, phrrngtn@dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk    +44 334 463261
Division of Computer Science, St Andrews University, Scotland KY16 9SS
 
------------------------------
 
From: yves.blondeel@fundp.ac.be (Yves Blondeel)
Subject: Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not?
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:27:51
Organization: FUNDP, Namur, Belgium
 
 
In article <telecom14.386.2@eecs.nwu.edu> sp@questor.org writes:
 
> Why not make all the Usenet newsgroups available on a sub-carrier on
> local tv-cable systems?
 
(** extract from responses I got to a related question a week ago **)
 
Continental Cablevision (Cambridge Massachussets) and PSI Cable
Internet (Performance Systems International) started providing
corporate IP connections via CATV in March 1994. Individual
connections to homes will start mid-October.
 
Boston College is working with them to provide the same throughout the
campus. The system is in test now and will come online as Project
Agora in September 1995.
 
CABLEVISION in New York (City) is working on providing a multimedia
front-end for their subscribers that includes Internet as well as
online service options such as Compuserve and America On Line, etc ...
 
 
Yves Blondeel    yves.blondeel@fundp.ac.be
 
------------------------------
 
From: Steven=Byrne%CFP%BTCE@smtpgate.dotc.gov.au
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 94 11:09:34 EST
Subject: Paper Released on Costing Residential Broadband Networks
 
 
Pat:
 
I thought TELECOM Digest readers may be interested to hear about the
release of some recent work of ours about costing the deployment of
residential broadband networks. I would be grateful if you could pass
this on to the readers of the Digest.
 
 
Thanks,
 
Steven Byrne
Principal Research Officer
Communications Futures Project
 
         ____________________________________________________
 
               Australian Communications Futures Project
         ____________________________________________________
 
The Communications Futures Project (CFP) has recently released another
in its series of Work-in-Progress papers.
 
The paper, reporting on work the CFP has undertaken to examine the
cost of deploying residential broadband services in Australia, is now
available free in either hard copy form or on-line for anonymous FTP
in a variety of formats (see below).
 
A summary of the paper follows:
 
COSTING NEW RESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS
CFP Work in Progress Paper No. 5
 
This paper reports on one aspect of work being undertaken by the
Communications Futures Project on likely market and network
developments for information services in Australia over the decade
from 1995 to 2005 and beyond.
 
It presents the results of an examination of the costs of providing
residential information services using a range of delivery platforms.
 
It was foreshadowed in CFP paper DELIVERY TECHNOLOGIES IN THE NEW
COMMUNICATIONS WORLD that the CFP would undertake further analysis of
the relative costs of providing these services on a range of delivery
platforms.  This paper reports preliminary results of this analysis.
It presents broad estimates of the costs of rolling out various
delivery platforms, although much of the discussion in this paper
focuses on HFC networks.
 
METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE
 
The approach taken in this paper involves estimating the costs of the
various components of each of the platforms.  An estimated cost per
household was derived for 1994 for each of the platforms identified in
the earlier work.  That is:
 
wireless platforms
*  direct broadcasting to the home by satellite (DBS)
    using digital signals, and
*  microwave multipoint distribution systems (MDS)
 
cable-based systems
*  optic fibre systems, particularly hybrid optic
    fibre - coaxial cable (HFC) systems, and
*  the asymmetrical digital subscriber line (ADSL)
    system using existing twisted pair telephone lines.
 
Estimates were made of the likely movements in component costs over
time and between different geographic areas.  Using a spreadsheet
based model cost estimates were then derived for all households in
different geographic areas and in Australia in total for each year
form 1995 to 2005.  This approach is part of a structured modelling
approach to costs to be revealed more fully in a subsequent paper.
 
For hard copies, either:
 
write to:
 
Research Manager
Communications Futures Project
Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics
GPO BOX 501   CANBERRA ACT 2601   AUSTRALIA
 
or fax (+61) 6 274 7170
or telephone (+61) 274 6016.
or email Steven=Byrne%cfp%btce@smtpgate.dotc.gov.au
 
For on-line versions of the paper, look in the directory
'cfp_documents' on the following anonymous FTP site:
 
happy.dotc.gov.au
 
View the file !index!.txt to see what is available in the CFP
directory, and in what formats.
 
 
Steven Byrne. Communications Futures Project. Bureau of Transport
and Communications Economics. Canberra, Australia.
Internet: Steven=Byrne%cfp%btce@smtpgate.dotc.gov.au
 
------------------------------
 
From: Eric <bartolinator@delphi.com>
Subject: Re: Telecommuting Law
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 94 21:05:58 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
 
 
I seriously doubt that even if a federal law mandating telecommuting
were to reach the floor, it would be poorly received by all parties,
and would readily be voted down.  The possibility of incentives
being offered would likely be welcome by most parties involved.
 
The social impact of telecommuting will be deep and has far-reaching
implications.  I have heard mostly environmental arguments for
telecommuting, and it seems quite reasonable that even with the
resulting increase in power con- sumption from computers & networks,
this would be much more efficiently used power.
 
The mammoth task will be to predict the impact on industries that are
supported by the business sector.  If telecommuting were accepted, and
taken to an extreme, which is highly unlikely at present, we could
expect to see revenues dropping for oil companies, garment
manufacturers, and food franchises.  While prices may favor the
consumer as demand falls, this would likely be short-lived, and would
be offset eventually by layoffs, and a resulting drop in the GNP.
This is, of course, a very narrow look at what could be expected, and
as I am only an armchair economist, I cannot account for all the
factors involved.
 
I DO, however, feel that the social impact would be positive.  People
do not need the workplace as a means of forcing them to socialize.
Given the extra time that telecommuting offers, they would readily
seek other, more beneficial forms of socializing.  The mere ability
for working parents to more easily accomodate the needs of their
children, is likely to have a more positive social benefit, by
allowing the family unit to function more naturally.  I seriously
doubt that the effect of removing adults, who are already developed
and in no need of further socialization, would outweigh the benefit of
having hildren who have received the proper amount of love and
attention from their parents, in their formative years.
 
Of course, telecommuting is not a valid alternative to a great
majority of occupations, and it is obvious that the benefits of
telecommuting would be enjoyed by only a relatively confined portion
of society, who, unfortunately, can already considered among the
advantaged.  So, it's not exactly a social panacea, but it is
definitely the direction of things to come.
 
(My apologies for not starting a new thread ... I didn't realize I
would have this much to write!  Perhaps those who reply would consider
starting one, as I have definitely strayed from the point of the
initial post.  My apologies, again.)
 
 
Eric Adamson
 
------------------------------
 
From: jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu (John E. Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Telecommuting Law
Date: 03 Oct 1994 18:33:02 -0700
Organization: California Technology Project of The Calif State Univ
 
 
russell@tekelec.com (Travis Russell) writes:
 
> In article <telecom14.371.17@eecs.nwu.edu>, rwarren@Cayman.COM 
(Ralph
> Warren) says:
 
> Failure to comply to this law will result in fines. I have heard 
fines
> up to $25,000 for non-compliance. Telecommuting is one of the 
options
> that a company in Los Angeles can provide, but is not a requirement.
 
Our college district is subject to a $25,000 fine *per day* for
non-compliance.  I've heard rumors that we have been fined, but I've
nothing on paper.
 
I personally think that telecommuting and higher bandwidths, either by
fiber or ADSL, will change the way we work.  Right now, we've had to
suffer through several years of commuting detours while the I-5, the
main thoroughfare thru L.A. and Orange Counties, gets widened and HOV
lanes added.  I think that I will live to see the same freeway lanes
turned into parking lots when people have taken advantage of the
telecommuting and other options.  (I'm not holding my breath, though.)
 
 
John Lundgren $$$$$$ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu $$ jlundgr@ctp.org $$
jlundgre@rsc.rancho.cc.ca.us $$$$$$ Standard Disclaimers apply.  $$
Rancho Santiago College - 17th St. at Bristol - Santa Ana, CA 92706
 
------------------------------
 
End of TELECOM Digest V14 #387
****************************
 

