AT&T eliminates VoIP home service

Simple market forces at work, but frustrating to those of us who're impacted.

AT&T cuts cord on VoIP service - Wireless - CNET News:
"AT&T has pulled the plug on its CallVantage voice over IP phone service, according to letters from subscribers this week.

The service competed with other VoIP services like Vonage. VoIP services use broadband networks to place phone calls. These services are much less expensive than traditional landline phone services and cost between $20 and $30 per month. But even this price is proving too high for consumers who are cutting their traditional phones to use their cell phones or are signing up for voice services with their cable providers, which are bundling the phone service in with broadband and TV service.
. . .
It is not a huge shock that AT&T is getting rid of the service. Last summer, the company stopped signing up new subscribers. Also AT&T has been pushing a new flavor of the VoIP service that it sells to its U-verse customers. U-verse is a new fiber network that AT&T is building to deliver high-speed broadband, TV, and phone service to consumers. Like the cable companies, AT&T is bundling the voice service with TV and broadband.

Verizon Communications also recently shut down its VoIP service called VoiceWing. It also sells an IP-based telephony service to its Fios fiber-to-the home customers as part of a triple play package."

NSA Doesn't Want to Do Cyber Security Alone

Putting an intelligence (spy) agency in sole charge of all government computer and network security would be a lousy idea. Each agency head needs to run their own program and be held accountable to it by outside audits.

NSA Chief Doesn't Want to Do Cyber Security Solo - PC World | Technology News and Updates
"The National Security Agency doesn't want sole responsibility for running U.S. cyber security, the agency's director said Tuesday.

Speaking at the RSA security conference in San Francisco, NSA Director Lieutenant General Keith Alexander said that any effort to keep U.S. and government networks safe would be a group effort, rather than a centrally managed operation.
. . .
The NSA director said that security guru Bruce Schneier was right, when just minutes earlier he had told the audience that "nobody" should be in charge of cyber security. "A top-down somebody's-in-charge model is not the right model," Schneier said.

In an interview Tuesday, Beckstrom said that he was happy to hear the NSA saying it didn't want to run U.S. cyber security, and was encouraged to see a discussion of the question of how much power the NSA actually wields. He said that agencies like the FBI and U.S. Department of Homeland Security, even the U.S. Department of Commerce, need to get more funds in order to take an active role in cyber security. "There needs to be a balance of power," he said. "I think the budgets are lopsided.""

Computer and network security needs to become part of the fabric of public and private business, just like proper accounting and personnel are. Policy should be set at the top levels, but it needs to be executed from the bottom up.

Eliminate the Air Force? I think not

I know I should ignore editorials in Big City newspapers, but this one gets under my skin:

Op-Ed Contributor - Up, Up and Out - NYTimes.com:
". . . there are three major changes Mr. Gates should add to his agenda, and they deserve President Obama’s support.

First, the Air Force should be eliminated, and its personnel and equipment integrated into the Army, Navy and Marine Corps. Second, the archaic “up or out” military promotion system should be scrapped in favor of a plan that treats service members as real assets. Third, the United States needs a national service program for all young men and women, without any deferments, to increase the quality and size of the pool from which troops are drawn."

Our current volunteer service is the best performing military we've ever had. Conscription may be needed if we face another world war situation, but we're better off without it now. If the federal government wants to create a new volunteer service and force our young people into government service, they can do that without disrupting our military. Young people performing charitable or other benevolent service under government guidance would learn a great deal about the waste, fraud, abuse, and inefficiency of government programs - knowledge that will serve them well as voters.

"At the moment, the Army, Navy and Marine Corps are at war, but the Air Force is not. This is not the fault of the Air Force: it is simply not structured to be in the fights in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Ridiculous - the Air Force is involved via flying UAV missions, ferrying troops and cargo, and involved in direct combat in both theaters. If the Air Force can manage it's workload without stressing it's staff, they should be congratulated for that. We certainly don't need to dismantle a strategic asset at a time when Russia among others is rebuilding strategic assets that only missiles and bombers can attack if needed.

"The result is an “up or out” system that demands service members move up the ladder simply to stay in the military. Any soldier passed over for promotion twice must leave or retire.

Treating service members like so many widgets — in particular, the enlisted men and women who make up 85 percent of the ranks — is arbitrary and bad management. I have seen many fit, experienced officers and enlisted Marines arbitrarily forced out because there were only so many slots into which they could be promoted."

This is one of the reasons our military is doing so well - the tendency to create intractable bureaucracies is damped by this promotion policy. In a society where we celebrate companies that fire the bottom 10% of their performers, we certainly shouldn't complain about a military that seeks excellence within it's ranks.

". . . would New Orleans reconstruction have lagged so long if we had had a national service program in natural-disaster recovery?"

Once again the excellent response by our Coast Guard gets overlooked. In the New Orleans tragedy, the entire US government reacted more quickly, with more supplies and more people than at any time in US history. Within just the last few decades, such a disaster was primarily the responsibility of those on the scene, the city and state leaders. The tragedy in News Orleans is that the city & state leaders felt no obligation to do their jobs and just sat back waiting for the federal government to save them.

Global Warming Alarmism

Before we destroy our economy by sending all our industry to China (where they will pollute far more than we do to produce the same goods) we need to examine the Global Warming paranoia. Turning America into a 3rd world nation will do nothing to improve life for others on the globe, and it will make life far worse for us.

Global Warming: A Classic Case of Alarmism - JoNova:













The big temperature picture. Graph and insight from Dr Syun Akasofu (2009 International Conference on Climate Change, New York, March 2009).

"The global temperature has been rising at a steady trend rate of 0.5°C per century since the end of the little ice age in the 1700s (when the Thames River would freeze over every winter). On top of the trend are oscillations that last about thirty years in each direction:
1882 – 1910 Cooling
1910 – 1944 Warming
1944 – 1975 Cooling
1975 – 2001 Warming

In 2009 we are where the green arrow points, with temperature leveling off. The pattern suggests that the world has entered a period of slight cooling until about 2030.

There was a cooling scare in the early 1970s at the end of the last cooling phase. The current global warming alarm is based on the last warming oscillation, from 1975 to 2001. The IPCC predictions simply extrapolated the last warming as if it would last forever, a textbook case of alarmism. However the last warming period ended after the usual thirty years or so, and the global temperature is now definitely tracking below the IPCC predictions."

Homeland Security warns of radicals on right

So now if we have a differing opinion regarding how our country should be run, we may be labelled as a threat and persecuted by the government. If successful, this may mean the end of peaceful and civil political debate - it will not mean the end of opposition to the government.

As noted elsewhere, the reference to immigration most likely means opponents of illegal immigration. See also this link.

"The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." ~ Robert A. Heinlein (1907–1988)

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1755

“Politics gets pretty messy, but it’s a better alternative than violence.” Dick Gephardt, 2009

Ecclesiastes 3: 1-15

Federal agency warns of radicals on right - Washington Times:
". . .
A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines 'rightwing extremism in the United States' as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

'It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,' the warning says.
. . .
The nine-page document was sent to police and sheriff's departments across the United States on April 7 under the headline, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

It says the federal government "will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months" to gather information on "rightwing extremist activity in the United States."

The joint federal-state activities will have "a particular emphasis" on the causes of "rightwing extremist radicalization.""

Our government has an obligation to try to prevent domestic terror attacks (like Oklahoma City), but their agents need to remember that a bumper sticker is not the equivalent of a bomb. When we can no longer have open debate on things like abortion, gun control, gay marriage, unions, and illegal immigration, then we are no longer free.

UPDATE: - of course Homeland Security might have been more careful in their wording (or publishing policy) if they kept up with the news:

State drops warnings over 'militia' members:
"The chief of the Missouri highway patrol is blasting a report issued by the Missouri Information Analysis Center that linked conservative groups to domestic terrorism, assuring that such reports no longer will be issued.

The report warned law enforcement agencies to watch for suspicious individuals who may have bumper stickers for third-party political candidates such as Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin.

It further warned law enforcement to watch out for individuals with 'radical' ideologies based on Christian views, such as opposing illegal immigration, abortion and federal taxes."

AT&T offers $100K reward in fiber optic vandalism

This is an example of why some people keep their land-line and their cell phones with different carriers. You don't want to be digging our that 30 year old CB radio when there's a problem and you can't reach 911.

AT&T offers $100K reward in fiber optic vandalism; notes second incident Between the Lines ZDNet.com:

"At some point around 2 a.m. PDT, a fiber optic line owned by AT&T but leased to Verizon became damaged. It was located in a manhole about 10 feet below the roadway. San Jose Police told KCBS-radio that they suspect vandalism and are treating the area as a crime scene.
. . .
Following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, AT&T’s networks were declared National Critical Infrastructures. Anyone who tampers with them is in violation of federal and state laws.

The damage cut off access to 911 emergency systems for people in the area.

There were actually two incidents - one in San Jose and another in San Carlos, which is about halfway between San Jose and San Francisco."

Our fancy Internet infrastructure operates on a wire and a prayer | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com:
"Barrett Lyon asks whether it’s possible to destroy the network with a hacksaw. In a word: Yup. It happened yesterday. AT&T used Twitter—home of the Fail Whale—to communicate with customers. Anyone see the irony in that one?

What’s truly scary is that we’re not just talking about the Internet here. The electric grid is vulnerable. Our transportation grid is vulnerable. Our infrastructure in the U.S. is a big sitting duck. The grid and the Internet are top of mind today, but I’m reminded of the overall infrastructure vulnerability every trip into Penn Station. Every once in a while you’ll see heavily armed police with their K-9 dogs in Penn Station’s lobby. It’s a common sight. However, if you really wanted to bring down the train station and subway it’s nothing a stray backpack couldn’t take care of.

Simply put, it’s impossible to completely secure all of the infrastructure out there. And everyone knows it. In 2003, a student dissertation raised national security concerns. It’s not rocket science to map infrastructure and cook up scenarios."

Obama's Global Op-Ed: "A Time For Global Action"

Our President writes an op-ed on the economy and only 3 US newspapers print it. This seems odd to me.

More than 30 papers around the world ran an op-ed today by President Obama arguing for "the urgent need for global economic cooperation."

According to the White House, the op-ed ran in the following papers:

1. Al Watan (Gulf States)
2. Arab Times (Gulf States)
3. Asharq Al Awsat (Arab-wide paper in Arabic)
4. The Australian (Australia)
5. Baltimore Sun (United States)
6. Bangkok Post (Thailand)
7. Chicago Tribune (United States)
8. Clarin (Argentina)
9. Corriere della Sera (Italy)
10. Die Welt (Germany)
11. El Pais (Madrid)
12. El Mercurio (Chile)
13. Eleftyropiea (Greece)
14. Estado de Sao Paulo (Brazil)
15. Gulf News (Gulf States)
16. The Hindustan Times/ The Hindu (India)
17. International Herald Tribune (London)
18. Kristeligt Dagblad (Denmark)
19. Le Monde (Paris)
20. Lidove Noviny (Czech)
21. Los Angeles Times (United States)
22. The News (Pakistan)
23. NRC Handelsblad (Netherlands)
24. Saudi Gazette (Saudi Arabia)
25. South China Morning Post (Hong Kong)
26. Straits Times (Singapore)
27. Sunday Times (South Africa)
28. Svenska Dagbladet (Sweden)
29. Syndey Morning Herald (Australia)
30. WProst (Poland)
31. Yomiuri Shimbun (Japan)

Obama's Global Op-Ed: "A Time For Global Action":

"A time for global action

By Barack Obama
Monday, March 23, 2009

WASHINGTON: We are living through a time of global economic challenges that cannot be met by half measures or the isolated efforts of any nation. Now, the leaders of the Group of 20 have a responsibility to take bold, comprehensive and coordinated action that not only jump-starts recovery, but also launches a new era of economic engagement to prevent a crisis like this from ever happening again.

No one can deny the urgency of action. A crisis in credit and confidence has swept across borders, with consequences for every corner of the world. For the first time in a generation, the global economy is contracting and trade is shrinking.

Trillions of dollars have been lost, banks have stopped lending, and tens of millions will lose their jobs across the globe. The prosperity of every nation has been endangered, along with the stability of governments and the survival of people in the most vulnerable parts of the world.

Once and for all, we have learned that the success of the American economy is inextricably linked to the global economy. There is no line between action that restores growth within our borders and action that supports it beyond.

If people in other countries cannot spend, markets dry up -- already we've seen the biggest drop in American exports in nearly four decades, which has led directly to American job losses. And if we continue to let financial institutions around the world act recklessly and irresponsibly, we will remain trapped in a cycle of bubble and bust. That is why the upcoming London Summit is directly relevant to our recovery at home.

My message is clear: The United States is ready to lead, and we call upon our partners to join us with a sense of urgency and common purpose. Much good work has been done, but much more remains.

Our leadership is grounded in a simple premise: We will act boldly to lift the American economy out of crisis and reform our regulatory structure, and these actions will be strengthened by complementary action abroad. Through our example, the United States can promote a global recovery and build confidence around the world; and if the London Summit helps galvanize collective action, we can forge a secure recovery, and future crises can be averted.

Our efforts must begin with swift action to stimulate growth. Already, the United States has passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act -- the most dramatic effort to jump-start job creation and lay a foundation for growth in a generation.

Other members of the G-20 have pursued fiscal stimulus as well, and these efforts should be robust and sustained until demand is restored. As we go forward, we should embrace a collective commitment to encourage open trade and investment, while resisting the protectionism that would deepen this crisis.

Second, we must restore the credit that businesses and consumers depend upon. At home, we are working aggressively to stabilize our financial system. This includes an honest assessment of the balance sheets of our major banks, and will lead directly to lending that can help Americans purchase goods, stay in their homes and grow their businesses.

This must continue to be amplified by the actions of our G-20 partners. Together, we can embrace a common framework that insists upon transparency, accountability and a focus on restoring the flow of credit that is the lifeblood of a growing global economy. And the G-20, together with multilateral institutions, can provide trade finance to help lift up exports and create jobs.

Third, we have an economic, security and moral obligation to extend a hand to countries and people who face the greatest risk. If we turn our backs on them, the suffering caused by this crisis will be enlarged, and our own recovery will be delayed because markets for our goods will shrink further and more American jobs will be lost.

The G-20 should quickly deploy resources to stabilize emerging markets, substantially boost the emergency capacity of the International Monetary Fund and help regional development banks accelerate lending. Meanwhile, America will support new and meaningful investments in food security that can help the poorest weather the difficult days that will come.

While these actions can help get us out of crisis, we cannot settle for a return to the status quo. We must put an end to the reckless speculation and spending beyond our means; to the bad credit, over-leveraged banks and absence of oversight that condemns us to bubbles that inevitably bust.

Only coordinated international action can prevent the irresponsible risk-taking that caused this crisis. That is why I am committed to seizing this opportunity to advance comprehensive reforms of our regulatory and supervisory framework.

All of our financial institutions -- on Wall Street and around the globe -- need strong oversight and common sense rules of the road. All markets should have standards for stability and a mechanism for disclosure. A strong framework of capital requirements should protect against future crises. We must crack down on offshore tax havens and money laundering.

Rigorous transparency and accountability must check abuse, and the days of out-of-control compensation must end. Instead of patchwork efforts that enable a race to the bottom, we must provide the clear incentives for good behavior that foster a race to the top.

I know that America bears our share of responsibility for the mess that we all face. But I also know that we need not choose between a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism and an oppressive government-run economy. That is a false choice that will not serve our people or any people.

This G-20 meeting provides a forum for a new kind of global economic cooperation. Now is the time to work together to restore the sustained growth that can only come from open and stable markets that harness innovation, support entrepreneurship and advance opportunity.

The nations of the world have a stake in one another. The United States is ready to join a global effort on behalf of new jobs and sustainable growth. Together, we can learn the lessons of this crisis, and forge a prosperity that is enduring and secure for the 21st century."