Subj : moving or not was: CFBBS To : Nancy Backus From : Barry Martin Date : Sun Oct 27 2019 09:30:00 Hi Nancy! NB>> Replying 11 October from the Pond, about 10:00am.... BM> Not September?! NB> Yeah, right... rub it in... ;0 You know what they say about once stuff is posted to the Internet! NB>>> was that I hadn't updated the port in my dialing stack for Tiny's... BM>> Just another sneaky little detail! And I probably would have been in BM>> the same situation as normally I don't go fiddling with settings BM>> unless I know I changed something shortly before the problem started, BM>> or know the other side made a change. NB>> I so rarely have internet access when I'm using the laptop on trips NB>> that I don't always think about the telnet dialing stack... nor have NB>> I set up an address book in the email reader on the laptop. Probably NB>> the last time I made sure the telnet stack was up-to-date was when we NB>> needed to use someone else's access when our DSL was down at home... NB>> and I guess Tiny changed the port number (to foil the script kiddies NB>> that were ramming his board) after that... and somehow I didn't think NB>> about fixing that on the laptop... as I said earlier, now I have it NB>> available with the laptop to put in... BM> Yes, along the lines of "it worked before so it should work now". BM> forgetting about that 'minor' detail about the port number change. NB> Yup. Didn't even reach conscious thought, actually... :) Otherwise you would have fixed it. And not even a 'well you should have thought about it' thing: The Wizard and I happen to be more interested with the inner-workings of computers so we think in those areas, you are more interested in it working that how it works (and my phrasing isn't quite right), but you knew when you were at your friends' last year (?) you might be able to connect to their router and they didn't even know where it is. BM>> Hmm: I think your dizziness wins over my gag reflex! Immediate guess BM>> would be leaning back in the chair altered your posture and your body BM>> didn't adapt. NB>> Good guess... I have what is called benign positional vertigo, and NB>> certain positions are likely to trigger the dizzies... staying in one NB>> of those positions for a longer time makes it harder and take longer NB>> to recover... I'm often just at the edge of the dizzies, but that I NB>> just cope with... BM> Yes, something one gets accustomed to and automatically deals with it. BM> Common example is one gets out of bed, stands up and feels BM> faint/dizzy. "Fix" (really workaround) is to sit on the edge of the bed BM> for a few seconds before standing up: gives the body an intermediate BM> step for time to build the blood pressure up. NB> Yup... good example... another would be to avoid certain NB> positions as being more likely to cause the issue... or to be NB> prepared to shift a head position that is starting to trigger NB> it... Right. Ideally to fix/correct the sitution but as one can't/is unable to use a work-around. Feel the hands starting to tingle, move the head. Laying down for an extended time, sit a few seconds before standing up. (Really need to come up with different examples!) NB>>> And it probably varies some from day to day and hour to hour, anyway, NB>>> depending on how many other people are trying to use it at any one NB>>> time... ;) BM>> My guess also. Ages ago when cable was getting in to the -- what is BM>> it called? Cable version of DSL -- market there as the 'warning' of the BM>> connection would slow down the more people on the block/in the area BM>> were on-line. ...And I just checked: back up to 8Mbps. ...Can tell BM>> I'm really concerned about the speed as the last time I checked was BM>> when I talked about it in an e-mail with you. (FWIW last time I BM>> checked the max. rate level available here was 10 Mbps.) NB>> As long as it's fast enough to get things done in a reasonable amount NB>> of time, the actual speed doesn't matter that much... Most of my NB>> online activity doesn't really require that much speed... but when NB>> Richard is sending the emails Sunday night with the service NB>> attachments to our shut-ins, speed matters more... those are big NB>> files, and it hogs the bandwidth at our house... I can't get online NB>> when he's in the process of sending it, so the faster it finishes, NB>> the better... BM> We have watched on-line shows, videos, etc., and rarely had the BM> buffering issue; when we did there was a known issue with the BM> (transmission) line outside. I don't think there has been a problem BM> since the repair tech was here two months ago. OTOH downloading an BM> e-mail with pictures attached can involve a bit of a wait. NB> The email attachments I was talking about are .mp3 files.... the NB> entire morning service including of course the sermon.... but NB> also the singing and the readings... Ah! And in the interim I did clog my DSL line: was downloading a few rather large video files concurrently -- I did note the displayed down- load speed had decreased for each but not a big deal: just takes a little longer to obtain the file; I'm not looking at it now. Then the music paused: buffering as it waited it's turn to download. Ah! Yes, there are times when a greater download speed is needed! If we did the typical Mediacom (and probably Comcast) commercial of the family of five live streaming all at once I'd probably would have increased my speed teir long ago. As for your downloading, the entire service is one huge file. Even if they broke it up into sections still would be downloading the various sections all at the same time and might even make things worse: if one big file "take things as they come along" but multiple files might be like my overload and create buffering or at least a slowdown. ...Plus more work on the Chruch side to prepare the files. BM>>>> Now will have to dig out the NCID project (for call-rejection of BM>>>> spam calls) and see if it works up here now. Probably still should BM>>>> move/have moved the electric line running next to the telephone, BM>>>> antenna coax, and network cable. NB> (snip) BM>>> Yes. Today would be good (except for other projects going on) as BM>>> currently 70ø and one set of forecasts indicated a high of 74 or 75ø BM>>> and another a little bit warmer. Cloudy (on and off rain all day) so BM>>> no Sun to heat the roof up. Will have another opportunity. NB>>> Hopefully soon... :) BM>> Got tbose But Firsts going on so holding off. NB>> At some point this project will have to become a But First for it NB>> to happen, sounds like.... ;) BM> Yes.... There are also a few semi-nebulous options I'd like, like BM> having the NCID unit correct the name displayed to all Caller IDs BM> rather than just on the NCID display. OTOH that want has nothing to do BM> with NCID's main function of blocking spam calls. Plus throw in get BM> one project completed before starting another. NB> What a concept...! Getting one thing finished first... ;) So far just a concept!! NB> I'd be surprised, though, if you were able to get all the Caller NB> IDs showing the same corrected ID... here it's just the two NB> handsets that share a common "brain" that show the more useful NB> ID, using the same directory... I'm sort of thinking the same. IIRC the NCID unit is placed in parallel with the other phones -- 'normal' wiring with all the devices in parallel. For the NCID to broadcast the corrected Caller ID information to the other phones/devices it would have to be in series to the other devices, at the 'beginning' of the phone system; other phones connected to it. Most people don't know how to do that, plus the NCID would have to have two telephone jacks: input and output. Still, after I take that computer class you've suggested I could create an add-on.... ¯ ® ¯ Barry_Martin_3@ ® ¯ @Q.COM ® ¯ ® .... Must-read books: "Exotic Irish Plants" by Phil O'Dendron --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.47 þ wcECHO 4.2 ÷ ILink: The Safe BBS þ Bettendorf, IA --- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462 * Origin: ILink: CFBBS | cfbbs.no-ip.com | 856-933-7096 (454:1/1) .