[HN Gopher] Installing a payphone in my house
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Installing a payphone in my house
        
       Author : itsjloh
       Score  : 985 points
       Date   : 2022-06-02 10:20 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (bert.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (bert.org)
        
       | mwexler wrote:
       | Nicely written. Humour comes in swift and silently, and makes
       | this a really enjoyable read. I was looking for more info about
       | how to beat the quarter-checker, but even without that, worth the
       | time.
        
       | usr1106 wrote:
       | In the 1990s credit cards were pretty uncommon in Europe. Most
       | shops that a student would shop at did not accept any.
       | 
       | When I visited the US I was shocked that you could do all kind of
       | business by just telling or typing in the number on the phone. I
       | soon learned that cheaper businesses (e.g international calls at
       | discount rates) did not accept my foreign card. However, more
       | expensive businesses (like AT&T to stay at the same example) just
       | accepted the number, no questions asked. CVV wasn't in use. A
       | concept that exceeded my imagination, credit card numbers are not
       | that secret, everone working at a checkout could collect them.
       | When reading this I guess they would have also accepted phantasy
       | numbers with a matching checksum.
       | 
       | My conclusion back then was: For those operating at comfortable
       | margins some loss by fraud is just priced in. Those offering
       | cheap prices don't have the luxury to do so, so they reject
       | everything that is not easy to verify, like e.g. foreign cards.
        
       | Mobil1 wrote:
       | I found that if you had 2 adjacent pay phones you could make free
       | calls by inverting the 2 handsets and placing the call on one
       | phone, but putting your money in the other so the sound of the
       | money dropping would make the operator think that you had paid
       | for your call. Your money would be returned to you when you hung
       | up the second phone.
        
         | jjeaff wrote:
         | Was it literally just the sound of money dropping that
         | validated the call? Presumably this was before automatic
         | switching and a live operator had to connect you?
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | Automatic switching came decades before automated _billing_.
           | See  "Operator Assisted Toll Dialing" (1949).[1] The
           | operators are tone-dialing calls, but the billing system is
           | entirely paper based.
           | 
           | Billing automation came in the 1960s, but didn't involve
           | computers yet. Special purpose hardware, paper tape, and
           | punched cards were involved.
           | 
           | [1] https://vimeo.com/390769230
        
           | brk wrote:
           | No, there were tones that the phone sent for each coin value.
           | IIRC they were fairly brief and somewhat "blippy", unlike the
           | flat DTMF tones. Back in the day you could build a Red Box
           | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_box_(phreaking)) that
           | would simulate these tones.
        
           | nahmean wrote:
           | At one point it was. You could even record the sound on a
           | handheld recorder and play it back. But it hasn't worked in a
           | long while. Pay phones mitigated this in a low tech way - by
           | software muting the handset.
           | 
           | Edit: oh yeah, and after that, you'd just call the operator
           | and tell them the keys were sticky and to dial the number for
           | you, then you'd "insert the coins" by playing the tones.
           | 
           | Well, or you just third party billed the call to someone you
           | didn't know. That worked too.
        
             | Slartie wrote:
             | > Pay phones mitigated this in a low tech way - by software
             | muting the handset.
             | 
             | So does this mean that there was a dedicated second
             | microphone hidden somewhere within the payphone body, that
             | would continue to record the sound the coins made?
        
               | baobrien wrote:
               | In early 3-slot North American payphones, there literally
               | was a bell that the coins struck and a transducer inside
               | the payphone body.
        
               | genewitch wrote:
               | The coins weren't recorded, it was just a short tone that
               | indicated 5C/. A quarter was five quick tones. A dime
               | two.
               | 
               | I used to mess with the proctor test set (dialing 117 in
               | the US at least on GTE) and only ever convinced it I
               | inserted a nickel even with many tries using a digital
               | recorder or a computer speaker.
        
             | kfrzcode wrote:
             | "bobwehadthebabyitsaboy"
        
               | jjulius wrote:
               | Oh hey, nostalgia.
        
             | jamal-kumar wrote:
             | After this mitigation was put into place enterprising
             | phreaks would take a lighter to the microphone part of the
             | handset, twist it open, cut the yellow wire, and redbox
             | away.
        
           | dhosek wrote:
           | It was automated. The coin drop sound (or at least what was
           | generated for the wire by the phone) was what drove the
           | switch. All signals on POTS lines were sounds (thus the tones
           | for pressing buttons or the numbers of clicks from dial
           | phones).
        
             | CaliforniaKarl wrote:
             | In the beginning, it was a real bell! One bell for 5C/,
             | rung twice for 10C/, and a separate gong sound for 25C/.
        
               | wolfgang42 wrote:
               | There's a ( _very_ old, by now) Henry Morgan sketch I
               | remember about an expensive long distance call: after an
               | interminable series of dings and bongs, the operator
               | admits that she lost count and has to return the coins so
               | he can try again.
               | 
               | (Once they straighten out the funds, there's a series of
               | about six different operators needed to get the call
               | across the country; all talking to, over, and past each
               | other. "Hello, Hyannis, this is Truro. I have a call for
               | Los Angeles! Westwood 5689." -- "Hello Wellfleet, this is
               | Hyannis. I have a call for Los Angeles. Westwood 5689."
               | -- "Hello Boston, this is Wellfleet. I have a call for
               | Los Angeles, Westwood 5698." -- "No, Westwood 56 _89_."
               | -- "Who was that, Wellfleet?" -- "That was Truro,
               | Boston." -- "No, _I'm_ Truro. That was Hyannis."
               | Meanwhile, the caller: "Are we still in Massachusetts??")
        
               | lstamour wrote:
               | Track 11 at https://archive.org/details/lp_the-best-of-
               | henry-morgan-exce...
               | 
               | Quite funny! :)
        
               | wolfgang42 wrote:
               | Thanks! I tried finding a link, but your search-fu is
               | apparently better than mine :-)
        
               | jamal-kumar wrote:
               | In my country it was 2200hz for a nickle, two for a dime,
               | three for a quarter, and anything bigger just didn't fit
        
           | hibbelig wrote:
           | I once made a call from a pay phone and after I was done it
           | rang. I picked up. A very nice lady told me I had not paid
           | enough and whether I could please put in another quarter or
           | whatever. That was an interesting experience.
           | 
           | In my mind I thought that pay phones were fully automated,
           | especially the count the money part.
        
             | avg_dev wrote:
             | You can't leave us in suspense, we need to know whether you
             | coughed up the dough or not.
        
               | hibbelig wrote:
               | :-) Of course I did.
        
             | theginger wrote:
             | Someone across the street could have been messing with you.
             | This sounds like it was from a time where you could ask to
             | borrow a bars phone to make a free local call and it could
             | be worth someone's while crossing the street to collect a
             | quarter.
        
         | jamal-kumar wrote:
         | lmfao that's hilarious, you just redboxed a phone with another
         | adjacent phone
        
       | mattlondon wrote:
       | I remember doing something similar to get ISP access in the early
       | 90s. Like AOL various ISPs would be bundled into CDs/floppies and
       | offer a free trial.
       | 
       | One of them did not validate the card number, so you could just
       | type in 000000000000 or whatever and your free trial was enabled
       | for a month or whatever and then be auto cancelled when they
       | tried to bill for your first month after the trial. In the UK
       | though local calls were not free and charged by the minute.
       | 
       | I think that ISP also bundled a <1.0 version of Netscape's
       | Mozilla (0.8?) on their disk which was nice as otherwise I only
       | had mosaic.
       | 
       | Good times.
       | 
       | Edit: I think the version of netscape/Mozilla was this one - I
       | distinctly remember the "M" logo that would rotate as pages
       | loaded slowly on a 14.4 modem:
       | https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/uploaded/old-software/web-br....
       | 
       | Curious that it was called "mosaic netscape" - I don't remember
       | that.
        
         | brk wrote:
         | When the first Palm VII's came out
         | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_VII) I wanted to see how
         | responsive the wireless connectivity was before buying one. The
         | local Staples store had a functional demo unit, but it had no
         | subscription. So I tried signing up with random info, when it
         | got to entering a card number, I entered 4111 1111 1111 1111,
         | which passes the basic validation checks for a visa (and is
         | obviously easy to remember). The device activated immediately
         | and I was able to try some live data transfers. It worked for
         | about 3 days (I went back to check it out of curiosity).
         | 
         | Presumably the activation of service happened locally in the
         | device, or with minimal cross-checking with the backend billing
         | service.
         | 
         | A few months later I tried it on another unit and the number no
         | longer worked for activation :)
        
       | RektBoy wrote:
       | What do you do for living now? B & E ?
        
       | bmitc wrote:
       | That's a really awesome story with a great opening, middle, and
       | especially the end, if one ignores the adolescent fraud. I think
       | it really highlights the simple joy that technology that
       | literally just works can bring. I'm around the same age as the
       | author, a little younger in fact, but there's just something
       | about today's Internet and a lot of the overwhelming amount of
       | technology that just isn't fun or memorable. From game consoles
       | to land lines to various other things, there were pieces of
       | technology that just worked and worked well. Of course, there was
       | technology that didn't work well, but I think part of the tragedy
       | is that a lot of technology that worked well has been replaced by
       | "better" technology that doesn't work well.
        
         | soheil wrote:
         | > "better" technology that doesn't work well
         | 
         | That's a very crude way of saying it and I 100% agree. The
         | digital revolution promised to make analog world more precise,
         | but we ended up having so much complexity as a result and the
         | benefits gained by precision at low level is replaced by ever
         | increasing chaos at high level. We seem to think having many
         | things rendered simultaneously and faster are inherently so
         | good not just for things like games that we built frameworks
         | like React that run big parts of the web.
         | 
         | It's as if we decided increasing entropy isn't so bad after
         | all.
        
         | Melatonic wrote:
         | Survivorship bias I think is at play here (especially with our
         | own memories being infallible). I also remember a TON of shit
         | being a pain in the ass and not working well at all.
        
         | unityByFreedom wrote:
         | > That's a really awesome story with a great opening, middle,
         | and especially the end, if one ignores the adolescent fraud.
         | 
         | That admission was the best part! Everyone here was not goody
         | two shoes in their teens. Accepting this reality can release
         | people from expectations of perfection. Perhaps ironically,
         | kids' behavior can improve when they feel their imperfections
         | are airable.
        
           | stevenjgarner wrote:
           | Going through the grueling immigration process, Homeland
           | Security eventually sits across the table from you, looks you
           | in the eye, and asks "have you ever committed a crime for
           | which you have not been convicted?"
        
           | JackFr wrote:
           | In the grand scheme of things, what he did is hardly the end
           | of the world.
           | 
           | And yet, it still doesn't sit quite right with me. I suppose
           | its because there doesn't seem to be the slightest hint in
           | the writing that credit card fraud is wrong, or that it's
           | even something you shouldn't do. I looked for it.
           | 
           | And to add to that, what he did wasn't 'a hack', it wasn't
           | particularly clever. It was just theft of services and a lot
           | of lying because he didn't have something he wanted.
           | 
           | I think if he would describe it as a youthful indiscretion or
           | something similar it would go a long way.
        
             | more_corn wrote:
             | Sure, but imagine a kid 16, reading 2600, figuring things
             | out. Trying to get access to the best tool for figuring
             | things out. I think a lot of people transgressed at that
             | age. I, for one, benefitted from being granted a bit of
             | leeway. My transgressions actually taught me to not WANT to
             | break the law which I think is better than just not
             | breaking the law because that's what's expected and one has
             | never considered the alternative.
        
             | crmd wrote:
             | In the hacker ethos, gaining access to systems is in no way
             | unethical or deserving of remorse. The hack in this case
             | was (1) exploiting the ISP's delayed batch processing of
             | credit card orders, and (2) circumventing their deny list
             | of callback phone numbers.
             | 
             | For the same reason you'll rarely see urbex photographers
             | expressing remorse for trespassing. Getting onto skyscraper
             | roofs and into steam tunnels is just what you do.
             | 
             | Related - I went to college in the late 90s, at the end of
             | this era, where there was a constant game of cat and mouse
             | between the University unix and network admins and the
             | hacker kids. Yes it was technically felonies all night
             | long, but there was legitimate mutual respect for technical
             | skills on both sides and following the unwritten rules of
             | not causing data loss or disrupting services. This is how I
             | learned the skills to start my career, and probably how
             | they learned themselves back when they were students. For
             | them to rat out a student was kind of unsportsmanlike. It
             | would be admitting they weren't good at their jobs.
             | 
             | I'm told this hacker culture no longer exists at my Uni. If
             | you get caught escalating privileges on a computer you'd be
             | facing expulsion and referral to the police.
        
               | kshacker wrote:
               | > I'm told this hacker culture no longer exists at my
               | Uni. If you get caught escalating privileges on a
               | computer you'd be facing expulsion and referral to the
               | police.
               | 
               | it has a reason. We did not have our life story at our
               | fingertips in those days. Even if the university
               | computers may not have sensitive information but they
               | could be hijacked to be part of bot net or just mint
               | bitcoins. They stakes are much higher. I am not at a uni
               | so don't know the reality but I can understand if they
               | are doing it.
        
             | spacedcowboy wrote:
             | I wrote my first ever (and last) virus for the
             | Archimedes...
             | 
             | Some history: Waaay back in the mists of time (1988) I was
             | a 1st-year undergrad in Physics. Together with a couple of
             | friends, I wrote a virus, just to see if we could (having
             | read through the Advanced User Guide and the Econet System
             | User Guide), then let it loose on just one of the networked
             | archimedes machines in the year-1 lab.
             | 
             | I guess I should say that the virus was completely
             | harmless, it just prepended 'Copyright (c) 1988 The Virus'
             | to the start of directory listings. It was written for
             | Acorn Archimedes (the lab hadn't got onto PC's by this
             | time, and the Acorn range had loads of ports, which physics
             | labs like :-) It spread like wildfire. People would come
             | in, log into the network, and become infected because the
             | last person to use their current computer was infected. It
             | would then infect their account, so wherever they logged on
             | in future would also infect the computer they were using
             | then. A couple of hours later, and most of the lab was
             | infected.
             | 
             | You have to remember that viruses in those days weren't
             | really networked. They came on floppy disks for Atari ST's
             | and Amiga's. I witnessed people logging onto the same
             | computer "to see if they were infected too". Of course, the
             | act of logging in would infect them... Of course
             | "authority" was not amused. Actually they were seriously
             | unamused, not that they caught us. They shut down the
             | year-1,2,3 network and disinfected all the accounts on the
             | network server by hand. Ouch.
             | 
             | There were basically 3 ways the virus could be activated: -
             | Typing any 'star' command (eg: "* .", which gave you a
             | directory listing. Sneaky, I thought, since the virus
             | announced itself when you did a '* .' When you thought
             | you'd beaten it, you'd do a '* .' to see if it was still
             | there :-) - The events (keypress, network, disk etc.) all
             | activated the virus if inactive, and also re-enabled the
             | interrupts, if they had been disabled - The interrupts
             | (NMI,VBI,..) all activated the virus if inactive, and also
             | re-enabled the events, if they had been deactivated.
             | 
             | On activation, the virus would replicate itself to the
             | current mass-storage media. This was to cause problems
             | because we hadn't really counted on just how effective this
             | would be. Within a few days of the virus being cleansed
             | (and everyone settling back to normal), it suddenly made a
             | re-appearance again, racing through the network once more
             | within an hour or two. Someone had put the virus onto their
             | floppy disk (by typing *. on the floppy when saving their
             | work, rather than the network) and had then brought the
             | disk back into college and re-infected the network.
             | 
             | If we thought authority was unamused last time, this time
             | they held a meeting for the entire department, and calmly
             | said the culprit when found would be expelled. Excrement
             | and fans came to mind. Of course, they thought we'd just
             | re-released it, but in fact it was just too successful for
             | comfort...
             | 
             | Since we had "shot our bolt", owning up didn't seem like a
             | good idea. The only solution we came up with was to write
             | another (silent, this time :-) virus which would disable
             | any copy of the old one, whilst hiding itself from the
             | users. We built in a time-to-die of a couple of months, let
             | it go, and prayed...
             | 
             | We had actually built in a kill-switch to the original
             | virus, which would disable and remove it - we didn't want
             | to be infected ourselves (at the start). Of course, it
             | became a matter of self-preservation to be infected later
             | on in the saga - 3 accounts unaccountably (pun intended :-)
             | uninfected... It wasn't too hard to destroy the original by
             | having the new virus "press" the key combination that
             | deleted the old one.
             | 
             | So, everyone was happy. Infected with the counter-virus for
             | a while, but happy. "Authority" thought they'd laid down
             | the law, and been taken seriously (oh if they knew...) and
             | we'd not been expelled. Everyone else lost their infections
             | within a few months ... Anyway. I've never written anything
             | remotely like a virus since [grin]
        
           | _notathrowaway wrote:
           | >Everyone here was not goody two shoes in their teens.
           | 
           | That's called projection.
        
           | languageserver wrote:
           | I am not sure credit card fraud is innocent pranks or
           | misbehavior... I can tell you with certainty that most
           | teenagers have never committed that sort of crimes tbh.
        
             | cortesoft wrote:
             | All credit card fraud is not created equal. He didn't steal
             | any physical goods, nor did he steal anyone's credit card.
             | He stole some hours of internet connection, which probably
             | didn't cost the ISP that much. Not saying it is totally
             | fine, but it really isn't that bad.
        
             | Jerrrry wrote:
             | Always-online teenagers are a different demographic than
             | your "average" teenager.
             | 
             | the highs of an exploit working or a bypass make drugs look
             | like candy.
        
             | williamcotton wrote:
             | If we're talking about the AOHell era of the mid 90s then I
             | have anecdotal evidence that the majority of kids I knew
             | were committing some kind of wire fraud in exchange for
             | internet access!
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOHell
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | Credit card fraud was really common in the 80 among
             | "hacker" types.
             | 
             | I knew of several in Lake Tahoe that were high-school kids
             | at the time in the late 80s - someohow managed to get
             | credit cards and would order deliveries to "vacation homes"
             | in lake tahoe where they knew the owners lived in the bay
             | area and wouldnt be at the house - and would have things
             | dropped off to the vacant houses to go get them.
             | 
             | Also, in 1980 - we had a payphone inside our home in Tahoe.
             | I didnt know this was an odd thing to have until much
             | later.
        
               | watwut wrote:
               | Late 1980 was when criminality was going up and right
               | before its peak. It is quite lower now ... and people who
               | were teenagers in late 1980 are almost 60 now.
        
               | samstave wrote:
               | Im 47. Started Highschool in 1989
        
               | chowchowchow wrote:
               | Check your math on that one. More like 50 +/- a few
               | years.
        
             | kingkawn wrote:
             | Here's your merit badge for pedantry
        
             | samtheDamned wrote:
             | You'd be surprised..
        
             | toss1 wrote:
             | Said the one who clearly missed out....
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | Not for lack of trying.
        
         | AlbertCory wrote:
         | Very true. The old-fashioned telephone handset was a
         | masterpiece of human engineering. I bet with state-of-the-art
         | mic and speakers, it would still be way better than a
         | smartphone for actual phone calls.
         | 
         | Of course, I have to admit that my Bluetooth headset is pretty
         | good, and a first-class gaming headset would be even better.
        
           | stavros wrote:
           | I converted an old rotary phone into a mobile phone
           | (https://www.stavros.io/posts/irotary-saga/), and the quality
           | is much better than a mobile. Even just the sidetone makes it
           | SO much better to talk on.
           | 
           | I have no idea why modern mobile phones have no (or very low
           | volume?) sidetone. It makes the UX orders of magnitude
           | better.
        
             | alamortsubite wrote:
             | Nice work! Maybe I missed this, but have you considered
             | simulating a dial tone?
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | I haven't, I think it would be a fair bit of work, given
               | that the modem is what outputs the sound.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | I haven't worked with the Arduino. Would it be difficult
               | to incorporate an SPDT relay to switch the sound source
               | between it and the modem?
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | Hmm, probably not, actually, that's a good idea. It was
               | one of my first projects, so I didn't really know what I
               | was doing, which limited how much I could do.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | It's a great project! Thanks for sharing it.
               | 
               | If the relay works you could also simulate the pulse
               | dialing signals with clicking audio on the dial return.
        
             | frosted-flakes wrote:
             | Yes, sidetone (hearing your own voice through the handset)
             | makes all the difference! I'm not exactly sure why, but I
             | find it so much easier to talk on the phone when there's a
             | sidetone. In general, for me, talking on the phone is like
             | talking into the void, and sidetone at least gives me the
             | assurance that, yes, it's still working. Like the little
             | inset video feed of yourself when you're on a Skype call.
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | Yeah, exactly. Plus, I've found I'm much louder when
               | there's no sidetone, which is very tiring.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | The low latency with a completely analog phone call is
           | amazing. We forget it but it was really really low.
        
             | GuB-42 wrote:
             | If I remember correctly, in many cases, latency was lower
             | than in-person talk, because of the speed of sound.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Yeah, effectively you're both whispering directly into
               | each other's ear, which, even if possible in-person is a
               | bit uncomfortable.
        
           | franga2000 wrote:
           | The mic and speaker in the 90s Iskra payphones are far
           | superior in sound quality to anything you'd find in a cheap
           | phone these days. I hooked one up to Discord last month for
           | an art instalation and could not believe my ears when it
           | sounded way better than the 3 other people in the call using
           | flagship smartphones.
        
             | WalterBright wrote:
             | One thing has not improved one iota in the 30 years I've
             | had a cell phone - the voice quality.
        
               | eddieroger wrote:
               | You're calling the wrong people, or people on the wrong
               | networks. I am on Verizon, and certainly if I call
               | another Verizon customer (and I'm pretty sure if I call
               | another carrier), it sounds as clear as if we were in the
               | same room, as good as FaceTime audio or any other high
               | fidelity voice system. You may just not realize it until
               | you call someone else and compare, or hear someone move
               | from their car's older Bluetooth system to cellular when
               | they get out of the car (or headphones, etc), but voice
               | quality has definitely improved to the point of not
               | needing to improve further.
        
               | genewitch wrote:
               | I'm not sure this is true universally. I just spoke to a
               | friend for the first time since I got a phone that does
               | "HD" calling, and although I've been speaking to them for
               | 25 years on the phone, I didn't recognize their voice. I
               | feel like POTS and edge->3g calling made me miss out on a
               | lot of detail and intonation. I'm just glad I get to
               | experience this call quality with non-technically
               | inclined friends before I go completely deaf.
               | 
               | I use a lot of voip services and there's something to be
               | said for the phone companies actually making a
               | competitive product, here.
               | 
               | I suppose one could argue that "HD calling" is
               | technically just VoIP as well.
        
               | jcrawfordor wrote:
               | VoIP systems negotiate codec choice on call initiation,
               | generally using a "best common denominator" rule. Even
               | when only companded PCM is available (PCM-a, PCM-u),
               | 64kbps will be used since it's the universal norm on the
               | TDM (conventional) telephone newtwork. Unfortunately, as
               | a capacity measure GSM specifies very low bitrates for
               | voice connections, as low as 5kbps in the worst case and
               | 10-20kbps typical. This requires the use of high-
               | efficiency vocoders like CELP variants that are
               | sufficient for intelligible speech but, well, only for
               | that purpose.
               | 
               | "HD voice" is exactly VoIP and with few exceptions is
               | only transported over SIP or a SIP-like protocol using
               | the existing RTP negotiation mechanism, which usually
               | ends up selecting 64kbps companded PCM (same as a
               | landline phone). Increasing use of VoLTE, which is
               | essentially an optimized form of SIP designed to
               | "combine" session control features with LTE for lower
               | overhead, has made this pretty common as HD voice support
               | is standard from VoLTE vendors. There was such a thing as
               | HD Voice over 3G using a similar mechanism that leveraged
               | HSPDA but it was never very common, at least in the US.
               | 
               | VoLTE will quickly become the only way to make cellular
               | phone calls in the US which we can expect to make HD
               | Voice pretty universal. Right now it can be spotty when
               | calling between networks, depending on how their peering
               | is set up.
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | The bitrate can be way higher, but the latency is often
               | much worse these days. It's high enough on most calls
               | that I just don't like talking on the phone anymore and I
               | think it's because of the latency.
        
               | stackbutterflow wrote:
               | At some point we may need a new name for that rectangle
               | shaped thing that we use for everything but hardly for
               | calling people anymore.
               | 
               | Maybe smartbrick?
        
               | frosted-flakes wrote:
               | A mobile, which it already is in much of the world. Or a
               | handy if you're german.
        
               | thereddaikon wrote:
               | PocketPC.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | With the 1950s mic and speakers, it was substantially better
           | than a smartphone.
           | 
           | The Western Electric model 1500 [1], from 1963, is generally
           | considered the best analog phone [1]. This was rented, not
           | sold, so it is extremely reliable and rugged.
           | 
           | Best audio quality was with ISDN phones. Digital end to end,
           | synchronized at the bit level, no noise, no dropouts.
           | 
           | [1] http://www.telephonearchive.com/phones/we/we1500.html
        
             | Aloha wrote:
             | I'm not sure why you picked a 1500 as the best sounding,
             | the 500, 1500 and 2500 all used the same network, receiver,
             | and transmitter elements - I've used all three, they
             | perform identically, the 1500 set is actually incredibly
             | rare - touch tone was just not common until the 2500 was
             | out.
             | 
             | The best speakerphone ever made (even better than modern
             | ones) is a 4A Speakerphone.
             | 
             | Also in my opinion, an AE 80 with a non cohered up carbon
             | mic will outperform a 500/1500/2500 on a short loop (sub
             | 15kf), and can be tuned to outperform on a long. The self
             | compensating network in the WE set is better however.
             | 
             | That all said, a modern Northern Telecom or Aastra analog
             | phone will consistently outperform a 500 set, because of
             | the electret mic in them. Carbon mics have benefits as an
             | amplifier, but transistors rendered them obsolete in most
             | cases.
        
               | E39M5S62 wrote:
               | You know your phones.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | thlr wrote:
         | I believe the reason technology could spark so much joy for a
         | young mind back a few dozen years back is more that it was much
         | simpler rather than "it just worked".
         | 
         | It was simple and therefore easier to tamper and play with.
         | Also, because it was so simple, more knowledge and
         | understanding of the underlying mechanisms was required to use
         | the technology. In the early years of the internet, simply
         | operating a computer and exploring the web was an adventure in
         | itself!
         | 
         | Now, things have gotten plenty complicated and that complexity
         | brings bugs and makes the technology impenetrable to the common
         | folk even with an educated mind - you need to be an expert now.
         | If it's too complex, you can't play with it, and if you can't
         | play with it, you don't learn and you don't have fun.
         | 
         | I feel that your conclusion, 'it just worked', is more a
         | consequence of the increase in complexity rather than a root
         | cause in itself.
        
         | wildmanx wrote:
         | > but there's just something about today's Internet and a lot
         | of the overwhelming amount of technology that just isn't fun or
         | memorable.
         | 
         | That's right -- modern age stuff isn't as _hackable_.
         | Especially not at the hardware level. You get an Alexa or a
         | mobile phone or a camera, it's all just a chip on a PCB in a
         | plastic case, not intended to be fiddled with by anybody (not
         | the owner, not some repair show, literally _nobody_) just to be
         | thrown away after a year or two and replaced by a new one.
         | 
         | It's all very sad. There is still some software component to
         | things that's hackable, but even that's harder to do. In the
         | past you turned on your C64 and could start write away code,
         | average Joe Teenager needs to install some IDE and pull in
         | hundreds of NPM dependencies from shady places just to show a
         | hello world. Unless daddy/mommy gave them a Linux box, then the
         | story is different.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | In the past you couldn't upgrade the memory in your C64, now
           | you can open the case on any desktop and put in different
           | RAM. Laptops are sometimes upgradable as well. The raspberry
           | pi even comes as a bare board for hacking on.
           | 
           | The kinds of hacking you can do today are different, but
           | things are just as hackable if you want. If you don't want to
           | hack, just get things done, then today things are much
           | better, computers mostly just work for people who need to get
           | things done.
        
           | duckmysick wrote:
           | > In the past you turned on your C64 and could start write
           | away code, average Joe Teenager needs to install some IDE and
           | pull in hundreds of NPM dependencies from shady places just
           | to show a hello world.
           | 
           | Or he could open a console in his web browser.
        
             | hyperdimension wrote:
             | What about the kids in school districts that issue locked-
             | down Chromebooks? They probably can't even do that!
             | 
             | I, for one, learned how to bcdedit my way into booting from
             | a .vhd on my school-issued laptop. And how to SSH tunnel on
             | port 443 to get past the proxy. How LSPs worked on Windows.
             | Messing around _is_ how kids get their start in computers,
             | and I couldn 't agree with the parent comment more.
        
             | pwg wrote:
             | Or average Joe Teenager installs a Linux distribution,
             | which then provides bash, perl, awk, Python, C, C++, often
             | Tcl/Tk, etc. and usually includes one or more editors for
             | creating source files. All without "pull[ing] in hundreds
             | of NPM dependencies from shady places"
        
         | the_arun wrote:
         | Today, we take internet for granted!
        
         | rconti wrote:
         | I have a lot of the same nostalgia, but so much of this story
         | is that necessity is the mother of invention.
         | 
         | The author:
         | 
         | 1. Had more time than he knew what to do with.
         | 
         | 2. Didn't have money
         | 
         | 3. Had authority figures getting in the way of what he wanted
         | to do.
         | 
         | A decade later, kids were 'hacking' their parents' wifi access
         | points by logging in as admin/password to bypass "go to bed and
         | stop using the internet" restrictions, but the author was not,
         | because he likely had more money, less time, and most
         | importantly, no authority to bypass :)
        
         | eternityforest wrote:
         | I think the technology itself is 100x better in just about
         | every way(Except for pure novelty, smartphones largely killed
         | true gadgets)
         | 
         | The lack of fun, to me, is mostly because of how everything
         | changed around it.
         | 
         | I can make a basic website now, no problem, everything is
         | easier than it was aside from the fact we pretty much have to
         | have HTTPS.
         | 
         | But, nobody will read it, because it will be lost in a sea of
         | clickbait. I will have a hard time writing it, because _I_ will
         | be distracted by the sea of clickbait, and worst of all, I 'll
         | have a hard time finding things to write about.
         | 
         | And of course, the very fact it all does work so incredibly
         | well, with a Sci-fi level of polish, means... it's no longer
         | new. Most of it is being a cruise ship tourist, not an Arctic
         | explorer.
         | 
         | Because the internet is dead without the offline stuff that
         | gives it meaning.
         | 
         | It's like, binoculars and a field notes book with nobody to spy
         | on, the perfect party where nobody shows up, or a spreadsheet
         | showing all the customers someone doesn't have.
         | 
         | I think it's just like the idea of set and setting.
         | 
         | The internet/tech/coding/etc is the drug, and we lost all the
         | cultural context, so now it's less "A beer at the bonfire with
         | friends" and more "I had a bottle of wine alone because I don't
         | know what else to do with myself".
        
           | runjake wrote:
           | For those of us who still embrace RSS and try to avoid the
           | clickbait and social media, please create a basic website.
           | The more of those basic sites we have, the more people will
           | avoid social media to some extent.
        
           | entropie wrote:
           | Well not sure.
           | 
           | My GFs blog is like in its 6th year now and every year its
           | more visitors. Its not that much in internet terms (we are at
           | ~700 visitors a day) but its serious content (dogs and
           | science around dogs). No clickbaits, no cookies, no nothing.
        
           | 300bps wrote:
           | _because I will be distracted by the sea of clickbait_
           | 
           | Welcome to the 21st century! One of the 20th century's main
           | themes was humans having to learn how to live in a world of
           | infinite sugar, fat and salt.
           | 
           | Here in the 21st century, we have to learn how to live in a
           | world of infinite information.
           | 
           | What will you do with your attention today? Will you consume
           | the mental equivalent of broccoli or snickers bars?
        
             | somesomething wrote:
             | damn... this hit harder than it should. Sometimes I need to
             | hear the obvious.
        
               | asveikau wrote:
               | I like the metaphor too but also so much of society
               | hasn't figured out the sugar thing either.
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | Not just infinite information but "legitimate" information
             | that directly conflicts with other interpretations of the
             | same thing.
             | 
             | You can now basically find "facts" that support any
             | assertion you wish to make. You can even live in a comfy
             | echo chamber where everybody else agrees with your "facts."
             | It doesn't even matter if your "facts" are actually correct
             | because there is a huge body of "evidence" on the internet
             | to fully back you up. It starts to make you question if
             | there is even an objective truth to things.
             | 
             | It's one reason I get so nervous about labeling things as
             | "misinformation". Because often times "misinformation"
             | simply means "something I disagree with" and todays
             | "misinformation" will eventually become "information"
             | 
             | We are entering into a post-truth era.
        
         | smiddereens wrote:
        
       | karmelapple wrote:
       | Does anyone remember a red phone book marketed as the "talking
       | phone book?"
       | 
       | In my town in the 1990s, it had the unique feature of a free
       | local number you could dial and use to play games, get movie
       | showtimes, find out the time, and more. It was almost like audio-
       | only webpages you pulled up with a four digit code after
       | initially dialing a regular phone number. I would spend lots of
       | time on there, typing in random codes to see if I could find an
       | Easter egg. And I did.
       | 
       | I found a code - I think it may have been 9876 - that opened up a
       | service where you could leave a short message that the next
       | person could hear. Frequently it was nothing much, but sometimes
       | it was ... pretty strange, sometimes pretty entertaining.
       | 
       | Did anyone else stumble upon this strange corner of phone
       | service, where you left a recording for strangers, and listened
       | to what they left?
        
         | aksss wrote:
         | No, God only knows what that service was intended for. :D
         | 
         | I do remember our town had a local number, 8463, that we could
         | call to get current time and temperature played back to us.
        
         | willcodeforfoo wrote:
         | I don't remember the leave-a-message one, but I do remember the
         | dial in service. One day I went down to the local library and
         | found an old phone book from the 90s and sure enough, it had
         | all the codes. Here are some photos from the Toledo, OH
         | Ameritech 1996-7 phone book if anyone else is curious:
         | 
         | https://cdn.remarkedusercontent.com/file/remarked-prod/1/mar...
         | https://cdn.remarkedusercontent.com/file/remarked-prod/1/mar...
         | https://cdn.remarkedusercontent.com/file/remarked-prod/1/mar...
         | https://cdn.remarkedusercontent.com/file/remarked-prod/1/mar...
         | https://cdn.remarkedusercontent.com/file/remarked-prod/1/mar...
         | https://cdn.remarkedusercontent.com/file/remarked-prod/1/mar...
        
           | post_break wrote:
           | Funny seeing Jerry Anderson, only to google him and see he
           | stepped down 4 years ago. I wonder if our number was in that
           | book.
        
       | hk1337 wrote:
       | > Next, I used a stud finder to detect a stud on the wall
       | 
       | Naturally, I imagine he used the stud finder on himself a few
       | times when his wife was in the room.
        
       | xeromal wrote:
       | Random, but this reminded me of the mid 2000s when you could text
       | google for info. GOOGL was the SMS code I believe. I miss it
       | still. You could send them a query and they would respond with
       | directions, phone numbers, and other kinds of results. You could
       | also call Goog-411 or some variant to get similar info.
        
         | pinko wrote:
         | I just removed GOOG-411 from my address book the other day.
         | RIP.
        
       | eternityforest wrote:
       | It is really cool that there's still some fun to be had with
       | something as simple as POTS, and that this person's experiences,
       | which are a part of hacker history, are preserved and published.
       | Great article!
        
       | 2b3a51 wrote:
       | _I explained what it was and we took turns listening to the dial
       | tone. I put some quarters in and called my cell phone to show her
       | how it worked._
       | 
       | Nostalgia: Early 1960s near Liverpool UK. Being taken up the
       | street to the phone booth to learn how to make a phone call
       | (coins, dial number, press A button, talk, hang up, press B
       | button to claim any leftover coins). Big thing when you are 6
       | years old.
        
       | franga2000 wrote:
       | Just last month I got the opportunity to assist with an art
       | installation that involved a phonebooth, which meant I got to
       | take one home and poke around its insides. It was some of the
       | most delightfully 90s tech I've seen in a while - 2-layer PCBs,
       | all through-hole components, only a few well-known ICs... I ended
       | up carefully removing all the "brains" and hooking up the insides
       | to a raspberry pi, which could join a Discord channel or answer
       | an incoming call when you picked up the phone.
       | 
       | Standing next to the phone talking to friends was strangely fun
       | and nostalgic experience, despite the fact I had only used a
       | payphone once in my life. I got a cellphone very quickly (perks
       | of having a tech journalist in the family), so by the time I was
       | old enough to be able to buy a phone card with my own money I no
       | longer needed it. During the pandemic, all of the remaining
       | phonebooths in the country were quietly shut down and dismantled.
       | 
       | I know it's completely irrational, but I'm still sad that I had
       | to eventually return the one I worked on and that in the many
       | years the system was still operational it never occurred to me to
       | buy a card and call someone from a phone booth just for the fun
       | of it.
       | 
       | P.S.: If anyone from Slovenia or other ex-Yu countries has any
       | ideas how I could get my hands on one of those Iskra payphones,
       | drop me an email (address in bio). I have so many ideas for
       | projects involving them, but it seems that I'm a bit too late to
       | stand behind the Telekom dumpster and snag a few before they're
       | scrapped.
        
         | aksss wrote:
         | I worked at a telco a little over ten years ago when they took
         | out all the pay phones in our city. In the garage there were
         | these enormous bins full of them, staged for some unknown fate.
         | A couple colleagues and I had gone down to take a look at the
         | spectacle and inquired if we could take one, and they were
         | like, "sure!". We climbed in an grabbed ourselves some
         | payphones. Still have one in my garage - I think it's cool as
         | shit.
        
         | bbarnett wrote:
         | Seems weird, to me, that you would need a card. Every phone
         | booth I've used took dimes, then quarters.
         | 
         | Some, near the end, could take a credit card or a telco card.
         | 
         | I presume you could buy the cards back in the day, anywhere and
         | easily?
        
           | squarefoot wrote:
           | At least over here in the EU coins were later substituted by
           | magnetic phone cards; iirc in the late 80s, presumably as a
           | measure against vandalism and theft. When phone booths were
           | later decommissioned, all those cards became collectibles and
           | still have a market online.
        
           | franga2000 wrote:
           | For at least the last 25 years of operation, all of our phone
           | booths only took smartcards that you could buy in basically
           | any store or news stand.
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | Interesting.
             | 
             | Seems the same elsewhere, too, as per other replies.
             | 
             | I recall our phones, as I said, having a card slot and coin
             | slot at the end.
             | 
             | I wonder if they retrofitted, with the goal of getting
             | people used to cards, before removing the change slot
             | entirely. This logic seems typical here.
             | 
             | But then the smartphone explosion happened, so just decided
             | to never buy new payphones with slots only.
             | 
             | EG, rather than phase out for card only, they'd have years
             | of spare parts and phones, as they slowly removed booths.
        
           | andylynch wrote:
           | Not sure where GP was, but in NZ which I think was fairly
           | typical, pay phone cards were introduced in 1989 - you could
           | buy them at nearly any corner shop. I think the big
           | advantages were coin collectors no longer being necessary
           | (they were a huge overhead!), and vandalism to steal the
           | coins being no more.
        
           | pvitz wrote:
           | In Austria at least, this was quite common. I remember that
           | the phone booth in our school only accepted a phone card and
           | almost every pupil had one for emergency cases. You could buy
           | them easily in magazine shops.
        
         | sangnoir wrote:
         | Vy any chance, did you write about the project somewhere? I
         | have a similar project on the back burner, but with a rotary-
         | dial handset, and I doubt a pi could provide enough juice to
         | ring.
        
           | franga2000 wrote:
           | I plan to write a blog post about it soon(tm), but my
           | schedule is absolutely packed this month, so probably not for
           | a while. Here's a placeholder link:
           | https://m.frangez.me/PhoneBooth
           | 
           | I'm using two of those 2EUR sound cards from China to drive
           | the handset and ringer speakers and both work quite well. I
           | would probably need to add a small amplifier if I wanted the
           | ringer to be heard from the street through the metal
           | enclosure and plexiglass booth, but that wasn't a requirement
           | for this project.
        
           | CapitalistCartr wrote:
           | In North America, ringing takes about 100 volts, but any
           | control will do. Link the control circuit to an ice cube
           | relay, then have that control the higher voltage.
        
       | cachvico wrote:
       | How come the ISP didn't blacklist his address?
        
         | CaliforniaKarl wrote:
         | I think the ISP didn't ask for an address. Back then I doubt
         | credit card companies were doing address verification, at least
         | for lower-value purchases. (The infrastructure probably didn't
         | exist.)
        
         | thematrixturtle wrote:
         | This is a different era of ISP. He was not signing up to have
         | fiber installed to his house or whatever (which was not a thing
         | back then), he was signing up to be able to call out to an
         | ISP's server with his modem and get on the Internet from there.
         | So the only thing the ISP knew about him was a username,
         | password and fake billing details, and since the ISP was
         | presumably not a telco, they could also not tell where the call
         | was coming from.
        
       | newman314 wrote:
       | I want to do this but with a real British phone booth.
        
         | parenthesis wrote:
         | Here in the UK, you see them in people's gardens sometimes:
         | 
         | https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9164681,-3.1675508,3a,15y,27...
        
         | bpye wrote:
         | Well it looks like you can buy them
         | https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/403689859315
        
           | wrboyce wrote:
           | It's worth noting a K6 weighs in at about 1,250kg so "collect
           | in person" is easier said than done!
           | 
           | Personally I'd go with a specialist/approved company such as
           | x2connect.
        
       | zamadatix wrote:
       | > > Have you ever used a payphone and thought to yourself, "That
       | would be a great novelty idea for the pool room, family room, or
       | office. What a conversation piece".
       | 
       | > Why yes, payphone.com, yes I have.
       | 
       | This had me rolling but it's also a great example of knowing your
       | niche target audience.
        
       | chrissnell wrote:
       | I did this back in the early 2000s, when Asterisk first became
       | really popular. My plan was to create an Asterisk PBX in my house
       | and hook the payphone to that and be able to use it to receive
       | and make VoIP calls. Unfortunately, the project never got off the
       | ground because I bought a phone 1) without any keys to the locks
       | and 2) without the proper software and interface cables to be
       | able to program it. I ended up selling it again on eBay for what
       | I paid for it.
        
       | slk500 wrote:
       | great, sweet story
        
       | oxguy3 wrote:
       | I did really enjoy this post, but is it just a tiny bit weird how
       | casual he is about repeatedly committing fraud? Not asking for
       | some grand apology (lord knows the crap I did as a kid), but the
       | post is written like defrauding an ISP is just a normal and fine
       | thing to do. Am I off base here?
        
         | 3np wrote:
         | There is a statute of limitations at play here I assume.
        
         | dQw4w9WgXcQ wrote:
         | You must be Gen-Z or younger. Small-time "fraud" antics like
         | this were part of the hacker ethos throughout the 80s and 90s,
         | some highlights being the Anarchist Cookbook, Matthew Broderick
         | changing school records in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, and Kevin
         | Mitnick as one of the notable poster children of the new era of
         | cyber enforcement crackdowns. Even the word "hacker" meant
         | something a lot different than today where kids now say that
         | someone "hacked" their Instagram.
        
           | Agamus wrote:
           | ^ This is accurate. And when I saw the William Poundstone
           | "Big Secrets" reference, I knew I was home. For anyone who
           | hasn't played in that series, do yourself the favor!
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Secrets
        
           | Gordonjcp wrote:
           | Suzie changing Dustin's grades in a direct lift from
           | Wargames, right there in the current series of Stranger
           | Things.
        
           | hnbad wrote:
           | Outside of movies these antics were confined to a specific
           | (wealthy, male, usually white) demographic, though. Likewise
           | a lot of 80s movies happily depict "funny" antics that would
           | even at the time have been considered sexual assault or rape
           | if the perps weren't wealthy white college "boys".
           | 
           | Sure, culture has become more sensitive to these things
           | overall and criminal prosecution of credit card fraud and
           | computer crimes has become a lot more effective but there's a
           | tangible difference between generating fake credit card
           | numbers and masking your identity to defraud ISPs and hacking
           | the Pentagon to access government secrets (namely, the latter
           | fits into the hacker ethos of "liberating information" and
           | rejecting authority whereas the former just provides personal
           | gain). Changing your school records as a student is a
           | childish version of the latter (as the intent is not to
           | create false credentials for monetary gain but to defy the
           | authority of teachers by subverting their means of
           | "punishment").
        
             | guerrilla wrote:
             | > Outside of movies these antics were confined to a
             | specific (wealthy, male, usually white) demographic,
             | though.
             | 
             | Um no, definitely not.
             | 
             | > Sure, culture has become more sensitive to these things
             | overall
             | 
             | Decades of fearmongering in media, omnipresent surveillance
             | and the buying off of all competent hackers did a good job
             | of that.
        
               | bbarnett wrote:
               | Careful now, you're disturbing the revisionist history,
               | wealthy/white/male narrative. Could be trouble.
               | 
               | You might get tweeted to insolvency, or even swatted to
               | death!
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | Don't do this.
        
             | kurisufag wrote:
             | >Outside of movies these antics were confined to a specific
             | (wealthy, male, usually white)
             | 
             | this could not possibly be further from the truth -- the
             | early hacking/phreaking scene was quite possibly one of the
             | most diverse in tech history, mostly because it was
             | actually meritocratic
             | 
             | even the population of kids that hung out on IRC during
             | early web2.0 DDoSing each other and trading 0days had a
             | disproportionate amount of minority individuals, and large
             | portions of them graduated to today's cybsec industry
        
             | yew wrote:
             | Fandom types and 80s hackers have that in common - mostly
             | white neckbeards roleplaying diversity and thinking it's
             | for real. (Most of the people who called themselves
             | "anarchists" back then too. Feels like political spaces
             | have seen a bit more improvement though.)
        
           | dhosek wrote:
           | Not to mention Matthew Broderick changing school records in
           | Wargames (before almost starting World War III). He was doing
           | a lot of changing school records back in the 80s.
        
         | drc500free wrote:
         | There is extremely low risk of colliding with a real number,
         | and people didn't feel guilty about using services that had
         | nearly zero marginal cost. Phreaking or fake-cc-number fraud
         | was considered pretty victimless, and if there was a victim it
         | was a baby bell that had just been busted up for being a
         | massive monopoly.
        
         | currency wrote:
         | Hacking systems was just something a lot of computer users did.
         | Often interest in hacking and interest in computers were
         | strongly related.
         | 
         | Check out any history of phreaking [0]
         | 
         | [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_box
        
         | kfrzcode wrote:
         | You are on "Hacker"News...
        
         | pavel_lishin wrote:
         | It's approximately equivalent to admitting you've pirated
         | movies.
        
         | AlbertCory wrote:
         | You're not off base for _now_. You are for _then_. Those were
         | different times.
        
         | tomc1985 wrote:
         | It was, for a time. Much better times than now, that's for
         | sure.
        
         | bluedino wrote:
         | It seems like for a while there we all did shit like that. Or
         | at least said we did.
        
         | jamal-kumar wrote:
         | What you ever see 'hackers'?
         | 
         | The 90s were cavalier. We're talking over 20 years ago,
         | different time.
         | 
         | The big difference was that people were... for lack of a better
         | designation, intensely naive back then. There just wasn't a lot
         | of understanding around consequences.
        
           | pigtailgirl wrote:
           | -- 1997 - 11 years old - figured out the username password &
           | dial up numbers for everyone in our small town are based on
           | the mailing address - once the bandwidth limit was reached on
           | the account - id just switch to someone elses - at the time i
           | justified it as 'borrowing their internet' - in retrospect it
           | was wrong - oh well --
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | I don't think that people were more naive, they were just
           | young.
           | 
           | I am pretty sure kids today are also doing some different
           | mildly illegal stuff with technology, but we'll have to wait
           | 20 years to find out about it.
        
             | trevyn wrote:
             | Photoshopping printed documents (school enrollment records,
             | event tickets, covid stuff, etc.) was definitely weirdly
             | popular among a certain demographic.
             | 
             | Also scamming product returns, food delivery refunds, stuff
             | like this.
             | 
             | Curious what other things people have run across.
        
           | serf wrote:
           | > What you ever see 'hackers'?
           | 
           | to be fair that movie follows a group of teenagers showcasing
           | illegal activities that finally culminate into their federal
           | arrest.
           | 
           | yeah, they're later exonerated because 'Movie-FBI' has a
           | heart and a sense of justice, but that's probably not the
           | best movie to try to pull criminality psych from.
           | 
           | my guess : Eric Corley injected a lot of his own personal
           | ethos into that movie. He was apparently an unpaid
           | consultant.
        
             | jamal-kumar wrote:
             | It's what people had to model their own behaviour on in a
             | time where most depictions weren't exactly positive I
             | guess?
             | 
             | I'm purely speaking retrospectively here
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | makeitdouble wrote:
         | The credit card fraud is to me the worst, as any random number
         | might actually match an existing one, and back in the days I
         | wouldn't expect much scrutiny from the card processor. That's
         | then up to the poor soul who's number was used to go through
         | paperwork purgatory to dispute the charge.
         | 
         | Orherwise ISPs are the poster child of monopoly giants that had
         | to be broken down kicking and screaming, but kept screwing the
         | customer over and over because there is litteraly nothing that
         | we can do about it (voting won't help). They can burn in hell I
         | wouldn't care.
        
           | cbhl wrote:
           | IIRC in the 90s online credit card processing was a minutes-
           | long affair since it would require dialing into the bank's
           | computer system, or possibly calling a human banker to check
           | the authorization. IIRC it wasn't uncommon to just do it
           | offline with physical pieces of paper in the mail. Towards
           | the late 90s they got better at rejecting CCs if you did
           | authorize online (especially after PayPal gave away a lot of
           | $5 prepaid ones).
           | 
           | ISPs were also pretty liberal with free trials (AOL CDs
           | galore) since it was mostly customer acquisition cost (it
           | wasn't yet established that you had to have an Internet
           | connection like you did a landline and Cable TV) and the
           | marginal cost was low (ideally, the cost of peering -- the
           | ISP basically had some routers and modem banks between an
           | internet exchange and a phone exchange; and the user paid any
           | applicable long distance charges to call the ISP). Whereas
           | now you'd preauthorize the card at signup time to catch this
           | sort of fraud beforehand.
        
           | jamal-kumar wrote:
           | Back then it was a giant pain in the ass.
           | 
           | These days isn't it a lot easier to deal with that? You
           | basically just get on the phone with equifax/transunion and
           | upload some documents.
           | 
           | Guess that trial and error had to start somewhere.
           | 
           | Also I really wonder what the mathematical chances are that
           | the card actually matched with someone back then. Like
           | obviously a collision risk here but how large?
        
             | makeitdouble wrote:
             | There's 12 random numbers, and I assume banks reject some
             | numbers based on obviousness (e.g. all 0, all 1s, 1234, all
             | 3 groups are identical etc.) so I'd assume there's actually
             | less probability space than what we'd expect.
             | 
             | Even if it's still a pretty huge space.
        
               | nickles wrote:
               | Credit card numbers aren't entirely random
               | 
               | [0] https://medium.com/@ma.juber/mathematics-behind-
               | credit-debit...
        
               | makeitdouble wrote:
               | Sorry I think I'm missing it, does that page explain
               | somewhere how the 12 digits that are not set by the
               | MII/IIN and check digit rules are not random ?
        
               | hnbad wrote:
               | It says the first six digits are the IIN (and the first
               | one of those is the MII).
               | 
               | So if you have fourteen digits, one of which is a check
               | digit and up to six of which are non-random, that leaves
               | only seven truly random digits per issuer, i.e. a pool of
               | 10'000'000 (10^7) numbers rather than the
               | 1'000'000'000'000 (10^12) possible numbers claimed
               | elsewhere.
               | 
               | Of course the actual pool is different as the number of
               | fixed digits seems to vary per issuer and for some it
               | seems to be only one.
        
           | suyula wrote:
           | If every human being alive today (~8 billion) had a valid
           | Visa card (14 digits not counting the beginning 4 and the
           | check digit), there would be a 0.008% chance of a collision.
        
             | makeitdouble wrote:
             | I kinda agree with the low probability, but you also
             | ignored the article (he's faking mastercard), and I see 12
             | digits not 14.
             | 
             | Also, not every valid number will be used (e.g. all 0s
             | won't be an option), and every number don't need to be
             | valid at the same time. If I renew 25 cards, their numbers
             | are burned with no reuse.
             | 
             | That's a long way to say, I'm not a fan in general of
             | throwing in naive probability calculations and calling it a
             | day.
        
               | makeitdouble wrote:
               | Correction, there's actually only 7 digits at most of
               | randomness
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31605950
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | There are generally 9 "random" digits in a 16-digit
               | Visa/MC card number.
               | 
               | The BIN/IIN is traditionally the first 6 digits. Extended
               | BINs can be 8-11 digits, which is like subnetting -- the
               | BIN sponsor can delegate assignment control of an
               | extended BIN range to another entity. So in some cases,
               | there can be as few as 4 "random" digits in the full card
               | number (PAN).
               | 
               | E.g.:                 BIN     "random"  Check
               | 411111  111111111 1            ExtendedBIN "random" Check
               | 41111111111 1111     1
               | 
               | If you were sweeping a PAN range for live numbers, you'd
               | start with a known-valid BIN, probably 6 or 8 digits.
               | Then randomly choose the next 9 (or 7) digits, and then
               | calculate the check digit.
               | 
               | We can't know the likelihood of hitting a valid number
               | without knowing the count of assigned PANs in that BIN,
               | but clearly the capacity would be 1 billion (or 10
               | million) possibilities.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | Dial-up ISPs were the poster child of anarchistic markets. If
           | you could get a data T1 and a PRI T1 and some modems, you
           | could run an ISP. When your PRI fills up, get another. When
           | your data fills up, get another. Etc. A lot of those were
           | pretty small operations (which is why the author had to get
           | friends to call in).
           | 
           | There were a pretty good number of nationwide ISPs to choose
           | from too, if you wanted something less fly by night. A whole
           | heck of a lot of consolidation happened since then of course.
           | But even the winners of dial-up pretty much lost to cable and
           | baby bells. It was easy to setup a dial-up ISP, but it's darn
           | hard to setup a broadband ISP, so we're stuck unless you can
           | convince the FCC that the 1996 Telecom Act applies (might
           | need some court work as well) and we can get mandatory line
           | sharing back.
        
         | adastra22 wrote:
         | Yeah this also struck me as quite strange. Not that he did it,
         | but that he was so cavalier about it, even after all this time.
        
         | Waterluvian wrote:
         | I pictured him being 14 through all that and that made it a wee
         | bit better.
        
         | mherdeg wrote:
         | This is more or less the tone of 2600 magazine though -- people
         | very cheerfully admit to stuff which, yes, is totally unwise to
         | write down that you have done.
         | 
         | The weird thing is we have had the CFAA hanging over us as some
         | kind of Sword of Damocles for decades and we just collectively
         | ignored it. Honestly everyone was even pretty cavalier about
         | this stuff during and after the Mitnick prosecution...
         | 
         | In the 2000s when I talked to people who do urban exploration
         | there was at least an understanding that you should not be
         | taking photos in sensitive locations -- "please don't make a
         | felony diary".
        
         | donkarma wrote:
         | don't be a snake
        
         | driverdan wrote:
         | As others pointed out a lot of us did that kind of stuff. I
         | signed up for AOL at least a hundred times using fake credit
         | card and bank account numbers. After that I picked a random
         | person out of the phone book and signed up for a local ISP that
         | mailed the bill, no credit card required. That worked for
         | something like 6 months before they cancelled the account.
         | 
         | You have to remember how expensive this stuff was in the 80's
         | and 90's, how low risk this type of fraud was, and how us teens
         | didn't really think about it. ISPs billed by the hour,
         | something a teen could not afford.
        
       | alex_young wrote:
       | I don't know if I enjoyed the idea or the writing more, but I'm
       | very happy I read this. Thank you.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | jamal-kumar wrote:
       | Back when I was a kid I had alot of fun using methods to get free
       | phone calls on these things. Like, beyond just red-boxing or
       | whatever (Past that time).
       | 
       | In Japan, they would just accept DTMF tones from anything that
       | would generate them. There was all these people using hacked
       | cards that they installed countermeasures against which were
       | hilarious because people using these hacked yakuza cards would
       | keep one foot in the doorway in case the fabled alarm would go
       | off, i knew a guy who did this thinking naaah it would never
       | happen to me. NOPE happens to him, he had to squeeze himself out
       | of that phone booth and run after a red light started flashing
       | and the door slammed shut on his shoe... Literally just playing
       | the DTMF tones into the handset would have gotten past that on
       | every 'grey phone' out there (The ones that advertise ISDN
       | connectivity). Wouldn't be surprised if that still works if they
       | still have those phones anywhere.
       | 
       | The other way I did it in another country was a telephone company
       | test line (toll free!) which would give you 30 seconds of silence
       | then a dial tone (presumably 'remote'). From this dial tone you
       | could call anywhere in the world. We got some list that
       | phonelosers used to make and called places like the president of
       | Kenya.
       | 
       | This guy mentions using a payphone which accepts incoming calls
       | to get the internet as a kid in the 90s. Those which still rang
       | on incoming were mostly gone by my time but a few were still
       | configured to act like that. Was fun to sit down the road with a
       | cellphone and watch people be scared to pick up the line after
       | watching it ring for a few seconds.
        
         | pavel_lishin wrote:
         | > _phonelosers_
         | 
         | Wow, there's a name I haven't heard or thought about in
         | years... I wonder if RBCP's writings are still floating around
         | somewhere. Even the fictional ones ( _especially_ the fictional
         | ones, I guess) are amazing.
        
         | meep0l wrote:
         | Could you elaborate on the "fabled alarm?"
        
           | jamal-kumar wrote:
           | Yeah a red light would flash over the booth and the door
           | would shut closed, hence having to put your foot in there.
           | Alot of people buying and using these cards were like
           | 'bullshit!' but this guy who told me about this figured to
           | err on the side of caution anyways and ended up having to
           | comically escape the situation with all these people looking
           | at him.
           | 
           | This was like 5 years before my own time in Japan but pretty
           | hilarious nonetheless
        
             | Gordonjcp wrote:
             | I'm not saying you're wrong but a) this sounds like a
             | massive safety issue and b) this sounds like exactly the
             | sort of thing I'd say to anyone trying to get a dodgy phone
             | card from me, "yeah you need to wedge your foot in the door
             | in case it detects the card is hooky, and tries to lock you
             | in" just so I could stand there and laugh at their
             | contortions trying to keep one foot outside while they use
             | the phone.
        
         | patio11 wrote:
         | _NOPE happens to him, he had to squeeze himself out of that
         | phone booth and run after a red light started flashing and the
         | door slammed shut on his shoe.._
         | 
         | This did not happen.
         | 
         | Almost no Japanese public telephones even in 2022 have a) doors
         | which lock or b) motors/servos to operate the door. The
         | exception on motors is a specialty item "automatic door
         | (electric type)" which is sold primarily as an accessibility
         | aid for people who cannot operate unpowered doors. The door, in
         | all cases, is for caller privacy, not for preserving the
         | integrity of telephone billing.
         | 
         | I feel _extremely_ confident in this, and confident that you
         | would get an immediate on-the-record denial from NTT if you
         | asked. One reason among many: if the phone booth was physically
         | capable of locking people inside that would endanger human life
         | in a natural disaster, and the first rule of engineering in
         | Japan is that one's system must function during natural
         | disasters.
         | 
         | On this I will see "I once talked to a Japanese woman" and
         | raise you "I have written the acceptance testing protocols
         | required by that 'rule' for a firm which produced publicly-
         | deployable hardware artifacts." plus "I have two working
         | eyeballs and can confirm the absence of a motor in almost all
         | telephone deployments."
         | 
         | (Apologies for someone-is-wrong-on-the-Internet here but we
         | were _extremely serious_ about rule #1.)
        
           | jamal-kumar wrote:
           | Were you an employee of NTT?
           | 
           | Why didn't you install DTMF filters on the phones lol I was
           | calling like new zealand and shit.
           | 
           | And I'm talking like, 20 years ago plus here... It could be
           | bullshit for sure, I'm relating someone else's story.
        
         | jamesy0ung wrote:
         | > In Japan, they would just accept DTMF tones from anything
         | that would generate them. There was all these people using
         | hacked cards that they installed countermeasures against which
         | were hilarious because people using these hacked yakuza cards
         | would keep one foot in the doorway in case the fabled alarm
         | would go off, i knew a guy who did this thinking naaah it would
         | never happen to me. NOPE happens to him, he had to squeeze
         | himself out of that phone booth and run after a red light
         | started flashing and the door slammed shut on his shoe...
         | Literally just playing the DTMF tones into the handset would
         | have gotten past that on every 'grey phone' out there (The ones
         | that advertise ISDN connectivity). Wouldn't be surprised if
         | that still works if they still have those phones anywhere.
         | 
         | How did this work? Did it literally lock you inside and how did
         | you exit?
        
           | jrockway wrote:
           | Apparently GlaDOS was the president of NTT at the time. She
           | really wanted a deadly neurotoxin emitter on every handset,
           | but it was deemed too costly.
        
           | jamal-kumar wrote:
           | I elaborated on this on another reply.
           | 
           | It's something that happened in the late 90s, some time after
           | I was in Japan myself. I trust the source, his Japanese wife
           | corroborated it somewhat embarrassed.
        
       | hnbad wrote:
       | I feel an incredible disconnect with people like this who
       | casually tell public stories about their youthful credit card
       | fraud and other computer crimes (cf. every single story in
       | _Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution_ ).
       | 
       | I understand the anti-capitalist (or at least anti-corporate) and
       | anti-authority attitudes of hacker culture but these stories are
       | not told by anarchist cyberpunks "sticking it to the man" but
       | almost invariably by sheltered (usually WASP) yuppies working for
       | billion dollar companies or in this case, Slack.
       | 
       | These aren't so much stories about clever hacks and youthful
       | rebellion but of a youth isolated from consequences for criminal
       | offenses that would otherwise have been sufficient to give them a
       | career-ending criminal record.
        
       | Maursault wrote:
       | My freshman year of HS, I bought a DTMF dialer from Radio Shack.
       | This was a small handheld device with a shallow coupler on the
       | back, and buttons matching those on a DTMF telephone, and
       | pressing them produced the same tones as a telephone. The dialer
       | had a memory function.
       | 
       | One day I noticed the tones produced by putting a quarter in a
       | pay phone to tell the backend switch a quarter had been inserted.
       | It was, like, beep beep beep beep beep, really fast. Dimes and
       | nickels made the same tones, but they were shorter, less beeps.
       | 
       | Something sounded familiar about these tones, and through trial
       | and error, I realized these tones were made from the DTMF tones
       | of either the asterisk key or the octothorpe key (I can't now
       | remember which, and btw, it is not a hash symbol, it is an
       | octothorpe). By putting enough presses of the right key into the
       | memory of the Radio Shack dialer, I could fool payphones into
       | thinking I had deposited quarters. I had turned my off the shelf
       | Radio Shack DTMF dialer into a Red Box, without actually doing
       | anything to the hardware or electronics. And it was a lot more
       | svelte than the original Woz Red Boxes, about the size of a flip
       | phone when closed.
       | 
       | At first, this worked at every payphone, always, any kind of
       | call, local or long distance. I spent a lot of time at the
       | airport and hotel pay phone banks calling a gf long distance. But
       | eventually, my DTMF dialer stopped fooling the switch, so I could
       | no longer make free local calls. But with long distance calls,
       | I'd usually get an operator once the spoofed coin inserts failed,
       | but they would always still fool the operator, who I think
       | assumed line interference prevented (what I assume were) the new
       | digital switches from recognizing coin insert tones. Then that
       | stopped working; somehow the operators knew what I was doing and
       | would accurately describe my spoof to me.
       | 
       | So it no longer worked with ordinary common pay phones. But I
       | found a pay phone installation that was not ordinary, I believe
       | it was called a "Smart Payphone," but it was not smart in the way
       | we think of smart phones today; it just had some extra
       | electronics and a small 3 line LCD panel which told you how long
       | your call lasted. I could continue to make local and long
       | distance calls from only these types of pay phones for a few more
       | years until every place I knew there had been one had been
       | uninstalled.
       | 
       | It only occurred to me later that I was not stealing from AT&T or
       | some local Bell affiliate. I had been stealing from whomever
       | owned the pay phone, who still had to pay for those long distance
       | calls I made. I have carried the guilt and shame of my juvenile
       | crimes ever since. Not kidding. That was all very, very wrong.
        
       | spicyramen_ wrote:
       | Awesome, I used to work with Mitel PBX which have a feature
       | called DISA which allows you to call a number and place calls
       | from there. The number you call will give you dial tone and you
       | could place calls anywhere I looked up the list of customers with
       | Visa find the main number and try the first 20-100 numbers which
       | was normally the range used (sold DIDs by Telco) during my
       | installation I gave myself access to those via 1800 numbers so it
       | was pretty much able to call LD/cell phone which used to be
       | expensive before
        
       | bluedino wrote:
       | Looking at that pay phone makes me think of those ancient phones
       | your had to hand crank. Looking real old now.
        
       | bambax wrote:
       | Excellent story, writing, and end. It's absurd to install a
       | payphone in one's house, and yet after reading this, it feels
       | completely necessary.
        
       | tempestn wrote:
       | Fun story, and that list of door games was a blast from the past.
       | I especially recall some fun times playing Planets: TEOS, trying
       | to whittle down the runaway leader while he was away on
       | vacation...
        
       | indus wrote:
       | You are on my leaderboard for the best writing for this year.
       | 
       | Thank you for rekindling some memories.
        
       | guerrilla wrote:
       | Best article I've seen here in a while. I really miss payphones
       | for some reason. Loved that he's teaching his daughter.
       | 
       | > My daughter is 5 - I don't want her dialing 911.
       | 
       | Five year old girls calling 911 has saved a lot of lives. I just
       | listened to a whole podcast series about that.
        
         | Johnny555 wrote:
         | If I had a landline in my house and went through all the
         | trouble to install an obvious phone like a payphone (well,
         | obvious to older people), I'd definitely want it to be able to
         | call out to 911. When calling from a landline, you're 100% sure
         | that EMS has your correct address (well, assuming that you set
         | up your address correctly when you ordered your ISP service).
        
       | cbhl wrote:
       | I feel like the logical next step is for the author to discover
       | PBX, such as Asterisk or something built on top of it. Then they
       | can call between the two in-house phones and also dial out to the
       | real phone line in an emergency.
       | 
       | Just need an old PC, a compatible dial-up modem with voice, and a
       | card with a few FXO ports to go to the payphone and child's
       | phone...
        
         | kalleboo wrote:
         | You can also get used Cisco VoIP ATAs for cheap from eBay (mine
         | was $20) with 2 lines that can be programmed for internal calls
         | and incoming/outgoing SIP, that's what I did to play around
         | with old modems and also set up 2 old-style phones to play
         | phone with my kids.
        
         | CaliforniaKarl wrote:
         | It would be cool! You'd need FXS ports, though (those are the
         | ones which provide the line/ring voltage). You'd also need to
         | research how the payphone indicated coin insertion
         | (bell/2bell/bong or something else), and how to tell the
         | payphone to either return the coins or drop them into the box
         | (in some cases it's an MF signal, in others it's polarity
         | reversal of the phone line).
        
           | jcrawfordor wrote:
           | The PacBell branding suggests this unit hasn't been
           | converted, but most popular payphone model have a COCOT
           | conversion kit available. COCOTs or customer-owned-coin-
           | operated-telephones perform the charging internally and don't
           | require exchange support, so they're a lot simpler to get
           | working. The conversion kits are pretty readily available
           | because a good majority of payphones out in the world today,
           | even operated by the incumbent telco, are actually COCOTs
           | since they've become cheaper and easier to manage over time.
           | Plus a lot of payphones aren't managed by the telco anymore
           | but instead by a separate private company like PTS, which
           | runs all COCOTs with an arrangement where they "dial in" to a
           | management system regularly for configuration and reports.
           | 
           | General rule of thumb is that any payphone that accepts
           | credit cards is actually a COCOT, any payphone not branded by
           | the ILEC is a COCOT, and a lot of the rest are COCOTs too
           | depending on the telco. "Genuine" exchange-controlled
           | payphones (that signal coin drops back to the exchange) have
           | become rare.
           | 
           | I'm pretty surprised he went with the Viking box actually
           | because it costs more than an inexpensive FXS ATA, and a lot
           | more than getting an ATA used. It's simpler to set up, but on
           | the other hand some ATAs have internal logic to connect their
           | two lines that you can enable so they behave as standalone
           | devices. I think this is typical on the older Ciscos.
        
         | mrweasel wrote:
         | There is an older project where the author hooks up a payphone
         | to a PBX: https://github.com/jcs/payphone
        
       | bjarneh wrote:
       | Ok, I need one of those. Very funny and well written piece...
       | 
       | > I'm not quite ready to reap what I sow.
        
       | sambalbadjak wrote:
       | I enjoyed reading that!
        
       | barbs wrote:
       | I always found it interesting that payphones could receive calls
       | in America. Australian payphones can't receive calls (at least,
       | not to my knowledge), and it always seemed like it would be ripe
       | for abuse if they could.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | retrac wrote:
         | It made sense originally. Most people did not originally have
         | telephones at home. It skewed towards businesses, and then
         | public venues like hotels. Almost immediately, a secondary
         | business started up around each telephone. A grocery store, for
         | example, might let customers place outgoing calls for a small
         | fee, and reserve slots for incoming calls, and take messages. A
         | single phone might be installed on the ground floor of an
         | apartment building, and one of the retirees became the building
         | phone operator.
         | 
         | As you might imagine, a lot of free outgoing calls were snuck
         | in. Just pick it up when the clerk isn't looking. And no one
         | wants to sit around all day guarding the phone, anyway. And so
         | payphones. In those environments, you'd want them to be able to
         | receive calls at a pre-arranged time, as well as place them.
         | And it just kinda carried forward. But many regions in North
         | America did start prohibiting incoming calls on payphones
         | eventually. You couldn't do that in the 90s where I grew up in
         | Canada.
        
       | pisspiss wrote:
        
       | alanh wrote:
       | > My daughter is 5 - I don't want her dialing 911.
       | 
       | Well... hmm. I taught my daughter how and when to do that by that
       | age. You never know. That could end up saving a life. She knows
       | not to do it frivolously. This does not seem too advanced a
       | concept for a kindergartner.
       | 
       | That said, intercom-like internal system Bertrand built seems to
       | be much cooler than having the real phone.
        
         | IncRnd wrote:
         | > My daughter is 5 - I don't want her dialing 911.
         | 
         | Yes, that was really weird to have as the very first item. As a
         | parent I taught my child, when she was young, to know my phone
         | number, to dial 911, and to recognize a police officer and
         | other service people.
        
       | riffraff wrote:
       | This was a fantastic read and the end just put a smile on my face
       | thanks for sharing.
        
       | esses wrote:
       | Payphone.com is wondering why sales are through the roof!
        
       | Ayesh wrote:
       | Wow this brings back memories. I stayed at a high school hostel,
       | and and remember calling the high school sweethearts after 9pm,
       | when they had super cheap fares. 9 minutes for an equivalent of
       | $0.02.
       | 
       | There was only one phone, so the rest of the kids were in a queue
       | waiting to call theirs. You'll get an earful if you were the one
       | to fill the coin storage (the phone company only comes once a
       | month or so to collect the money) or jam a coin.
        
       | jaywalk wrote:
       | This is really cool, but I was hoping he had gone all the way
       | with the setup and had a simulated CO backend that actually
       | validated that coins were inserted to make a call.
        
       | charlieyu1 wrote:
       | They should keep at least a few pay phones. Works great when your
       | phone battery dies. I think I have used one as recent as 2010s.
        
         | crispyambulance wrote:
         | The last time I tried to use a payphone was 2007. I literally
         | could not figure the damn thing out. FWIW, it was immediately
         | after landing in a foreign country and my language/reading
         | skills were not up to par and it was a credit card based thing.
         | 
         | After that, I switched to just getting a temporary SIM at the
         | airport.
        
       | markstos wrote:
       | I had that same clear landline phone. Maybe from Radio Shack.
        
       | superdug wrote:
       | Back in my day this was all called phreaking [
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phreaking ]
       | 
       | I had the pleasure of knowing a guy who knew a guy when I was in
       | school. Basically there was a prefix 786 that you could (within
       | the area code of course) dial the prefix for the callback 971 and
       | the last 4 digits of the host (thankfully the number of the pay
       | phone is right there on the pay phone) and then hang up twice the
       | phone would ring until you picked the phone up.
       | 
       | Fast forward to another thing of the past, the mall! The mall had
       | BANKS of pay-hones just sitting around. So a group of friends and
       | I got to all of the banks and decided to make all the phones
       | ring. We walked around the mall forever as people just looked at
       | the ringing phones and carried on about their lives.
       | 
       | After doing it for about an hour security caught on and I got
       | banned from the mall, I think for the fourth or fifth time.
       | 
       | It was a beautiful site to see. Two dozen or so payphones just
       | ringing and people completely perplexed as to why.
        
       | z82s3 wrote:
       | I enjoyed learning about BBS door games.
        
       | marzetti wrote:
       | Thanks for this article and the comments. Reminds me of a trick
       | we kids did in the early 60s (yeah, sorry) with the British
       | 'phone box' pay phones. We called it 'tapping the phone', but it
       | wasn't spy style listening. Passed from kid to kid the amazing
       | trick was you could dial the number by tapping the handset (10
       | taps for zero, 9 taps for 9, ..) and the phone would ring the
       | number but you didn't then have to 'press button A' to speak..
       | you simply made the call, spoke normally, hung up, and pressed
       | button B to get your money back! Sadly, I never tried
       | international calls... When we moved to New Zealand around '63-4,
       | I discovered the phone dial was reversed, in the UK it was 1-9,0,
       | in NZ it was 9-1,0. (So emergency calls were 111 not 999 as in
       | the UK.) The trick still worked but, except for 0, you had to
       | '10s complement' the taps. Maybe because of that none of the kids
       | I knew at the time in NZ appeared to know the trick...
        
         | blangk wrote:
         | We used to get the money back with a pretty reliable mechanical
         | method, stuffing a flattened MacDonald's straw into the machine
         | above the spare change slot and jiggling in and out. You needed
         | a coin for the call but could return and re use it each time or
         | even for the same call.
        
         | myrryr wrote:
         | This is because the NZ answer was to use a regular land line,
         | and dial extra numbers on the end, the exchange would work, but
         | their billing system would throw out the call, giving it to you
         | for free.
        
         | bjelkeman-again wrote:
         | In Sweden, at the high school I went to, we had pay phones
         | which would behave as if you had inserted a coin if you zapped
         | it with static electricity. We used this for a while to make
         | prank calls to other countries. Typically to random numbers we
         | just tried, sometimes in the middle of the night in the other
         | country.
        
         | slyall wrote:
         | A friend of mine had a system for getting free calls from New
         | Zealand payphones.
         | 
         | He installed a small switch between the payphone and the line
         | before it went into the ground. He then exploited the lack of
         | coordination between the phone and the exchange.
         | 
         | * First he would pick up the phone and start dialing 0800
         | (equivalent of 1-800), the phone would see this was a free
         | number and ignore what was being entered next.
         | 
         | * Then he would briefly interrupt the line. The phone wouldn't
         | notice but the exchange would think the call had ended.
         | 
         | * Then he would dial a new number. The exchange would think the
         | payphone was making sure he paid, while the payphone would
         | think he was still dialing a free number.
         | 
         | So to call 0900 123 456 for free he would dial
         | 0800-click-0900123456
         | 
         | Obviously the phone company audits quickly turned up a problem
         | but he got away with it for a little while.
        
           | aksss wrote:
           | Glad to know I wasn't the only kid trying, by hook or crook,
           | to figure out what was on the other end of those 900 numbers.
           | :D
        
         | shaky-carrousel wrote:
         | When I was a kid, we had a trick here in Spain to make free
         | calls in public pay phones. When the other person answered, you
         | had to hang up, wait about half a second and then pick up the
         | phone. The head piece was in a lever, so you had to manipulate
         | that lever. The further the call recipient, the longer you had
         | to wait to pick up. For a person 50 kms away you had to wait a
         | bit over a second, if I recall correctly.
        
       | J8K357R wrote:
       | I'm, not sure admitting to fraud, even if the ISP is probably
       | long gone, is a great idea.
        
       | shitshitshit wrote:
        
       | Fatnino wrote:
       | Why is there a reverse the digits step in the cc# algorithm?
       | 
       | Seems like it will work just fine without doing that.
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | My understanding is when doing it by hand some like to reverse
         | it so when writing the products the digits get written
         | continuously left to right. I.e. matter of preference.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | lrvick wrote:
       | Being able to disconnect when I leave my home office is how I
       | stay happy and productive, and rejecting "app culture" by
       | ditching my smartphone last year has been a big part of that.
       | 
       | Still sometimes I need to make an outgoing call to some customer
       | support line or other such nonsense that only works over "the
       | phone".
       | 
       | Back in the day before cellphones were an option I would
       | sometimes use a payphone for these edge cases, but they basically
       | no longer exist.
       | 
       | I had already canceled my cell phone subscriptions a couple years
       | ago and ported my one remaining cell number to a VoIP provider.
       | This lets me get SMS over email for dumb services I can't avoid
       | like banks that insist on using SMS verification still.
       | 
       | Given that setup had worked well, I decided for rare life edge
       | cases that still require classic phone system voice calls I could
       | also get a VoiP ATA box and route calls to it. This let me setup
       | some "dumb" landline phones at home, the first which logically
       | had to be a payphone, which is now installed and working in my
       | home office as of a few months ago, and I love it.
       | 
       | It is visible in most of my work video calls and people are often
       | skeptical that it really works. Some call it to test are amazed
       | it works fine. It amuses me.
        
       | sirius93 wrote:
       | Nice article.
        
       | swamp40 wrote:
       | A pay-for-data would be much more useful in my house. We have a
       | 1TB/month limit that we are constantly going over. And the ATT
       | analytics/tools won't let you pinpoint where it is going.
        
       | daniel_iversen wrote:
       | This is very cool, but I'm personally more interested in what he
       | is using for the big digital picture frame next to his phone :)
        
       | ck2 wrote:
       | One last generation might still understand the superman jokes and
       | "I'm going to need an exit" but 100 years from now it's
       | definitely going to need an explainer.
        
         | 0des wrote:
         | The matrix had phone booths in the good one.
         | 
         | edit: not one of you asked "which one's the good one".. I rest
         | my case.
        
           | ck2 wrote:
           | "Too bad they never made any sequels"
           | 
           | https://m.xkcd.com/566/
        
           | idontwantthis wrote:
           | I rewatched all 3 recently, and I have to say I don't
           | remember why I and everyone else disliked the sequels so
           | much. They are exciting, and tell a good story. I haven't
           | watched the new one yet.
        
             | ck2 wrote:
             | Do not watch the fourth. Not kidding. It's not worth the
             | curiosity.
             | 
             | Yes the 2nd and 3rd were great despite critics. The fourth
             | is a "WTF who wrote this garbage money grab" the entire
             | time, it's not even "fan service" because it destroys
             | everything with poor writing and terrible acting, feels
             | like someone was shouting "we'll fix it in post" after
             | every first take rushing to the next shot to churn it out.
             | 
             | Remember how epic the music was in the first three? The
             | fourth is like that kid from Bob's Burgers mashing on a
             | keyboard.
             | 
             | Remember the epic dialog from Hugo Weaving and those
             | chilling rants from Agent Smith? Yeah absolutely nothing,
             | nothing even vaguely faintly like it in the fourth, it
             | almost undoes the entire franchise.
        
               | jamal-kumar wrote:
               | I'm really of the opinion that they did that on purpose
               | given the philosophical underpinnings of the original.
               | Like, to make a point, because Warner Bros owned the
               | rights to their franchise and were going to make some
               | banal crap anyways, with or without the Wachowskis.
        
               | hnbad wrote:
               | That's literally why.
               | 
               | Also 2 and 3 were mostly bad because releasing two part
               | movies wasn't a thing at the time and thus the films had
               | to be forced into (unsatisfying) single-movie narrative
               | arcs despite having an obvious overarching narrative.
               | 
               | Re-watching 2 and 3 as a double feature years later makes
               | them less of a trainwreck and more of a mildly
               | underwhelming but watchable and solid sequel to a movie
               | so good it was impossible to follow up on. It finishes
               | the story, literally ends the universe it created and
               | ties up the loose ends.
               | 
               | On the other hand 4 is the sequel that never should have
               | been but ultimately exists to seal the franchise
               | permanently shut because any attempt to build on it can
               | only be read as a soulless cashgrab because there is now
               | literally nothing left to tell. WB didn't want to let its
               | IP die so the Wachowskis had to drive a stake through its
               | heart and kiss it goodbye.
        
             | jamal-kumar wrote:
             | Ever watch the newest one they made? It's like
             | baudrillardian banality taken to its logical extreme. The
             | first half is literally a clip show. Comes off as a shitty
             | superhero movie of now but with matrix characters
        
               | hnbad wrote:
               | The movie is infinitely better if you understand it
               | within its real world context.
               | 
               | The Wachowskis did not want to make another Matrix movie
               | but the studio approached them and said that they would
               | make the movie either way but they would be given full
               | artistic freedom if they agreed. They basically had the
               | choice of doing this themselves or letting the studio
               | turn it into a soulless franchise detached from their own
               | vision.
               | 
               | The movie is mostly an allegory for how the movie was
               | created and why it shouldn't exist. Aside from mindless
               | indulgence the ending is also giving a middle finger to
               | the production company. The philosophy is dull because
               | everything that needed to be said was already said so the
               | only thing left to do is repeat it more blatantly for the
               | audience in the back.
               | 
               | That doesn't mean it's a great movie and you can argue
               | that a movie should be enjoyable without context, but for
               | me knowing this context allowed me to enjoy it through
               | that lens a lot more than I probably would have had I not
               | come into this knowing this.
        
               | mihaic wrote:
               | My thoughts exactly. As a fan of the first Matrix, it
               | felt a bit cathartic to see the honesty upfront, so I
               | could just see this movie as a standalone statement with
               | some decent visuals. It was pretty much the opposite of
               | watching the latest Star Trek series, that have
               | completely departed from the original philosophy.
        
       | bredren wrote:
       | This was a great post with a very sweet ending.
       | 
       | The unexpected screenshot of the LORD intro ascii art was a blast
       | from the past.
        
       | ValtteriL wrote:
       | I want a payphone to my house straight from a casino in Vegas
       | too!
       | 
       | Just worrying about the "seen some shit" thing: where I used to
       | grow up, the only payphone was mostly used as a toilet by drunk
       | people.
        
       | pavel_lishin wrote:
       | > _This basically creates a closed network between two phones.
       | You can configure it so that if you pick up one phone, the other
       | phone rings, and when that phone picks up, you can talk, and
       | vice-versa. So I bought one, drilled a hole to my daughter's
       | room, and ran another RJ-11 cable to her phone._
       | 
       | Okay, well, now I have something to do with the rotary phone I
       | inherited from a previous job. Time to set up a phone line to my
       | kid's room!
       | 
       | I wonder if something exists to connect any arbitrary number of
       | phones together. Maybe even with distinct phone numbers?
       | 
       | edit: duh, of course it does, PBX. maybe that'll be my summer
       | project.
        
       | mrb wrote:
       | I love it that he uses the payphone to talk to his daughter's
       | phone in her room... or rather that _she_ uses her phone to call
       | him ;) I also just set up a private phone network in my house,
       | and my daughter can also call my room, from her bedroom. But it
       | spiraled very quickly into something more evolved  & more fun.
       | 
       | It all started when I discovered after buying our new house that
       | most rooms were pre-wired with RJ11 outlets, with all the lines
       | going to a central closet. So one day I bought a cheap 8-port PBX
       | for $80 (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015MIQ12A) and bought a
       | classic rotary phone for my daughter's room, and a regular phone
       | for our room. The PBX needed no configuration whatsoever, it
       | comes with the ports assigned extensions 601, 602, etc, so right
       | away my daughter was elated she could call us from her room by
       | just dialing "601" or whatever. It's important to note we do not
       | have a landline; the PBX's outgoing lines were left unconnected,
       | so it was purely a private phone network. The PBX could also be
       | configured so it auto-dials an extension as soon as the phone is
       | picked up. But I wanted my daughter to learn how to use a rotary
       | dial so I didn't use that feature. As a side note, the "phone
       | line simulator" that the OP uses is basically a minimalist 2-port
       | PBX with no outgoing line.
       | 
       | But I thought, how hard is it to replace the PBX with an Asterisk
       | VOIP system? So I replaced the PBX with a $140 Analog Telphone
       | Adapter (also 8 ports: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07B6TL7N6), I
       | configured the ATA to route calls via SIP to my Linux gateway, on
       | which I installed Asterisk. I wrote a simple Asterisk config
       | defining even shorter extensions so my daughter only has to dial
       | "1" or "2" instead of "601" or "602". Then I set up some
       | extensions that play recorded audio files, like songs, or sweet
       | messages we recorded to each other.
       | 
       | Then, later I thought it might be practical for my daughter to be
       | able to call my cellphone (in case of emergencies or whatnot). So
       | I searched for VOIP providers, found https://voip.ms/ and signed
       | up for an account. I configured Asterisk to place outgoing calls
       | through this provider. And I defined new extensions: 3 rings my
       | cellphone, and 4 rings my wife's cellphone, while the other
       | extensions work just as before (eg. 1 still rings our bedroom.)
       | But I specifically did NOT configure Asterisk to be able to place
       | outgoing calls to arbitrary numbers. So the internal phones are
       | only able to call my predefined extensions.
       | 
       | And again later I thought it might be practical to be able to
       | call her bedroom phone from my cellphone. So I added a DID number
       | (direct inward dialing) to my voip.ms account. Then I configured
       | Asterisk to accept incoming calls from voip.ms, then prompt for
       | an extension, and forward the call accordingly. So when I call
       | the number, I hear "please dial an extension", then I can type 2,
       | and my daughter's phone rings.
       | 
       | In order to avoid spam calls, I made Asterisk check the caller ID
       | and accept calls coming ONLY from my cellphone or from my wife's
       | cellphone. (I'm well aware that caller ID can be spoofed, in fact
       | I have spoofed it myself a few times with my setup as a
       | demonstration to family & friends.) In the 2 months since I
       | bought the DID number I did not see a single call intercepted by
       | my caller id filter. So it looks like I got a pretty "clean"
       | number. I understand that I might not have been that lucky.
       | 
       | And that's basically where I'm at today. We have a mostly private
       | in-home phone network, that can also call our cellphones, and our
       | cellphones only are allowed to call into the house phone system.
       | 
       | Our daughter will call us in the morning when she wakes up to say
       | what she wants for breakfast. When her cousins visit, they chat
       | on the phone from room to room. It's fun!
       | 
       | As someone who knew nothing about Asterisk, I found the official
       | documentation utterly mediocre. The process of configuring it
       | consisted mostly of finding real-world examples, then trying to
       | reverse engineer them by finding what they do from the
       | documentation. But in the end I still got everything to work
       | exactly the way I wanted it.
        
         | driverdan wrote:
         | That is such a cool project. I would have _loved_ this as a
         | kid.
        
         | pavel_lishin wrote:
         | This is incredible! I want to set this up now. I don't suppose
         | you have a more detailed write-up? Or is this a "setting this
         | up is left as an exercise for the reader" situation?
        
         | westhom wrote:
         | Thanks for sharing. This is exactly what I want to do once I
         | get a house. First just room to room calling with extensions,
         | and then possibly outgoing for fun. It's good to know the
         | actual hardware isn't expensive and it can support analog. And
         | lots of fun old school phones to choose from.
        
       | rconti wrote:
       | I'm a Sonic customer and just learned about their Tradewars
       | server! thanks!!
        
         | naet wrote:
         | I am a very happy Sonic customer as well (fuck comcast...) but
         | the tradewars server doesn't seem to still be up? I think early
         | Sonic had a lot of neat stuff like usenet, free hosting, and
         | some other offerings that they have done away with over the
         | years.
        
       | slazaro wrote:
       | I was just analizing the Luhn algorithm and... the step to
       | reverse the digits doesn't seem to do anything, right? None of
       | the other steps depend on it and in the end you just sum all of
       | the digits together... Is it because the amount of initial digits
       | might not have the same parity and therefore you'd sum a
       | different set of digits depending on whether you reverse or not?
        
         | account42 wrote:
         | I think it only matters for which digits you double if there
         | are an even number of digits.
        
       | doctor_eval wrote:
       | I'm not usually nostalgic, but I love everything about that phone
       | line simulator. The case, the dip switches, the font, the model
       | number DLE-200B. Brings back memories of a time long past.
        
         | 2rsf wrote:
         | Well, it is an old timer. I spent many days with one in the mid
         | 90's and it wasn't new even then
        
         | the_only_law wrote:
         | I was really hoping to find an ISDN simulator with U-interfaces
         | but anything I could find on eBay I wasn't going to pay for
         | since I had no documentation on how to configure/operate them.
         | 
         | I'd try to make one myself if I wasn't so good at killing
         | hardware.
        
         | wolrah wrote:
         | Basically everything Viking makes has an old school telecom
         | aesthetic.
        
       | burnt_toast wrote:
       | The ending was very wholesome
        
       | DeathArrow wrote:
       | Is there an adapter which allows you to connect an analog phone
       | to a digital phone line?
       | 
       | I would like to make use of an ancient analog phone.
        
         | CaliforniaKarl wrote:
         | Yup! You want an Analog Telephone Adapter (ATA). That's a box
         | which takes Ethernet in, and gives you one or more FXS ports.
         | (An FXS and an FXO port are similar, but the FXS port is the
         | one which provides the current that powers the phone, generates
         | the ringing signal, etc.)
         | 
         | It's important to note that other than call routing, the ATA
         | has to do almost everything the phone company would do. The ATA
         | provides any Caller ID, for example. It provides call-waiting,
         | or 3-way conferencing. If you want to use a rotary phone,
         | you'll need one that handles pulse dialing.
         | 
         | Your ATA will use SIP to connect to a VoIP provider. Some
         | support using multiple SIP accounts (especially if the ATA has
         | multiple FXS ports.
        
         | wolrah wrote:
         | > Is there an adapter which allows you to connect an analog
         | phone to a digital phone line?
         | 
         | A VoIP analog telephone adapter (ATA) would be the most common
         | form of this these days. Most will have two analog lines,
         | though other configurations are available.
         | 
         | The Sipura SPA series and it's derivatives (Linksys PAP2(T),
         | Cisco SPA122) are popular, as well as Obihai's lineup. I've
         | used them all extensively and they're solid.
         | 
         | You can connect these to a SIP based VoIP provider or they can
         | operate entirely standalone just calling port to port. With a
         | bit of work you can even link up multiple devices on a private
         | network IP to IP.
        
       | bschne wrote:
       | My grandfather once built a phone line simulator you could
       | connect up to 8 or 10 phones to and actually dial them by a one-
       | digit number. I think he got the schematics from some old
       | electronics magazine. Definitely one of the coolest ,,toys" I
       | ever got as a kid.
        
         | Gordonjcp wrote:
         | In the olden days (up to about the mid-1990s!) the island of
         | Canna off the west coast of Scotland that had a ten-subscriber
         | phone exchange where you could dial any number on the island
         | with a single digit. You could only make one call at a time off
         | the island, via a VHF link on around 80MHz to the telephone
         | exchange in Mallaig about 25 miles away.
        
         | julianbuse wrote:
         | that's incredibly cool!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-03 23:01 UTC)