You're right. The FCC would most likely only get interested when this attack is used more than a few times.

But when they get interested, it may be expensive.

Did I miss something? Did the complainer respond to the sound level?

Don't have to be loud to be obnoxious.

BTW, did you see what I did there?

And flowers. Wait, how do I get raw honey? Curses!

The EPA's own site states that PM2.5 can consist of organic compounds, metals, and 'etc.'. Not terribly specific actually.

Mind you, the EPA would prefer to focus on combustion products, since those are much easier to identify and the originators much easier to punish, since life on our planet will produce substantial particulate matter despite the most earnest legislative efforts to minimize that.

More ugh.

I was not referencing any cell site work, just the d-slams and all the necessary work going on. Put in the batteries to do backup power. I think AT&t did have cell service and main back then, but it could have been Cingular. Not to cell sites. Sorry

Oh yeah, March Madness, which is all the college basketball to watch. And which is often available OTA.

You should watch the college softball WS, them players can play!

Sports team choose the outlets that broadcast their games etc. in one of several ways. Some form or join leagues that negotiate and manage the rights for them. Others negotiate directly. Some team owners also own media outlets. Some deals are for multiple years, some not very long at all. Some deals restrict over the air broadcasting, others leave OTA rights out.

Monopoly? Sure, it looks like a monopoly, but the idea of multiple outlets showing the same games at the same time is fairly unusual, though when it happens there are usually also multiple deals behind it. I watch a lot of EPL on Mexican OTA channels because some deal out there lets them have it, and I do not need much commentary. Otherwise I would be forced into more subscriptions.

Will I participate in this new alliance? Probably not. Sports media are pricing me out of the market, by splitting deals into multiple streamers. This deal may force me to say no because I don't want the detritus that comes with bundling. I've given up on Disney content, college football networks are uninteresting to me, everything ESPN other than ESPN+ I do not care about. FSx etc. are marginally interesting. I'm just not their market.

This will afflict other markets also. It's the nature of the media business today to consolidate and get pricing power. But monopoly? That seems to be defined by some as 'too expensive'. Feh.

Correct, replacement not 'upgrade', and for the life of the subscriber, not merely tenancy. They are forcing a change in tech, let them provide the same true lifeline service.

And installation, Many of the affected subscribers may need assistance to deal with this. Look, the burden should be on ATT to provide suitable service if they wish to abandon the current systems.

During the ice storm in the Northeast (Upstate New York, Maine, and parts of Quebec, etc., only POTS was functional immediately after, power was out to my home at the time for 11 days, some for 18 days. Telephone service survived largely because the aerial lines were below all the other utilities such as electrical transmission, local distribution, cable TV, even municipal signaling.

And Verizon maintained service by conscripting generators, chargers, and batteries for the DSLAMs necessary to provide service to the last mile or so. It required also that the Maine National Guard provide fuel for this work. Batteries and chargers came from Massachusetts, which had suffered a similar storm the year before centered on Cape Cod, where the current Maine director of operations worked, having transferred from that region. He knew what was needed.

With this effort many who needed life-sustaining medical equipment were identified, contacted, and served. Emergency services were able to save many lives. And of course trouble reports were made possible. My sister lived in a house about a quarter mile from the main road, and electric service crews missed her for an additional week, not realizing there was a line into the woods. Her telephone service went down with that line. I got a call from her when she was at work, contacted a Central Maine Power executive I knew, and they were on site within an hour. Woops. Wood stoves and artesian well in the breach...

Electric crews came from as far as Hawaii to assist in restoration, Eastern Maine hit the hardest. The upshot is that POTS was a vital service during this event, irreplaceable. Today cell service would rely upon backup power, and that might not last 11 days, and further might not be able to, in any way, be extended to address the need.

POTS was a literal life saver here, but knowing how copper is built, this is indeed a technology that either needs modernization or replacement. ATT should be required to offer existing users similar, replacement service, and perhaps CPUC should require this at no significant change in costs, as these users are not at fault. If wireless service is the answer, it should be required to offer the same level of service, hardened against power outages and natural disasters. Walking away from POTS probably does make sense, if the replacement is of similar reliability and performance. And no, ATT doesn't get to claim that current POTS is in any way less reliable than some substitute, this current diminished reliability is more due to ATT's failing craft and maintenance. I see it in Arizona, and it is not anything but lack of attention. No excuse.

Billionaires be billionaires. Same issues, same problem of entry to market. Remember, Elon had a job before SpaceX and Tesla. And that was depicted as behemoth preventing opportunity to newcomers.

"We need to have prohibition and regulation that prohibits the capital markets from funding predatory pricing,"

This is a laudable and honorable goal. It is also doomed to failure, worse than doing nothing.

Human nature being what it is, and easily discerned, we cannot escape the reality that any profitable endeavor will attempt to maximize profit. Ti will do so by any means necessary, if it is true to its purpose, and will compete fairly or unfairly.

Cory's intention, to enforce fair competition, ignores the reality that this is an attempt to legislate morality. Failure.

I would encourage, instead, to legislate accountability. And I do not yet know how to do this. Could be my idea is merely another form of morality, and likewise also doomed.

And bear in mind that while we see the 'current system' serving the successful, the billionaires etc., most all billionaires started with little or nothing. We need only encourage a system that gives the future billionaires the opportunity to succeed as their predecessors did. PS -

"what new massive tech companies have come into existence since Facebook, Google, Amazon etc ? Answer ZERO."

Um, SpaceX? Or will the poster merely include that in the 'etc.'...? That's lazy.

Well, MCSE trainers were bandying about the ,.local TLD as a clever hack in 1993, and my best efforts to teach DNS to the instructor I was saddled with proved fruitless. He was not having it. Nearly every other student in the class however was coming out of the Novell world. like I was, and at the next user group meeting we not only refuted it, we proved it at lab. Didn't matter until one of my clients hired on another firm with multiple MCSEs, you know, for redundancy, and they went bonkers over my registering the client a domain just for internal use. After 3 weeks of frolicking in DNS, they gave up and used that domain and the internal DNS server, and the owner admitted I was right. But I lost the gig anyways. And the new team was good.

Why not just designate the .local TLD for this purpose? Microsoft taught this in the MCSE courses way back in the 'beginning'.

It's still stupid. If you want to use a private domain, learn how or have your DNS server configured to do so. This is pollution.

Oh wait, yeah, some bad actor would try to register the .local TLD and both break this and create a huge security hole. Fixing something that requires further understanding of DSN than many organizations have or care to. If you wanna do something, you ought to learn how first. Still a stupid idea. Include the .int, .private, and the list goes on. This is close to requiring definition of all possible TLDs to permit private registration, and so we have an unworkable system. Jon Postel is starting to rotate I fear...

"Imagine what other entities can also buy it'

Your auto loan lender, your home mortgage lender, all sorts of retailers, hospitals, insurance companies...