[conspire] AT&T and CPUC

[Ron / BCLUG]

Steve Litt wrote on 2024-01-23 19:37:

> Ron, everything you say is true, but it doesn't address Rick Moen's 
> point that some folks can't use a cell phone because of no towers,
> no Internet lines, etc.

Yeah, but I'm not addressing the regulatory / corporate systemic 
failure(s) that impede the rollout of internet or mobile services.

Rather, this is intended to address the calculus of which service can be 
most helpful in an emergency / natural disaster.


Plus, I figured anyone on this list at least has internet, at which 
point one can be a hundred miles from a tower and still use the phone.

Which is very likely to have better sound quality and more functionality
than any landline phone.




> And it's not just rural people either. Here in Orlando Florida, when
> a category 1 hurricane passes within 30 miles of us, out electricity
> is out for three days. This means no wifi

That's definitely a problem, and again not keen to support telco's, but
relying on an unbroken cable between oneself and the outside world to
provide communication in a natural disaster seems, in 2024, less 
reliable than mobile for reasons below.

And with mobile, there's always the option to fall back to LTE / 5G, and 
with a provider like Ting, you only pay for what you use - so even in an 
internet outage, there's a backup internet connection along with voice 
and SMS.


> and I presume no power to cell towers.

I'd expect at least minimal backup power to many / most towers.

I'm curious now. The smallish ones on buildings don't appear to be too 
power hungry, but the self-supporting ones have quite a bit of 
infrastructure in a cabinet at the base.

I wonder if there's a generator or battery bank or something in there?


> Meanwhile, our landline, with
> its 75 DC volts provided by the phone company, continues to work as
> long as we use an oldschool phone that needs no power source other
> than the 75 volts DC. In every hurricane, our landline is our
> guaranteed communication out.
Are your cables all buried?

Also, I thought POTS were 48v?  Checking Wikipedia:

 > a direct current (DC) voltage at a nominal voltage of −48V when the
 > receiver is on-hook


Because that unbroken wire between points seems a lot less likely to 
survive intact than a wireless link to a tower, which may have a 
microwave uplink, which can put the final connection to fibre optics 
outside the disaster zone (depending on nature of disaster).


Also, if one's dwelling gets flattened, or one is not home at the time 
of a disaster, a landline is useless.




If Vancouver were to get flattened by an 8+ earthquake, I can't fathom 
landlines being of much use, but SMS takes minimal resources and can be 
stood up post quake faster than copper can be repaired at scale.

Truck mounted cellular providers can be brought in to enhance service as 
well.

This can allow far more people to connect to the outside world via SMS 
than everyone trying to use voice calls.

Also important, people inside the disaster area can be contacted via a 
known number even if sheltering at, say, a community centre.


Everyone's risk assessment is different, and the telco's deserve all the 
hate, but I just wanted to add a few more variables to peoples 
calculations of the best service in a disaster.


It's worth it to also mention that the ability to take photos can 
provide enormous evidentiary value.

And GPS should be mentioned too.



TL;DR:

Wireless vs unbroken physical connection is more reliable

Ability to have communications at any / all times is much more 
beneficial in regards to safety (i.e. car crash)

A backup internet service in one's pocket is invaluable and not very 
expensive: probably about the same as a landline

Emergency contact list built in to mobile devices

Can initiate / receive communication during times of crisis, including 
if a personal crisis is affecting a loved one when we're not near a landline

Photos / videos can be very useful

GPS can save lives

The "tracking device" in a pocket is more likely to help authorities 
find someone lost or injured than allow authorities to derive any value 
from one's movements



rb