A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone service will be switched to DV. The
full number will need to be dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc. So far
so good.
But the letter also states that the switchover will not require any new equipment at the customer
premised or an engineer's visit, all the work will be done at the exchange.
This is odd as she has no broadband service, just POTS phones.
Will she be put on "SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone service will be switched to DV. The
full number will need to be dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc. So far
so good.
But the letter also states that the switchover will not require any new equipment at the customer
premised or an engineer's visit, all the work will be done at the exchange.
This is odd as she has no broadband service, just POTS phones.
Will she be put on "SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
On Sat, 11 Apr 2026 10:00:07 +0100, Codger <codger524@gmail.com> wrote:
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone service will be switched to DV. The
full number will need to be dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc. So far
so good.
But the letter also states that the switchover will not require any new equipment at the customer
premised or an engineer's visit, all the work will be done at the exchange. >>
This is odd as she has no broadband service, just POTS phones.
Will she be put on "SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
Oops - that should be "SOTAP for Analog".
On Sat 11/04/2026 10:00, Codger wrote:
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone
service will be switched to DV. The full number will need to be
dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc. So
far so good. But the letter also states that the switchover will not
require any new equipment at the customer premised or an engineer's
visit, all the work will be done at the exchange. This is odd as she
has no broadband service, just POTS phones. Will she be put on
"SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
We had the same.
Effectively they will put the ATA (Analogue Telephone Adapter) in the exchange building but the switching/connection of the call could be
anywhere in the world (let all UK!) so the full dialling code+number
must be dialled even for local calls. However the system will pick up
1 series and 999 before conversion and route them accordingly..
The reason is that they have failed to find a suitable solution to
systems - such a OAP alarms - that require voltage changes on the line
etc.
So much for getting rid of copper!
On Sat 11/04/2026 10:00, Codger wrote:
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone
service will be switched to DV.-a The
full number will need to be dialled and there will be new features for
voice messaging etc.-a So far
so good.
But the letter also states that the switchover will not require any
new equipment at the customer
premised or an engineer's visit, all the work will be done at the
exchange.
This is odd as she has no broadband service, just POTS phones.
Will she be put on "SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
We had the same.
Effectively they will put the ATA (Analogue Telephone Adapter) in the exchange building but the switching/connection of the call could be
anywhere in the world (let all UK!) so the full dialling code+number
must be dialled even for local calls. However the system will pick up 1 series and 999 before conversion and route them accordingly..
The reason is that they have failed to find a suitable solution to
systems - such a OAP alarms - that require voltage changes on the line etc.
So much for getting rid of copper!
On 11/04/2026 11:02, Woody wrote:
On Sat 11/04/2026 10:00, Codger wrote:
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone
service will be switched to DV.-a The
full number will need to be dialled and there will be new features
for voice messaging etc.-a So far
so good.
But the letter also states that the switchover will not require any
new equipment at the customer
premised or an engineer's visit, all the work will be done at the
exchange.
This is odd as she has no broadband service, just POTS phones.
Will she be put on "SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the
inevitable?
We had the same.
Effectively they will put the ATA (Analogue Telephone Adapter) in the
exchange building but the switching/connection of the call could be
anywhere in the world (let all UK!) so the full dialling code+number
must be dialled even for local calls. However the system will pick up
1 series and 999 before conversion and route them accordingly..
The reason is that they have failed to find a suitable solution to
systems - such a OAP alarms - that require voltage changes on the line
etc.
So much for getting rid of copper!
It's only a stop gap, until Openreach work out a model using FTTP
Until such time that all premises currently served by FTTC, have not
(for whatever reason) been switched to FTTP, copper will remain.
However, I'm surprised looking at Bob's document, the solution is not installed inside the FTTC cabinet, because that would allow the truck multi-pairs between the exchange and cabinet to be 'forgotton'quicker ?
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> writes:I dont see how they put an ATA in an exchange that no longer exists...
On Sat 11/04/2026 10:00, Codger wrote:
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone
service will be switched to DV. The full number will need to be
dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc. So
far so good. But the letter also states that the switchover will not
require any new equipment at the customer premised or an engineer's
visit, all the work will be done at the exchange. This is odd as she
has no broadband service, just POTS phones. Will she be put on
"SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
We had the same.
Effectively they will put the ATA (Analogue Telephone Adapter) in the
exchange building but the switching/connection of the call could be
anywhere in the world (let all UK!) so the full dialling code+number
must be dialled even for local calls. However the system will pick up
1 series and 999 before conversion and route them accordingly..
The reason is that they have failed to find a suitable solution to
systems - such a OAP alarms - that require voltage changes on the line
etc.
So much for getting rid of copper!
It sounds like they /have/ found a solution though, isn't that what the
ATA in the exchange is doing? Is it a more complex one than the one in a router?
Certainly sounds like SOTAP/PDPL -
On 11/04/2026 11:13, Richmond wrote:
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> writes:I dont see how they put an ATA in an exchange that no longer exists...
On Sat 11/04/2026 10:00, Codger wrote:
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone
service will be switched to DV.-a The full number will need to be
dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc.-a So
far so good.-a But the letter also states that the switchover will not >>>> require any new equipment at the customer premised or an engineer's
visit, all the work will be done at the exchange.-a This is odd as she >>>> has no broadband service, just POTS phones.-a Will she be put on
"SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
We had the same.
Effectively they will put the ATA (Analogue Telephone Adapter) in the
exchange building but the switching/connection of the call could be
anywhere in the world (let all UK!) so the full dialling code+number
must be dialled even for local calls. However the system will pick up
1 series and 999 before conversion and route them accordingly..
The reason is that they have failed to find a suitable solution to
systems - such a OAP alarms - that require voltage changes on the line
etc.
So much for getting rid of copper!
It sounds like they /have/ found a solution though, isn't that what the
ATA in the exchange is doing? Is it a more complex one than the one in a
router?
Id expect an ATA in-a a streetbox until its only FTTP and then an ATA in
the customers premises
Probably battery backed up with a built in NTE
"However, this remains a temporary solution, which allows enough time
for the most challenging / vulnerable and CNI users to find a modern
digital solution. But it will eventually be retired too through the
future closure of OpenreachrCOs old exchanges, which is expected to occur
at full speed from 2030 onwards."
They won't. This is only a temporary service that will be ceased when
the Exchanges close. Its also not available for new supply, only as a migration from a POTS line...
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> writes:
They won't. This is only a temporary service that will be ceased when
the Exchanges close. Its also not available for new supply, only as a
migration from a POTS line...
This temporary solution sounds better than the permanent one, which is
to provide an ATA in the router which breaks various bits of equipment
like my Truecall device. Will they be selling off these ATAs which can
do the necessary voltage changes on the line eventually? so I can buy
one and put it in my living room?
"However, this remains a temporary solution, which allows enough time
for the most challenging / vulnerable and CNI users to find a modern
digital solution.
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
[...]
"However, this remains a temporary solution, which allows enough time
for the most challenging / vulnerable and CNI users to find a modern
digital solution.
The bloody cheek of it! They have created a problem with their greed to
sell off the exchanges and copper - then they put the ounus on their customers to find a way around it.
That is very odd as TrueCall claim it will work with BT's Digital
Voice service...
https://www.truecall.co.uk/category-s/128.htm
Q. Which network providers does trueCall support?
A. trueCall will work on standard analogue domestic telephone lines
from all the main telephone providers, and on most digital lines (with
the exception of Vodafone, Zen Internet and Community Fibre). We
recommend that you turn on the Caller ID service from your phone
supplier (this is free).
They claim it won't work with ZEN which I find very odd...
.. actually I see why now.
https://forums.thinkbroadband.com/zen/4739885-digital-voice-fritzbox-7530-has-broken-my-answerphone.html?fpart=all&vc=1
Dave
BT/Openreach announced the end of copper 10 years ago, yet suppliers continued to sell solutions they knew would be obsolete. Why? Why are Truecall still selling a device they know won't work with several modern systems. They have had many years to develop a replacement but haven't.
Why is this? Probably because they know the market is too small to make
this profitable.
On 11/04/2026 20:55, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
[...]
"However, this remains a temporary solution, which allows enough time
for the most challenging / vulnerable and CNI users to find a modern
digital solution.
The bloody cheek of it! They have created a problem with their greed to sell off the exchanges and copper - then they put the ounus on their customers to find a way around it.
The demise of landlines is a natural process. Most users do not want a landline and are ditching them as fast as they can. Given only about 10%
of households want a landline, would they be prepared to pay the cost of retaining the Exchanges and copper infrastructure? I doubt it very much.
BT/Openreach announced the end of copper 10 years ago, yet suppliers continued to sell solutions they knew would be obsolete. Why? Why are Truecall still selling a device they know won't work with several modern systems. They have had many years to develop a replacement but haven't.
Why is this? Probably because they know the market is too small to make
this profitable.
So whilst many of those who grew up with a landline want to keep one,
its simply no longer viable...
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service
available from Openreach or any other supplier?
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
There's no excuses for the telecare people, whose customers are paying ongoing service fees, but I have a bit of sympathy for Truecall. Previously they just had the 'BT' network to rely on, with a side order of Virgin
Media. BT's network followed the SINs, because they wrote them. Now you have every ISP bringing in their VOIP solution with a half-baked set of
voice settings on whatever router they bought this week, half of which might not be localised to the UK, and they have no clue about the voice interface or how debug these nitpicking details: 'works for me' is the best you'll
get.
I did come across some device which would send a ringing signal but I
don't know if it would work so just haven't bothered.
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service
available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I think that is in fact the point.
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service
available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
Plus very, very few locations are simultaneously unusable for a mobile connection.
And very, very, very few locations are unusable for those and Starlink.
Theo
On 12/04/2026 12:50, Theo wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service
available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
Plus very, very few locations are simultaneously unusable for a mobile connection.
And very, very, very few locations are unusable for those and Starlink.
TheoI think that is in fact the point.
When 'powered by the exchange;' was dreamt up, many people did not have
mains electricity let alone reliable mains
Small business telephone exchanges were battery-powered by primary cells
long after mains was commonly available. The 100-line exchange where I worked until 1999 had a room full of lead-acid accumulators charged in 'float' from the mains. In the event of a power cut, we still had a
day's worth of telephone service.
During the power cuts of the 1970s, I kept an AVO connected actoss my extension line so I could warn the switchboard if the batteries were
running dangerously low. If we had rotas of power cuts now, thousands
of subscribers would be cut off for long periods and there would be
deaths as a result.
Nobody will care until it happens, then they will say "We couldn't have forseen it" and "Lessons will be learned". - They won't!
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 12/04/2026 12:50, Theo wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I think that is in fact the point.
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service
available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
Plus very, very few locations are simultaneously unusable for a mobile
connection.
And very, very, very few locations are unusable for those and Starlink.
Theo
When 'powered by the exchange;' was dreamt up, many people did not have
mains electricity let alone reliable mains
Small business telephone exchanges were battery-powered by primary cells
long after mains was commonly available. The 100-line exchange where I worked until 1999 had a room full of lead-acid accumulators charged in 'float' from the mains. In the event of a power cut, we still had a
day's worth of telephone service.
During the power cuts of the 1970s, I kept an AVO connected actoss my extension line so I could warn the switchboard if the batteries were
running dangerously low. If we had rotas of power cuts now, thousands
of subscribers would be cut off for long periods and there would be
deaths as a result.
Nobody will care until it happens, then they will say "We couldn't have forseen it" and "Lessons will be learned". - They won't!
On 2026/4/13 13:53:51, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 12/04/2026 12:50, Theo wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I think that is in fact the point.
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service >>>>> available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
Plus very, very few locations are simultaneously unusable for a mobile >>> connection.
And very, very, very few locations are unusable for those and Starlink. >>>
Theo
When 'powered by the exchange;' was dreamt up, many people did not have
mains electricity let alone reliable mains
Small business telephone exchanges were battery-powered by primary cells
Not "primary", I think.
long after mains was commonly available. The 100-line exchange where I worked until 1999 had a room full of lead-acid accumulators charged in 'float' from the mains. In the event of a power cut, we still had a
day's worth of telephone service.
Yes, I've seen rooms like that - the operative word being room; they
were _big_ cells. About the size of large car or small truck batteries - until you realised that those were the individual two volt _cells_.
During the power cuts of the 1970s, I kept an AVO connected actoss my extension line so I could warn the switchboard if the batteries were running dangerously low.
(What could they do about it when you did tell them?)
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/4/13 13:53:51, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 12/04/2026 12:50, Theo wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I think that is in fact the point.
On 11/04/2026 18:36, Mike Humphrey wrote:
How do we
"find a modern digital solution" when there is no broadband service >>>>>>> available from Openreach or any other supplier?
If you have a copper telephone line you can at least have a modem
Very few locations are totally unusable for ADSL..
Plus very, very few locations are simultaneously unusable for a mobile >>>>> connection.
And very, very, very few locations are unusable for those and Starlink. >>>>>
Theo
When 'powered by the exchange;' was dreamt up, many people did not have >>>> mains electricity let alone reliable mains
Small business telephone exchanges were battery-powered by primary cells
Not "primary", I think.
Yes, wooden boxes full of glass Leclanch|- cells. My grandmother had
long after mains was commonly available. The 100-line exchange where I
worked until 1999 had a room full of lead-acid accumulators charged in
'float' from the mains. In the event of a power cut, we still had a
day's worth of telephone service.
Yes, I've seen rooms like that - the operative word being room; they
were _big_ cells. About the size of large car or small truck batteries -
until you realised that those were the individual two volt _cells_.
These were only about 10-inches cube, arranged on strong wooden
shelving.
The big ones that you remember were for powering central exchanges in
major cities (the main busbars had to be interleaved, alternately
positive and negative, so as to cancel the external field and minimise
the physical forces pushing them apart).
During the power cuts of the 1970s, I kept an AVO connected actoss my
extension line so I could warn the switchboard if the batteries were
running dangerously low.
(What could they do about it when you did tell them?)
They would go into 'emergency mode' whereby non-essential calls would be refused. Luckily the batteries were sufficient and that never happened.
I think it may actually have been somewhere in the electricity supply industry (I did my sandwich course with a switchgear company), and
nothing to do with telecomms - maybe for powering switchgear?
"J. P. Gilliver" wrote:
I think it may actually have been somewhere in the electricity supply
industry (I did my sandwich course with a switchgear company), and
nothing to do with telecomms - maybe for powering switchgear?
Edison NiFe cells?
During the power cuts of the 1970s, I kept an AVO connected actoss my
extension line so I could warn the switchboard if the batteries were
running dangerously low.
(What could they do about it when you did tell them?)
They would go into 'emergency mode' whereby non-essential calls would be refused. Luckily the batteries were sufficient and that never happened.
I didn't know that mode survived into the '70s.
On 2026/4/14 18:51:28, Andy Burns wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver" wrote:
I think it may actually have been somewhere in the electricity supply
industry (I did my sandwich course with a switchgear company), and
nothing to do with telecomms - maybe for powering switchgear?
Edison NiFe cells?
May have been. I only saw such a room once, and that well over 40 years
ago, so its purpose is somewhat lost in the haze of memory! I do
remember they were individual cells the size of car/truck batteries, and
made of glass.
A neighbour has received a letter from BT to say that her phone service will be switched to DV. The
full number will need to be dialled and there will be new features for voice messaging etc. So far
so good.
But the letter also states that the switchover will not require any new equipment at the customer
premised or an engineer's visit, all the work will be done at the exchange.
This is odd as she has no broadband service, just POTS phones.
Will she be put on "SOGEA for Analog" so just putting off the inevitable?
At least in my case, the product name is Pre-Digital Phone line (PDPL)
and the BT wholesale handbook is <https://www.bt.com/bt-plc/assets/ documents/special-services/pdpl-wholesale-product-handbook.pdf>. -aIt is
a stop gap with an end date of 2030.-a It is being forced on customers on the vulnerable list, which includes anyone over 70.-a I think it was only introduced last year.-a The literature says that it may not work with community alarms.-a I suspect the real reasons are to do with exchange powering.
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> writes:
They won't. This is only a temporary service that will be ceased when
the Exchanges close. Its also not available for new supply, only as a
migration from a POTS line...
This temporary solution sounds better than the permanent one, which is
to provide an ATA in the router which breaks various bits of equipment
like my Truecall device. Will they be selling off these ATAs which can
do the necessary voltage changes on the line eventually? so I can buy
one and put it in my living room?
On 13/04/2026 13:53, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Nobody will care until it happens, then they will say "We couldn't have
forseen it" and "Lessons will be learned". - They won't!
It will be cheaper to just give a proper UPS to any vulnerable user.
Didn't they hand out mobile phones to an area with a long fault so could
do the same - perhaps a mobile phone restricted to emergency calls and
one other number?
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> writes:
I was just thinking about the situation during long mains losses, I
have not noticed any of the retailers supplying ordinary consumers who
are selling proper UPS's that will run a system for any length of
time.
I would have thought that some would have taken the opportunity to
promote the sale of UPS's
Virgin Media gives out these:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/MOTOROLA-FW500-Landline-battery-emerges-white/dp/B0D1QZ8FT4
"Motorola Voice - FW500 Desktop Phone with SIM and Landline - 4G LTE Emergency Backup, Up to 8 Hours of Battery Life, Emergency Phone in Case
of Power Outage, Large Keys", but that rather assumes 4G/3G
reception.
On 13/04/2026 13:53, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Nobody will care until it happens, then they will say "We couldn't have forseen it" and "Lessons will be learned". - They won't!
It will be cheaper to just give a proper UPS to any vulnerable user.
Didn't they hand out mobile phones to an area with a long fault so could
do the same - perhaps a mobile phone restricted to emergency calls and
one other number?
Virgin Media gives out these:
On 03/05/2026 14:08, Richmond wrote:
Virgin Media gives out these:
Don't BT / EE have an equivalent?
I have a reasonable size UPS that will me going whilst I finish off any work. I would have thought there was a market for these that the
retailers like Curry's would try to serve.
I was told years ago that mobile phone base stations
On 2026/5/3 18:39:23, JMB99 wrote:
On 03/05/2026 14:08, Richmond wrote:Probably not big enough; I suspect most of those still using actual
Virgin Media gives out these:
Don't BT / EE have an equivalent?
I have a reasonable size UPS that will me going whilst I finish off
any work. I would have thought there was a market for these that the
retailers like Curry's would try to serve.
computers (rather than 'phones) will be using laptops, which are intrinsically a poor man's UPS these days (though don't feed the
router of course).
It appears you have little knowledge of the strenuous efforts that went
into ensuring the POTS system was reliable under the worst conditions
for the best part of 80 years. If you read through back-numbers of
POEEJ (particularly around the WWII period) there was a well-justified
pride in giving a reliable service which is completely lacking now.
The worn-out undefunded wreck, which we now think of as POTS, bears
little resemblance to the technically-primitive but properly maintained
and trusted system we had before the 1960s.
David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> wrote:
On 03/05/2026 13:17, JMB99 wrote:
I was told years ago that mobile phone base stations
I think they were drawing an analogy between a phone battery and its charger, and a UPS, not about the power at the base station.
Yes - with a mobile you have two ways to make calls. Either via the mobile network, or via Wifi Calling and your broadband. If either one of those networks is up you can call. That gives additional resiliency over a landline phone which relies on the broadband to stay operational. The phone will stay working if the power goes off, and you have the option to take it somewhere else that might have a working signal even if the signal at your location is gone. Plus infrastructure to charge it is common now (can be charged from your car, a cheap power bank, a small solar panel, a USB socket at a shop/neighbour/etc that does have power, on a bus/train/... etc etc)
Of course the wifi calling option requires some local battery backup at your end, but the mobile part is still useful if not. Plus with satellite SMS
and satellite calling becoming available, you may still be able to use it even if all the local networks are down.
The PSTN phone is pretty limited - it works as long as the exchange
batteries last, but once they're flat it's useless.
The PSTN phone is pretty limited - it works as long as the exchange
batteries last, but once they're flat it's useless.
It appears you have little knowledge of the strenuous efforts that went
into ensuring the POTS system was reliable under the worst conditions
for the best part of 80 years. If you read through back-numbers of
POEEJ (particularly around the WWII period) there was a well-justified
pride in giving a reliable service which is completely lacking now.
The worn-out undefunded wreck, which we now think of as POTS, bears
little resemblance to the technically-primitive but properly maintained
and trusted system we had before the 1960s.
On 03/05/2026 13:17, JMB99 wrote:
I was told years ago that mobile phone base stations
I think they were drawing an analogy between a phone battery and its charger, and a UPS, not about the power at the base station.
That gives additional resiliency over aOr you can invest in a router that falls back to mobile if the broadband
landline phone which relies on the broadband to stay operational.
On 03/05/2026 13:17, JMB99 wrote:
I was told years ago that mobile phone base stations
I think they were drawing an analogy between a phone battery and its charger, and a UPS, not about the power at the base station.
The worn-out undefunded wreck, which we now think of as POTS, bears
little resemblance to the technically-primitive but properly maintained
and trusted system we had before the 1960s.
I am not sure what that means?
Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
It appears you have little knowledge of the strenuous efforts that
went into ensuring the POTS system was reliable under the worst
conditions for the best part of 80 years. If you read through
back-numbers of POEEJ (particularly around the WWII period) there was
a well-justified pride in giving a reliable service which is
completely lacking now.
The worn-out undefunded wreck, which we now think of as POTS, bears
little resemblance to the technically-primitive but properly
maintained and trusted system we had before the 1960s.
My point is that that was then. Wired telephones were the only
(practical) comms, and when something is important for national
security then you put a lot of effort into making it robust.
Now everyone has a battery-backed multi-network wireless comms
terminal in their pocket, and so that is the easiest route forward to
making a robust comms system that works in times of crisis.
Keeping old-tech going that increasingly fewer people use does not do
that job. First, many people no longer have a landline phone.
Second, for those that do, they are not ready for a crisis - even if
they have a wired POTS connection with a battery at the exchange,
they're using a DECT handset that'll die as soon as the power goes
out.
You can solve that problem in the short term with battery backup
boxes, and in the longer term with house batteries (something I think
we'll increasingly see, for national defence and resilience as well as
lower bills). But people are no longer turning to landline phones in
time of crisis, so that effort is like backing the lame horse in the
race.
I'm not saying the 'digital voice' switch hasn't been an utter
disaster: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2026/may/02/landline-phone-users-voice-fears-over-digital-switchover
but whatever you can do to make that better, keeping going with POTS
is just not practical long term. For one thing, buying new POTS kit
is going to be increasingly difficult as the world moves on.
but whatever you can do to make that better, keeping going with POTS is
just not practical long term. For one thing, buying new POTS kit is going
to be increasingly difficult as the world moves on.
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
[...]
but whatever you can do to make that better, keeping going with POTS is just not practical long term. For one thing, buying new POTS kit is going to be increasingly difficult as the world moves on.
That sounds a bit like the argument that was made in favour of a
particular brand of sound-editing software (whuch I shall call 'X') that
was bloated, expensive and difficult to use, when there were many better alternatives
Q: Why is 'X' used in all the professional studios?
A: Because 'X' is used in all the professional studios, so you can go
to any studio and use it.
Q: Why are we getting rid of POTS?
A: Because we are getting rid of POTS, so it will be more difficult and expensive to use in future.
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have
to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual suspects
for that.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
If your mobile does Wifi Calling, you can call using your mobile minutes and your broadband for backhaul.
Although for making calls I do prefer using DECT handsets over awkward squares of glass. (yes, I know hands free and headsets etc are available)
If you read through back-numbers of
POEEJ (particularly around the WWII period)
On 04/05/2026 16:41, Richmond wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone?
Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have
to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
20p a year if you don't use it, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
Should be included in the above.
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have
to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are expensive VOIP calls.
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have
to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are expensive VOIP calls.
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have >> to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
So, you too have misread the question and calculated the cost of a SIM
card, not the cost of running a mobile phone.
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual suspects for that.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
If your mobile does Wifi Calling, you can call using your mobile minutes and
your broadband for backhaul.
Yes, that's what I meant. My mobile costs more than VOIP but as the
signal is poor it uses VOIP anyway. So I am paying 3p for a VOIP call, I might as well use VOIP and pay 1p.
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
[...]
but whatever you can do to make that better, keeping going with POTS is
just not practical long term. For one thing, buying new POTS kit is going >> to be increasingly difficult as the world moves on.
That sounds a bit like the argument that was made in favour of a
particular brand of sound-editing software (whuch I shall call 'X') that
was bloated, expensive and difficult to use, when there were many better alternatives
Q: Why is 'X' used in all the professional studios?
A: Because 'X' is used in all the professional studios, so you can go
to any studio and use it.
Q: Why are we getting rid of POTS?
A: Because we are getting rid of POTS, so it will be more difficult and expensive to use in future.
On 04/05/2026 16:41, Richmond wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
20p a year if you don't use it, -u40 a year if you only talk to other giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone?
Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup
plan you have to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the
cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
So, you too have misread the question and calculated the cost of a
SIM card, not the cost of running a mobile phone.
I bought an HMD 110 new for -u29. It does 4G and VoLTE. I don't use
it as my primary phone but if I would if I only wanted calls and
texts. Pay a little more and you get wifi support and wifi calling.
All my other phones have been bought used for a fraction of the new
price.
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual
suspects for that.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls
are expensive VOIP calls.
If your mobile does Wifi Calling, you can call using your mobile
minutes and your broadband for backhaul.
Yes, that's what I meant. My mobile costs more than VOIP but as the
signal is poor it uses VOIP anyway. So I am paying 3p for a VOIP
call, I might as well use VOIP and pay 1p.
My VOIP costs more than my mobile minutes, but I prefer using the DECT handset so I tend to pay the extra to use VOIP.
(also, being on a call while wanting to access things on your
smartphone is annoying, especially if they do things like text you
security codes)
Theo
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have >>> to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
So, you too have misread the question and calculated the cost of a SIM
card, not the cost of running a mobile phone.
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual suspects
for that.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
If your mobile does Wifi Calling, you can call using your mobile minutes and >> your broadband for backhaul.
Yes, that's what I meant. My mobile costs more than VOIP but as the
signal is poor it uses VOIP anyway. So I am paying 3p for a VOIP call, I might as well use VOIP and pay 1p.
On 04/05/2026 16:41, Richmond wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have
to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
-a20p a year if you don't use it, -u40 a year if you only talk to other giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
-aShould be included in the above.
On 04/05/2026 19:26, Chris Green wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 16:41, Richmond wrote:However if your mobile phone cost -u500 (which isn't outlandish) that
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have >>>> to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
20p a year if you don't use it, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
takes 2500 years that the handset would have to survive.
-u500 for an alternative to a house phone is outlandish.
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have
to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
So, you too have misread the question and calculated the cost of a SIM card, not the cost of running a mobile phone.
I bought an HMD 110 new for -u29. It does 4G and VoLTE.
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual suspects
for that.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are expensive VOIP calls.
If your mobile does Wifi Calling, you can call using your mobile minutes and your broadband for backhaul.
Although for making calls I do prefer using DECT handsets over awkward squares of glass. (yes, I know hands free and headsets etc are available)
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 16:41, Richmond wrote:However if your mobile phone cost -u500 (which isn't outlandish) that
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude
estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have >>> to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
20p a year if you don't use it, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
takes 2500 years that the handset would have to survive.
You can still order a phone without broadband. It will cost more than broadband phone but you can still order it.
If you just want a mobile for backup then you can run one for much
much less. Argus have a Nokia mobile for -u19.99
https://www.argos.co.uk/product/7568590
if you then put -u10 on a GiffGaff account you just need to make one chargeable call or send an SMS every 6 months. GiffGaff
e-mail. Assuming you send an SMS your -u10 will last you 50 years.
David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> writes:
You can still order a phone without broadband. It will cost more than
broadband phone but you can still order it.
If you just want a mobile for backup then you can run one for much
much less. Argus have a Nokia mobile for -u19.99
https://www.argos.co.uk/product/7568590
if you then put -u10 on a GiffGaff account you just need to make one
chargeable call or send an SMS every 6 months. GiffGaff
e-mail. Assuming you send an SMS your -u10 will last you 50 years.
That advert says the network is vodafone. And it is supplied without a charger, so you would have to buy a charger. Presumably you wouldn't have
one if you were elderly and being forced off your landline.
I can't work out if there is a contract in that price or if it is locked
to vodafone.
It's too late for me to order a phone without broadband as I already had
a phone with broadband and it was ADSL2 and my understanding was if I
tried to do anything with the phone line, ADSL2 would be disconnected.
My point is that that was then. Wired telephones were the only (practical) comms, and when something is important for national security then you put a lot of effort into making it robust.
I remember the delicious smell of urine in the phone boxes bedecked with adverts for French lessons...
Pretty much correct. I would have thought you could get full fibre 50 for
25 quid a month. probably more than adsl. I would have thought the zen
offer of Full Fibre 100 at 28 quid plus phone at 5 quid a month would be less than BT.
David Woolley <david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid> wrote:
On 03/05/2026 13:17, JMB99 wrote:
I was told years ago that mobile phone base stations
I think they were drawing an analogy between a phone battery and its
charger, and a UPS, not about the power at the base station.
Yes - with a mobile you have two ways to make calls. Either via the mobile network, or via Wifi Calling and your broadband. If either one of those networks is up you can call. That gives additional resiliency over a landline phone which relies on the broadband to stay operational. The phone will stay working if the power goes off, and you have the option to take it somewhere else that might have a working signal even if the signal at your location is gone. Plus infrastructure to charge it is common now (can be charged from your car, a cheap power bank, a small solar panel, a USB socket at a shop/neighbour/etc that does have power, on a bus/train/... etc etc)
Of course the wifi calling option requires some local battery backup at your end, but the mobile part is still useful if not. Plus with satellite SMS
and satellite calling becoming available, you may still be able to use it even if all the local networks are down.
The PSTN phone is pretty limited - it works as long as the exchange
batteries last, but once they're flat it's useless.
Theo
On 04/05/2026 12:10, Theo wrote:
My point is that that was then. Wired telephones were the only (practical) >> comms, and when something is important for national security then you put a >> lot of effort into making it robust.
Nothing wrong with "new tech" but sometimes "old tech" still works well.
Bit like the way TV companies got rid of teletext without having a
better system.
On 04/05/2026 21:30, David Wade wrote:
Pretty much correct. I would have thought you could get full fibre 50
for 25 quid a month. probably more than adsl. I would have thought
the zen offer of Full Fibre 100 at 28 quid plus phone at 5 quid a
month would be less than BT.
For me, openreach Zen 105 is -u33 + -u7.50, EE 150 -u29 + -u5 (ignoring setup fees, annual increases, inclusive landline calls etc.)
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum.Cost me around -u40 including battery replacements and repairs
-u500 for an alternative to a house phone is outlandish.If the alternative to the housephone is doing wifi calling, then it
isn't the alternative to the landline, it is the fibre broadband which
is the alternative to the landline.
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or has already gone in many countries. Anything we do on our small islands isn't going to stop that.
Yes we can stand up our own POTS manufacturing industry just like we can build our own steam locomotives, but without a global market to source components from (in particular copper line equipment and exchange plant) it will get yet more expensive. And that's to support a network that an ever diminishing number of people actually use.
So the public are ditching landlines, most of those who have one are elderly, so given the state of the NHS I would say that for home use the landline is dead in the water....
On 04/05/2026 12:10, Theo wrote:
My point is that that was then.-a Wired telephones were the only
(practical)
comms, and when something is important for national security then you
put a
lot of effort into making it robust.
Nothing wrong with "new tech" but sometimes "old tech" still works well.
Bit like the way TV companies got rid of teletext without having a
better system.
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or has already gone in many countries. Anything we do on our small islands isn't going to stop that.
In many countries POTS never started at all. It was far cheaper to build
base stations and sell smart phones than to lay vulnerable copper wires.
Word of mouth was better than teletext.
I would have to ask Theo, have you ever seen the size of the support
battery in most PSTN exchanges? Originally they were designed to support Strowger, then along came Crossbar, System X, System Y etc etc, but the battery banks were so big and heavy they just left them where they are
and looked after them.
How do they get the mains power to operate then if there aren't any
copper wires?
Many remote mobile base stations seem to have a generator that runs to
charge the batteries then shuts down. Often combined with a small
wind turbine and solar panel. Not sure about mobile phone operators
but the railway had at least one (probably more) that had a heat
source with thermocouples charging a battery.
There are Calorgas bottles which they change periodically.
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Has anyone calculated how much it costs to run a mobile phone? Claude estimates -u250--u450 per annum. So if mobile is the backup plan you have to add that on to VOIP. And you have to add on the cost of fibre too.
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Spusu?
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual suspects for that.
Yes, but your hardware is **way** more expensive and goes out of date
much faster. A POTS phone from the 1930s will still probably work
with a 'real' landline. For a handset that works on Spusu (or
whatever you happen to use) you'll need to replace it every few years
or so.
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are expensive VOIP calls.
If your mobile does Wifi Calling, you can call using your mobile minutes and
your broadband for backhaul.
More expense, the disater that is 4G which works with some networks,
if you happen to have the right handset which works with VoWifi etc.
means that if you want to change anything it will likely stop working.
Although for making calls I do prefer using DECT handsets over awkward squares of glass. (yes, I know hands free and headsets etc are available)
Aha! There's a luddite in there/ :-)
I would have to ask Theo, have you ever seen the size of the support
battery in most PSTN exchanges? Originally they were designed to support Strowger, then along came Crossbar, System X, System Y etc etc, but the battery banks were so big and heavy they just left them where they are
and looked after them.
Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
More expense, the disater that is 4G which works with some networks,
if you happen to have the right handset which works with VoWifi etc.
means that if you want to change anything it will likely stop working.
This appears to be a primarily UK disaster - in other countries they don't seem to have such problems.
That's not very useful for us poor UK residents! :-) I discovered the problem as 3G began to disappear, my phone could no longer make calls.
Trying to find out whether any particular phone would work on my
network was basically impossible. The only approach appears to be to
use a phone listed by your particular provider as one that works. This
can vary from MVNO to MVNO even on the same network.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or has already gone in >>> many countries. Anything we do on our small islands isn't going to stop >>> that.In many countries POTS never started at all. It was far cheaper to build
base stations and sell smart phones than to lay vulnerable copper wires.
How do they get the mains power to operate then if there aren't any
copper wires?
On 04/05/2026 12:10, Theo wrote:
My point is that that was then.-a Wired telephones were the only
(practical)
comms, and when something is important for national security then you
put a
lot of effort into making it robust.
Nothing wrong with "new tech" but sometimes "old tech" still works well.
Bit like the way TV companies got rid of teletext without having a
better system.
On 05/05/2026 12:13, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or has already >>gone in > many countries. Anything we do on our small islands isn't >>going to stop > that. > In many countries POTS never started at all. It >>was far cheaper to build base stations and sell smart phones than to lay >>vulnerable copper wires.
How do they get the mains power to operate then if there aren't any
copper wires?
I really didn't think you were that stupid.
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> writes:
20p a year if you don't use it
, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
--
Should be included in the above.
I don't know what you mean there.
Pretty much correct. I would have thought you could get full fibre 50
for 25 quid a month. probably more than adsl. I would have thought the
zen offer of Full Fibre 100 at 28 quid plus phone at 5 quid a month
would be less than BT.
dave
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Good luck getting a landline with unlimited calls from the usual suspects
for that.
Although for making calls I do prefer using DECT handsets over awkward squares of glass. (yes, I know hands free and headsets etc are available)
Theo
On 2026/5/4 17:46:55, Richmond wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> writes:
[]
20p a year if you don't use it
Who's that with? Less than my 2 pounds per 180 days (min, spend 10).
, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
Is that one payment of 72, or 6 a month? (Again, who with?)
AND you can still get TVs that have Teletext capability albeit only the
BBC transmit it now AFAIK.
On 05/05/2026 23:33, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Oh, interesting. Whenever I've looked into them, I've always got the
On 2026/5/4 17:46:55, Richmond wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> writes:
[]
20p a year if you don't use it
Who's that with? Less than my 2 pounds per 180 days (min, spend 10).
giffgaff.
Is that what they call "goodie bags"? Do you get to keep the same numberIs that one payment of 72, or 6 a month? (Again, who with?), -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data). >>
-u6 a month with giffgaff (but you could leave gaps between the months)
On 2026/5/4 21:30:7, David Wade wrote:
[]
Pretty much correct. I would have thought you could get full fibre 50
for 25 quid a month. probably more than adsl. I would have thought the
zen offer of Full Fibre 100 at 28 quid plus phone at 5 quid a month
would be less than BT.
How many minutes are included in that 5 a month?
dave
John
Oh, interesting. Whenever I've looked into them, I've always got the impression that there was something about them that expired if not used.
-u6 a month with giffgaff (but you could leave gaps between the
months)
Is that what they call "goodie bags"? Do you get to keep the same number
if you leave a gap?
On 2026/5/6 9:3:29, Nick Finnigan wrote:
-u6 a month with giffgaff (but you could leave gaps between the months)
Is that what they call "goodie bags"? Do you get to keep the same number
if you leave a gap?
On 2026/5/6 9:3:29, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 05/05/2026 23:33, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/5/4 17:46:55, Richmond wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> writes:
[]
20p a year if you don't use it
Who's that with? Less than my 2 pounds per 180 days (min, spend 10).
giffgaff.
Oh, interesting. Whenever I've looked into them, I've always got the impression that there was something about them that expired if not used.
Is that one payment of 72, or 6 a month? (Again, who with?), -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data). >>>
-u6 a month with giffgaff (but you could leave gaps between the months)
Is that what they call "goodie bags"? Do you get to keep the same number
if you leave a gap?
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are
expensive VOIP calls.
How much and with whom is your VoIP?
Why should copper wires be such a problem for telecomms signals when
much biigger copper wires are needed to power the alternatives?
On 05/05/2026 22:46, Woody wrote:
AND you can still get TVs that have Teletext capability albeit only
the BBC transmit it now AFAIK.
Teletext is a service on analogue Tv so BBC do not transmit it.
There is "Text" service incorporated into digital TV but it is not
teletext and very limited as well as not used by many people. It did
not have many of the features of teletext.
On 2026/5/4 17:46:15, Theo wrote:
[]
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Does that data allow tethering?
On 06/05/2026 10:16, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/5/6 9:3:29, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 05/05/2026 23:33, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/5/4 17:46:55, Richmond wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> writes:
[]
20p a year if you don't use it
Who's that with? Less than my 2 pounds per 180 days (min, spend 10).
giffgaff.
Oh, interesting. Whenever I've looked into them, I've always got the
impression that there was something about them that expired if not used.
It does that is why its 20p if you don-|t use it. You need to send a text every 180 days @ 10p per text, so in practice might stretch to 30p. They
seem to e-mail you a reminder, so you need some credit, but so long as
you text every 180 days you lose nothing. You can make calls etc but
they are expensive at 25p a minute, unless you have a current goody bag.
Is that what they call "goodie bags"? Do you get to keep the same number
, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
Is that one payment of 72, or 6 a month? (Again, who with?)
-u6 a month with giffgaff (but you could leave gaps between the months) >>
if you leave a gap?
Yes, you can select a pure a pay-as-you go service, you just put a 6
quid goody bag on when you need it. If you don't pay you keep the
number. Just need one top-up every 6 Months to keep the SIM active.
Dave
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> writes:
As there is hardly any reception in my house, mobile phone calls are >>>>> expensive VOIP calls.
How much and with whom is your VoIP?
I am not sure if you are asking me this question as there are several
levels of quotation. But I have two VOIP providers, A&A and
Voipfone. Both charge about 1.5p to phone a landline. My mobile costs 3p
to phone a landline, which is quite cheap for PAYG mobile. To phone a
mobile with A&A is about 4p, whereas with O2 it is 3p, so there it
depends on how bad I think the reception is going to be and how much it matters.
But anyway the thing people are overlooking is that people with a mobile phone typically use a smart phone. And smart phones cost money, they
have to be replaced because the batteries die or the updates cease.
The question is, how did we end up in this situation? In the early days
of PAYG mobile they were expensive, then they became cheap for a while,
now they are expensive again. Maybe 15-25ppm. So people with mobiles
paid a subscription.
But it was also expensive to phone a mobile from a> landline, sopeople started paying for all inclusive calls. But you
don't want to pay two subscriptions, so people started to drop the
landline, as you can't take it with you when you go out.
The last time I looked Virgin Media was charging about 18ppm for
landline calls outside a package. And that is going to be the same with
VOIP. It is a total rip-off.
On 06/05/2026 00:36, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/5/4 21:30:7, David Wade wrote:
[]
Pretty much correct. I would have thought you could get full fibre 50
for 25 quid a month. probably more than adsl. I would have thought the
zen offer of Full Fibre 100 at 28 quid plus phone at 5 quid a month
would be less than BT.
How many minutes are included in that 5 a month?
Only 1000
dave
John
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:The usual "fair usage" woffle. (Though these days anyone who manages
On 2026/5/4 17:46:15, Theo wrote:
[]
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Does that data allow tethering?
They don't block it, but in the T&C:
6.1 Responsible use for unlimited voice, texts and data
All our plans are for personal and non-commercial use in mobile handheld devices only. The SIM cards
should not be used as an alternative to home broadband. If you download, send, []
Can you "hold" goody bags and stay on PAYG, or if you have a goodie bag
and make a call/send a text, does that automatically start any GB you have?
(For the batteries, or cells - I wouldn't buy one of the sort where you
can't replace the cell.)
Phones that have easily changeable batteries are going to be rare
On 2026/5/6 9:34:31, David Wade wrote:
On 06/05/2026 10:16, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/5/6 9:3:29, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 05/05/2026 23:33, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/5/4 17:46:55, Richmond wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> writes:
[]
20p a year if you don't use it
Who's that with? Less than my 2 pounds per 180 days (min, spend 10).
giffgaff.
Oh, interesting. Whenever I've looked into them, I've always got the
impression that there was something about them that expired if not used.
It does that is why its 20p if you don-|t use it. You need to send a text
every 180 days @ 10p per text, so in practice might stretch to 30p. They
Got it.
seem to e-mail you a reminder, so you need some credit, but so long asThat's what I was remembering - that if you made a single call/sent a
you text every 180 days you lose nothing. You can make calls etc but
they are expensive at 25p a minute, unless you have a current goody bag.
single text, it cut a hole in the current goodie bag, which then leaked
out even if you used it no more. (More below)
, -u40 a year if you only talk to other
giffgaff users, -u72 for unlimited calls and SMS, (if no mobile data).
Is that one payment of 72, or 6 a month? (Again, who with?)
-u6 a month with giffgaff (but you could leave gaps between the months)
Is that what they call "goodie bags"? Do you get to keep the same number >>> if you leave a gap?
Yes, you can select a pure a pay-as-you go service, you just put a 6
quid goody bag on when you need it. If you don't pay you keep the
number. Just need one top-up every 6 Months to keep the SIM active.
Dave
I didn't know, or had forgotten, that they offer true PAYG (however expensive) as well as "goody bags".
Can you "hold" goody bags and stay on PAYG, or if you have a goodie bag
and make a call/send a text, does that automatically start any GB you have?
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 05/05/2026 12:13, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I really didn't think you were that stupid.
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or has alreadygone in > many countries. Anything we do on our small islands isn't
going to stop > that. > In many countries POTS never started at all. It >>>> was far cheaper to build base stations and sell smart phones than to lay >>>> vulnerable copper wires.
How do they get the mains power to operate then if there aren't any
copper wires?
Why should copper wires be such a problem for telecomms signals when
much biigger copper wires are needed to power the alternatives?
On 05/05/2026 23:29, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Why should copper wires be such a problem for telecomms signals when
much biigger copper wires are needed to power the alternatives?
Some quick thoughts
Individual wires to each customer versus shared wires to sub-stations.
Copper versus aluminium (at least for the main distribution system
aluminium is too corrosion prone for telecoms, although it has been used). Operate at low voltages, so safe to steal, versus 66kV to each community. Power distribution at high voltages means that relatively thin wires can
be used in terms of the conductor area for end customers.
Phone wires are thin, so corrode through quickly and currents are not
large enough to break through corrosion and joints easily.
I suspect the communities that went direct to mobile use much less mains power per head, than the first world.
Power can be generated locally.
On 2026/5/6 13:50:20, Theo wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/5/4 17:46:15, Theo wrote:
[]
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Does that data allow tethering?
They don't block it, but in the T&C:
6.1 Responsible use for unlimited voice, texts and dataThe usual "fair usage" woffle. (Though these days anyone who manages
All our plans are for personal and non-commercial use in mobile handheld devices only. The SIM cards
should not be used as an alternative to home broadband. If you download, send, []
home broadband on under 1G a month is lucky.)
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or has already gone in many countries. Anything we do on our small islands isn't going to stop that.
In many countries POTS never started at all. It was far cheaper to build base stations and sell smart phones than to lay vulnerable copper wires.
Likewise FTTP is the obvious way to go of there is no pre-existent
copper network
Yes we can stand up our own POTS manufacturing industry just like we can build our own steam locomotives, but without a global market to source components from (in particular copper line equipment and exchange plant) it will get yet more expensive. And that's to support a network that an ever diminishing number of people actually use.
Some people want to go back to steam trains, too.
On 06/05/2026 15:34, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
Can you "hold" goody bags and stay on PAYG, or if you have a goodie bag
and make a call/send a text, does that automatically start any GB you have?
They start when you buy one, so yes a goody bag expires, but I seldom
use the phone with the giffgaff SIM in for anything other than texting
so just 10p from the 5 quid I put on when I bough the SIM.
Whilst a goody bag is sold as "30gb" what you are buying is a 1 month
capped contract..
Dave
David Woolley wrote:
Phones that have easily changeable batteries are going to be rare
They're going to become common again by Feb 2027 as the EU is mandating batteries changeable by end-users with normal tools, there might be a
few wrinkles compared to the old days ...
On 2026/5/6 16:38:7, Andy Burns wrote:
David Woolley wrote:Hmm. And UK landlines off by end January. Coincidence? :-)
Phones that have easily changeable batteries are going to be rare
They're going to become common again by Feb 2027 as the EU is mandating
batteries changeable by end-users with normal tools, there might be a
few wrinkles compared to the old days ...
They start when you buy one, so yes a goody bag expires, but I seldom
use the phone with the giffgaff SIM in for anything other than texting
so just 10p from the 5 quid I put on when I bough the SIM.
Whilst a goody bag is sold as "30gb" what you are buying is a 1 month
capped contract..
On 06/05/2026 16:53, David Wade wrote:
They start when you buy one, so yes a goody bag expires, but I seldom
If you already have one running, the next one doesn't start until the running one completes (I think you can force an early completion, when
your remaining data falls below a certain level).
use the phone with the giffgaff SIM in for anything other than texting
so just 10p from the 5 quid I put on when I bough the SIM.
Whilst a goody bag is sold as "30gb" what you are buying is a 1 month
capped contract..
Yes.-a They seem to have been caught out on that one and you now have to agree to the contract.-a The catch is that contract has come to mean a
long term commitment, rather than the strict definition (offer,
acceptance, consideration, etc.), although I think you are stressing the duration, which isn't part of the legal definition.
In this case there is one payment, it lasts one month, you get a service that allows you talk time, texts and data. How is that not a one month contract?
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:I used a SPUSU SIM (Unlimited calls and 5 gig of data) in a 4G router
On 2026/5/6 13:50:20, Theo wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:The usual "fair usage" woffle. (Though these days anyone who manages
On 2026/5/4 17:46:15, Theo wrote:
[]
I pay -u2.99 a month for unlimited calls, texts and 1GB of data.
Does that data allow tethering?
They don't block it, but in the T&C:
6.1 Responsible use for unlimited voice, texts and data
All our plans are for personal and non-commercial use in mobile handheld devices only. The SIM cards
should not be used as an alternative to home broadband. If you download, send, []
home broadband on under 1G a month is lucky.)
Also to note that when tethering you *are* using the SIM in a mobile
handheld device. You just happen to using it as a relay for a larger device which you may or may not be holding in your other hand.
I think this section is so that you don't use it for commercial purposes
or in IoT devices. They might be fine with the latter for data, but some send a lot of SMS and that might be something they don't like, or use it for 24/7 audio streaming or whatever.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or hasIn many countries POTS never started at all. It was far cheaper to
already gone in many countries. Anything we do on our small
islands isn't going to stop that.
build base stations and sell smart phones than to lay vulnerable
copper wires.
Likewise FTTP is the obvious way to go of there is no pre-existent
copper network
Indeed. And one bit of FTTP plus a base station remains a lot
cheaper than a full buildout.
Yes we can stand up our own POTS manufacturing industry just like
we can build our own steam locomotives, but without a global
market to source components from (in particular copper line
equipment and exchange plant) it will get yet more expensive.
And that's to support a network that an ever diminishing number
of people actually use.
Some people want to go back to steam trains, too.
The UK is actually a world leader in building steam locomotives. It
is not a large number (there are a number of volunteer projects
ongoing but there are also companies you can order off the peg steam
locos from and they do sometimes have customers). But that's the
kind of activity level you get when everyone else is using more
modern tech.
Theo
On 06 May 2026 18:04:49 +0100 (BST)
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or hasIn many countries POTS never started at all. It was far cheaper to
already gone in many countries. Anything we do on our small
islands isn't going to stop that.
build base stations and sell smart phones than to lay vulnerable
copper wires.
Likewise FTTP is the obvious way to go of there is no pre-existent
copper network
Indeed. And one bit of FTTP plus a base station remains a lot
cheaper than a full buildout.
Yes we can stand up our own POTS manufacturing industry just like
we can build our own steam locomotives, but without a global
market to source components from (in particular copper line
equipment and exchange plant) it will get yet more expensive.
And that's to support a network that an ever diminishing number
of people actually use.
Some people want to go back to steam trains, too.
The UK is actually a world leader in building steam locomotives. It
is not a large number (there are a number of volunteer projects
ongoing but there are also companies you can order off the peg steam
locos from and they do sometimes have customers). But that's the
kind of activity level you get when everyone else is using more
modern tech.
Theo
I worked in China from Oct 1988 to May 1989. The end of normal
construction of Steam Locomotives ended while I was there. They were
commonly visible on the railways.
And yes, I left China only a short time before the Tian'anmen Square Massacre.
On 09/05/2026 10:24, Davey wrote:
On 06 May 2026 18:04:49 +0100 (BST)What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour is
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/05/2026 17:50, Theo wrote:
Because 'we' is now the entire world. POTS is going or hasIn many countries POTS never started at all. It was far cheaper to
already gone in many countries. Anything we do on our small
islands isn't going to stop that.
build base stations and sell smart phones than to lay vulnerable
copper wires.
Likewise FTTP is the obvious way to go of there is no pre-existent
copper network
Indeed. And one bit of FTTP plus a base station remains a lot
cheaper than a full buildout.
Yes we can stand up our own POTS manufacturing industry just like
we can build our own steam locomotives, but without a global
market to source components from (in particular copper line
equipment and exchange plant) it will get yet more expensive.
And that's to support a network that an ever diminishing number
of people actually use.
Some people want to go back to steam trains, too.
The UK is actually a world leader in building steam locomotives. It
is not a large number (there are a number of volunteer projects
ongoing but there are also companies you can order off the peg steam
locos from and they do sometimes have customers). But that's the
kind of activity level you get when everyone else is using more
modern tech.
Theo
I worked in China from Oct 1988 to May 1989. The end of normal
construction of Steam Locomotives ended while I was there. They were
commonly visible on the railways.
And yes, I left China only a short time before the Tian'anmen Square
Massacre.
cheap and steam lives on.
On Sat, 9 May 2026 12:02:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 09/05/2026 10:24, Davey wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour is >cheap and steam lives on.
I worked in China from Oct 1988 to May 1989. The end of normal
construction of Steam Locomotives ended while I was there. They were
commonly visible on the railways.
And yes, I left China only a short time before the Tian'anmen Square
Massacre.
Barely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines,
and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the state-owned network.
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour isBarely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines,
cheap and steam lives on.
and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the state-owned network.
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour isBarely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines,
cheap and steam lives on.
and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the
state-owned network.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
On 11/05/2026 13:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour isBarely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines,
cheap and steam lives on.
and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the
state-owned network.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
Even that is changing. China has big problems with air pollution from
coal. Remember at the Three Gorges Dam it has the largest hydro power station in the world....
Dave
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
On 11/05/2026 13:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour is >>>>> cheap and steam lives on.Barely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines,
and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the
state-owned network.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
Even that is changing. China has big problems with air pollution from
coal. Remember at the Three Gorges Dam it has the largest hydro power
station in the world....
Dave
With an installed capacity of 22500MW and a capacity factor of 45%, what percentage of ChinarCOs electrical demand does the Three Gorges Dam supply? How much of that demand is supplied by coal?
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
On 11/05/2026 13:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour is >>>>> cheap and steam lives on.Barely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines,
and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the
state-owned network.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
Even that is changing. China has big problems with air pollution from
coal. Remember at the Three Gorges Dam it has the largest hydro power
station in the world....
Dave
With an installed capacity of 22500MW and a capacity factor of 45%, what percentage of ChinarCOs electrical demand does the Three Gorges Dam supply? How much of that demand is supplied by coal?
On 12/05/2026 10:22, Spike wrote:
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:That is a difficult question as its changing, yes slowly but it is
On 11/05/2026 13:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour is >>>>>> cheap and steam lives on.Barely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines, >>>>> and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the >>>>> state-owned network.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
Even that is changing. China has big problems with air pollution from
coal. Remember at the Three Gorges Dam it has the largest hydro power
station in the world....
Dave
With an installed capacity of 22500MW and a capacity factor of 45%, what
percentage of ChinarCOs electrical demand does the Three Gorges Dam supply? >> How much of that demand is supplied by coal?
changing. Figures I found were 65% in 2019, down to 58% in 2024 and apparently now 55%, but of course this doesn't mean less coal, just more
of the other sources...
Dave
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:
On 12/05/2026 10:22, Spike wrote:
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:That is a difficult question as its changing, yes slowly but it is
On 11/05/2026 13:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and India labour is >>>>>>> cheap and steam lives on.Barely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines, >>>>>> and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the >>>>>> state-owned network.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
Even that is changing. China has big problems with air pollution from
coal. Remember at the Three Gorges Dam it has the largest hydro power
station in the world....
Dave
With an installed capacity of 22500MW and a capacity factor of 45%, what >>> percentage of ChinarCOs electrical demand does the Three Gorges Dam supply? >>> How much of that demand is supplied by coal?
changing. Figures I found were 65% in 2019, down to 58% in 2024 and
apparently now 55%, but of course this doesn't mean less coal, just more
of the other sources...
Dave
Either way, it shows the folly of carrying on with the costly rush in the
UK towards the Net Zero target, which even if reached will, according to
the IPCCrCOs own equations, contribute an insignificant reduction, probably measured in thousandths of a degree, to the non-issue of CO2-induced
climate change.
By all means dump coal because itrCOs polluting the cities, but not because of some mythical benefit to the climate.
I can still recall being caught, with my patents while on a car trip to LondonrCOs Oxford Street, by the great smog of 1952 suddenly descending.
On 12/05/2026 15:21, Spike wrote:
I can still recall being caught, with my patents while on a car trip to
LondonrCOs Oxford Street, by the great smog of 1952 suddenly descending.
I ended up with whooping cough asthma and permanently scarred lungs. I
was 2 years old...
On 12/05/2026 15:21, Spike wrote:
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:It is now accepted that-a the-a most 'alarming' IPCC scenarios are
On 12/05/2026 10:22, Spike wrote:Either way, it shows the folly of carrying on with the costly rush in the
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> wrote:That is a difficult question as its changing, yes slowly but it is
On 11/05/2026 13:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2026 10:56, Trolleybus wrote:
What killed steam was high labour costs. In china and IndiaBarely. I think steam in India is restricted to a few tourist lines, >>>>>>> and China just has a few mainly industrial bits, none of them on the >>>>>>> state-owned network.
labour is
cheap and steam lives on.
Probably true. But china is still mainly coal powered :-)
Even that is changing. China has big problems with air pollution from >>>>> coal. Remember at the Three Gorges Dam it has the largest hydro power >>>>> station in the world....
Dave
With an installed capacity of 22500MW and a capacity factor of 45%,
what
percentage of ChinarCOs electrical demand does the Three Gorges Dam
supply?
How much of that demand is supplied by coal?
changing. Figures I found were 65% in 2019, down to 58% in 2024 and
apparently now 55%, but of course this doesn't mean less coal, just more >>> of the other sources...
Dave
UK towards the Net Zero target, which even if reached will, according to
the IPCCrCOs own equations, contribute an insignificant reduction, probably >> measured in thousandths of a degree, to the non-issue of CO2-induced
climate change.
basically impossible since there isn't enough fossil fuel left to
generate them and its rising cost mandates moves towards either
renewables or nuclear power
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/rcp85-is-officially-dead
By all means dump coal because itrCOs polluting the cities, but not because >> of some mythical benefit to the climate.Coal is simply running out.
Chin and India are doing what they have to - relying on coal, adding
nuclear to replace it as fast as they can and throwing up wind and solar
as far as the grids will stand it, which is not very far,.
I can still recall being caught, with my patents while on a car trip toI ended up with whooping cough asthma and permanently scarred lungs. I
LondonrCOs Oxford Street, by the great smog of 1952 suddenly descending.
was 2 years old...
Renewable advocates like to say the china is bursting with renewables
but-a apart from hydropwer it isn't.
On 12/05/2026 15:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renewable advocates like to say the china is bursting with renewables
but-a apart from hydropwer it isn't.
Is it more a case that they can ignore protests from environmentalists?
On 12/05/2026 16:32, JMB99 wrote:
On 12/05/2026 15:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renewable advocates like to say the china is bursting with
renewables but-a apart from hydropwer it isn't.
Is it more a case that they can ignore protests from
environmentalists?
Certainly their policies are decided by a centralised government and
not a rabble of private interests gulling the gullible
But environmentalism is dead. Even the Greens are busy reinventing themselves as
HAMAS UK.
On Wed, 13 May 2026 09:44:56 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 12/05/2026 16:32, JMB99 wrote:
On 12/05/2026 15:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Certainly their policies are decided by a centralised government and
Renewable advocates like to say the china is bursting with
renewables but-a apart from hydropwer it isn't.
Is it more a case that they can ignore protests from
environmentalists?
not a rabble of private interests gulling the gullible
But environmentalism is dead. Even the Greens are busy reinventing
themselves as
HAMAS UK.
See, if you can, this tongue-in-cheek piece: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/05/13/zack-polanski-green-party-my-truths/
Perfect.
See, if you can, this tongue-in-cheek piece:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/05/13/zack-polanski-green-party-
my-truths/
He is even worse than the Liberal Dimwits in saying totally
contradictory things to people intending to vote for the Greens
depending on exactly who they are and what they want to hear.
By the way it is getting increasingly hard to read ye Telegraph:
You have to enable JavaScript in your blocker until the page loads, then immediately disable it before the 'give us your money' shit turns up
the cult of Nigel Farage and the Tories
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
By the way it is getting increasingly hard to read ye Telegraph:
You have to enable JavaScript in your blocker until the page loads, then
immediately disable it before the 'give us your money' shit turns up
I use a second (different) browser to cope with this issue and which has JS disabled, merely pasting into it the copied link. Works a treat for JS-scripted web sites.
On 13/05/2026 14:29, grinch wrote:
the cult of Nigel Farage and the Tories
Oh dear
How sad.
Never mind
Either way, it shows the folly of carrying on with the costly rush
in the UK towards the Net Zero target, which even if reached will,
according to the IPCCas own equations, contribute an insignificant
reduction, probably measured in thousandths of a degree, to the
non-issue of CO2-induced climate change.
By all means dump coal because itas polluting the cities, but not
because of some mythical benefit to the climate.
On 13/05/2026 14:51, Spike wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:Unfortunately that no longer works for El Torygraph, JS is needed to
By the way it is getting increasingly hard to read ye Telegraph:
You have to enable JavaScript in your blocker until the page loads, then >>> immediately disable it before the 'give us your money' shit turns up
I use a second (different) browser to cope with this issue and which has JS >> disabled, merely pasting into it the copied link. Works a treat for
JS-scripted web sites.
load the page, but once cached you can disable it for a subscription
free read.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 07:09:33 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
922 files (14,318M bytes) |
| Messages: | 264,772 |
