Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spcl85$su0$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:57:57 on Wed, 15 Dec
> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp7sjr$knq$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:32:59 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sp7qaj$6n7$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:56 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sov2qn$eb4$6@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:51 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 09/12/2021 19:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <soo710$nau$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:52:32 on Tue, 7 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  If rail tickets were the only ecommerce product I ever bought, it
>>>>>>>>>>> might,  just, be acceptable. But given that I buy from perhaps a
>>>>>>>>>>> hundred, it's a  bit rich for whatever ATOC/Fat-Controller is called
>>>>>>>>>>> this week to expect  me to bend over backwards for *their*
>>>>>>>>>>> convenience.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Far better, if we got back to the hear of this thread, they could
>>>>>>>>>>> be bothered to keep their ticket machines operational, or provide
>>>>>>>>>>> PERTIS machines, so passengers weren't forced to buy at the last
>>>>>>>>>>> minute using their mobile, stood in the rain in the station car
>>>>>>>>>>> park, on pain of a £100 fine.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You need to get yourself organised, oh, and an umbrella. Personally
>>>>>>>>>> if it is pouring with rail I'd do the on-line ordering before I got
>>>>>>>>>> out of the car.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But I don't know the TVM is broken until I get to it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Doesn't stop you going back to the car to get out f the rain or even
>>>>>>>> sheltering under the station canopy while you order the ticket. No need
>>>>>>>> to stand in the rain.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The car is parked at least a hundred yards away, the station has no
>>>>>>> canopy, and the train is due in five minutes (which would be plenty of
>>>>>>> time to buy a ticket from a working TVM).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Won’t you get wet using the TVM?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but only for about twenty seconds.
>>>>
>>>> No, you’ll get wet for the 5 minutes you’re waiting for the
>>>> train. Next.
>>>
>>> The time interval in question is when one puts down the umbrella,
>>> because I don't have three arms.
>>
>> I’ve not come across a TVM which requires 2 arms to operate it. Can you
>> explain?
>
> At the very least, one hand to hold my wallet, and another to open it
> and extract the Credit Card and pay. That's assuming I can actually get
> to the wallet in my inside pocket of the raincoat, one-handed.

So you don’t get the card out of the wallet and put it somewhere accessible
before you get out of the car? OK.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spfbkl$pf8$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:32:21 on Thu, 16 Dec
> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <spcs1d$dru$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:53:49 on Wed, 15 Dec
>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <4KF5hmunlMuhFAZN@perry.uk>, at 16:42:15 on Tue, 14 Dec 2021,
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I keep meaning to study the BBC Breakfast (etc) clocks in more
>>>>>>>>>> detail to see how far off they are, especially as one of their Covid
>>>>>>>>>> geeks has a digital clock on the wall behind him. I have two adjacent
>>>>>>>>>> TVs, one on Freesat, the other on Freeview, and they are about two
>>>>>>>>>> seconds apart.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One has the signal travelling a lot further than the other. Add in he
>>>>>>>>> digital delays on each tx chain (and rx chain) and you are going to get
>>>>>>>>> noticeable variations between nominally the same stations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Doesn't superficially explain why the terrestrial version is lagging
>>>>>>>> the satellite (although the explanation has to be the terrestrial
>>>>>>>> transmitter is getting a satellite feed, and is adding in a decode/
>>>>>>>> recode delay). It's about two seconds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are they the same model of TV/decoder? Do they have a PVR function that
>>>>>>> might be intercepting the signal before displaying it? I’m not
>>>>>>> familiar
>>>>>>> with digital TV or audio broadcasting but I do just about enough about
>>>>>>> media streaming to be dangerous.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Different brands, and it's the satellite one which has the PVR function
>>>>>> built in (but annoyingly, requires an external USB HDD, and won't
>>>>>> recognise an external thumb drive[1]). But I do have a "separates"
>>>>>> Freeview PVR plugged into the terrestrial one, so later I'll see what
>>>>>> the timings are on that, compared to the Freesat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly the same amount of delay. Two seconds (or however long it takes
>>>>> the announcer to say "and on BBC iPlayer").
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a helpful thing to measure because they always pause after that.
>>>>>
>>>>> So the satellite TV goes "blah blah blah trailer crap crap crap
>>>>> available live and on BBC iPlayer [silence]", and the terrestrial TV
>>>>> echoes over the silence "and on BBC iPlayer".
>>>>
>>>> Slight diversion: on the occasions when there is a clock on screen,
>>>> if it’s
>>>> showing seconds how far are they away from GMT/UTC/whathaveyou?
>>>
>>> Haven't got to that yet, not least because they are usually reluctant to
>>> show clocks with seconds on them.
>>>
>>> But the dum-di-dum-di-pling-plog <lets fill in a routine minute-long
>>> pregnant pause waiting for the top of the hour> dum-di-dum-di-pling-plog
>>> screen, on whatever BBC 24hrs is called this week, does have a seconds
>>> countdown.
>>>
>>> But it's actually difficult to closely *watch* screens in two different
>>> rooms at the same time, whereas I *can* listen to two sets of sound.
>>
>> I wasn’t thinking you might watch them both, but compare each to, say, the
>> time on your phone or a portable computing device. The device’s clock is
>> likely to be synchonised with NTP or some similar protocol, and thus be
>> pretty close to UTC.
>
> I agree the phone time will be accurate, but with the time on the TV
> only clicking over in minutes, that means constantly looking back and
> forth between those two, while also expecting to be able to count the
> interval to at least as good as 0.5 secs.
>
> I suspect what it's going to need is putting a digital time display in
> front of the TV, filming the pair, and then watching it afterwards.

Watch one, with the time displayed on the phone as it approaches the
minute. See how long after the phone flips from :59 to :00 the minute
display on the TV changes. Move to the other room and the do the same a
minute later.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>
> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
> are forwarding one they bought for you.

It would seem that it is less-used from communication from businesses
(currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS), but I don't see
why (unless there's 'better' protection against messages from 'unknown'
numbers).

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sp1v69$r5q$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:40:09 on Sat, 11 Dec
> 2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:51:38 -0000 (UTC)
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>
>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar social media
>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>
>>> Well, until you give in to the entreaties to install Adobe Acrobat Reader
>>> DC or whatever it’s called, which keeps trying to log you into Adobe’s
>>> systems every time it opens. I deleted it. No, I can’t fill in PDF forms
>>> any more. I don’t care.
>>
>> And I'm not interested in installing some Billy No Mates data trawling garbage
>> from facebook.
>
> In which case you'll be blissfully ignorant (now there's a first, NOT)
> that the people you communicate with on WhatsApp are *only* your mates.
>
> That's what makes it such a useful app (no outsiders, spammers etc).
>

That must be a change made since 2018.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 21:14:17 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
<anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>
>It would seem that it is less-used from communication from businesses
>(currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS), but I don't see
>why (unless there's 'better' protection against messages from 'unknown'
>numbers).

If you get a WhatsApp message from someone not already in your contact
list, then you are given the immediate option to block them and/or
report it as unwanted. That's built in to the system, and is effective -
a blocked sender cannot contact you, and a sender who gets too many
reports will have their account disabled.

That facility isn't available in SMS, where reporting a spammer requires
forwarding the message to your provider and blocking can't be done at
the network level.

Also, as I've said elsewhere in this discussion, access to WhatsApp's
API (which is necessary in order to send bulk messages to large numbers
of people simultaneously) is strictly controlled, whereas anybody can
just buy bulk SMS from a large number of providers with few moral qualms
about what you'll do with them.

Mark

On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>
> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from businesses
> (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS), but I don't see
> why (unless there's 'better' protection against messages from 'unknown'
> numbers).
>

What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
normal communication.

In message <spga79$jr5$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:14:17 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sp1v69$r5q$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:40:09 on Sat, 11 Dec
>> 2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:51:38 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar social media
>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>
>>>> Well, until you give in to the entreaties to install Adobe Acrobat
>>>>Reader DC or whatever it’s called, which keeps trying to log
>>>>you into Adobe’s systems every time it opens. I deleted it.
>>>>No, I can’t fill in PDF forms any more. I don’t care.
>>>
>>> And I'm not interested in installing some Billy No Mates data
>>>trawling garbage from facebook.
>>
>> In which case you'll be blissfully ignorant (now there's a first, NOT)
>> that the people you communicate with on WhatsApp are *only* your mates.
>>
>> That's what makes it such a useful app (no outsiders, spammers etc).
>
>That must be a change made since 2018.

It's always been the case, I think. You have to be invited into a closed
user group by what would in more formal circumstances be called a
moderator.
--
Roland Perry

In message <spggra$mml$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:07:22 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>>> are forwarding one they bought for you.

>> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from
>>businesses (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS),
>>but I don't see why (unless there's 'better' protection against
>>messages from 'unknown' numbers).
>
>What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
>normal communication.

For many years the networks struggled to come up with ideas for
monetising the SMS infrastructure, which is there primarily to allow the
network to manage the phone. This like sending it appropriate settings,
and turning the "you have voicemail" icon on and off.

Although some experimented with offering it as a "bonus" free
direct-messaging service between subscribers, others took the view
they'd die in the ditch if they couldn't charge either the sender or
recipient 10p per message.

One of the schemes, which I suspect is what you are objecting to, was to
sell SMS as a paging service, but rather than to a limited number of
people with proprietary pagers, anyone with a GSM phone. And hence you
have people like the dentist sending an SMS saying "Reminder about your
appointment tomorrow at 10am".

But this was only ever intended as a one-way channel.

Abuse is possible, of course, just like the increasing tendency for
companies (I've had several from TOCs recently) sending emails from
"no-reply" addresses.
--
Roland Perry

In message <spfmj6$6gi$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:39:18 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spdcmj$e3r$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:38:11 on Wed, 15 Dec
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> I don't find the concept of 'email a pdf to be shown on my phone' to be in
>>>>> any way unique to TOCs.
>>>>
>>>> I've not encountered it when buying from Screwfix,
>>>
>>> No, you get emailed an 11-digit code and present that with ID to a human;
>>> presumably if they did automated pick-up points you'd get a barcode.
>>
>> I'm never asked for ID,
>
>By the Ts&Cs they're supposed to ask for ID, but I agree that they rarely
>do (I usually have it ready just in case, or show it when giving my order
>number).

I think Covid knocked it on the head completely, when there was the
initial scare about touching C&P machines at all.

>> and all they want is a verbal 4-last digits,
>> which you write down from the screen at the end of the order.
>
>That involves having a pen and paper handy; having the email open on my
>phone is *far* easier ;)

As I'm ordering on my desktop, I have a pen and pad extremely handy. In
practice I just print the order confirmation out (it's literally
one-click).

>Occasionally if they can't find your order from the last four digits they
>might perhaps ask for the full code [1]; presumably you'd have to drive
>home to write the rest on your piece of paper? ;)

Never happened to me.

>[1] looking back through my recent orders, the numbers appear to be
>sequential, and increment at the rate of around 23,000 per hour.

I've got orders here A882592xxxx this time yesterday, and A882250xxxx
noon the day before, so that's 190k/hr, although I would expect the last
digit to be a checksum, so close to your figure perhaps.

Unlike TOD, you have to fulfil the order at the precise location you
chose when ordering, which reduces the required entropy considerably.
--
Roland Perry

In message <PZ4E15cW1DvhFAn$@perry.uk>, at 07:33:42 on Fri, 17 Dec 2021,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <spfmj6$6gi$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:39:18 on Thu, 16 Dec
>2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <spdcmj$e3r$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:38:11 on Wed, 15 Dec
>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> I don't find the concept of 'email a pdf to be shown on my phone'
>>>>>>to be in
>>>>>> any way unique to TOCs.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've not encountered it when buying from Screwfix,
>>>>
>>>> No, you get emailed an 11-digit code and present that with ID to a human;
>>>> presumably if they did automated pick-up points you'd get a barcode.
>>>
>>> I'm never asked for ID,
>>
>>By the Ts&Cs they're supposed to ask for ID, but I agree that they rarely
>>do (I usually have it ready just in case, or show it when giving my order
>>number).
>
>I think Covid knocked it on the head completely, when there was the
>initial scare about touching C&P machines at all.
>
>>> and all they want is a verbal 4-last digits,
>>> which you write down from the screen at the end of the order.
>>
>>That involves having a pen and paper handy; having the email open on my
>>phone is *far* easier ;)
>
>As I'm ordering on my desktop, I have a pen and pad extremely handy. In
>practice I just print the order confirmation out (it's literally
>one-click).
>
>>Occasionally if they can't find your order from the last four digits they
>>might perhaps ask for the full code [1]; presumably you'd have to drive
>>home to write the rest on your piece of paper? ;)
>
>Never happened to me.
>
>>[1] looking back through my recent orders, the numbers appear to be
>>sequential, and increment at the rate of around 23,000 per hour.
>
>I've got orders here A882592xxxx this time yesterday, and A882250xxxx
>noon the day before, so that's 190k/hr, although I would expect the
>last digit to be a checksum, so close to your figure perhaps.
>
>Unlike TOD, you have to fulfil the order at the precise location you
>chose when ordering, which reduces the required entropy considerably.

And <thread convergence> they send you an SMS when the order is ready to
collect, and that has the code too. although I don't think they've ever
claimed that having such a phone in your hand is sufficient.

Back in the day, they didn't look orders up from the codes, anyway, they
asked for your postcode, and then your name.

I've noticed recently they tend to send the SMS far too quickly for
anyone to have actually go and pick the order, so must be relying on
their tills being updated with *free* stock levels, to prevent walk-ins
jumping the queue. It wasn't always like that.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 23:07:22 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk
wrote:

>On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>>
>> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from businesses
>> (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS), but I don't see
>> why (unless there's 'better' protection against messages from 'unknown'
>> numbers).
>>
>
>What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
>normal communication.

If you mean sending an SMS from a number that you can't reply to, that's
a feature of the way the system is designed rather than necessarily a
choice of the sender. It stems from the fact that SMS was, originally,
inteded as a means for the network to communicate with subscribers, not
a user-to-user communication system. That facility was later bolted on,
but has never really sat well with the architecture. A proper
user-to-user instant messaging system had to wait until the advent of
integrated PDA phones.

Mark

In message <spfrq6$dav$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:08:22 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:

>> I agree the phone time will be accurate, but with the time on the TV
>> only clicking over in minutes, that means constantly looking back and
>> forth between those two, while also expecting to be able to count the
>> interval to at least as good as 0.5 secs.
>>
>> I suspect what it's going to need is putting a digital time display in
>> front of the TV, filming the pair, and then watching it afterwards.
>
>Watch one, with the time displayed on the phone as it approaches the
>minute. See how long after the phone flips from :59 to :00 the minute
>display on the TV changes. Move to the other room and the do the same a
>minute later.

I've tried that, but it doesn't give the precision required. Also I want
to do it when they are broadcasting a programme with an independent
clock in vision (one of their Covid talking heads has that), and if the
above process needs repeating a couple of times, they might be gone by
then.
--
Roland Perry

In message <spfrgo$b2r$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:03:20 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spcl85$su0$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:57:57 on Wed, 15 Dec
>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sp7sjr$knq$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:32:59 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <sp7qaj$6n7$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:56 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <sov2qn$eb4$6@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:51 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 09/12/2021 19:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <soo710$nau$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:52:32 on Tue, 7 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  If rail tickets were the only ecommerce product I ever bought, it
>>>>>>>>>>>> might,  just, be acceptable. But given that I buy from perhaps a
>>>>>>>>>>>> hundred, it's a  bit rich for whatever ATOC/Fat-Controller
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> this week to expect  me to bend over backwards for *their*
>>>>>>>>>>>> convenience.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Far better, if we got back to the hear of this thread, they could
>>>>>>>>>>>> be bothered to keep their ticket machines operational, or provide
>>>>>>>>>>>> PERTIS machines, so passengers weren't forced to buy at the last
>>>>>>>>>>>> minute using their mobile, stood in the rain in the station car
>>>>>>>>>>>> park, on pain of a £100 fine.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You need to get yourself organised, oh, and an umbrella. Personally
>>>>>>>>>>> if it is pouring with rail I'd do the on-line ordering before I got
>>>>>>>>>>> out of the car.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But I don't know the TVM is broken until I get to it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Doesn't stop you going back to the car to get out f the rain or even
>>>>>>>>> sheltering under the station canopy while you order the
>>>>>>>>>ticket. No need
>>>>>>>>> to stand in the rain.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The car is parked at least a hundred yards away, the station has no
>>>>>>>> canopy, and the train is due in five minutes (which would be plenty of
>>>>>>>> time to buy a ticket from a working TVM).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Won’t you get wet using the TVM?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but only for about twenty seconds.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you’ll get wet for the 5 minutes you’re waiting for the
>>>>> train. Next.
>>>>
>>>> The time interval in question is when one puts down the umbrella,
>>>> because I don't have three arms.
>>>
>>> I’ve not come across a TVM which requires 2 arms to operate it. Can you
>>> explain?
>>
>> At the very least, one hand to hold my wallet, and another to open it
>> and extract the Credit Card and pay. That's assuming I can actually get
>> to the wallet in my inside pocket of the raincoat, one-handed.
>
>So you don’t get the card out of the wallet and put it somewhere accessible
>before you get out of the car? OK.

Didn't I say I often walked to the station?

And yes, when I was in London last week I did keep a contactless card in
a jacket pocket so I could tap in and out more easily, but it also fell
out on one occasion [not while I at a TVM] when I removed something else
from the same pocket (probably my glasses) but luckily I noticed.

Anyway, keep up the good work demonstrating how much extra you think I
should be expected to do in order to mitigate the railway's failings.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 07:20:55 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <spggra$mml$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:07:22 on Thu, 16 Dec
>2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>>>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>>>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>
>>> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from
>>>businesses (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS),
>>>but I don't see why (unless there's 'better' protection against
>>>messages from 'unknown' numbers).
>>
>>What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
>>normal communication.
>
>For many years the networks struggled to come up with ideas for
>monetising the SMS infrastructure, which is there primarily to allow the
>network to manage the phone. This like sending it appropriate settings,
>and turning the "you have voicemail" icon on and off.

I don't think that they struggled for that long but it certainly
wasn't instant. I managed a team developing GSM notification and short
messaging products, including an SMSC that I led the development of. I
was therefore heavily involved in the environment at the time,
speaking to several operators every month. Our customers were on six
continenets so we knew the lie of the land.

You're right that SMS wasn't really intended as a consumer product and
was used largely in the early days for configuration and, ore
inportanly volume-wise,notification. The latter became widespread once
suitable notification products had been developed by, largely, the
vendors of voicemail systems and in those days there were really only
two vendors that were succeeding in the GSM market outside the US; us
(Unisys) and Comverse. My employer was a pioneer and created software
allowing class 0 messages to be used to silently check if a handset
was available to receive a notification as well as an implementation
of the voicemail icon on PCN (at that time 1800MHz GSM) handsets.

We were also, of course, looking to extend our offerings, with early
products including SMS-email.

SMS takeup was steady although unspectacular, but it was held back by
the inability to send SMS to anyone not on your own network. Once the
operators allows SMS to competitors the market exploded, far in excess
of the operators' expectations. I used to read a GSM industry
newsletter at the time and the growth rates were staggering. The
exploding text rates also made the popular press with stories such as
'teenagers, used to texting, now use their thumbs for things that
previous generations used other fingers for' and, I'm sure, the usual
moral panic.

As volumes exploded I remember difficult sales meetings with large
operators who'd tell us they didn't want anything that would attract
more SMS to their network. This is because SMS was carried 'for free'
on the signalling channel and that capacity was exhausted. I don't
know but maybe adding more signalling would have been more expensive
in terms of MSCs/switches than would have been the case if SMS was
carries over data channels.

Of course these problems were eventually overcome, but I think the
growth was more rapid than Roland remembers, although I accept that
netiher of us has provided a timeline.
>
>Although some experimented with offering it as a "bonus" free
>direct-messaging service between subscribers, others took the view
>they'd die in the ditch if they couldn't charge either the sender or
>recipient 10p per message.
>
They monetarised SMS very quickly! Was it free initially? Maybe, it
was a long time ago, but at least more GSM operators weren't
encumbered by the monolithic, labrythine billing systems that the
fixed operators were burdened with and I'm sure that the
infrastructure providers would have been fairly quick to add any
necessary billng hooks into their kit.

>One of the schemes, which I suspect is what you are objecting to, was to
>sell SMS as a paging service, but rather than to a limited number of
>people with proprietary pagers, anyone with a GSM phone. And hence you
>have people like the dentist sending an SMS saying "Reminder about your
>appointment tomorrow at 10am".

This is, of course, simply a notification. We tried to interest the
operators in this sort of thing but didn't get far, although some
operators (South Africa Telekom comes to mind) were pioneers, offering
all sorts of things including reminders to Muslims of prayer time.
>
>But this was only ever intended as a one-way channel.
>
Yes, notifications often are.

Now the technology that they really struggled to monetise, or even
build a decent product around, was the Cell Broadcast Service.

>Abuse is possible, of course, just like the increasing tendency for
>companies (I've had several from TOCs recently) sending emails from
>"no-reply" addresses.

Ken <ken@birchanger.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 07:20:55 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <spggra$mml$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:07:22 on Thu, 16 Dec
>> 2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>> On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>>>>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>>>>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>>
>>>> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from
>>>> businesses (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS),
>>>> but I don't see why (unless there's 'better' protection against
>>>> messages from 'unknown' numbers).
>>>
>>> What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
>>> normal communication.
>>
>> For many years the networks struggled to come up with ideas for
>> monetising the SMS infrastructure, which is there primarily to allow the
>> network to manage the phone. This like sending it appropriate settings,
>> and turning the "you have voicemail" icon on and off.
>
> I don't think that they struggled for that long but it certainly
> wasn't instant. I managed a team developing GSM notification and short
> messaging products, including an SMSC that I led the development of. I
> was therefore heavily involved in the environment at the time,
> speaking to several operators every month. Our customers were on six
> continenets so we knew the lie of the land.
>
> You're right that SMS wasn't really intended as a consumer product and
> was used largely in the early days for configuration and, ore
> inportanly volume-wise,notification. The latter became widespread once
> suitable notification products had been developed by, largely, the
> vendors of voicemail systems and in those days there were really only
> two vendors that were succeeding in the GSM market outside the US; us
> (Unisys) and Comverse. My employer was a pioneer and created software
> allowing class 0 messages to be used to silently check if a handset
> was available to receive a notification as well as an implementation
> of the voicemail icon on PCN (at that time 1800MHz GSM) handsets.
>
> We were also, of course, looking to extend our offerings, with early
> products including SMS-email.
>
> SMS takeup was steady although unspectacular, but it was held back by
> the inability to send SMS to anyone not on your own network. Once the
> operators allows SMS to competitors the market exploded, far in excess
> of the operators' expectations. I used to read a GSM industry
> newsletter at the time and the growth rates were staggering. The
> exploding text rates also made the popular press with stories such as
> 'teenagers, used to texting, now use their thumbs for things that
> previous generations used other fingers for' and, I'm sure, the usual
> moral panic.
>
> As volumes exploded I remember difficult sales meetings with large
> operators who'd tell us they didn't want anything that would attract
> more SMS to their network. This is because SMS was carried 'for free'
> on the signalling channel and that capacity was exhausted. I don't
> know but maybe adding more signalling would have been more expensive
> in terms of MSCs/switches than would have been the case if SMS was
> carries over data channels.
>
> Of course these problems were eventually overcome, but I think the
> growth was more rapid than Roland remembers, although I accept that
> netiher of us has provided a timeline.
>>
>> Although some experimented with offering it as a "bonus" free
>> direct-messaging service between subscribers, others took the view
>> they'd die in the ditch if they couldn't charge either the sender or
>> recipient 10p per message.
>>
> They monetarised SMS very quickly! Was it free initially? Maybe, it
> was a long time ago, but at least more GSM operators weren't
> encumbered by the monolithic, labrythine billing systems that the
> fixed operators were burdened with and I'm sure that the
> infrastructure providers would have been fairly quick to add any
> necessary billng hooks into their kit.
>
>> One of the schemes, which I suspect is what you are objecting to, was to
>> sell SMS as a paging service, but rather than to a limited number of
>> people with proprietary pagers, anyone with a GSM phone. And hence you
>> have people like the dentist sending an SMS saying "Reminder about your
>> appointment tomorrow at 10am".
>
> This is, of course, simply a notification. We tried to interest the
> operators in this sort of thing but didn't get far, although some
> operators (South Africa Telekom comes to mind) were pioneers, offering
> all sorts of things including reminders to Muslims of prayer time.
>>
>> But this was only ever intended as a one-way channel.
>>
> Yes, notifications often are.
>
> Now the technology that they really struggled to monetise, or even
> build a decent product around, was the Cell Broadcast Service.
>
>
>> Abuse is possible, of course, just like the increasing tendency for
>> companies (I've had several from TOCs recently) sending emails from
>> "no-reply" addresses.
>

The early days of SMS were fun. Vodafone or Cellnet, I forget which, had a
dial up modem interface to their system. I wrote a program to send
instrument error messages to my phone that way. No charging mechanism and
no security at all. You just connected and sent ASCII strings, which
included the the target phone number. No authentication needed.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spfrgo$b2r$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:03:20 on Thu, 16 Dec
> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <spcl85$su0$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:57:57 on Wed, 15 Dec
>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sp7sjr$knq$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:32:59 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sp7qaj$6n7$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:56 on Mon, 13 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sov2qn$eb4$6@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:51 on Fri, 10 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 09/12/2021 19:21, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <soo710$nau$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:52:32 on Tue, 7 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  If rail tickets were the only ecommerce product I ever bought, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> might,  just, be acceptable. But given that I buy from perhaps a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hundred, it's a  bit rich for whatever ATOC/Fat-Controller
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this week to expect  me to bend over backwards for *their*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> convenience.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Far better, if we got back to the hear of this thread, they could
>>>>>>>>>>>>> be bothered to keep their ticket machines operational, or provide
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PERTIS machines, so passengers weren't forced to buy at the last
>>>>>>>>>>>>> minute using their mobile, stood in the rain in the station car
>>>>>>>>>>>>> park, on pain of a £100 fine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to get yourself organised, oh, and an umbrella. Personally
>>>>>>>>>>>> if it is pouring with rail I'd do the on-line ordering before I got
>>>>>>>>>>>> out of the car.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But I don't know the TVM is broken until I get to it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't stop you going back to the car to get out f the rain or even
>>>>>>>>>> sheltering under the station canopy while you order the
>>>>>>>>>> ticket. No need
>>>>>>>>>> to stand in the rain.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The car is parked at least a hundred yards away, the station has no
>>>>>>>>> canopy, and the train is due in five minutes (which would be plenty of
>>>>>>>>> time to buy a ticket from a working TVM).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Won’t you get wet using the TVM?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, but only for about twenty seconds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, you’ll get wet for the 5 minutes you’re waiting for the
>>>>>> train. Next.
>>>>>
>>>>> The time interval in question is when one puts down the umbrella,
>>>>> because I don't have three arms.
>>>>
>>>> I’ve not come across a TVM which requires 2 arms to operate it. Can you
>>>> explain?
>>>
>>> At the very least, one hand to hold my wallet, and another to open it
>>> and extract the Credit Card and pay. That's assuming I can actually get
>>> to the wallet in my inside pocket of the raincoat, one-handed.
>>
>> So you don’t get the card out of the wallet and put it somewhere accessible
>> before you get out of the car? OK.
>
> Didn't I say I often walked to the station?
>
> And yes, when I was in London last week I did keep a contactless card in
> a jacket pocket so I could tap in and out more easily, but it also fell
> out on one occasion [not while I at a TVM] when I removed something else
> from the same pocket (probably my glasses) but luckily I noticed.
>
> Anyway, keep up the good work demonstrating how much extra you think I
> should be expected to do in order to mitigate the railway's failings.

Just wondering if you might think ahead (I’m not saying I would!): I’m
walking to the station, it’s raining, I’ve got an umbrella, it’s going to
be difficult to get the card out without getting wet…

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <spga79$jr5$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:14:17 on Thu, 16 Dec
> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sp1v69$r5q$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:40:09 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>> 2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:51:38 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar social media
>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, until you give in to the entreaties to install Adobe Acrobat
>>>>> Reader DC or whatever it’s called, which keeps trying to log
>>>>> you into Adobe’s systems every time it opens. I deleted it.
>>>>> No, I can’t fill in PDF forms any more. I don’t care.
>>>>
>>>> And I'm not interested in installing some Billy No Mates data
>>>> trawling garbage from facebook.
>>>
>>> In which case you'll be blissfully ignorant (now there's a first, NOT)
>>> that the people you communicate with on WhatsApp are *only* your mates.
>>>
>>> That's what makes it such a useful app (no outsiders, spammers etc).
>>
>> That must be a change made since 2018.
>
> It's always been the case, I think. You have to be invited into a closed
> user group by what would in more formal circumstances be called a
> moderator.

I have WhatsApp messages in 2018 from a company I don't have in my
contacts.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Am 17.12.2021 um 13:17 schrieb Anna Noyd-Dryver:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spga79$jr5$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:14:17 on Thu, 16 Dec
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sp1v69$r5q$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:40:09 on Sat, 11 Dec
>>>> 2021, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:51:38 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>>>>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar social media
>>>>>>> nonsense installed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, until you give in to the entreaties to install Adobe Acrobat
>>>>>> Reader DC or whatever it’s called, which keeps trying to log
>>>>>> you into Adobe’s systems every time it opens. I deleted it.
>>>>>> No, I can’t fill in PDF forms any more. I don’t care.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I'm not interested in installing some Billy No Mates data
>>>>> trawling garbage from facebook.
>>>>
>>>> In which case you'll be blissfully ignorant (now there's a first, NOT)
>>>> that the people you communicate with on WhatsApp are *only* your mates.
>>>>
>>>> That's what makes it such a useful app (no outsiders, spammers etc).
>>>
>>> That must be a change made since 2018.
>>
>> It's always been the case, I think. You have to be invited into a closed
>> user group by what would in more formal circumstances be called a
>> moderator.
>
> I have WhatsApp messages in 2018 from a company I don't have in my
> contacts.

Individual Whatsapp messages but not whatsapp groups.

In message <sphr8g$ske$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:11:12 on Fri, 17 Dec
2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:

>The early days of SMS were fun. Vodafone or Cellnet, I forget which, had a
>dial up modem interface to their system. I wrote a program to send
>instrument error messages to my phone that way. No charging mechanism

They'd be getting the termination fees for the inbound calls.
--
Roland Perry

In message <3bkorg1p1tmtcb4ct09pqq5u9trsbmljha@4ax.com>, at 09:04:41 on
Fri, 17 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 23:07:22 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk
>wrote:
>
>>On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>>>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>>>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>>>
>>> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from businesses
>>> (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS), but I don't see
>>> why (unless there's 'better' protection against messages from 'unknown'
>>> numbers).
>>>
>>
>>What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
>>normal communication.
>
>If you mean sending an SMS from a number that you can't reply to, that's
>a feature of the way the system is designed rather than necessarily a
>choice of the sender. It stems from the fact that SMS was, originally,
>inteded as a means for the network to communicate with subscribers, not
>a user-to-user communication system. That facility was later bolted on,
>but has never really sat well with the architecture. A proper
>user-to-user instant messaging system had to wait until the advent of
>integrated PDA phones.

Not true. Orange offered it on their mars-bar phone from day one.
--
Roland Perry

In message <kroorglab62sf1ks0r5csn9h89kl7bi5qj@4ax.com>, at 10:58:13 on
Fri, 17 Dec 2021, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 07:20:55 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <spggra$mml$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:07:22 on Thu, 16 Dec
>>2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>>On 16/12/2021 21:14, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But the closed-user-group architecture makes it somewhat unsuitable for
>>>>> receiving tickets from random vendors, rather than family/friends who
>>>>> are forwarding one they bought for you.
>>
>>>> It would seem that it is less-used from communication from
>>>>businesses (currently one in my WhatsApp, rather than many in SMS),
>>>>but I don't see why (unless there's 'better' protection against
>>>>messages from 'unknown' numbers).
>>>
>>>What I object to is SMSs from companies who wont use that mode for
>>>normal communication.
>>
>>For many years the networks struggled to come up with ideas for
>>monetising the SMS infrastructure, which is there primarily to allow the
>>network to manage the phone. This like sending it appropriate settings,
>>and turning the "you have voicemail" icon on and off.
>
>I don't think that they struggled for that long but it certainly
>wasn't instant. I managed a team developing GSM notification and short
>messaging products, including an SMSC that I led the development of. I
>was therefore heavily involved in the environment at the time,
>speaking to several operators every month. Our customers were on six
>continenets so we knew the lie of the land.

I suppose time passes, and expressions like "many years" recede into the
depths of history. But I was first involved in this around 1994/5, and
as a consumer didn't start getting many SMS from dentists and the like
until at least ten years later. That felt like a long time.

>We were also, of course, looking to extend our offerings, with early
>products including SMS-email.

Vodafone had a product almost from the start which was multiple SMS
concatenated into what felt a lot like email. But I don't think they
marketed it. Partly perhaps because using it internally for free was all
fine and dandy, but if consumers were going to paying 10p every 140
bytes they'd probably die of bill-shock.

>SMS takeup was steady although unspectacular, but it was held back by
>the inability to send SMS to anyone not on your own network.

That was part of the "10p or die" philosophy.

>Once the operators allows SMS to competitors the market exploded,

Many people used overseas SMSC, which UK operators accepted for free
delivery. Perhaps because they never expected there to enough to be
worth bothering setting up a fee-sharing structure.

>far in excess of the operators' expectations. I used to read a GSM
>industry newsletter at the time and the growth rates were staggering.
>The exploding text rates also made the popular press with stories such
>as 'teenagers, used to texting, now use their thumbs for things that
>previous generations used other fingers for' and, I'm sure, the usual
>moral panic.
>
>As volumes exploded

What date have we got to now?

>I remember difficult sales meetings with large operators who'd tell us
>they didn't want anything that would attract more SMS to their network.
>This is because SMS was carried 'for free' on the signalling channel
>and that capacity was exhausted. I don't know but maybe adding more
>signalling would have been more expensive in terms of MSCs/switches
>than would have been the case if SMS was carries over data channels.
>
>Of course these problems were eventually overcome, but I think the
>growth was more rapid than Roland remembers, although I accept that
>netiher of us has provided a timeline.

I've started that.

[notifications]

>>But this was only ever intended as a one-way channel.
>>
>Yes, notifications often are.

But people here are complaining that they can't engage in a conversation
with organisations who send them notifications
--
Roland Perry

In message <spfgab$p4t$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:11 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spavjm$qqm$5@dont-email.me>, at 20:42:30 on Tue, 14 Dec
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>>> Even using a specific email address for ticket providers is not viable
>>>>>> as I'm illegally on two email lists neither of which provide the
>>>>>> legally required link to remove myself for the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course it is viable, how long does it take to set up a specific email
>>>>> address for the purpose?
>>>>
>>>> Not long. But it becomes usable when the junk email builds up.
>>>
>>> tickets2020@…
>>> tickets2021@…
>>> tickets2022@…
>>
>> And thus you continue to twist the knife, appeasing vendors who
>> externalise so much of the transactional admin to their customers.
>>
>
>I'm twisting nothing; the majority of the population appear to cope fine
>with being emailed PDFs and showing them on their phones,

No they don't, they simply don't buy the tickets in the first place, or
if they do, have so little other email traffic that the other couple of
hundred emails a day which serious email users receive, don't swamp
them.

--
Roland Perry

In message <spfgab$p4t$2@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:11 on Thu, 16 Dec
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <spd1do$lcr$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:25:44 on Wed, 15 Dec
>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <spavjm$qqm$5@dont-email.me>, at 20:42:30 on Tue, 14 Dec
>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even using a specific email address for ticket providers is not viable
>>>>>>>> as I'm illegally on two email lists neither of which provide the
>>>>>>>> legally required link to remove myself for the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course it is viable, how long does it take to set up a specific email
>>>>>>> address for the purpose?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not long. But it becomes usable when the junk email builds up.
>>>>>
>>>>> tickets2020@…
>>>>> tickets2021@…
>>>>> tickets2022@…
>>>>
>>>> And thus you continue to twist the knife, appeasing vendors who
>>>> externalise so much of the transactional admin to their customers.
>>>
>>> I think we need to give up. Roland appears to live in a parallel world to
>>> the rest of us.
>>
>> JOOI, what percentage of ordinary members of the public do you think set
>> up special email addresses for different online purchases?
>
>I'd suggest that the vast majority of the population find it entirely
>unnecessary

And I've already explained why that is (in particular that very few buy
such tickets).
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:11:24 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <spd3ci$4i2$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:59:14 on Wed, 15 Dec
>2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:13:07 +0000
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <csk4rghk31luqbj54d6mbr93pge8ssj7jd@4ax.com>, at 19:09:15 on
>>>> Thu, 9 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>> Email is, at least, reasonably universal. I'm not a huge fan of having
>>>>> to install a different app for every service I use. Maybe TOCs could
>>>>> offer ticket delivery via WhatsApp.
>>>>
>>>> Something less century than PDF, anyway.
>>>
>>> PDFs work everywhere. Not everyone has WhatsCrap or similar social media
>>> nonsense installed.
>>
>>WhatsApp isn't social media. Yes it's recently been purchased by Facebook,
>>but it's still a simple messaging app - basically texting by WiFi/mobile
>>data, rather than by the (potentially chargeable) SMS system.
>
>The one-to-many [and anyone in the group replying] nature (should you
>choose to use it) of WhatsApp is definitely social media.
>
In the one circumstance that I use it, it is a substitute for a secure
radio group.

On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 14:47:53 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <spcfdu$kum$3@dont-email.me>, at 10:18:38 on Wed, 15 Dec
>2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <soko3p$ccm$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:19:37 on Mon, 6 Dec 2021,
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 06/12/2021 09:28, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <sog0jr$k1t$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:14:03 on Sat, 4 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There’s also nothing to stop you having an entirely different email
>>>>>> account, with a separate inbox for tickets. Most email clients handle
>>>>>> multiple accounts.
>>>
>>>>> That's something which doesn't scale on phones. I've tried this,
>>>>> specifically the last time this subject cropped up. And beyond about a
>>>>> dozen it gets unmanageable.
>>>>
>>>> You don't need a dozen, just one for tickets.
>>>
>>> Of all the transactions I might want to do on a phone, what gives trains
>>> companies the right to make such unique demands. (btw, the "dozen" is
>>> the number of TOCs I might use).
>>
>>I don't find the concept of 'email a pdf to be shown on my phone' to be in
>>any way unique to TOCs.
>
>I've not encountered it when buying from Screwfix, Amazon or AliExpress
>to name but a few sites I buy from most frequently.
>
I get Screwfix invoices e-mailed as PDFs, (usually before I am out of
the shop door).