In article <tdaevs$344io$1@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

> How long before one blows up or just causes a fire?

> I don't like leaving batteries float charging unnecessarily.

> Batteries in UPS need regularly changing, is the average user going to
> test their batteries regularly?

I may be wrong, but I've assumed that modern 'house batteries' have some
degree of 'clever' maintainance electronics. I'd expect that of a decent
UPS.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <5a17d1a557bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> Overwhelmingly the biggest factor in having delusional beliefs is
> Propaganda.

Thanks. I did LOL at that. :-)

> The answer is also the same here as in Russia, unless you look to other
> sources of information besides main stream media how are you going to
> know?

And this from the man who refuses to even read the book I suggested on
Climate Change because he "knows" from his actual *ignorance* of its
content that it must be a "Bible". Whilst presenting gems like his "two
points paper" here as being evidence for his delusions on the topic.

A paper we duly read and found to be nonsense in terms of actual evidence.
In contrast to his flat refusual to even read a book full of references to
measured evidence.

Physician, heal thyself. :-)

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <7m1ifh93olmot95r5kfkp9m4clnirusp2v@4ax.com>, BrightsideS9
<reply_to_address_is_not@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> You are proposing a Tesco mobile at £7.50 a month ontop of purchase
> price, just to use as an emergency, for a stalwart land line user eh?
> paying

Particularly odd plan at a time when many people will be struggling to
afford food and heating! But we can't have "inefficient" public control of
energy can we, that would be awful.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <tdaf3p$344io$2@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 13/08/2022 12:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> > So if you don't, make a fuss. They are apparently obliged to then
> > provide a local power backup for when there is a power cut.
> > Personally, I think that should be the case in all homes as a matter
> > of safety. Just has it has been in the past.

> Didn't it used to be a requirement of business premises that they had at
> least one phone that worked when mains supply lost.

It was a GPO requirement that phones had to go on working in power cuts. At
least for homes. In principle, I think that still applies. But telcos may
assume "they have a mobile as well" as a get-out... without bothering to
check.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 09:51:46 +0100, Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
wrote:

>In article <30ihfhpupjiedmicqspbkcjcjv8ls151qs@4ax.com>,
> Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> if it's absolutely vital that your fibre service keeps working, and
>> for some reason you can't use a mobile, then I would suggest that it's
>> up to you to get yourself a suitable power backup device.
>
>AIUI the service provider is *required* to ensure you can still 'use a
>phone'. So the legal burden is on them. Problem is, they may simply take
>for granted "everyone has a mobile, so that's OK".
>
>Jim

If something is vital to me, then regardless of anybody else's
responsibilities I'd rather take any necessary precautions myself and
make sure they're done properly and to *my* exact requirements than
leave it to someone else to do what *they* think will suffice.

Anyone who can't do this themselves would be better putting themselves
in the hands of a knowledgeable friend than any big company.

Rod.

On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 09:48:10 +0100, Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
wrote:

>It was a GPO requirement that phones had to go on working in power cuts.

At first it would have been an inevitable consequence, a side effect
if you like, of the way the original analogue telephone system worked,
using 50 Volt batteries at the exchange. It would not have been
necessary to make it a legal requirement because it would have
happened anyway. Was it really a legal requirement from the very
start, and if not, when did it change?

Rod.

>> Batteries in UPS need regularly changing, is the average user
>> going to
>> test their batteries regularly?
>
> I may be wrong, but I've assumed that modern 'house batteries'
> have some degree of 'clever' maintainance electronics.
> I'd expect that of a decent UPS.

I have an APC BX500 500VA UPS running several devices on my modem and router
shelf that total 16W, should keep them running for a day or so.

Then a larger APC BX1400 1,400VA for two PCs and screens, a USB connection
means Windows knows it's running off a battery and will close down
automatically before it dies, less than an hour.

Beware these APC devices have multiple IEC socket outlets, so buy 13A power
strips with an IEC plug for all the mains adapters.

Angus

In article <5a18459960noise@audiomisc.co.uk>,
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <5a17d1a557bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
> <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> > Overwhelmingly the biggest factor in having delusional beliefs is
> > Propaganda.

> Thanks. I did LOL at that. :-)

> > The answer is also the same here as in Russia, unless you look to
> > other sources of information besides main stream media how are
> > you going to know?

> And this from the man who refuses to even read the book I suggested
> on Climate Change because he "knows" from his actual *ignorance* of
> its content that it must be a "Bible". Whilst presenting gems like
> his "two points paper" here as being evidence for his delusions on
> the topic.

You've raised the issue of the two point paper before whenever you
need to have an attack on me. I've no idea to what it refers and I
don't care. Knock yourself out, I know the more you attack me, the
weaker you position.

> A paper we duly read and found to be nonsense in terms of actual
> evidence.

You mean the leftie activists decided they didn't like it whatever it
was - ok.

> In contrast to his flat refusual to even read a book full
> of references to measured evidence.

Did the book come down from heaven, written on a tablet by god
himself? Or is it a man's opinion?

Yes, of course any view different to your's is wrong by definition,
the left can't stand different POVs, everyone has to be on song
perfectly with evenly distributed misery.

On climate change, enjoy this.

The reason the IPCC and other climate bedwetters always refer back to
around 150 years ago is simple. It was near the lowest point in the
last 10,000 years so hardly representative. We are roughly 1 deg
above the coldest it has been in the last 10,000 years and remarkably
2 degs cooler than the warmest.

!30,000 years ago, temperatures were 6 deg warmer than now and hippos
and elephants lived on the banks of the Thames.

So unprecedented - no.

Here's another excellent video from Tony Heller who shows clearly
fraud being used and what a heat wave was like in the early 1900s in
the USA. Ours is nothing compared to that. I take it you've not
considered suicide due to the heat?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEcRGXzv_5U

Yes, dismiss it, slag me of for pointing out the truth but you know
really, you know he's right.

Co2 has a very small part to play in the temperatures and is not the
reason for our current temperatures.

Co2 did not create the 1945-1975 cooling.
It did not cause the Holocene optimum, Minoan Warming, Roman Warming,
Medieval warming or modern warming.

You may like to know the best explanation I've seen is that it's
clouds that make the difference not piffling levels of CO2 which are
*nearly* the lowest they have ever been.

This is backed up by CERES satellite data which shows: Outgoing long
wave radiation from the planet has increased and has been increasing
for years NOT TRAPPED! But also short wave radiation, ie. the stuff
normally reflected off clouds has reduced. More sun past less cloud
gives climate warming and was ever thus.

And while I'm on - when you burn fossil fuels you return CO2 back
where it came from in the past and the earth didn't explode, burn,
die then did it? The only time CO2 leads temperature is in computer
models, never in reality.

CO2 is innocent. CO2 is a political weapon used by people for
political reasons normally to control YOU!. Activists are either very
gullible or water melons who know full well what they're doing. Its a
fraud.

Have you seen the WEF website? They're quite open about their control
plans, they just need reasons for global communism and CO2 and a new
pandemic will supply just that.

The fools will go for it.

Bob.

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <tdae64$342jk$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>
>>> So if you don't, make a fuss. They are apparently obliged to then
>>> provide a local power backup for when there is a power cut.
>>> Personally, I think that should be the case in all homes as a matter
>>> of safety. Just has it has been in the past.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>
>> It is technically trivial. Box stuffed full of lithium batteries float
>> charged from mains. Pass through to keep router/ONT operating when mains
>> on. When mains fails power to equipment stops.
>
> "Technically", yes. But the real problem is that some users either don't
> know any of this - or what may happen soon to them - or find they are
> already easily afford food/heating - or be elderly/disabled and can't find
> out about this or physically do the things needed. etc. etc.
>
> And when the connection provider makes a change like this taking for
> granted what the mere 'customer' can/will do.
>
> The point Barry is making is that what should happen, all too often, isn't.
> And trying to sort this out with the provider is a nightmare. He's quite
> good at arguing with companies and finding things out. A friend of mine who
> is bedridden and relies on 'pop in carers' during the day may find this
> more difficult. His only way to communicate is via those visitors or his
> standard phone. No mobile, no computers, etc.
>
> Jim
>

And those vulnerable people should be supported by the authorities
accordingly. It’s not a justification for keeping the wired copper network
going. Is there any reason why your friend can’t have a desk style gsm
phone?

On 16/08/2022 14:01, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <5a18459960noise@audiomisc.co.uk>,
> Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <5a17d1a557bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
>> <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>>> Overwhelmingly the biggest factor in having delusional beliefs is
>>> Propaganda.
>
>> Thanks. I did LOL at that. :-)
>
>>> The answer is also the same here as in Russia, unless you look to
>>> other sources of information besides main stream media how are
>>> you going to know?
>
>> And this from the man who refuses to even read the book I suggested
>> on Climate Change because he "knows" from his actual *ignorance* of
>> its content that it must be a "Bible". Whilst presenting gems like
>> his "two points paper" here as being evidence for his delusions on
>> the topic.
>
> You've raised the issue of the two point paper before whenever you
> need to have an attack on me. I've no idea to what it refers and I
> don't care. Knock yourself out, I know the more you attack me, the
> weaker you position.

LOL! It was *YOU* who posted a link to a pseudo-scientific 'paper'
which, IIRC, tried to debunk AGW by considering the atmospheres on two
other planets beside earth, and deriving some 'law' that connected their
atmospheres with a straight line, which Jim debunked by considering
another planet in the Solar System for which the supposed 'law' didn't
hold, and thereby that the 'paper' was nothing more than denialist
pseudo-science.

>> A paper we duly read and found to be nonsense in terms of actual
>> evidence.
>
> You mean the leftie activists decided they didn't like it whatever it
> was - ok.

He means that the 'law' it claimed to show didn't apply to other
planets, and therefore wasn't a 'law' at all!

>> In contrast to his flat refusual to even read a book full
>> of references to measured evidence.
>
> Did the book come down from heaven, written on a tablet by god
> himself? Or is it a man's opinion?
>
> Yes, of course any view different to your's is wrong by definition,
> the left can't stand different POVs, everyone has to be on song
> perfectly with evenly distributed misery.
>
> On climate change, enjoy this.

It was a very well researched and well written, I would guess eminently
readable even by a non-scientist, explanation of how humans are
affecting the planet.

> The reason the IPCC and other climate bedwetters always refer back to
> around 150 years ago is simple. It was near the lowest point in the
> last 10,000 years so hardly representative. We are roughly 1 deg
> above the coldest it has been in the last 10,000 years and remarkably
> 2 degs cooler than the warmest.
>
> !30,000 years ago, temperatures were 6 deg warmer than now and hippos
> and elephants lived on the banks of the Thames.
>
> So unprecedented - no.
>
> Here's another excellent video from Tony Heller who shows clearly
> fraud being used and what a heat wave was like in the early 1900s in
> the USA. Ours is nothing compared to that. I take it you've not
> considered suicide due to the heat?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEcRGXzv_5U

00:15 "Biden Admin'n announced today that the US had the third hottest
July on record"

Just 15 seconds to the first fraudulent lie by Helluvaliar, surely a
record, even for him? A search found no reference to any such claim by
Biden or his administration, only the findings of an official US
government agency, NOAA, and newspaper reports thereof:

https://www.noaa.gov/

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/us-record-heat-july-2022-b2141051.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-11091697/July-2022-one-three-hottest-Julys-record.html

00:24 "The average mean temperature of the US Historical Climatology
Network from January through July was the 15th lowest on record since 1895"

Even supposing this claim is true - HelluvaLiar's abysmal record means
that it almost certainly isn't - it is still perfectly possible for
July to have been the third hottest on record because, typically for
HelluvaLiar, he is trying to sow confusion by comparing apples with
oranges, instead of like of like as he should be. But anyway, it's a
lie [my caps]:

https://www.noaa.gov/news/earth-had-its-6th-hottest-july-and-year-to-date-on-record

"Year to date | January through July 2022

The average global land and ocean-surface temperature was the
sixth-warmest year to date on record, at 1.55 degrees F (0.86 of a
degree C) above average. Asia had its second-hottest such YTD on record
with Europe seeing its fifth hottest. Africa, NORTH AMERICA and South
America all had an above-average YTD, though it did not rank among their
top-10 warmest on record.

0:33 "The percent of days above 70 degrees Fahrenheit was the third
lowest on record"

Another lie, see above.

So that's three lies within the first minutes, no point in watching further.

> Yes, dismiss it, slag me of for pointing out the truth but you know
> really, you know he's right.

I know that he's an unprincipled shit who makes a living by serially
lying online, helped by other unprincipled shits like you because he
tells you what you want to believe, rather than what is actually true,
so you pimp him extra income by linking to him.

[Snip multitude of climate denialist false claims already debunked
multiple times here before, which have earned yet another complaint to
the abuse address of your news server.]

> Have you seen the WEF website? They're quite open about their control
> plans, they just need reasons for global communism and CO2 and a new
> pandemic will supply just that.

I'm happy to let others judge for themselves, because there's nothing
there that you claim, thus proving once again what a shameless serial
liar you are.

https://www.weforum.org/

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <7m1ifh93olmot95r5kfkp9m4clnirusp2v@4ax.com>, BrightsideS9
> <reply_to_address_is_not@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> You are proposing a Tesco mobile at £7.50 a month ontop of purchase
>> price, just to use as an emergency, for a stalwart land line user eh?
>> paying
>
> Particularly odd plan at a time when many people will be struggling to
> afford food and heating! But we can't have "inefficient" public control of
> energy can we, that would be awful.
>
> Jim
>

£7.50 is cheaper than the standard BT line rental by a factor of 2 or 3
depending on your deal. It’s also the same price that BT or Zen charge for
a voip service on top of a broadband service. A voip service via the likes
of Sipgate costs nothing apart small call charges. If you are trying to
wave the shroud of the aged poverty stricken pensioner with a voice only
line then they would be better off with a mobile tariff. The savings will
pay for a desk style gsm phone in around 6 months, for those that can’t
cope with a standard mobile phone. I get the feeling all these calls to the
disadvantaged are simply an excuse by the able and well off who don’t want
to face change.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 15:41:42 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <7m1ifh93olmot95r5kfkp9m4clnirusp2v@4ax.com>, BrightsideS9
>> <reply_to_address_is_not@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> You are proposing a Tesco mobile at £7.50 a month ontop of purchase
>>> price, just to use as an emergency, for a stalwart land line user eh?
>>> paying
>>
>> Particularly odd plan at a time when many people will be struggling to
>> afford food and heating! But we can't have "inefficient" public control of
>> energy can we, that would be awful.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>
>£7.50 is cheaper than the standard BT line rental by a factor of 2 or 3
>depending on your deal. It’s also the same price that BT or Zen charge for
>a voip service on top of a broadband service. A voip service via the likes
>of Sipgate costs nothing apart small call charges. If you are trying to
>wave the shroud of the aged poverty stricken pensioner with a voice only
>line then they would be better off with a mobile tariff. The savings will
>pay for a desk style gsm phone in around 6 months, for those that can’t
>cope with a standard mobile phone. I get the feeling all these calls to the
>disadvantaged are simply an excuse by the able and well off who don’t want
>to face change.

You still don't get it do you?

There are several factors that have to be considered that leads this
user to be a stalwart land line user, it is not just economics.

--
brightside S9

BrightsideS9 <reply_to_address_is_not@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 15:41:42 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In article <7m1ifh93olmot95r5kfkp9m4clnirusp2v@4ax.com>, BrightsideS9
>>> <reply_to_address_is_not@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are proposing a Tesco mobile at £7.50 a month ontop of purchase
>>>> price, just to use as an emergency, for a stalwart land line user eh?
>>>> paying
>>>
>>> Particularly odd plan at a time when many people will be struggling to
>>> afford food and heating! But we can't have "inefficient" public control of
>>> energy can we, that would be awful.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>
>> £7.50 is cheaper than the standard BT line rental by a factor of 2 or 3
>> depending on your deal. It’s also the same price that BT or Zen charge for
>> a voip service on top of a broadband service. A voip service via the likes
>> of Sipgate costs nothing apart small call charges. If you are trying to
>> wave the shroud of the aged poverty stricken pensioner with a voice only
>> line then they would be better off with a mobile tariff. The savings will
>> pay for a desk style gsm phone in around 6 months, for those that can’t
>> cope with a standard mobile phone. I get the feeling all these calls to the
>> disadvantaged are simply an excuse by the able and well off who don’t want
>> to face change.
>
> You still don't get it do you?
>
> There are several factors that have to be considered that leads this
> user to be a stalwart land line user, it is not just economics.
>

I do. I’ve dealt with an elderly mother. I’ll point out yet again that
rural Finland has done without landlines for at least 5 years and the end
of the world hasn’t come. It won’t be economic to maintain a copper
landline system so folk will have to adapt.

On 16/08/2022 12:16, Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
>
> Beware these APC devices have multiple IEC socket outlets

Can you explain why? Most of the ones I have looked at had at least two
IEC outlets.

Jim

In article <tdgtm2$51lj$1@dont-email.me>,
Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
> On 16/08/2022 12:16, Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
> >
> > Beware these APC devices have multiple IEC socket outlets

> Can you explain why? Most of the ones I have looked at had at least two
> IEC outlets.

> Jim

My thought is that "wallwart" PSUs don't use IEC connectors. I have a 4x13A
strip running off one IEC.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 16/08/2022 12:08, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 09:51:46 +0100, Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <30ihfhpupjiedmicqspbkcjcjv8ls151qs@4ax.com>,
>> Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>> if it's absolutely vital that your fibre service keeps working, and
>>> for some reason you can't use a mobile, then I would suggest that it's
>>> up to you to get yourself a suitable power backup device.
>>
>> AIUI the service provider is *required* to ensure you can still 'use a
>> phone'. So the legal burden is on them. Problem is, they may simply take
>> for granted "everyone has a mobile, so that's OK".
>>

No longer. Ofcom says "they must have a solution" not that "voip must
work in power cut" in fact it goes on to say "the technology used to
provide this solution isn't fixed" & only specifies 1 hour duration in a
power cut. See below for documents...

>> Jim
>
> If something is vital to me, then regardless of anybody else's
> responsibilities I'd rather take any necessary precautions myself and
> make sure they're done properly and to *my* exact requirements than
> leave it to someone else to do what *they* think will suffice.
>
> Anyone who can't do this themselves would be better putting themselves
> in the hands of a knowledgeable friend than any big company.
>
> Rod.
This requirement has been quietly watered down in effect dropped. From
the BT FAQ:-

https://www.bt.com/help/landline/digital-voice--will-my-service-work-in-a-power-cut-
<tiny version of link https://tinyurl.com/yf5b8twy >

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Digital Voice: Will my service work in a power cut?
===================================================

No, your Hub must have power for you to be able to make calls using our
Digital Voice service.

If there's a power cut, please make calls using an alternative method,
such as a mobile phone.

If you live in an area where you believe you have no mobile reception,
or you don’t have access to a mobile phone please give us a call on 150.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

and the OFCOM guidance says :-

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/123118/guidance-emergency-access-power-cut.pdf

( short version https://tinyurl.com/477bdma7 )

* Providers should have at least one solution
(so you may have to ask for it)
*A minimum of one hour
(so pointless in recent disruption)

A lot more detail in the document but most of it boils down to "identify
vunerable customers, act"

Dave

On 16/08/2022 18:05, BrightsideS9 wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 15:41:42 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In article <7m1ifh93olmot95r5kfkp9m4clnirusp2v@4ax.com>, BrightsideS9
>>> <reply_to_address_is_not@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are proposing a Tesco mobile at £7.50 a month ontop of purchase
>>>> price, just to use as an emergency, for a stalwart land line user eh?
>>>> paying
>>>
>>> Particularly odd plan at a time when many people will be struggling to
>>> afford food and heating! But we can't have "inefficient" public control of
>>> energy can we, that would be awful.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>
>> £7.50 is cheaper than the standard BT line rental by a factor of 2 or 3
>> depending on your deal. It’s also the same price that BT or Zen charge for
>> a voip service on top of a broadband service. A voip service via the likes
>> of Sipgate costs nothing apart small call charges. If you are trying to
>> wave the shroud of the aged poverty stricken pensioner with a voice only
>> line then they would be better off with a mobile tariff. The savings will
>> pay for a desk style gsm phone in around 6 months, for those that can’t
>> cope with a standard mobile phone. I get the feeling all these calls to the
>> disadvantaged are simply an excuse by the able and well off who don’t want
>> to face change.
>
> You still don't get it do you?
>
> There are several factors that have to be considered that leads this
> user to be a stalwart land line user, it is not just economics.
>

Fair enough, but :-

1. Land lines as we know them are going away.
2. BT (or other providers) no longer have to provide resilience in the
event of a power cut unless you are a vulnerable customer.

Ofcom Guidance is here:-
https://tinyurl.com/477bdma7

so I can't see any reason to have a landline that is not a landline....

Dave

> My thought is that "wallwart" PSUs don't use IEC connectors. I
> have a 4x13A strip running off one IEC.

Exactly, although I have two 4x13A strips.

I have some IEC-IEC cables for the PCs on the larger APC, but also a 13A strip
for the network switch and access point power supplies.

My house has a lot of ethernet wiring under the floors, more reliable
networking than mesh repeaters.

Angus

In article <memo.20220817082244.13472A@magsys.adsl.magsys.co.uk>, Angus
Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd <angus@magsys.co.uk> wrote:
> > My thought is that "wallwart" PSUs don't use IEC connectors. I have a
> > 4x13A strip running off one IEC.

> Exactly, although I have two 4x13A strips.

> I have some IEC-IEC cables for the PCs on the larger APC, but also a 13A
> strip for the network switch and access point power supplies.

> My house has a lot of ethernet wiring under the floors, more reliable
> networking than mesh repeaters.

> Angus
>
I've managed to run cables outdoors. Saves lifting carpets and floorboards.
While there is a mest system, it's for ipads, etc, real computers have fixed
wiring.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article <6d42354b-1d83-1914-430c-9caeab139b34@outlook.com>, Robin
<rbw@outlook.com> wrote:
> > However they may simply "not ask, not know" as it is for them simpler
> > and cheaper.

> I'd reckon most realise that e.g. poorly babies dying because no one
> could call an ambulance leads to opprobrium, fines, and compensation.
> IME companies are like individuals: most don't try it on when the odds
> of getting caught are high and the punishment hurts.

You (we'd) think the companies would know all you wrote and thus *check
with clients* that they will be OK, and take steps to ensure this. However
Barry has been reporting that for his company this isn't even the case when
he *chases* them about the issue.

As often, what "should" be, isn't always so. He can pester them as he knows
about the problem. Many people won't as things stand.

In theory, theory and practice agree. But in practice...

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <5a18dfaff9bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> > And this from the man who refuses to even read the book I suggested on
> > Climate Change because he "knows" from his actual *ignorance* of its
> > content that it must be a "Bible". Whilst presenting gems like his
> > "two points paper" here as being evidence for his delusions on the
> > topic.

> You've raised the issue of the two point paper before whenever you need
> to have an attack on me. I've no idea to what it refers and I don't
> care. Knock yourself out, I know the more you attack me, the weaker you
> position.

You seem now to have developed dementia as well as being paranoid!

Here is the paper *you* referenced here as 'evidence' that AGW was a myth.
http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.earth.20190806.15.pdf

You did this in mid 2020. And said it showed that climate was nothing to do
with CO2 levels.

However for those who have a clue, quick examination showed the paper was
nonsense. Only has two - carefully selected by the author - 'data points'.
However as anyone with a basic knowledge of Astronomy will be aware, there
are more than two bodies in the Solar System that have an atmosphere. So I
got another data point... and it didn't sit on the line the author claimed
as the basis of his daft assertion.

I would guess that even you know the Soar System has more than two possible
data points that would be relevant... or would have done if you hadn't
grabbed the paper as 'proof' of your beilef.

JJ then pointed out that the paper was from a paper mill publisher. i.e.
They'll publish anything if you pay them.

> > A paper we duly read and found to be nonsense in terms of actual
> > evidence.

> You mean the leftie activists decided they didn't like it whatever it
> was - ok.

Your point here (pun alert) is that pretty much all scientists must be
"leftie activists". I confess I can't recall finding questions about
politics on any of the science exams I ever took, or indeed, set.

> > In contrast to his flat refusual to even read a book full of
> > references to measured evidence.

> Did the book come down from heaven, written on a tablet by god himself?
> Or is it a man's opinion?

[snip Bob's following rambles]

It is the work of *hundreds* of scientists, collated, and referenced, with
an overall explanation of the *mutliple* processes that cause climate
change. Both 'natural' and 'man made'. With *hundreds* of references to the
collected data, analysis, etc.

To know more you'd need the moral courage to actually read it and at least
try to understand it. But you have repeatedly refused to do so.

Yet in stark contrast, I and others like JJ have *repeatedly* read the
items you toss up here as window dressing. And find, time after time, that
in terms of basic science, they are simply nonsense.

I've given the details of the book many times here. But just in case
someone new has encountered your fantasising I'll give them again

The Human Planet: How we created the Anthropocene
by Simon L. Lewis and Mark A. Maslin
Pelican Paperback 978-0-241-28088-1
My copy cost 8.99 UKP.

It deals with a variety of processes that have, and do, change the climate
- both 'man made' and 'natural'. Deals with these over timescales ranging
from billions of years down to the recent period of a few hundred.

*30 Pages* of references to journal papers, evidence, etc. (somewhere
around 400 references of all kinds).

If anyone has an interest in the climate change situation is is a great -
and detailed - way to see how the data lays out what has happened, and s
happening. In terms of the real science.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <tdh4h4$5t38$1@dont-email.me>, David Wade
<g4ugm@dave.invalid>
wrote:
> >> AIUI the service provider is *required* to ensure you can still 'use
> >> a phone'. So the legal burden is on them. Problem is, they may simply
> >> take for granted "everyone has a mobile, so that's OK".
> >>

> No longer. Ofcom says "they must have a solution" not that "voip must
> work in power cut" in fact it goes on to say "the technology used to
> provide this solution isn't fixed" & only specifies 1 hour duration in a
> power cut. See below for documents...

Erm... my use of "still use a phone" was meant to include a mobile *if they
have one*. The problem is as I've already said. Some people don't, and at
least one company isn't warning people that they may need one, or a UPS, or
some other 'solution'.

The problem is users being left in ignorance without help - on more than
one level!

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <jaumfhho9pi5ur3t36uhbhsch4ii2r5rs1@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> If something is vital to me, then regardless of anybody else's
> responsibilities I'd rather take any necessary precautions myself and
> make sure they're done properly and to *my* exact requirements than
> leave it to someone else to do what *they* think will suffice.

That's fine IF you know that you need to do so - and of course, if you can
afford it and know how to make suitable arrangements.

The basic problem I've been pointing out is that some people are not told
about the details of a change which may give them a problem in a power cut
+ emergency after their connection is changed. And may not then have what
is 'neede', perhaps because they can't afford it, or even be able to use
it.

Even Barry who has a clue about technology is struggling with getting some
who are applying the change to deal with this issue.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <tdgddg$388m$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
wrote:

> And those vulnerable people should be supported by the authorities
> accordingly. It's not a justification for keeping the wired copper
> network going. Is there any reason why your friend can't have a desk
> style gsm phone?

You're missing the point. This is that the company is making the change
*without* telling people of this consequence. Let alone check if they can
afford it or live where they'd get a mobile to work.

BTW Barry isn't just a 'friend' of mine. He is also a well-known
journalist who has decades of publishing technical articles in a
wide range of magazines and journals. His original focus was
on things like patents, but this expanded over the years. He
did for some years write as "Adrian Hope" IIRC.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <5a194e38e0noise@audiomisc.co.uk>,
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:

> You seem now to have developed dementia as well as being paranoid!
> claimed as the basis of his daft assertion.

Sooner or later with extreme lefties, they cannot resist, they always
live down to my expectations and start the insults again, it's their
first weapon. So tired of it. It makes your argument weaker not
stronger.

You wish to ignore history.

Ignore data tampering.

Ignore emails describing the plot to remove "inconvenient" things
from history which JJ of course claimed was debunked but of course
that easy to say but untrue. The emails still exist and we know who
wrote them and why.

Ignore temperature records where no tampering has taken place.

Ignore that models are preset to give the desired result.

Ignore previous warm periods warmer than now, both in the last
century and centuries ago.

Ignore the obvious "fix" described in this video which in common with
so many slams the door on items that don't suite the agenda, just
like the BBC. To me, it looks like a corrupt stitch up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJIw7ulYaGk

Why is it that the most profound anti CO2 people are left wing?
Globalist and communist using a myth as a weapon on the gullible.

I've had enough, with you anmd the insults.

Bob.