From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 6/3/26 00:27, InterLinked wrote:

On 6/2/2026 10:46 PM, Rich wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2026-06-01 15:19, Rich wrote:

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Thu, 28 May 2026 22:14:29 -0400, c186282 wrote:

     But, I'm not gonna tamper. That would be THE excuse to snip my >>>>>>      landline. Can tell, they're just LOOKING for an excuse ... >>>>>

There's that too. CenturyLink is the landline provider and I can
see them
saying I need a long distance provider. AT&T is less than $15/mo so it >>>>> isn't a huge deal.

The two are no longer inseperable as they were when Ma-Bell was a
single monopoly.

You can (or at least you very well should be able to) have local
service from CenturyLink without long distance from AT&T.

I never bought long distance service for my POTS line, it was local
only.  And the only issue that ever occurred is I could not make
direct-dialed long distance calls.  For the once in five years I ever >>>> needed to do so I solved the problem using one of those old "calling
cards" services.

And Verizon never had any issues with no LD service.

The number is now connected to a VOIP provider, so I get "anywhere in
the USA" calling for the exact same price as every other call (the very >>>> concept of 'long distance' eroded decades ago, not that the 'long
distance' carriers ever bothered to inform anyone of that fact).

No, mine keeps charging long distance fares :-(

Well, I can call anyone on Spain for free, but not outside.

And they keep secret the VoIP configuration.

The AT&T breakup here in the USA back in the early 80's separated (as
in completely severed) the connection between "local phone service" and
"long distance" service.  The old AT&T "local offices" became the "baby
bells" (Verizon, Pacific Bell, other's I've forgotten the names of
now).  The old AT&T long distance portion became a "long distance
provider" but phone subscribers (who still had to use a baby-bell for
phone service) were no longer required to have long distance service.

It sounds like Spain works a bit differently than what formed here in
the US.

In my case, I moved my Verizon phone number to voip.ms (a VOIP
provider).  Instead of, IIRC, about $45/month at the time for Verizon
POTS service I pay the VOIP provider about $2/month.  That is for
"metered VOIP", so all calls incur a per minute charge (something like
$0.001/minute, i.e.  so small as to be nearly zero).  But I can call my
next door neighbor, or someone in Hawaii or Alaska (very long way away)
for the same $0.001/minute.  They do offer an 'unmetered' plan as well,
but it runs something like $15/month or $19/month, and I seldom ever
make or receive phone calls, so paying for 'unmetered' just didn't make
sense in my case.

But this is conflating with regulated facilities based phone service
with unregulated over the top services. Also, they are not mutually exclusive. I have over 70 phone numbers myself through IP-based CLECs
and thousands of minutes of call volume flow monthly through various Asterisk systems of mine for me and other folks. But I still keep the regulated POTS line because it serves a fundamentally different purpose. VoIP is great for cheap phone calls that are fine if they are best-
effort, drop a few packets, etc. etc. Relying on "cheap" stuff for life/ death situations is a different matter.

OK - "unlimited free" may NOT be so 'realistic'. Sending
info COSTS in many ways. Ruin that and you've ruined yer
whole comm system (or have to support it with ridiculous
'socialistic' means).

Quality is another factor. Verizon's 5c/min long-distance plan is TDM- based, very good quality that is hard to match with VoIP services. I
don't use it much, but I will often use it if I know I'm calling another POTS line. If I'm calling a VoIP or wireless number, then it's not worth
the cost since the quality will suck anyways, and I send the call
through a VoIP carrier.

"Quality" for digital voice/data comms WAS bad - but
so was the TECH.

Now (using vastly more CPU/MEM/GPUs) it's most always
gonna be very good. VOIP and related are now very
decent - very low latency and high quality. TOOK awhile.

(And sometimes, I use them in tandem; placing a call to one of my VoIP numbers over the POTS line and then terminating the call often results
in a noticeably better connection than doing "over the top VoIP" using a residential broadband connection.)

Modern comms piggyback, or overlay, on EVERY available
connection method. Yer TCP frames likely traverse fiber,
copper, microwave, maybe even sat. It's why UDP isn't
that good outside yer door.

I realize that most people these days don't care about voice quality and
are quite happy with poor quality VoIP services or cell phones. I think
a lot of people have forgotten or don't even know what good quality
phone calls even sound like.

Well, "poor" quality now was "Just GREAT" quality even
10-15 years ago.

Also, Gen-Z/A2 are AFRAID to talk to actual humans ...
not sure why but it's documented. They'll text the
bartender rather than call-out an order. Worrisome.
Socially decompositional. Soon they'll even be afraid
to text ...... then it's ALL Done. All Fall Down
Go Boom. Vlad/Xi will be delighted - most Westerners
socially/psych paralyzed, unable to cooperate in
real time with anyone on any subject.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2