MR> nobody uses instant msging anymore.

Shame actually. I got on the net in 1996 and ICQ and IRC were my main means of communication. I loved getting the oh-ow sounds when logging in, having people reach out to me and exchanging messages.

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: knightbbs to MRO on Fri Jun 25 2021 10:41 pm

> MR> nobody uses instant msging anymore.
>
> Shame actually. I got on the net in 1996 and ICQ and IRC were my main means
> of communication. I loved getting the oh-ow sounds when logging in, having
> people reach out to me and exchanging messages.

i used to have so many people bothering me though. it was pretty annoying at times. it's my fault, i had my client open.

i prefer texting and telegram and irc now.
i reply when i'm able.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: knightbbs to MRO on Fri Jun 25 2021 10:41 pm

> MR> nobody uses instant msging anymore.
>
> Shame actually. I got on the net in 1996 and ICQ and IRC were my main means
> of communication. I loved getting the oh-ow sounds when logging in, having
> people reach out to me and exchanging messages.

IM clients on your phone are the main form of communication now. Where I am
from pretty much everyone is on WhatsApp -- it's a very good way to keep in
touch with people. I don't see much of a difference between IM clients such as
WhatsApp and the likes of MSN other than it's based on a smart phone rather
than a traditional computer. I hear a lot of people are on Discord now... I
don't use that so I don't know much about it. Back when I used to play online
games as a teen, we used mIRC to chat with one another. That was a LONG time
ago though.

---
■ Synchronet ■ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to knightbbs on Wed Jun 30 2021 03:39 pm

> > Shame actually. I got on the net in 1996 and ICQ and IRC were my main
> > means of communication. I loved getting the oh-ow sounds when logging in,
> > having people reach out to me and exchanging messages.
>
> IM clients on your phone are the main form of communication now. Where I am
> from pretty much everyone is on WhatsApp -- it's a very good way to keep in

the people i know just use facebook, snapchat, instagram or txting.
whatsapp isnt that popular with them. i have whatsapp but why would i use it when i can txt a friend instead?
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: MRO to Andeddu on Wed Jun 30 2021 08:54 pm

> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> By: Andeddu to knightbbs on Wed Jun 30 2021 03:39 pm
>
> > > Shame actually. I got on the net in 1996 and ICQ and IRC were my main
> > > means of communication. I loved getting the oh-ow sounds when logging
> > > having people reach out to me and exchanging messages.
>
> > IM clients on your phone are the main form of communication now. Where I
> > from pretty much everyone is on WhatsApp -- it's a very good way to keep
>
> the people i know just use facebook, snapchat, instagram or txting.
> whatsapp isnt that popular with them. i have whatsapp but why would i use i
> when i can txt a friend instead?

Whatsapp is the de-facto communication tool in Spain. It is not phone calls, it
is not Facebook. Most Spaniards who need to send a message to somebody will try
Whatsapp as their first option. If that option fails then they will desist
trying something else at all.

Which sucks because "silos" (communication platforms ran by a single provider,
who requires you to register with an unique identifier) are quite lame out of
niche applications.

Whatsapp and the like have a big edge against old-school texting because phone
plans in Spain usually don't include free or cheap SMS. Instead, data plans
are available in spades.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Arelor to MRO on Thu Jul 01 2021 06:09 pm

>
> Whatsapp and the like have a big edge against old-school texting because
> phone plans in Spain usually don't include free or cheap SMS. Instead, data
> plans
> are available in spades.
>

that's sad. you guys are almost 20 years behind the rest of the world.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: MRO to Andeddu on Wed Jun 30 2021 08:54 pm

> > > Shame actually. I got on the net in 1996 and ICQ and IRC were my main
> > > means of communication. I loved getting the oh-ow sounds when logging
> > > in, having people reach out to me and exchanging messages.
>
> > IM clients on your phone are the main form of communication now. Where I
> > am from pretty much everyone is on WhatsApp -- it's a very good way to
> > keep in
>
> the people i know just use facebook, snapchat, instagram or txting.
> whatsapp isnt that popular with them. i have whatsapp but why would i use
> it when i can txt a friend instead?

I think most people still use all those social media clients alongside WhatsApp
which is more for general chat. In the UK texting is pretty much dead as it's
just not as good an experience as WhatsApp... NightFox said before that
WhatsApp isn't massive in the USA but I reside in the UK. Texting is also still
limited here in the sense that most phone packages include around 500-1000 text
messages. Everyone seems to have a large data contract so WhatsApp can be used
without having to worry about going over your allowance... perhaps that's the
reason it's so popular.

Either way, I think smart phones are responsible for killing off traditional IM
clients such as MSN.

---
■ Synchronet ■ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Arelor to MRO on Thu Jul 01 2021 06:09 pm

> Whatsapp is the de-facto communication tool in Spain. It is not phone calls,
> it is not Facebook. Most Spaniards who need to send a message to somebody
> will try Whatsapp as their first option. If that option fails then they will
> desist trying something else at all.
>
> Which sucks because "silos" (communication platforms ran by a single
> provider, who requires you to register with an unique identifier) are quite
> lame out of niche applications.
>
> Whatsapp and the like have a big edge against old-school texting because
> phone plans in Spain usually don't include free or cheap SMS. Instead, data
> plans
> are available in spades.

Same here in the UK. I used to speak people over the phone quite often but now
I can barely remember the last time I had a traditional call with a friend.
WhatsApp also include a Skype style voice only or camera enabled chat which is
pretty decent as I use that quite often. I've also had acquaintances and work
colleagues contact me over WhatsApp voice chat rather than phone me which was
weird at first but I am used to it now.

---
■ Synchronet ■ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to Arelor on Mon Jul 05 2021 01:47 am

>
> Same here in the UK. I used to speak people over the phone quite often but n
> I can barely remember the last time I had a traditional call with a friend.
> WhatsApp also include a Skype style voice only or camera enabled chat which
> pretty decent as I use that quite often. I've also had acquaintances and wor
> colleagues contact me over WhatsApp voice chat rather than phone me which wa
> weird at first but I am used to it now.
>

The problem with video and voice calls is that they require you to have a
proper data plan and a provider able to sustain the call. My father tried with
Whatsapp videocalls once but they didn't work well at all. Similar thing with
voice calls.

It sucks a lot because many people will try to initiate a videocall to you, and
the whole thing will fail because the ISP can't sustain it, and the initiator
is often too stupid or mean to switch to regular phone call - which works
perfectly fine.

I have an unlimited phone plan. I can phone as much people I want as often I
want and for how long as I want and it won't cost me an extra dime. I have no
need for IP calls myself.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to MRO on Mon Jul 05 2021 01:40 am

>
> I think most people still use all those social media clients alongside
> WhatsApp which is more for general chat. In the UK texting is pretty much
> dead as it's just not as good an experience as WhatsApp... NightFox said
> before that WhatsApp isn't massive in the USA but I reside in the UK.
> Texting is also still limited here in the sense that most phone packages
> include around 500-1000 text messages. Everyone seems to have a large data
> contract so WhatsApp can be used without having to worry about going over
> your allowance... perhaps that's the reason it's so popular.
>
> Either way, I think smart phones are responsible for killing off traditional

that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt msgs.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: MRO to Andeddu on Mon Jul 05 2021 09:28 am

> that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt msgs

If you think a limit of 500 to 100 SMS is bad, then wait until you learn they
charge 20 cents each here.

The bright side is out ISPs don't block common service ports such as port 22
and 25 for home connections very often, which is good because it allows
residential customers to do a lot of hobby things with their networks that
American users seem to need an enterprise subscription for.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Arelor to MRO on Mon Jul 05 2021 12:41 pm

> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> By: MRO to Andeddu on Mon Jul 05 2021 09:28 am
>
> > that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt
> > msgs
>
> If you think a limit of 500 to 100 SMS is bad, then wait until you learn
> they charge 20 cents each here.

that's like 20 years ago prices.
>
> The bright side is out ISPs don't block common service ports such as port 22
> and 25 for home connections very often, which is good because it allows
> residential customers to do a lot of hobby things with their networks that
> American users seem to need an enterprise subscription for.
>

there's only a few isps that block certain ports and it's not very common.
i'm on one of the big ones and they let you do what you want. I only got in trouble one time when a guy signed up for a mailing list from me and then reported me to my isp as a spammer. They checked me out and saw i was not commercial and then flagged my account to disregard any further reports.

http://foxriver.net/public/frn-rules.wct

"UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL OR BULK MAIL/ADVERTISING:
UNSOLICITED Commercial or Bulk Mail/Advertising Messages (UBE/UCE) are EXPRESSLY NOT PERMITTED to be DELIVERED TO or SENT FROM The System - PERIOD!
Electronic conveyance of unrequested or unsolicited mailings en masse or otherwise using credentials bearing The System's domain name or that of any other domain owned or operated by The System or its related domains and entities, regardless of whether or not such mailings are sent via The System's facilities, is expressly prohibited.

The System does not support, recognize or condone 'Opt-Out' concepts of mailings or conditions by outside or inside entities. Such assumed permission until permission is revoked methods are, quite bluntly in our opinion, - bullshit. If a party does not specifically request, accept, or grant permission via plainly written and boldly posted notices or agreements, any advertising or other communication from any other party, then it is unacceptable to send any such form of information to that original party.

So-called Opt-In concepts are greatly more acceptable and recognized by The System here on behalf of its users only if PRE-authorized by The User.

The System reports all abuses to appropriate and pertinent authorities, including but not limited to, internet service providers, registration services, abuse agency entities, advertisers, Real-time Blocking Lists (RBL's), and other such reporting services.

Persons or entities sending unsolicited commercial or bulk mail/advertising to any account at The System may be charged fees for such services rendered including but not necessarily limited to, storage and administrative fees and any legal or other related costs incurred. Payment for such services is payable on demand. Minimum cost for such services shall be no less than $50.00(US) per occurrence.

Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, p.227, any and all unsolicited commercial e-mail sent to addresses to any domain under this systems control and operation may be subject to download and archival fees in the amount of $500.00(US) per message. Parties sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account may be charged $500.00(US) for administrative fees for sending such unwanted mailings to The System. Failure to abide by these rules and conditions, and/or continued abuses can and will result in legal action."

I didn't get an invoice for 500 bucks from this loon, though.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

-=> On 07-05-21 03:07, Arelor wrote to Andeddu <=-

Ar> The problem with video and voice calls is that they require you to have
Ar> a proper data plan and a provider able to sustain the call. My father
Ar> tried with Whatsapp videocalls once but they didn't work well at all.
Ar> Similar thing with voice calls.

I've found they generally work well here, though I prefer to do video over
wifi, because I have unlimited data on the home Internet.

Ar> It sucks a lot because many people will try to initiate a videocall to
Ar> you, and the whole thing will fail because the ISP can't sustain it,
Ar> and the initiator is often too stupid or mean to switch to regular
Ar> phone call - which works perfectly fine.

Yeah regular phone calls often do work better.

Ar> I have an unlimited phone plan. I can phone as much people I want as
Ar> often I want and for how long as I want and it won't cost me an extra
Ar> dime. I have no need for IP calls myself.

Same here, I have unlimited calls and text, so regular phone calls work fine,
and no issues with placing a call. Only exception is international calls,
which cost money and require an alternative.

.... "He who laughs last, thinks slowest."
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au

-=> On 07-05-21 09:28, MRO wrote to Andeddu <=-

MR> @VIA: VERT/BBSESINF
MR> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
MR> By: Andeddu to MRO on Mon Jul 05 2021 01:40 am

>
> I think most people still use all those social media clients alongside
> WhatsApp which is more for general chat. In the UK texting is pretty much
> dead as it's just not as good an experience as WhatsApp... NightFox said
> before that WhatsApp isn't massive in the USA but I reside in the UK.
> Texting is also still limited here in the sense that most phone packages
> include around 500-1000 text messages. Everyone seems to have a large data
> contract so WhatsApp can be used without having to worry about going over
> your allowance... perhaps that's the reason it's so popular.
>
> Either way, I think smart phones are responsible for killing off traditional

MR> that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt
MR> msgs. ---

Yeah here in Australia, unlimited text is very common. I've had unlimited text
messages for years.

.... The colder the X-ray table, the more of your body is required on it.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to MRO on Mon Jul 05 2021 01:40 am

An> Either way, I think smart phones are responsible for killing off
An> traditional IM clients such as MSN.

I don't see why they couldn't coexist. Traditional IM clients had apps for smartphones, so they could be used both on a desktop/laptop and a smartphone. These days, I've seen some instances where smartphone text messages are available on a PC/laptop (I think Apple does that with their iPhone and Mac OS), so it seems it has come full circle. The usefulness of being able to communicate on a PC/laptop is still there. I also think it would be useful to be able to communicate with someone without sharing your phone number.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Arelor to Andeddu on Mon Jul 05 2021 03:07 am

> The problem with video and voice calls is that they require you to have a
> proper data plan and a provider able to sustain the call. My father tried
> with Whatsapp videocalls once but they didn't work well at all. Similar
> thing with voice calls.
>
> It sucks a lot because many people will try to initiate a videocall to you,
> and the whole thing will fail because the ISP can't sustain it, and the
> initiator is often too stupid or mean to switch to regular phone call -
> which works perfectly fine.
>
> I have an unlimited phone plan. I can phone as much people I want as often I
> want and for how long as I want and it won't cost me an extra dime. I have
> no need for IP calls myself.

I don't think that's a problem with 99% of people though because 4G coverage is
so good now and if you're at home you should have a decent WiFi connection. For
the people who are out in the sticks and are unable to sustain a conference
call, a traditional phone call would be far more appropriate.

I don't know how many minutes I have in my contract for phone calls... possibly
only 200-300 minutes, but I have unlimited data so I tend to just use 4G for
everything even when I have access to a WiFi connection.

---
■ Synchronet ■ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: MRO to Andeddu on Mon Jul 05 2021 09:28 am

> that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt
> msgs.

Most contacts I see now have huge data or unlimited data plans and very limited
text message and call time. The way I see it is that text messaging and phone
calls are so 2008 and we've moved on since then.

---
■ Synchronet ■ BBS for Amstrad computer users including CPC, PPC and PCW!

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to MRO on Wed Jul 07 2021 05:19 pm

An> Most contacts I see now have huge data or unlimited data plans and very
An> limited text message and call time. The way I see it is that text
An> messaging and phone calls are so 2008 and we've moved on since then.

Sometimes a phone call is nice though. You can't replace the nuance you get with hearing someone's voice.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to MRO on Wed Jul 07 2021 05:19 pm

> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> By: MRO to Andeddu on Mon Jul 05 2021 09:28 am
>
> > that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt
> > msgs.
>
> Most contacts I see now have huge data or unlimited data plans and very
> limited text message and call time. The way I see it is that text messaging
> and phone calls are so 2008 and we've moved on since then.

thats very strange for them to limit calls and txting.
why would they even do that if they provide unlimited data?
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Andeddu to Arelor on Wed Jul 07 2021 05:17 pm

> I don't think that's a problem with 99% of people though because 4G coverage is so good now and
> you're at home you should have a decent WiFi connection. For the people who are out in the stick
> and are unable to sustain a conference call, a traditional phone call would be far more
> appropriate.

That is a very firstworldler-like declaration to make.

A lot of people on this ball of mud we call Earth does not even have a data plan at all. They just
can't afford it. I have heard a lot of people in India has smartphones without dataplans at all and
they get their Internet fix using public wifis or whatever.

According to the GSMA State of Mobile Internet Connectivity report, as much as 40% of the planet's
population will still be digitally isolated by 2025.

You don't have to be very far off to be out of proper mobile network coverage though. If I drive
for half an hour away of the main city of my province, the quality of the connectivity drops very
sharply.

I am a liiitle bit touchy with this subject because I have noticed a very disturbing pattern when
rolling down technologies like these:

* Technology is first deployed, availability is insufficient, and everybody thinks it is not "quite
there".

* Technology becomes widely available in high density population areas. Inhabitants in high
population areas think the technology is great.

* Inhabitants of densely populated areas claim the tech is ready and whidespread (because it is for
them). The technology starts being deployed in low-density inhabited areas at snail pace.

* Inhabitants of densely populated areas start pushing for sociological changes that surround the
new technology assuming it is widespread. For example, they try to make Internet access mandatory
for certain tasks that used to be doable over a phone line.

* When inhabitants of places where this technology is not deployed at all complain, city slickers
counter with some statement which is true if you happen to live in New York. "How come you don't
have affordable Internet! Stop complaining and get an ADSL subscription! I have one and it is
cheap! Get on with the times man, it is 2005 already!"

For a New Yorker it might seem that 99% of people won't have trouble adopting the tech, but believe
me, this is an skewed assumption.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Nightfox to Andeddu on Wed Jul 07 2021 04:17 pm

> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> By: Andeddu to MRO on Wed Jul 07 2021 05:19 pm
>
> An> Most contacts I see now have huge data or unlimited data plans and very limited text messag
> An> and call time. The way I see it is that text messaging and phone calls are so 2008 and we'v
> An> moved on since then.
>
> Sometimes a phone call is nice though. You can't replace the nuance you get with hearing someon
> voice.
>
> Nightfox
>

From a business and sales person perspective, if you don't _talk_ to people, you are going to have
a very hard time doing business.

If you just send messages, you are just going to be another annoying email in somebody's inbox.
Messages also get stored cold for a lot of time before somebody reads them. If the delivery agency
your ecommerce uses loses a parcel and the customer is mad at you, what you want to do is talk to
some representative of the agency instead of sending them a message and waiting for them to read
it, and then send back an apology form that does not solve anything.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: MRO to Andeddu on Wed Jul 07 2021 10:06 pm

> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> By: Andeddu to MRO on Wed Jul 07 2021 05:19 pm
>
> > Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> > By: MRO to Andeddu on Mon Jul 05 2021 09:28 am
>
> > > that's so fucking backwards. you shouldnt have a limited amount of txt msgs.
>
> > Most contacts I see now have huge data or unlimited data plans and very limited text message
> > call time. The way I see it is that text messaging and phone calls are so 2008 and we've move
> > on since then.
>
> thats very strange for them to limit calls and txting.
> why would they even do that if they provide unlimited data?

I think it is because they want to sell SMS plans to the enterprise segment.

Enterprise in Spain consumes SMS plans like crazy. They do for everything from banking to
marketing. There is an study that SMS are much more likely to be read, and - very important - are
much more likely to reach the recipient on time, because not everybody has access to a
low-latency-high-bandwidth mobile network 24/7/365, but much more people has access to a network
which is at least SMS capable.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Arelor to Andeddu on Thu Jul 08 2021 06:22 am

Ar> That is a very firstworldler-like declaration to make.

Ar> A lot of people on this ball of mud we call Earth does not even have a data
Ar> plan at all. They just can't afford it. I have heard a lot of people in
Ar> India has smartphones without dataplans at all and they get their Internet
Ar> fix using public wifis or whatever.

2600 magazine has a regular column called "Telecom Insider" written by a guy who travels the world contracting for telcos. He does a good job of documenting the telco conditions in the countries he visits.

He described a China a few years back where "regular joes" did most of their commerce with a feature phone bought with a pre-paid plan, and using SMS to pay bills and conduct business. I'd almost prefer that to the State-Of-The-Art people are pushing.

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: Arelor to Andeddu on Thu Jul 08 2021 06:22 am

>> I don't think that's a problem with 99% of people though because 4G
>> coverage is so good now and you're at home you should have a decent

Ar> That is a very firstworldler-like declaration to make.

Ar> A lot of people on this ball of mud we call Earth does not even have a
Ar> data plan at all. They just can't afford it. I have heard a lot of people

I agree. And even though I live in a first-world country, cell data coverage can be spotty, as it always has. There are some parts of town where my signal strength is fairly low, and if I'm driving somewhere, there are places where I don't get a signal at all. That happens if I'm driving to the coast - There are areas between my city and the coast that are just mainly forest, where people don't live, and apparently there aren't enough cell towers in some of those areas.

I think Addieu is in the UK, which is a smaller country, and I could see it being a lot easier to ensure 100% cell coverage in a smaller area. But in a larger country, I think it could be cost-prohibitive for cell companies to maintain enough cell towers to have coverage even outside of the cities.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Arelor on Thu Jul 08 2021 10:34 am

> Re: Re: KICQ as an "Old New I
> By: Arelor to Andeddu on Thu Jul 08 2021 06:22 am
>
> Ar> That is a very firstworldler-like declaration to make.
>
> Ar> A lot of people on this ball of mud we call Earth does not even have a data plan at all. The
> Ar> just can't afford it. I have heard a lot of people in India has smartphones without dataplan
> Ar> at all and they get their Internet fix using public wifis or whatever.
>
> 2600 magazine has a regular column called "Telecom Insider" written by a guy who travels the wor
> contracting for telcos. He does a good job of documenting the telco conditions in the countries
> visits.
>
> He described a China a few years back where "regular joes" did most of their commerce with a
> feature phone bought with a pre-paid plan, and using SMS to pay bills and conduct business. I'd
> almost prefer that to the State-Of-The-Art people are pushing.

That sounds fine.

How do you pay a bill using SMS?

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL