Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA12771; Tue, 13 Jan 1998 23:44:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 23:44:30 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199801140444.XAA12771@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V18 #8 TELECOM Digest Tue, 13 Jan 98 23:44:00 EST Volume 18 : Issue 8 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AOL Accused of Privacy Violation (TELECOM Digest Editor) Pat Does Talk Radio (oldbear@arctos.com) ISDN in Pennsylvania, Anyone? (Bill Levant) ClearNet PCS Service (Canada) Billing Surprises (Hardy Rosenke) ACM Policy 98 (USACM Washington Office) Microsoft vs. Netscape (Babu Mengelepouti) Re: Microsoft's Fax to Larry Lessig: Bill Gates as Satan? (James Bellaire) CLEC's Headquarter Location Info (John Stahl) Book Review: "Using Eudora, 2nd ed.", Dee-Ann LeBlanc (Rob Slade) Ameritch ISDN Usage Costs (Rick R. Cox) Re: Map Wanted Showing RBOC Territories (John R. Levine) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 15:13:57 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: AOL Accused of Privacy Violation Attention AOL apologists: I'll be expecting to hear from you today or tomorrow at your earliest convenience, reminding me once again of how poor AOL gets picked on unfairly. I *still* contend that AOL seems far, far to cozy and comfortable with law enforcement officials hanging around all the time. The message which follows was forwarded to me. PAT] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 15:40:07 -0800 (PST) From: William Knowles Subject: AOL accused of privacy violation America Online (AOL) may have violated its own policy and perhaps the law when it allegedly revealed the identity of a member to a Navy investigator. The United States Navy is recommending that a U.S. sailor be discharged for "Homosexual Conduct Admittance" because he typed the word "gay" on his member profile under "Marital Status." But the sailor, Timothy McVeigh of Hawaii (no relation to the Timothy McVeigh convicted of bombing the federal building in Oklahoma), and his attornies said that the Navy may never have been able to legally link him with the profile if an AOL employee hadn't provided his identity to a Naval investigator, violating AOL's own privacy policy. The Navy linked the profile to McVeigh after the military investigator called AOL and said he wanted to find out the identity of the person who had sent him a fax that belonged to the screen name. Without identifying himself, he said an employee named "Owen" revealed the name of the account owner as McVeigh along with his state of residence, according to transcripts of sworn military testimony provided by McVeigh's advocates. But AOL spokeswoman Wendy Goldberg said AOL does not release the identity of a user unless it is "presented with a search warrant, a court order, or subpoena. Federal law prohibits release of any personal information. We take this in our members' policy very seriously." When asked if AOL had, in fact, released the user's identity, she replied, "There is nothing in the transcript to suggest we gave out private information." However, others who have read the transcript think otherwise. "AOL appears to have violated its much-touted privacy policy and destroyed a subscriber's life," said David Sobel, an attorney with the Electronic Privacy Information Center."Every AOL subscriber needs to be concerned about this incident." The investigator said he called AOL and asked for the identity of the person who owned the screen name, according to the transcripts. The investigator, who did not identify himself, said that on Sept. 12 an employee in "tech services" revealed to him that the owner of the account was named "Timothy R. McVeigh" and that he lived in Hawaii. That information was enough to get McVeigh drummed out of the military, and privacy experts now are concerned about the privacy of other AOL members. AOL's policy states it will "not to disclose identity information to third parties that would link a member's screen name(s) with a member's actual name, unless required to do so by law or legal process served on AOL, Inc. (e.g., a subpoena)." Deirdre Mulligan, a staff attorney with the Center for Democracy and Technology, said that when the Navy investigator called AOL seeking to connect the screen name with McVeigh, it also violated a federal law: the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which requires that a government agency seeking information about an individual's online communication or subscriber information must go through an "appropriate legal process in which, at the very least, they seek an administrative subpoena." "The military clearly violated the law," she said. "They are not just allowed to call up and say who they are and seek information about an individual." She added that AOL may also have violated the law, which prohibits private companies from giving that information to a government agency. According to the hearing transcripts provided by McVeigh's advocates, the Navy investigator said he called AOL and asked for the identity of the person who had sent an email message without identifying himself. That may not matter when it comes to the question of the law, she said. "From the transcript, this person said he asked for information and it was provided without any check of who he was and his right to get information," she said. == The information standard is more draconian than the gold standard, because the government has lost control of the marketplace. -- Walter Wriston == http://www.dis.org/erehwon/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I said, I do hope the folks at AOL who write me from time to time complaining that treat AOL unfairly here will respond with the version of the facts as they see them. I see this as just another example of AOL's hospitality to the government; their willingness to violate the privacy rights of their subscribers whenever it suits them to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 23:19:15 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: Pat Does Talk Radio Having spent an hour Friday night listening to Pat as guest on WGR talk radio (thanks to real-audio and the 'net), I must say that Pat is as rational and insightful "live" as he is in ASCII. This was not easy to do, as the talk-show host had a very clear political agenda and really just wanted to use Pat as an "expert witness" to prove the hypothesis that the second line access charge is just another example of the Clinton administration duplicitously imposing hidden taxes on the unsuspecting American public. Regardless of the politics, Pat did a great job of explaining that the access fee was only on second telephone lines and not a fee being imposed on the phone extension in the upstairs bedroom. I would have liked to have heard more discussion of the whole idea of using the phone system (if one can still call it a system) as a way of shifting expenses between one set of telephone users and another. Certainly this kind of cross-subsidization was the portrayed as the villian which prompted divestiture, but no one seems to be saying that "deregulation" is far from deregulated and that the cross-subsidy game is now just being played by different interests on a slightly different playing field. Pat did make the point that the "computers-in-schools" surcharge in many ways resembles the old doctrine of universal service. Unfortunately, I think this went over the head of the program host -- and probably many listeners as well. I appreciated the brief digression into the subject of discount long distance calling plans being not all that they seem. But it worries me that people will debate national telecommunications policy without being able to figure out that the five-dollar a month fee their "discount" long distance service charges should be considered in figuring their actual cost per minute for calls. Possibly the "computers-in-schools" surcharge should be redirected to teaching basic life skills mathematics. Anyway, Pat deserves a 'well done' for his keeping his cool and coming across as the intelligent voice of reason. Regards, Will The Old Bear [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your compliments. Others have said they also enjoyed the show. I wish he had kept me on for the phone calls which followed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Levant Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 20:27:57 EST Subject: ISDN in Pennsylvania, Anyone? Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Well, we finally broke down and bought one of those new-fangled Pentium computer thingies :-), but it is apparent that POTS dialup is going to be almost intolerably slow (when we were using the poor old 386, who noticed?). BA's web pages are generally uninformative. Is there anyone out there who actually *has* ISDN from BA-Pennsylvania, and can tell me : 1) What does it REALLY cost per month (exclusive of usage) 2) What usage is charged for, and how (is LD charged as usage PLUS toll, are incoming calls charged; does BA allow flat-rate voice-over-bearer?) 3) Are you happy with it? I realize that this is a bit off-topic, but I've come to trust those who post here; E-Mail is welcomed, so we don't drive POP (poor old PAT) crazy with off-topic posts ... Bill [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Toshiba Satellite 220-CDS laptop I now have which was a gift from Mike Sandman has Pentium/Intel on it. As I mentioned before, it came loaded with Microsoft stuff. I made a mistake earlier in quoting the amount of memory in it. It has 16,134 kb of ram, and a 1.4 gig drive. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hardy@null.net (Hardy Rosenke) Subject: ClearNet PCS Service (Canada) Billing Surprises Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 02:43:19 GMT Organization: Home HARDware (!) BBS Reply-To: hardy@null.net (especially if you are in Greater Vancouver area) -- take note ... Check your invoice (if you've received it *__VERY__* carefully. On mine, there are NUMEROUS calls that are indeed local (verified by dialing from a landline) that I have been charged LD tarriffs on. They are mainly to new exchanges, which, after the 604/250 area code split are numbers that are being assigned for the first time in the "NEW" 604, but which used to have LD counterparts in the "NEW" 250/"OLD" 604. Just on my paltry one month bill, it amounted to around $8.00 in exraneous charges. When I called and got thru, I was told that they were aware of the problem and a credit would be issued on my next statement. I don't know if they are going to willingly go thru and GIVE BACK money, so I urge everyone to scrupulously check their invoices when they get them!! On a related note, I also checked to see that they had my credit card information on file for payment, an option that I took when I signed up with them -- suprisingly enough they did not, and I was a mere four days away from getting docked interest charges. Something else to harrass them about .... Regards, Hardy Rosenke Vancouver, BC ------------------------------ From: usacm_dc@acm.org (USACM Washington Office) Subject: ACM Policy 98 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:54:40 -0500 Organization: Association for Computing ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING (ACM) ANNUAL CONFERENCE * * * POLICY98 * * * "Shaping Policy in the Information Age" Washington, DC, Renaissance Hotel May 10-12, 1998 Preliminary Notice For Conference and Registration information see: http://www.acm.org/usacm/events/policy98/ The ACM Annual Conference will focus on public policy issues affecting future applications of computing. Our goal is to forge stronger links between computing professionals and policy makers. Attendees will interact with prominent leaders from academia, industry, Congress, and Executive agencies, and participate in debates on policy issues including Universal Access, Electronic Commerce, Intellectual Property, and Education Online. The conference will promote more regular engagement of computing professionals in democratic processes related to productive use of computing and information processing innovations. A blend of technical skills and policy insights are essential to cope with the inherent opportunities and dangers of any transformational technology. Continuing collaborations between computing professionals and policy makers will benefit citizens, consumers, entrepreneurs, researchers, and students. You can make a difference! May 10: Ethical and social impacts papers and panels May 11-12: Public policy panels and featured speakers All Policy98 attendees are invited to the Annual ACM Awards Banquet on Sunday evening May 10th, and a conference reception on Monday evening May 11th. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ PANEL TOPICS AND COORDINATORS =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Universal Service: Ollie Smoot What can be done to promote widespread access to the benefits of the Internet? What is the role of government and the role of the private sector in wiring schools, libraries, and medical facilities? Electronic Commerce: Jim Horning How much public policy does EComm need? What problems would inadequate, excessive, or misguided policies cause? Can compromises in areas like fair trade practices, fraud prevention, security, privacy, law enforcement, and taxation advance the interests of all stakeholders? Intellectual Property in Cyberspace: Pam Samuelson What will be the impact of the WIPO agreements on copyright in cyberspace? How should intellectual property be protected and what safeguards are necessary to protect libraries and academic institutions? Education Online: Charles N. Brownstein The Internet offers unparalleled opportunities for learning and teaching. What public policy and technical challenges must be met to realize these prospects? +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Ben Shneiderman, USACM (U.S. Public Policy Committee) C. Dianne Martin, SIGCAS (ACM Special Interest Group on Computers & Society) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Marc Rotenberg, Public Policy Keith Miller, Ethics and Social Impacts +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ REGISTRATION INFORMATION =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ For more information, contact: policy98@acm.org or to register electronically, see: http://www.acm.org/usacm/events/policy98/reginfo.html Early registrants and ACM members receive discounts. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:30:09 -0800 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: Microsoft vs. Netscape Pat said: > I immediatly went out and got a copy of Internet Explorer 4.0 (the > latest version) to replace the version 3 which had come installed. But > I didn't stop there. I also got a copy of Netscape 3.0 and installed > it. As a consumer I also want a choice, and I have both icons on the > desktop ready for use.] Then PAT said: > Maybe Lessig will do everyone a favor and resign; if he won't and/or > the Court decides to have him continue arbitrating this, then my > recommendation would be for everyone to remove Netscape from their > computer and trash all the associated software in protest. PAT] Isn't this contradictory, Pat? Choice dosen't mean deleting all non-Microsoft products, although I'm sure Microsoft would be delighted. I think that it's more than Netscape sour grapes, Pat. The real problem with Microsoft entering the browser market is that they are GIVING THEIR BROWSER AVAILABLE FOR FREE. It's just like the early history of the Bell system, when Bell went into a town to compete head-to-head with the family-owned telco that had served the people there for years. They put in a switch, built infrastructure, and immediately began giving THEIR phone service away almost free -- financially breaking their competition, refusing to interconnect, and eventually putting the "phone company family" out on the streets. What's the difference between this and Microsoft's behavior in the browser market? They GIVE IE AWAY FOR FREE. Netscape doesn't (except for academic use), nor can they afford to give a product that costs them a lot of money to develop away for free. Now, I am not discounting the fact that the Dept. of Justice just pulled out a boner the size of Omaha here, but that speaks nothing on the merits of the case. I think trying to put your competition out of business by giving your product away for free is antitrust. Do you really honestly believe that once Netscape is out of business and Microsoft owns the market MSIE will still be free? Or any other Internet related software for that matter? Somehow I suspect the party will end, just as it did in all of the small towns that Bell invaded. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 13:21:14 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Re: Microsoft's Fax to Larry Lessig: Bill Gates as Satan? In TELECOM Digest V18 #1 Pat Townson wrote: > Maybe Lessig will do everyone a favor and resign; if he won't and/or > the Court decides to have him continue arbitrating this, then > my recommendation would be for everyone to remove Netscape from > their computer and trash all the associated software in protest. PAT] Sorry Pat, but Netscape will remain on my machine. I decided against IE a long time ago. I have contact with two Windows 95 machines. An old 486/66 that has been upgraded in steps from Win 3.11 at home, and a new Pentium that came with Windows 95 and Microsoft Plus! that I use at work. (I also have Plus! on my home machine.) The work machine came with Microsoft's IE 3.0, my home machine has been a kind host to Netscape Navigator, as well as a Fasttrak server that I use for testing web pages. (SHTML, Livewire, all the tricks!) The existance of Internet Explorer on the work machine has changed the 'Internet' control panel, removing the 'connect on demand' option that is available on my home machine. Which means that a simple piece of software that I wrote to grab files (using the command prompt FTP) works fine on my non-IE machine at home, but not on the IE machine at work. Thanks to Internet Explorer I cannot run a simple anonymous FTP script from the command line or in a batch file. IE has caused a pain in this user's neck! And no level of uninstalling has allowed me to run my script on the machine it was intended to run on. (I need it to run on the office machine so it can post the FTP'd files through the office Novell LAN.) I don't like the way that Microsoft integration messes up software written by others, forcing further purchase of MS software. Netscape does not intefere with the normal operation of my machine. It won't be removed from my machine. As for the case ... It does seem that Professor Lessig has a conflict of interest, which is unfortunate. Microsoft's should not be requiring purchasers of Windows 95 to use their browsers. (What's next? Will they buy Rand McNally and prevent me from using DeLorme Street Atlas? I use as little of the Microsoft integration that I can.) It is a shame that these two companies can't fight fairly, with BOTH Microsoft and Netscape trying to write SOFTWARE that competes instead of legal briefs. Maybe we should delete both browsers from our systems. I have Lynx for Windows 95 on my machine and it seems to work ok. (But no frills.) James Bellaire (Still using anonymous FTP, lynx, telnet, and the command prompt. I even use tracert and ping occasionally!) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have Lynx (the latest version) installed on my unix accounts everywhere (I have about five unix accounts through various universities, etc) and I love it. It allows me to browse via my old terminals which I use to connect with the net for working on this Digest, etc. I do not know what the trouble is with your 'on demand' panel, which Windows refers to as the 'application launch' area. I took the IE icon down from there and put a few others there which I wanted to use instead. I tend to keep the most used stuff on the desktop, and the tiny icons on the bottom of the screen for the lesser-used stuff that I want from time to time. Why not just edit yours to get rid of the IE thing if that is what you want? PAT] ------------------------------ From: aljon@worldnet.att.net Subject: CLEC's Headquarter Location Info Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:07:01 +0000 Can anyone identify the following list of CLEC's? Have uncovered this partial list showing the state suspected of containing their headquarters. Have visited http://www.clec.com but these are not listed. Would appreciate knowing their locations and telephone numbers: The Phone Co. (PA) A.R.C. Networks (NY) KMC (NJ) MSI (PA) Thanks for your help. John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecommunications, Data and Internet Consultants email: aljon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:15:51 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Using Eudora, 2nd ed.", Dee-Ann LeBlanc Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKUSEUDR.RVW 970706 "Using Eudora, 2nd ed.", Dee-Ann LeBlanc, 1997, 0-7897-1166-4, U$24.99/C$35.95/UK#22.99 %A Dee-Ann LeBlanc %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1997 %G 0-7897-1166-4 %I MacMillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$24.99/C$35.95/UK#22.99 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 306 %T "Using Eudora, 2nd ed." With the explosion of growth in dialup IP Internet connections, Eudora very quickly surged to the front of the pack in terms of mail user agents. Until Netscape Navigator 3.0, it was the preferred program for local Internet Service Providers to hand out (not least, perhaps, because of the free version). Even the Lite edition has a number of advantages over both the Netscape and Microsoft products, and while Eudora is not as functional or flexible as Pegasus, it is certainly better known. Over the last few years, I have had numerous interchanges with email users, and even trainers, who, it slowly became clear, saw email exclusively through the Eudora screen. Therefore, I was delighted to find that LeBlanc starts with some basics, background, and fundamentals before jumping into the menus. At appropriate points (such as Styled Text) the reader is reminded that not everyone uses Eudora--certain special features are *not* universal. Netiquette is dealt with in detail, down to aspects of how much text to quote in a reply. The coverage of Eudora itself is clear, comprehensive, and logical. The most common, and necessary, functions are explained first, with advanced functions later. (Oddly, the one piece of information that most frustrated me when starting to use Eudora -- the keystroke to use to go to the next message -- was not covered in the text. It was provided in the quick reference chart.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKUSEUDR.RVW 970706 ------------------------------ From: Rick.R.Cox@ait4.ameritech.com (Rick R. Cox) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 98 03:31:23 GMT Subject: Ameritch ISDN Usage Costs Jack, I saw your request for ISDN usage info on TELECOM Digest V18 #3. I don't claim to know what analog usage rates are in Michigan so I won't comment on them. Your description of ISDN (BRI) usage seemed way off. Currently in MI, business usage for a local call (BRI) is $.0842 per call, per channel, untimed. Call it 8.5 cents for ease of multiplication. So it's possible to, for example, place a call to your ISP in the morning and let it run all day for 8.5 cents at 64k or 17 cents for 128k. Residential BRI gets 50 free, untimed, local calls per month as part of their standard price. Additional calls are charged at the same rate as business calls. Note: there are other residential plans available. These rates have been in effect since 11 August 97. They can be found on our web page www.ameritech.com/teamdata If the BRI line in question is older than Aug. of 97 they may still be under the old tariff which was grandfathered for one year. If you want to change to the new tarriff, call the Ameritech ISDN Provisioning Center at 800-432-4736. They can switch your BRI line over. If you have other ISDN questions feel free to call me, or one of my co-workers at 800-832-6328. I hope this helps, Rick Cox Data Design Consultant Ameritech Team Data ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1998 02:44:57 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Map Wanted Showing RBOC Territories Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Hey Pat, would you happen to have or know where to find a map of the > U.S. showing the RBOC territories? Or, if there is one with more detail > that would be fine too. There's a simple but adequate one on the home page at www.555-1212.com. RBOC boundaries follow state lines with only a few exceptions, e.g., Greenwich Conn. is served by New York, er, NYN, er, Bell Atlantic while the rest of the state is served by SNET, uh, SBC. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V18 #8 ****************************