• Owen (unregistered) in reply to mjolnir

    LOL, I think the trick is to get hired by Marketing instead of IT. If they like you, you can keep 'em snowed forever! I too want one of those gigs, preferably with a real hot boss who will pay me to perform vile sex acts with her, all the while ignoring the code.

  • Will (unregistered) in reply to dontmatter
    dontmatter:
    Andrew:
    Any word that can be said with a "to" before it, or an "s", "ed" or "ing" after it, is a verb! Yes, let's start verbing everything!
    So "everything" is a verb?

    No. "Everyth" is not a word, so "everything" does not meet these criteria.

  • (cs) in reply to -j
    -j:
    The witty riposte of illiterates down the centuries!

    Which century would you prefer we pick our vocabulary from? I'd really rather not have to continually describe computer and mobile phone and other 20th/21st century concepts using only words common in Elizabethan English.

  • S|i(3_x (unregistered) in reply to BBT
    BBT:
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    It is now. Language changes- deal with it.

    QFT. Dictionary.com lists it as a transitive verb.

  • Tobias (unregistered) in reply to SuperJason
    SuperJason:
    I wanted to have a service that did the same thing, and I was going to use the email gateways as well. Is there any reason why that is a bad idea?

    It's unreliable. Here in Germany your mail SMS would reach virtually nobody. Reason: The user has to activate the mail-to-SMS gateway before any message send to it is delivered at all. I keep it off - why should I pay if someone wants to send me a message?

  • Jerry Kindall (unregistered) in reply to pinball
    It is still used, but its more of a niche market these days. The best use I see with them is in restaurants to let me know I can get seated.
    Restaurants aren't using a wide-area pager network, though. They have their own transmitter on-site. It's cheaper than paying for all those pager accounts.

    The pager network is now often used for low-speed data transmission. If your city broadcasts traffic data, it's probably being sent on paging channels. (Or on Microsoft's DirectBand, which uses FM radio frequencies.)

  • M.G. (unregistered) in reply to Maximilianop
    Comment held for moderation.
  • w00t (unregistered) in reply to Maximilianop
    Maximilianop:
    dnm:
    Maximilianop: You can e-mail an IP address just fine. When you send an e-mail, it will try to get its mx record, if one does not exist, it will go to its A record. Or in the case of an IP address, straight to the IP and attempt the delivery.
    You can't do a DNS Query for MX records (or any at all) on an IP, just a domain name. (Think about how much secret information you would get about a NIC if you just DNS queryed it's ip)...

    WTF? You can do DNS queries on IP addresses just fine. How do you think ping tells you the hostname associated with an IP address? PTR records in the in-addr.arpa zone, that's how! I'm sure you could stuff in an MX record too. After all, people are already stuffing in CNAME, TXT and LOC records, and stuff for ipsec. It's just that e-mail servers won't bother querying DNS when they've already got an IP number to work with.

  • (cs) in reply to kerch
    kerch:
    Let's hope PhoneNumber is not null, otherwise the guy whose address is null@vtext.com is gonna get inundated again...

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1931904,00.asp

    That reminds me of this site

    http://donotreply.com/

  • NonTexter (unregistered)

    Yep, "texting" is just kewl [/sarcasm]

  • dkf (unregistered) in reply to Maximilianop
    Maximilianop:
    SMS fall into a mailbox, which is scanned by a software in charge of sending it to the cellphone.
    If I ever find out that you've done something like that for the email->sms gateway for a large provider, you'll be the subject of an article here so quick you won't have time to breathe.

    CAPTCHA: ewww (yeah, I don't normally, but this time it was 100% apt!)

  • Mika (unregistered) in reply to akatherder

    Most Decompilers add gotos, even if original didn't have any.

  • (cs) in reply to darwin
    darwin:
    If you are correct, then email is not a word at all. Let me write up a letter and send it electronically to Oxford to let them know. While I am at it, I'll be adamant that they remove any of these newfangled terms that have crept into the language over the last, I don't know, 500 years like automobile, airplane, and rocket.
    You misspelled car, aeroplane and watercress.
  • (cs) in reply to dontmatter
    dontmatter:
    Andrew:
    Any word that can be said with a "to" before it, or an "s", "ed" or "ing" after it, is a verb!
    So "everything" is a verb?
    How else could I have everythed your mum? (My, she's a damn good everyth, I'll tell you.)
  • Roger Leong (unregistered) in reply to TheRider

    The code was generated by decompiler >_>

  • (cs) in reply to w00t
    w00t:
    Maximilianop:
    dnm:
    Maximilianop: You can e-mail an IP address just fine. When you send an e-mail, it will try to get its mx record, if one does not exist, it will go to its A record. Or in the case of an IP address, straight to the IP and attempt the delivery.
    You can't do a DNS Query for MX records (or any at all) on an IP, just a domain name. (Think about how much secret information you would get about a NIC if you just DNS queryed it's ip)...

    WTF? You can do DNS queries on IP addresses just fine. How do you think ping tells you the hostname associated with an IP address? PTR records in the in-addr.arpa zone, that's how! I'm sure you could stuff in an MX record too. After all, people are already stuffing in CNAME, TXT and LOC records, and stuff for ipsec. It's just that e-mail servers won't bother querying DNS when they've already got an IP number to work with.

    Sure, you can do a reverse DNS lookup on the IP address, but that won't necessarily get you the right domain.

    Just look at the situation where a domain owner is using a hosting service, rather than purchasing their own hardware. The MX record for your domain points to the hosting service's mail server. This server will be hosting email for a number of domains.

    Someone tries an email to webmaster@[mail server IP]. The mail server is contacted correctly, but what should it do when it's asked to send an email to that address?

    You can't do a reverse DNS lookup (PTR record) on the IP address, because that would simply get you the hosting service's domain. That's not the one you want.

    Because there are multiple domains on the same IP address, there's no way to tell exactly which domain to send to, especially if more than one has a mail user called webmaster.

    There are only 2 options left: [1] Bounce the email [2] Send it to some default account

    Neither of these is the intended result.

  • Timbojones (unregistered) in reply to Welbog
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    All nouns must be verbed!

  • Anthony (unregistered) in reply to Welbog

    But, google is! At least in the past year or two, since the Oxford English adopted it.

  • (cs) in reply to Anon

    Yes, generally "break" and "continue" are actually just sugar for goto.

  • (cs) in reply to Tobias
    Tobias:
    SuperJason:
    I wanted to have a service that did the same thing, and I was going to use the email gateways as well. Is there any reason why that is a bad idea?

    It's unreliable. Here in Germany your mail SMS would reach virtually nobody. Reason: The user has to activate the mail-to-SMS gateway before any message send to it is delivered at all. I keep it off - why should I pay if someone wants to send me a message?

    Here, it's on by default, but we have another problem: number portability. As I understand it, these apps use area code + exchange to determine provider -- e.g., I know 650-669-**** numbers all belong to a single cell provider 'round here. We'll call it "TeleMart".

    Problem is, if you've taken your number with you to another provider -- say, "MobileCom", this breaks down -- the software will continue to send your SMS to Telemart.

    There's already a free service out there that does this: teleflip.com. Send a message to <phone number>@teleflip.com. I used it a lot, but all the people I text have switched providers by now, so teleflip no longer works for any of them.

  • Old Wolf (unregistered) in reply to frymaster
    frymaster:
    TGV:
    Most countries being England and the US? Here it's called smsen...

    I live in Scotland and it's the same here... I believe it's also the same in Wales, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and sometimes in India :P

    In NZ it is "texting". I recall with amusement when a friend told me excitedly, "The new version of ICQ will support text messaging!"

  • cookies (unregistered)

    In Australia we

    • send a text
    • send a text message
    • send an sms
    • send a message
    • use text as a verb eg. "I'll text you later"
    • use message as a verb eg. "I'll message you later"

    MMMmmm "tastey" captcha... must be lunch time.

  • Joseph Newton (unregistered) in reply to bstorer
    bstorer:
    Rik:
    Umm guys. SMS means Short Message Service and is called "texting" in most countries.
    I think I speak for everyone when I say this is totally new information!

    I found it informative. I had been wondering what Systems Management Server had to do with cell phones and the Web. I'm still a bit unclear as to how texting interacts with Web page delivery or interaction.

  • Joseph Newton (unregistered) in reply to The Anonymous Coward
    The Anonymous Coward:
    All smtp uses email's domain to understad where it's send to ... if you just put the ip of the mail server it would:
    1. Not work due to not finding corresponding mail server
    2. In case I missed the part of SMTP 101 where it's possible to relay to an IP ... how would the receiving server know where to host it into?

    Soooo... you don't actually know what an IP is, do you? When a mail server (or anything else) uses a domain name to route traffic, it does so by first using DNS to translate that name into an IP; the IP address is what's actually used to figure out where traffic should go. Domain names are just to assist humans.

    It is not quite that simple. You have certainly explained DNS here, but the fact is that a number of systems do use the request URL on the server side to route to the appropriate process. The Drupal content management system is one. IIS is another. Others may be able to offer further examples.

  • Angry Coder (unregistered) in reply to BBT
    BBT:
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    It is now. Language changes- deal with it.

    rite ON bro!! I was have been tellin me english teechs this 4 ages! Rulz are for loosahs and spelling nazi! As long as teh words meaning is there doesnt matter how presentsed it is done like! Changes is teh bomb!!!!

  • Joseph Newton (unregistered) in reply to iain'tanenglishmajor
    iain'tanenglishmajor:
    Welbog wrote: >TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    But "texting" is a verb. Welcome to the joys of the English language.

    ...or a gerund, depending on context.

  • Share My Shampoo (unregistered) in reply to zip
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (cs) in reply to The Anonymous Coward
    The Anonymous Coward:
    All smtp uses email's domain to understad where it's send to ... if you just put the ip of the mail server it would:
    1. Not work due to not finding corresponding mail server
    2. In case I missed the part of SMTP 101 where it's possible to relay to an IP ... how would the receiving server know where to host it into?

    Soooo... you don't actually know what an IP is, do you? When a mail server (or anything else) uses a domain name to route traffic, it does so by first using DNS to translate that name into an IP; the IP address is what's actually used to figure out where traffic should go. Domain names are just to assist humans.

    Actually you are assuming that it's a very simple email setup. If it uses virtual domain hosting then sending it to an IP will not work. It is unlikely that Verizon uses virtual hosting shared with other providers, but they may use load balancers and virtual hosting for all of their related domains (verizon, verizon wireless, etc) to consolidate the IT infrastructure.

  • scruffy (unregistered) in reply to Anon

    In most languages we would consider "break" and "continue" to simply be sanitised forms of goto. Chen java is compiled to bytecode, break is (IIRC) represented by a simple bytecode, while goto is represented by a "goto" bytecode that references into the class's litteral pool to find the destination address. It's been a couple of years since I've played with JVMs though.

    It looks like the programmer did actually use "goto" on the previous clauses and then "break" on the last.

    This being demo code, the implementation isn't the real wtf, the real wtf is using email to sms gateways.

  • scruffy (unregistered) in reply to Anon

    In most languages we would consider "break" and "continue" to simply be sanitised forms of goto. Chen java is compiled to bytecode, break is (IIRC) represented by a simple bytecode, while goto is represented by a "goto" bytecode that references into the class's litteral pool to find the destination address. It's been a couple of years since I've played with JVMs though.

    It looks like the programmer did actually use "goto" on the previous clauses and then "break" on the last.

    This being demo code, the implementation isn't the real wtf, the real wtf is using email to sms gateways.

  • Alex (unregistered)

    There's also the fact that some telco stuff uses enum to convert between e164 phone numbers and IP addys. Reverse the phone no and query e164.in-addr.arpa, I think.

  • (cs) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    Maximilianop:
    SMS fall into a mailbox, which is scanned by a software in charge of sending it to the cellphone.
    If I ever find out that you've done something like that for the email->sms gateway for a large provider, you'll be the subject of an article here so quick you won't have time to breathe.

    CAPTCHA: ewww (yeah, I don't normally, but this time it was 100% apt!)

    Well, I assumed due to one case, my cellphone provider.

    I can access my SMS after receiving them on the phone by a POP mailbox, since both (SMS gateway and POP server) come from same IP(Same machine I'm guessing again) and mail has an older date than the SMS, I guessed the mail is stored first, and send to phone later.

    P.D: If I ever get to work on such a system, I would submit the story here MYSELF :D

  • (cs) in reply to BBT
    BBT:
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    It is now. Language changes- deal with it.

    Google is a noun. No, its a verb. Wait, its an adjective!!

  • Sgt. Preston (unregistered) in reply to Welbog
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!
    This takes us away from the topic of the WTF (like that's never happened before), but this digression is interesting.

    I don't have a problem with the coining of the verb "to text", because it expresses an idea for which we didn't previously have a clear and succinct term. Before people started to say "I'll text you," they had to say "I'll send you a text message." This was arguably cumbersome -- and certainly too lengthy for many in the age of SMS.

    What I mind about the English language's openness to new words are (a) the profligate, almost carcinomic, creation of new words and expressions where we already have eleven perfectly good ones that mean exactly the same thing, and (b) the creation or redefinition of terms through shear ignorance or laziness.

    One of my pet expressions that I would like to see adopted more widely is "youall" (or "y'all") and its companion phrase "all y'all" as they are used in the southern US. I live in Canada, where the plural of "you" is "you". This sometimes leads to confusing ambiguities. "Youall" is clearer and, while somewhat quaint to many of our ears, sounds less low-brow than the regrettably ubiquitous "youse". "Youall" is not, however, completely unambiguous, because the "all" part makes it sound omniinclusive, which it is not. That's where "all y'all" comes in. It's both plural and omniinclusive, even if it sounds rather amusing to those not from The South.

  • BAReFOOt (unregistered)

    Oh man, have you all never used a decompiler? The goto obviously is a decompilation artefact. And the rest is not bad if you mind that you're looking trough the decompiler googles.

  • (cs) in reply to Sgt. Preston
    Sgt. Preston:
    One of my pet expressions that I would like to see adopted more widely is "youall" (or "y'all")

    I'm trying to popularize it in Michigan. Like you said, it's extremely handy. If you're inviting someone to a party, and it's evident that their entire family is invited, you can say:

    Are you coming? (uh oh I thought the wife and kids were invited) Are you, Jill, and the kids coming? (yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and yes). Are you all coming? (yup)

  • (cs) in reply to Welbog
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!
    It is in English, and has been for many hundreds of years.

    If you look in the full version of the Oxford English Dictionary* you will find that there is a citation from 1599:

    NASHE in Lenten Stuffe:
    A chronographical Latin table..in a fair text hand, texting unto us, how, in the sceptredom of Edward the Confessor, the sands first began to grow into sight at low water.
    *Before you start complaining that this is a UK dictionary, not a Merkin one consider that a) What is now the USA was still a colony when the cited text was written and b) If you want your own language call it American; if you want to keep using ours, use it correctly!
  • (cs) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    Sgt. Preston:
    One of my pet expressions that I would like to see adopted more widely is "youall" (or "y'all")

    I'm trying to popularize it in Michigan. Like you said, it's extremely handy. If you're inviting someone to a party, and it's evident that their entire family is invited, you can say:

    Are you coming? (uh oh I thought the wife and kids were invited) Are you, Jill, and the kids coming? (yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and yes). Are you all coming? (yup)

    Yeah, we already have a phrase to mean more than one person, it's "you all". "y'all" is laziness and technically acceptable I guess, but try it in England (in most places) and you'd be laughed at. They didn't invent "you all" down south you see, they just made it more lazy.

  • Ben Hutchings (unregistered) in reply to dnm
    Comment held for moderation.
  • jon (unregistered) in reply to Joseph Newton
    Joseph Newton:
    iain'tanenglishmajor:
    Welbog wrote: >TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    But "texting" is a verb. Welcome to the joys of the English language.

    ...or a gerund, depending on context.

    Aye. Whilst in Laramie last year, I queried if "Wyoming" was a present participle or a gerund. I got no replies.

    Captcha: Vern. Yeah. I asked him, too.

  • (cs)

    Why would they have their own implementation for sending SMS - that is WTF in itself ? There are various websites offering the same functionality (some are free, some are not). Those sites keep track of the various mobile networks world-wide for you.

    You just have an interface by which you send the SMS-text and addressee to your chosen provider. That's it.

    As for receiving SMS, you just sign up with a mobile provider. Then it can be as simple as connecting a mobile to a PC (serial port, USB or even Bluetooth) and just waiting for messages to come in in your app. Do not send SMS this way, though: that can become quickly very expensive except for very small numbers of messages.

  • (cs) in reply to Spoe
    Spoe:
    Welbog:
    TEXT IS NOT A VERB!

    Yes, and when William the Conqueror showed up on the shores of Britain in 1066 he found everyone speaking the same English we do today. Since, you know, the language never changes and words never take on new meanings and/or usages. Never.

    CAPTCHA: craaazy

    English happened when Norman knights and Saxon barmaids negotiated for the latter's virtues.

  • (cs) in reply to CorporateFelon
    CorporateFelon:
    Charles:
    I work on an SMSC, my guess is the WTF here is that he didn't interface using SMPP, the industry standard for sending short messages like grown-ups.

    My guess is the company didn't want to pay to send text messages.

    This way the company can send all the text messages they want with out paying a dime. I know it's not the best way, but I'm guessing this was their line of thought. I had to deal with a situation exactly like this before.

    Don't forget: Marketing was paying the contractor and Marketing usually can not initiate service contracts with telco providers without IT in the vast majority of organizations. Since Marketing was going behind IT's back they had to do it on the cheap ....

  • (cs) in reply to Misha
    Misha:
    morry:
    question for pondering: considering how similar (in function) pagers and sms are, how come they can't communicate with each other via some intermediate? Obviously a pager and a cell phone operate on different frequencies and protocols, but how come there's not a phone number you can SMS and it'll send a page, and vice versa?

    They can't? I always assumed pagers where just mobile phones without the voice function. But then, having grown up in the mobile age, I've only ever seen a pager on /Scrubs/. I don't think pagers are used at all in Europe/Asia where SMS is ubiquitous, except maybe by emergency workers.

    So how does a pager work if it isn't a phone? Are you telling me we have an entire wireless network just to support something no one uses anymore?

    Pagers were around a looooong time before the first (analog) mobiles - ten, fifteen years or more. I have seen my first one sometime in the late seventies. They had their own separate networks right up to the point when they were abolised.

  • david (unregistered)

    When my grandfather worked in a residential hotel, he used to walk through the lobby and common areas calling "Message for Mr Smith". The process was called paging, although his job title was actually 'bell boy', not 'page'.

    In most hospitals, this system was replaced by a system of colored lights in each ward and at other critical points. When the red light came on (a 'code red'), the critical response team would respond. This system remaind in use in hospitals even after public address systems were introduced in hotels, because it was quite, and did not disturb the patients as much as having the speakers announcing 'code red in ward A' or 'paging Mr Smith'

    Beepers (aka pagers) eventually replaced colored lights because (1) You could have a lot more codes, and (2) You could reach a lot more sites. You could even reach off-site! Of course, 'beepers' were notoriously intrusive - until the invention of the cell-phone.

    'Beepers' eventually became really cheap. Really Really cheap, so if restraunts are using their own transmitters, that's because the broadcast system has collapsed.

  • Jon (unregistered) in reply to Sgt. Preston
    Sgt. Preston:
    One of my pet expressions that I would like to see adopted more widely is "youall" (or "y'all") and its companion phrase "all y'all" as they are used in the southern US. I live in Canada, where the plural of "you" is "you". This sometimes leads to confusing ambiguities. "Youall" is clearer and, while somewhat quaint to many of our ears, sounds less low-brow than the regrettably ubiquitous "youse". "Youall" is not, however, completely unambiguous, because the "all" part makes it sound omniinclusive, which it is not. That's where "all y'all" comes in. It's both plural and omniinclusive, even if it sounds rather amusing to those not from The South.
    I like thy idea, but thou'rt forgetting what happened the last time English had that distinction.
  • ian (unregistered) in reply to TheRider
    TheRider:
    1. The "goto Label_005B" is particularly amusing. What weed was this guy smoking?

    That's the java decompiler at work.

  • Sgt. Preston (unregistered) in reply to Kemp
    Kemp:
    akatherder:
    Sgt. Preston:
    One of my pet expressions that I would like to see adopted more widely is "youall" (or "y'all")

    I'm trying to popularize it in Michigan. Like you said, it's extremely handy. If you're inviting someone to a party, and it's evident that their entire family is invited, you can say:

    Are you coming? (uh oh I thought the wife and kids were invited) Are you, Jill, and the kids coming? (yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and yes). Are you all coming? (yup)

    Yeah, we already have a phrase to mean more than one person, it's "you all". "y'all" is laziness and technically acceptable I guess, but try it in England (in most places) and you'd be laughed at. They didn't invent "you all" down south you see, they just made it more lazy.

    Kemp, do they use "you all" in England to mean you plural? If so, I wasn't aware of it. How do they distinguish between "you all" meaning more than one of you and "you all" meaning all of you (i.e., everybody)?

  • !Pony (unregistered) in reply to Welbog

    This is from Dictionary.com:

    "tr.v. text·ed, text·ing, texts

    1. To send a text message to: She texted me when she arrived.
    2. To communicate by text message: He texted that he would be late."
  • bos_tsip (unregistered) in reply to frymaster

    well surely, your country is not part of the "most countries"

Leave a comment on “Buzz, Cell Phone, Buzz”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article