logoalt Hacker News

Grombobulous • today at 6:00 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

This assumes that anyone has maintained the 48V infrastructure, which doesn’t seem like something that will be feasible considering the insignificant quantity of customers using true copper landline service.

The other problem with customers preferring not to have landlines is that by the time they need them, it’s too late to convince them to buy a traditional telephone and plug it in. You are likely to be nursing home age if you still prefer having a landline. You can have amazing infrastructure but if nobody uses it, it’s useless.

What we really have now is cellular sites with their own infrastructure aiming to keep them operational during power outages.

Then we’ve also got various satellite services that are growing in capabilities day by day, and are built in to common devices like iPhones as an SOS method.

I’m not in the UK but my house was built relatively recently and it doesn’t have any telephone jacks. The theoretical benefits of a landline are entirely theoretical. The ship has thoroughly sailed.


Replies

gumby • today at 6:21 PM

You put the battery in the RC and have a battery maintenance schedule. They do that today: the CO battery is just for phones within a few miles of the CO, so rural setups use distributed batteries. Ppl forget how much of California is quite remote and (to my pleasure) without mobile coverage.

I have copper service (buried) for the alarm system in my house in Palo Alto, powered by the CO. I will be sorry to lose it.

The cell ppl so have batteries in the bis and ter nodes but not long term power like the phone company has to do.

Satellite bandwidth is quite limited and uses a lot of power. It’s not really a solution, especially with consumer terminals. It’s just a handwave to get away with not dealing with the problems.

Overall this is a step backwards on safety. Telecoms MAHA

➕ show 1 reply