perelgut@utcsrgv.UUCP (Stephen Perelgut) (02/28/84)
(..)
\/
I am tired of hearing the title phrase repeated in almost every Canadian
article about telecommunications. Does anyone outside of Canada ever hear
that phrase? What makes it true?
--
Stephen Perelgut
Computer Systems Research Group University of Toronto
Usenet: {linus, ihnp4, allegra, decvax, floyd}!utcsrgv!perelgut
CSNET: perelgut@Torontodave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman) (02/28/84)
I guess Alexander Graham Bell made it true, inventing the telephone
in Brantford, Ontario...
Dave Sherman
--
{allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!daveperelgut@utcsrgv.UUCP (Stephen Perelgut) (02/28/84)
.
Bell sketched detailed plans for the telephone in July 1874 while at his
parent's home in Brantford, Ontario but:
a) Alexander Graham Bell was a Scottish immigrant
b) the first telephone didn't work until 1876 when Bell spilled
some acid and his assistant heard through the experimental
telephone the now immortal words (thanks to Don Ameche),
"Mr. Watson, come here, I want you."
c) Bell demonstrated his one way telephone for the first time on
June 25, 1876 at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition.
(Coincidently the same day that General George Custer and his
troops were busy providing amusement for a bunch of Sioux
indians at the Little Bighorn.)
[ The above information is take from a draft copy of "Knights of the
New Technology", Imprint/Key Porter without permission. The information
is available as public knowledge if you look hard enough!]
P.S. From the same source, quoting Marshall McLuhan from his 1964 book
"Understanding Media" on the effects of telecommunications on human
behaviour.
"No more unexpected social result of the telephone has been observed
than its elimination of the red-light district and its creation of
the call girl."
--
Stephen Perelgut
Computer Systems Research Group University of Toronto
Usenet: {linus, ihnp4, allegra, decvax, floyd}!utcsrgv!perelgut
CSNET: perelgut@Torontotomm@tekecs.UUCP (Tom Milligan) (03/01/84)
An Italian professor of mine once related a story to our class claiming that Bell actually did not invent the telephone...Instead, the original concept was developed by an Italian by the name of Antonio Meucci. Meucci, the story goes, didn't have the resources to develop his idea, so he went to a famous scientist by the name of Bell, hoping that Bell would see merit in the idea, and would provide Meucci with the resources to develop it. Bell reportedly sent Meucci away, telling him that the idea was not a sound (pun intended) one. Shortly thereafter Bell is credited with having invented the telephone. The same professor also said that Meucci's descendants recently went to court to resolve the matter, presenting Meucci's notebooks with descriptions of his ideas as their evidence. The court supposedly ruled that yes, Meucci is the originator of the idea of the telephone, but that Bell actually gave the idea its fruition. That is all we were told of the courts decision. The professor said that this is what is taught in the schools in Italy. Can anyone confirm or deny this story? Tom Milligan decvax!tektronix!tekecs!tomm
ljdickey@watmath.UUCP (Lee Dickey) (03/18/84)
The first commercial radio station in north america was station
CFCF in Montreal. It was followed by KDKA in Pittsburgh.
--
Lee Dickey, University of Waterloo. (ljdickey@watmath.UUCP)
...!allegra!watmath!ljdickey
...!ucbvax!decvax!watmath!ljdickeywmartin@brl-vgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (03/19/84)
Nobody seems to have yet mentioned Reginald Fessenden (I doubt that I spelled that correctly...), the Canadian inventor of radio, in this discussion topic. He's another one of the zillions of inventors who have been overshadowed by some famous name in the field (in this case Marconi). There was a short series about him on Radio Canada International's SWL Digest program a few months back, I believe. Will Martin
chrisr@hcr.UUCP (Chris Retterath) (03/20/84)
Maybe we've gone too far ahead. In Canada, the broadcast medium is "public property", which translates to the CRTC applying heavy handed government controls on every aspect of the business. Getting a license to transmit is hard enough, as the fight for University radio stations to transmit on other than campus wires exemplifies. Now we hear that a station in Montreal will lose its license partly because the programmers used too much French in their broadcasts. Cobourg lost a classical station recently because of content decisions. It appears that having a license means that the CRTC must approve everything you broadcast. I won't even go into the horror stories about "canadian content", except to say that the nationality the authors, producers, directors, et al are is usually not of any interest to me. I'm just glad that I live near enough to the U.S. border to pick up U.S. radio and television stations. Getting back to the Canadian tradition, I see communications developments mired down in government crapola all the time. Bell just got turned down in its application for a license to develop cellular telephone circuits; satellite dishes were illegal until recently and are only partly legal for home use; stereo AM is coming in at a snail's pace, and so the story goes. Pioneer? Don't make me laugh! Chris Retterath, hcr!chrisr unclear
parnass@ihuxf.UUCP (Bob Parnass, AJ9S) (03/21/84)
x
Scanner Newsletter Confiscated by Canadian Authorities
The Radio Communications Monitoring Association (RCMA) is a
radio club for persons interested in listening to two-way
communications.
The 90 page club newsletter contains, among other things,
interesting frequencies to monitor, like those of the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). Unlike their American coun-
terparts, Canadian members receive their newsletters in
unmarked envelopes because the Canadian government has con-
fiscated copies of this magazine in the past.
--
==========================================================================
Bob Parnass, AT&T Bell Laboratories - ihnp4!ihuxf!parnass - (312)979-5760 ntt@dciem.UUCP (Mark Brader) (03/22/84)
Chris Retterath (hcr!chrisr) writes:
Maybe we've gone too far ahead. In Canada, the broadcast medium is
"public property", which translates to the CRTC applying heavy handed
government controls on every aspect of the business. Getting a license
to transmit is hard enough ... It appears that having a license
means that the CRTC must approve everything you broadcast.
Is this meant to suggest that anybody who wants to should be able to
operate a transmitter? The electromagnetic spectrum is a strictly limited
resource, and it's just as well that most countries not only regulate
transmissions within their borders but also ensure that these
transmissions do not interfere with other countries.
The mass broadcast industry could never have developed in an
chaotic environment of unregulated frequencies, and would be
severely damaged if the rules were removed now. (Whether this would
be a good thing or not is left as an exercise for the reader--
but consider the Communist countries where the border rules do not apply.)
I won't even go into the horror stories about "Canadian content" ...
I'm just glad that I live near enough to the U.S. border to pick up
U.S. radio and television stations.
Same here. Now if my cable company was allowed to bring me those U.S.
shows in versions that don't have minutes cut out for extra commercials...*
oh well, at least I can buy an aerial if I want. Anyway, I do agree that
the CRTC is heavy-handed, and, what's worse, erratic. And the repeated
use over many years of broadcast** regulations by governments*** for national-
istic ends is abhorrent. (Here's an example from over 30 years ago: Toronto
radio station CFRB, which had been ordered to leave the CBS network when
the national radio network CBC was formed, was broadcasting on 860.
One day the government simply informed them that 860 was wanted for a SECOND
CBC station in Toronto and, after a certain date, CFRB would henceforth
use the inferior frequency 1010.)
Among his or her examples of undesirable government interference in
communications, Chris gives:
... stereo AM is coming in at a snail's pace ...
Well, I would rather that stereo AM had not appeared at all.
As I said, the spectrum is a limited resource, and I would rather see
more stations added than stations being allowed a wider bandwidth.
Mark Brader
*If a local station shows the same show at the same time, no matter how
much it is cut, the cable company is obliged to substitute the local
channel for the foreign one at the request of the local station.
These cuts typically amount to 2 minutes per hour.
**Not to mention air travel.
***Both parties are at fault. At least, there were no significant
changes during the Progressive Conservative government of 1979-80.thomson@uthub.UUCP (Brian Thomson) (03/23/84)
I seem to remember once reading in the news that John Meisel, chairman
of the CRTC, does not watch television. Can anyone confirm or deny?
--
Brian Thomson, CSRG Univ. of Toronto
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,utzoo}!utcsrgv!uthub!thomsonjulian@deepthot.UUCP (Julian Davies) (03/27/84)
John Meisel (chair of CRTC) reported not to watch TV..?? Don't know. Does *anyone* watch TV nowadays?
ntt@dciem.UUCP (Mark Brader) (03/27/84)
The first practical radio transmitter and receiver that could be powered
from the AC line were invented right here in Toronto by Ted Rogers.
All previous attempts had failed to suppress the 60 Hz oscillation
sufficiently, so all earlier transmitters and receivers had to use
large power batteries. (I don't know about places with DC power supply,
but these have never been numerous.) The first radio station using
this equipment was CFRB, the RB being for "Rogers* Batteryless",
which is still alive and well some 50 years later.
*Note to local readers: CFRB has no connection to any company now using
the name Rogers. The name was accidentally released in a reorganization.
Source: "Sinc, Betty, and the Morning Man: the Story of CFRB" by Donald Jack
(summarized from memory)
Mark Brader