Just put a Google Voice line behind a FreePBX or Asterisk and you get all the call filtering you want. You can even make your internal numbers or whatever.
I first found the Tin Can cool, but now seeing their privacy policy, it's definitely nothing for me. I'd just use a normal VoIP cordless phone (e.g. Gigaset makes various models), or even a normal corded phone with a VoIP ATA. Some of them might even have integrated whitelisting, but I didn't check.
Is there such a thing? Given it's radio waves in regulated radio spectrum, I'm not sure such a device would even be allowed to operate without a license. This said, there are 3G Nokia dumbphones (e.g. C2-01). I just had to stop using one because my operator tore down the 3G network here, like in most of Europe. (2G was already down since some time).
Edit: there are even 4G-VoLTE dumbphones by the way.
Internet traffic today is estimated to be a few tens of exabytes per day. Even if you assume 100000 Starlink satellites (we're far from that), each satellite would have to handle hundreds of terabytes per day. That's tens of gigabits per second per satellite, assuming traffic is split evenly among them (will never happen in real situations).
Starlink V3 can pump out some seriously impressive speeds and handle thousands of clients. Starlink is both a great leap forward in rocketry and radio technology.
I do still think funny how we are going back to the pre war technology tree for a re-visit
That's not even sufficient to handle the needs of a single large city. The limitation is that even with the much larger constellation they hope to deploy there won't be enough satellites visible at once from any given large metro area.
But a huge difference is that there's a plan for congestion. We heavily rely on QUIC to drain network queues and prioritize/queue media based on importance. It's doable with multicast+unicast, but complicated.
That one seems to be an RPC framework, whereas the other one is for PHP applications... maybe an unfortunate name clash, but they don't do the same thing nor anything I'd call similar.
This is just kind-of low-power. Some microcontrollers (e.g. PICs) can have sleep consumptions measured in nanoamperes. Months to years on a coin cell... just, they would need an external wifi module, which is highly inconvenient.
Where and how they spent their money is on p. 21 of this PDF [1] which can be obtained from this official source [2]. This is just a high-level breakdown, but it does illustrate that, for example, more than twice as much is spent on "Donation processing expenses" ($7.5M) as "Internet hosting" ($3.1M), and that the largest line item, by far, is "Salaries and benefits" ($106M).
Well obviously salaries will be the highest expense in any organization like this. The more interesting question is if it's salaries to security programmers or teachers at an african womens' coding bootcamp (yes they did spend money on that, and yes it's probably useful, but hardly what people think of when they see those "donate now to keep wikipedia alive" banners). A big percentage probably goes to their CEO who does who knows what.
There are a couple of ways to approach this information. One is to compare to the past. For example, comparing with 2008-2009 [1], they now spend 3.75 times as much on hosting, but 48 times as much on salaries, illustrating a more-than-tenfold relative growth in salaries compared to hosting. While hosting is not now nor ever was their only relevant expense, it is a good anchor point.
Another key difference over the last 15 years has been the introduction of awards and grants, which didn't exist then but now comprise $26.8M (15%) of their expenditures. This is where most of the ideological/controversial spending actually goes, rather than the salaries per se, but even more to the point, this one line item is more than 3 times their entire inflation-adjusted budget from 15 years ago ($5.6M times 150% CPI = $8.4M) and is still more than if we adjusted their entire budget using the hosting cost as an index ($5.6M times 3.75 = $21M).
Look, I'm not defending wikipedia, I'd just like to point out that comparing hosting to salaries is a quite strange metric. Hosting is cheap and relatively constant, adding features to the site or paying admins to maintain the quality of edits is scalable. How does throwing more money at hosting make a better product? It's not like the servers can't handle the requests.
Using hosting costs as an index is nonsensical. I wasn't able to find numbers for 2009, but since 2015 the monthly page views have remained almost exactly constant. So you might as well claim that they're vastly overpaying for hosting since inflation from 2008 is way less than 3.75x.
I picked hosting because it's a line item that exists across all of their budgets, it's a rough proxy for a web business's non-salary expenses, it's a big part of what you think you're donating to based upon Wikipedia's own language in their fundraising drives, and if nothing else, it's way more forgiving to the growth of their expenses than consumer price inflation is.
Ultimately every person has to decide for themselves whether they think WMF is a worthy recipient for their donations, but it is in no way operating on a shoestring budget nor staffed by volunteers anymore.
DOS interrupt support is still limited. Running SHELL would essentially require implementing a full MS-DOS COMMAND.COM, which is a significant undertaking.
I first found the Tin Can cool, but now seeing their privacy policy, it's definitely nothing for me. I'd just use a normal VoIP cordless phone (e.g. Gigaset makes various models), or even a normal corded phone with a VoIP ATA. Some of them might even have integrated whitelisting, but I didn't check.
reply