🚀 go-pugleaf

Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>tert in seattle <tert@ftupet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>smr wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>On 5/30/2013 2:42 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>how often does this happen though (a fed style smackdown)?
>
>>>>>>>>>>>Technically daily, because it's only due to the Feds saying so
>>>>>>>>>>>that AT&T lets us into their colos, provides last mile at tariff
>>>>>>>>>>>instead of at a huge profit for them... we do ask the FCC to
>>>>>>>>>>>intervene if they're being dicks a few times a year. It's more
>>>>>>>>>>>of a quiet regulatory enforcement thing than it is what I think
>>>>>>>>>>>you're picturing, a huge, "Break up Ma Bell!" type of government
>>>>>>>>>>>intervention.
>
>>>>>>>>>>did all the exploded pieces of Ma Bell gravitate back together in
>>>>>>>>>>the end?
>
>>>>>>>>>not completely, verizon and centurylink own large pieces of territory
>>>>>>>>>and there's a couple of smaller ones like fairpoint around as well,
>>>>>>>>>but at&t is back to pretty damned big.
>
>>>>>>>>I forgot a major piece, post breakup, at&t still had the equipment
>>>>>>>>manufacturing and labs (western electric and bell labs).  that stuff
>>>>>>>>is all different companies like Alcatel-Lucent and Avaya now.
>
>>>>>>>AT&T is SBC renamed. SBC bought what had been AT&T Long Lines.
>
>>>>>>so?  I know the lineage, it's not relevant to tert's question.
>
>>>>>Well, whatever you happened to know didn't entirely make it into your
>>>>>followup, like the particularly important bit that today's AT&T itself
>>>>>is a renamed, partly-merged Baby Bell, and not the successor to the
>>>>>pre-divestiture corporate conglomerate.
>
>>>>did you even read tert's question?
>
>>>Why, yes, Geoff. It was fairly straightforward. Your answer, in part,
>>>"but at&t is back to pretty damned big" was misleading, given that
>>>post-divestiture AT&T didn't make those significant acquisitions,
>>>one of the Baby Bell's did, and what remained of post-divestiture AT&T
>>>after spinning off Western Electric and Bell Labs was acquired by
>>>a Baby Bell.
>
>>how do you get through your day being so pedantic?  how does your head not
>>explode?
>
> I had no idea that adding a critical and factual point to your summary
> was pedantic, especially given that your statement was misleading.
>
> Boy oh boy, you've really got your feathers all ruffled.
>
> Believe me, if I knew that saying "SBC is AT&T" in a thread was all it took
> for you to get your panties in a bunch and humiliate yourself in this fashion,
> I would have used it years ago.

sigh;