TECHNOLOGY: U.S. phone numbers are so often formatted in the outdated (123) 555-1234 format

Thursday, April 23, 2026

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/04/16/how-to-format-10-digit-phone-numbers

How to Format 10-Digit Phone Numbers
By John Gruber

*** begin quote ***

The Associated Press Stylebook, on Threads:

We updated our style for telephone numbers in 2024 to drop parentheses. We now recommend the form: 212-621-1500.

For international numbers use 011 (from the United States), the country code, the city code and the telephone number: 011-44-20-7535-1515.

Use hyphens, not periods. No parentheses. The form for toll-free numbers: 800-111-1000. If extension numbers are needed, use a comma to separate the main number from the extension: 212-621-1500, Ext. 2.

I have long been annoyed that U.S. phone numbers are so often formatted in the outdated (123) 555-1234 format. The use of parentheses for the area code dates back to the old days, when you only needed to dial the area code to call a number outside your own area code. (The same era whence comes the verb dial.) Until 10-digit dialing with mandatory area codes started to become standard in the late 1990s, you only needed to dial seven digits to call a local number.

*** end quote ***

Never realized that this was a problem.  But it is annoying when filling out forms, cut’n’pasting data, and interchanging fields.

I’d agree with the author mostly except of the extensions.  I’d prefer just the comma and number.  I remember using it on autodialers back in the old telephone modem days.

We need open standards that everyone uses!

— 30 —


POLITICAL: Bad policy message by DJT47 gets rejection by all men of good will

Monday, April 13, 2026
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/04/05/easter-morning-message-of-hope
 
It’s getting harder to tell which side is the authoritarian theocratic regime run by demented hateful nut jobs. (You Crazy Bastards would be an excellent title for a book on the Trump 2.0 administration.)
 
By John Gruber
# – # – # – # – #
 
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/07/tucker-carlson-rips-donald-trump-easter-iran-truth-social-post-00861281
 

*** begin quote ***

“How dare you speak that way on Easter morning to the country?” Carlson said in a monologue on his podcast. “Who do you think you are? You’re tweeting out the f-word on Easter morning.”

*** end quote ***

# – # – # – # – #

https://podscripts.co/podcasts/part-of-the-problem/bridge-and-power-plant-day?scroll_to_words=Tucker+Carlson&search_type=basic

*** begin quote ***

“Because these are laws that are not created by people. They supersede people. But on January 4th, when the President of the United States told us he was stealing that our country was stealing something that didn’t belong to us, people should have piped up and said something, but they didn’t. And that got us all the way to yesterday, which was Easter Sunday. “

*** end quote ***

https://podscripts.co/podcasts/part-of-the-problem/trump-backed-down?scroll_to_words=Tucker+Carlson&search_type=basic

*** begin quote ***

Did Tucker Carlson coming out against Trump, his biggest, the number one right wing, you know, show in the country? Maybe, maybe it did. But what? Even if it did have an effect, what did it do? Stop Donald Trump from doing bridge and power plant day? Okay. All right, fine. Stop just more death and destruction from coming that still wouldn’t have opened the straight of her moose or overthrown this regime. Man, look, we will see where all of this goes. Obviously, it’s still a very, very risky situation. but I will say I will end this on the note that I started it on, which is that thank God Donald Trump was just completely bluffing.

*** end quote ***

# – # – # – # – #

​This is what set off a Tucker Carlson rant.  And that rant was cited by @ComicDaveSmith.  That’s how I found it.  It really made the case that DJT47 is not a Christian and really terrible human being. 

Can’t say that I disagree.

Remember the Gooferment and almost all the politicians and bureaucrats are immoral, ineffective, and inefficient. As well as untrustworthy.

— 30 —

  •