Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!fernwood!portal!sv!gundrum
From: gundrum@svc.portal.com
Subject: Re: Caller ID problems
Message-ID: <1991Apr12.205159.9315@svc.portal.com>
Sender: gundrum@sv.portal.com (Eric Gundrum)
Organization: Software Ventures Corporation, Berkeley
References: <1991Mar30.043415.7314@odin.corp.sgi.com> <13945@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Apr5.212502.22001@eci386.uucp> <1991Apr10.155422.26742@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <STANTON.91Apr10105447@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <Ic0sYPQ91EAf8EqOYb@rchland.ibm.com>
Distribution:  us
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 20:51:59 GMT

>Allow anyone to set a default when they get their phone service and >allow
for easy changing when you dial

Most phone companies think they are in the business of making money, not
providing service. They want to charge extra for the unusual service of
blocking the calling numbers. This charge (about $5 per month for constant
blocking proposed in CA) is far more than it should cost them.

One item that seems to be lacking in this discussion is that the proposed
blocking schemes are not really private. There is a function that will call
back the last person who called you, even if that person had a "private
number." Also, there is a feature that will allow you to inform the police
of the last number that called you, even if it was private.
-- 
_______________________________________________________________________
Any statements made by this account are strictly based on heresay and 
should be assumed to have no intelligence behind them. (No, that does 
not mean they have the approval of management.) gundrum@svc.portal.com
