Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: arnor!uri@uunet.uu.net (Uri Blumenthal) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller ID Privacy Question Message-ID: Date: 5 Sep 89 14:35:39 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: IBM Corp., Yorktown NY Lines: 18 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 351, message 2 of 5 > device transmit the *name* of the caller, rather than the phone number, > since this would (a) identify the caller by the name under which the telco > carried him in its records; (b) probably be the same name under which I > had made your aquaintence; and (c) protect the private phone number of the > caller. In other words, the little box would read out, "Dr. Brown at home" > or "Smith Telemarketing Co." etc...the same purpose would be served. PT] You see, to have the name shown would be very nice, except for one little thing. Just how many 'John Smith's may live in your neighborhood? Should I check each one in case of problem? Or the next step in that direction would be to show the caller address also (:-)? [Moderator's Note: It does not really matter how many John Smiths live in Chicago. Acceptance or rejection of the call would frequently be based on my personal aquaintence with *some person* named John Smith. If I know of some person by that name, we might assume my aquaintence is calling. PT]