Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: ceb@csli.stanford.edu (Charles Buckley) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Caller-ID and Blocking Message-ID: Date: 18 Nov 89 19:38:08 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Lines: 29 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 520, message 7 of 12 >From: peter%ficc@uunet.uu.net (Peter da Silva) >Date: 13 Nov 89 18:55:21 GMT >Unblockable Caller-ID is, on the balance, a bad development. >I wish some of the people out there would campaign to fix it, rather >than tear it down. Sigh. A really simple solution presents itself, which is to have certain target numbers, available through simple application, which cannot make use of caller id - calls to these numbers will be guaranteed anonymous, and it would be a federal felony to have such a service be available on a line so advertised. The police department anonymous tips line could be one of these, as well as the crisis lines for battered women, and other places where it seemed to the subscribers applying to be a good idea. The existence of these would justify making anonymous-out numbers as difficult to get as they currently are, since normally non-anonymous-out callers could still call those willing to interact with them anonymously as before. Such numbers would carry a small symbol after their listings, and on advertisements, etc. which means that this number is anonymous. It should be something with good icongraphic significance, but typable using typewriters (and computer equipment) that everyone has. I like ][, which looks like a little barrier, or maybe nnn-nnnn@#, where @ is replaced by < overstruck with /, which is harder to type, but more symbolically laden.