Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: Caller ID problems
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 05:35:41 GMT
Message-ID: <1991Apr02.053541.27508@looking.on.ca>
References: <13945@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Mar30.230852.9730@menudo.uh.edu> <13948@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Apr1.024412.6474@menudo.uh.edu> <1991Apr1.185518.9876@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>

Caller ID is not enough on its own.  To really work properly, you want
to send all sorts of other info in the packet, including the type of
call and priority of call.

For example, I don't want anything but absolute emergencies to get
through when I'm asleep or having sex.   I'll accept urgent calls
during dinner or busy with something.  I'll accept regular calls at
other times.   Some calls might be diverted to my machine, some might
make it to me, depending on what my home computer thinks I am doing.

Note that to make an emergency call would require operator intervention,
and there would be penalties for misuse.

The packet should also include who the call is for, of course, for auto
feed into voice mail, or ident-a-call, or direction to an extension or fax.

Indeed, ten years down the road, the simple interface of the telephone
and keypad will probably not be used for most calls in *my* circle of
people.   Instead your computer will call my computer, and if everything
is ok, a voice connection will be established, or voice e-mail will be
sent, etc.

At least that's how I want it.

Do people who hate caller ID also think that anonymous E-mail should be
the default?
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473