Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!kudla From: kudla@rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) Subject: Re: Caller ID problems In-Reply-To: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu's message of 2 Apr 91 07:38:25 GMT Message-ID: Nntp-Posting-Host: nuge107.its.rpi.edu Organization: just say no! References: <1991Mar29.220816.8305@ima.isc.com> <1991Mar30.043415.7314@odin.corp.sgi.com> <13945@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Apr2.073825.7152@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 3 Apr 91 21:47:42 GMT Lines: 51 In article <1991Apr2.073825.7152@milton.u.washington.edu> cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) writes: In article <13945@helios.TAMU.EDU> byron@archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis) writes: >I don't see how anyone can regard Caller ID as an "invasion of >privacy". It's like saying that a peephole on your front door >constitutes an invasion of any visitor's privacy because their >"right" to knock on your door anonymously has been interfered with. It's an invasion of your privacy when the person behind the peephole reaches out, grabs your neck, and wrings your wallet from your pocket long enough to get your name, address, telephone number, and any associated data. Get it? No, I don't get how simply seeing a person's number displayed is equivalent to grabbing their wallet and extracting any data you please. At present, the evil nasty cross-referenced telephone directories everyone warns about are not available in machine-readable format that I know of. Without such a beast, the operator would have to have already gotten the info about you - just like if you already had dealt with the person on the other side of the peephole and knew its face. Even *with* the xref directory, the oper would only have your name and address - or more specifically, the name and address of whomever owns the phone at your residence. In my case, this is *not* my name, though the address may be correct. And if you have an unlisted number, which admittedly is pretty pointless with CallerID in effect (and which I feel should really be abolished), they can't even get that info from the xref directory. If the person on the receiving end of the phone call doesn't have CallerID, it is really analogous to a door without a peephole - the only way to get *any* info about the caller is to make yourself known and *ask* for the info. This is a really complex issue, but I've been using email, which is harder for the average user to forge (i.e. most non-geeks don't know how) and which always identifies the sender, for years now and I've gotten into the habit of letting my machine get my calls rather than answer them myself when I'm in a don't-want-to-talk mood, and getting anonymous stuff in the U.S. Mail usually freaks me out a little. That is to say, I've been spoiled. I also have no reason to be anonymous. Robert Jude Kudla No more bars! No more cages! Just rollerskating, disco music, and the occasional light show....