Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!mauxci!eci386!jmm
From: jmm@eci386.uucp (John Macdonald)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Caller ID problems
Message-ID: <1991Apr5.221414.22427@eci386.uucp>
Date: 5 Apr 91 22:14:14 GMT
References: <1991Mar30.043415.7314@odin.corp.sgi.com> <13945@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Mar30.230852.9730@menudo.uh.edu> <13948@helios.TAMU.EDU>
Reply-To: jmm@eci386.UUCP (John Macdonald)
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Lines: 82

In article <13948@helios.TAMU.EDU> byron@archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis) writes:
|Furthermore, how does the peephole analogy extend to phones without caller
|ID? I'm forced to pick up the headset, and listen for myself, or not answer
|the phone at all. Not a very good analogy, hm?

It corresponds extremely well.  A phone without the caller id detector
is in exactly the same situation as the door without a peehole.  If
you think either one helps your security or privacy, you can pay the
cost of getting it.

|I don't see how per-call blocking is a nice compromise, either. It rather
|defeats the purpose of caller ID, don't you think?

No it does not.  It reduces the value of caller id at the same time
as it reduces the invasion of privacy inflicted on the caller.  Yes,
you can end up being unable to call some people if you are at a
phone that cannot or does not provide caller id trying to call a
person who refuses to accept a call when caller id is not available.
So what?  The same situation corresponds to trying to visit someone
who only opens their door to people that they recognize after you
just came out of the hospital with bandages over your face.

|I think the issue of "privacy" here is and continues to be a red herring.

No.

There is an easily demonstrated reason to fear invasion of
privacy resulting from Caller ID.

There are two current marketing phenonema that relate to this -
mailing list sales, and telephone marketing.

Mailing lists are a big business.  Any organization that compiles
mailing lists for any purpose, has been tempted to market that
list.  It can be a very lucrative business.  It is also subject
to privacy concerns.  Many organizations are careful to state their
mailing list policy, and to provide their members/customers the
option of restricting their name and address from distribution on
a commercial mailing list basis.  The important factor in mailing
list commercial value is how well it allows targeting.  Companies
are willing to pay relatively high amounts for mailing lists that
they think will have a good match to the specific audience that
they wish to reach.  There are a wide range of mailing lists within
this "targeting factor" spectrum.  Some companies combine mailing
lists to provide correlation to become extremely selective.

Telephone marketing is currently done in a shotgun fashion - dial
every phone number in every exchange at a time when people are
likely to be home (in the middle of supper).  Despite the intrusive
nature of the current practice - it must provide a good enough
level of success for some organizations, because it keeps being
used.  (Newspaper subscriptions seems to be a very common one for
people to compain about.)

Caller ID provides the ability for organizations to collect a well
qualified database at little cost.  (A mailing list often requires
typing in a name and address from the customers hand written original
and can only be collected when the customer provides it.)  The same
computer that accepts the caller id information and passes it to the
telephone answerer can also use the phone number to look up historical
records for that number.  The answerer can use a very few keystrokes
to enter codes for the type of transaction that occurred.  This
collected info can be extremely detailed at little cost.

There will be a huge market in telephone lists, just as there is
a market in mailing lists - the better qualified, the more specific
infomation about your "private" life that a list has, the more
valuable it is for targeting purposes.

I do not state that this is a universally *bad* thing.  Telemarketers
may be able to better target their customers, instead of using the
shotgun approach.  (This means that far more businesses will find
telemarketing worthwile - if you have a well targeted database of
phone numbers then you will not be irritating a large number of
people who absolutely no interest in your product.  Overall, it
will probably mean *more* telemarketing calls, but a higher
proportion of them will be selling things that you might really
want.)  But I am sure that it will lead to results in specific cases
that will be objectionable and frightening.
-- 
sendmail - as easy to operate and as painless as using        | John Macdonald
manually powered dental tools on yourself - John R. MacMillan |   jmm@eci386