Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 20:32:48 -0700 From: David Gast Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Convenience of Phone System? Message-ID: Organization: TELECOM Digest Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 282, Message 9 of 11 Lines: 34 Barton.Bruce@camb.com wrote: > Phone numbers are a crude temporary necessity they have imposed on us. > Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend > Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be > voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is > being refered to. Sometimes I am really amazed at the suggestions that are made to improve convenience. To some extent the above may be convenient. On the other hand, do we really want the phone company (and every COCOT sleeze since the example above includes a pay phone) or the government to recognize our voice on a routine basis? Our every move would be tracked. Additionally, this particular scenario has a huge security hole: I call someone, they record my voice, then they call someone, but pipe their input through a device that simulates my voice. Now they can easily represent themselves as me. Perhaps we should close some the existing security holes before we make new giant ones. David [Moderator's Note: And what, pray tell, is the difference between this and sending someone a written letter who then forges my handwriting and signs off on some fraudulent documents for me? Maybe we should stop allowing handwritten communication between people (or individuals and companies) before this 'existing security hole' gets worse. How inconvenient do you want things to be just to accomodate your fears about 'what might happen'? PAT]