Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: 17 May 91 16:27:01 GMT From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 50k Counts of Wire Fraud Message-ID: Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA 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 369, Message 6 of 10 Lines: 54 In article , bluemoon!sbrack@cis.ohio- state.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes... > If your buddy the plumber doesn't understand such simple > concepts as dialing the operator for rate information on unrecognized > numbers, then he really shouldn't use any telecom device more involved > than a 500 set (not that he couldn't get himself burned there, too .. 8). > If you decide, of your own free will, to call a telephone number, then > you are agreeing to pay for the telephone service you have requested, > be it a $0.25 local call or a $25.00 audiotex number. Mr. Brack's argument is truly nitwitted, if that's a word! He seems to think that people who receive calls on beepers shoul CALL THE OPERATOR and ASK THE RATE for every call to a prefix they don't recognize. Now, what's wrong with that picture? 1) Which operator, 0 or 00? 2) Don't we have dial-direct nowadays? Operators aren't "free". 3) Do operators know the price of every "audiotex" call? No. 4) If it's an emergency worth beeping, why should the bozo take several minutes just to verify the cost? Hell, it's a local number (7 digits) and it's not "900", so why should he even suspect that there's a bomb in the envelope? 5) To the vast majority of us, the telephone is a communications tool, not an audiotex access terminal. The cost of a telephone call is well understood. From a home phone to any other phone in NYC proper, it's under 20c/call. The fact that a prefix was assigned to audiotext is an obscure exception that few people care about. > No, blind trust is not a good idea. But, in this case, again > not related to what wew were discussing, the contractor (I'm assuming) > lied. The audiotex vendor, on the other hand, simply asked beeper > users to call his number. No lies there. OF COURSE it's a lie: He lied that there was an urgent need for a callback. There was nothing for the paged party but a recording. Call 911 and ask to play telephone chess with the guy who answers. See how he feels. Beepers are more akin to 911 (emergencies) than to the Naughty Peahen Hotline. 50k counts of wirefraud sounds good to me! Consecutive sentences. Fred R. Goldstein Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 952 3274 Do you think anyone else on the planet would share my opinions, let alone a multi-billion dollar corporation?