Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: John Higdon Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller-ID Objections Message-ID: <2480@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 28 Dec 89 19:25:22 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 81 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 9, Issue 600, message 9 of 9 In article <2431@accuvax.nwu.edu> alonzo@microsoft.UUCP (Alonzo GARIEPY) writes: >In article <2369@accuvax.nwu.edu> John Higdon writes: >> Is there no other aspect of telephony that has potential for abuse? >Is this supposed to be an argument?!! "We already have problems so >there is nothing wrong with amplifying them." Everything we accept in the name of progress carries risks. Driving an automobile, riding a motorcycle, flying in a plane, even, as I pointed out, simply having a telephone. Shall we forgo every new technology that might carry a potential downside? >You stray dangerously close to a definition of progress that has >nothing to do with improving people's lives. So if someone, somewhere, can find a potential disadvantage with a new way of doing things, we should immediately remove that thought from consideration? If a new service or invention won't improve your life, no one should benefit? Can you substantiate harm caused by Caller-ID? It does exist in the world; it should be a simple matter to pull up some case histories. Someone explain why I, JMH, should not be entitled to see the number of those people who call me. Don't tell me about whackos and criminals who might abuse the system; I'm not one of them. Don't tell me about big business and government; they already have access to these numbers. Saying that some of us shouldn't have this technology because others might abuse it is akin to saying that no one should have computers because some malicious hackers might cause trouble, or that no one should have automobiles because there are irresponsible people who will drink and drive and kill people (a much more compelling argument than any against Caller-ID, IMHO). In article <2413@accuvax.nwu.edu> leichter@yale.edu (Jerry Leichter (LEICHTER-JERRY@CS.YALE.EDU)) writes: >X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 9, Issue 595, message 1 of 7 >Discussion on this topic continues interminably. What's unfortunate >about it is how many not-quite-truths make it into the discussions. Amen, brother. >For example, John Higdon's messages are well argued, but often miss >the point. He claims (correctly) that Caller ID could be very useful >to him, and to others. Fine, but from that it does not follow that >the privacy issues others have raised are of no import. But you are the first to bring up some well-thought-out and legitimate privacy concerns. Heretofore we have been subjected to every conceiveable privacy non-sequitur, from wife-beating to IRS fraud. Previous comments provided no reasons whatsoever for considering the privacy issue; yours did. In my previous post on the matter, I invited legitimate concerns, as opposed to what we had been subjected to so far. >Higdon does not expect his phone number to be private. Here, I will take issue with you. I have *many* private numbers and I expect them to remain so. But I am prepared, in a world of Caller-ID, to take the necessary steps to keep them private. In other words, I will take the responsibility for maintaining my privacy, not by denying the rest of society the advantages of Caller-ID, but by taking prudent steps to make sure that none of these numbers appear on an undesireable display. This can mean watching who I call with what line, or even how I handle incoming calls when I know that my number has been compromised. But do not simplistically dismiss me by saying that "Higdon doesn't care about his privacy". That is absolutely wrong. But maintaining my privacy is my responsibility in any environment, and not that of some utility regulator. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !