Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: The Blade Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller-ID Message-ID: <2502@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 30 Dec 89 18:35:52 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM Lines: 33 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 602, message 12 of 12 Caller*ID in NJ Bell is being challanged by various public action groups. The main reason is that when a customer is paying for their number to unpublished, CID is taking that away, in turn making it a worthless service. I heard in PA. that they are having trouble passing it through the courts, which is my case is good. CID would mean almost an end to phreaking, and hacking for that matter. It would save millions in lost revenue for the long distance companies, and almost wipe out illegally using these codes from one's residence. Granted, you could go to a payphone and not worry about it, but the hassle would tempt one to stay inside and pay for the call. Does anyone know if there is such a thing as a 800 reverse directory, or an on-line national reverse directory? Blade [Moderator's Note: If it is *good* in your opinion that long distance companies lose millions in revenue to phreaks who work from the comfort and privacy of their home to steal phone service and burglarize computer systems (usually both at the same time) with ease, then I would say that's all the more reason to implement CID -- ASAP! It goes without saying that phreaks (or do you say freaks? :} ) have been among those voicing the loudest objections to CID. The lack of anomynity is going to hurt, isn't it guy? I do not know of any 800 reverse directory, but Haines Criss-Cross might publish one since they publish x-refs for most major cities. PT]