cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-07-15 - Re: Can’t block caller ID in Massachusetts?

Header Data

From: “Bruce M.” <bkmarsh@feist.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: e16e36cae64502f06baeb46d1a6da9ed12cea3eb0e8472311e602326d4b6e3be
Message ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.960714162205.17031A-100000@wichita.fn.net>
Reply To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960714094635.9973A-100000@user1.scranton.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-15 01:45:09 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 09:45:09 +0800

Raw message

From: "Bruce M." <bkmarsh@feist.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 09:45:09 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Can't block caller ID in Massachusetts?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960714094635.9973A-100000@user1.scranton.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.960714162205.17031A-100000@wichita.fn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sun, 14 Jul 1996, Moroni wrote:

>      The reason that caller ID cannot be blocked to 800 and 900 numbers 
> is that it is used for billing purposes by the telephone company to the 
> person or business who owns that 900 or 800 number. 

    They would get your phone number and information on their bill 
regardless of whether they have ANI/CID/etc.  That comes from the phone 
company and not from their own systems.

> to keep records. They records as they stand now include the phone number 
> from which they were dialed and the length of the call. My phone call to 
> them from Scranton ,Pa will cost the L.L.Bean less then Tim Mays from 
> California because I am closer.

    Not necessarily.  I get charged a flat 13 cents a minute for all 
connects to my 800 number, regardless of where they are calling from.

>       What could concevably be done is that the software could be 
> reprogrammed to delete the phone number immediatley after the 
> computation. Or to have the computation done immediately and deltion to 
> accompany it. third, the phone company could reprogram it so the mileage 
> and time is computed somhow without the logging of the caller. All of 
> this has to do computer programming and I find none of the aforementioned 
> an impossibility to achieve.

    There is a big difference, and change in the way they could operate 
their records, between having instant access to your number when you call 
or having access to it when they receive the telco bill at the end of the 
month.
                       ________________________________
                      [ Bruce M. - Feist Systems, Inc. ]
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     "Official estimates show that more than 120 countries have or are 
      developing [information warfare] capabilities." -GAO/AIMD-96-84
                         So, what is your excuse now?

Thread