David Dodell <ddodell@stjhmc.fidonet.org> (04/28/91)
On <Sat, Apr 27 00:29>, TELECOM Moderator (...!eecs.nwu.edu!telecom ) wrote: > [Moderator's Note: Well I would rather suspect the owner of the box > has to load the information matching certain numbers and names. How > would telco know who was calling? All they can say for sure is the > number. PAT] Actually that is coming. I was at a friend's house who works for US West. I was reading their internal weekly newsletter, and it said that US West was testing a Called ID scheme in Nebraska (I think) that would deliver both the calling number and subscriber name. The article went on to say that this was unique where all other systems only delivered the calling number. David St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona uucp: {gatech, ames, rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!ddodell Bitnet: ATW1H @ ASUACAD FidoNet=> 1:114/15 Internet: ddodell@stjhmc.fidonet.org FAX: +1 (602) 451-1165
Steve Forrette <forrette@cory.berkeley.edu> (04/29/91)
In article <telecom11.312.4@eecs.nwu.edu> David writes: > Actually that is coming. I was at a friend's house who works for US > West. I was reading their internal weekly newsletter, and it said > that US West was testing a Called ID scheme in Nebraska (I think) that > would deliver both the calling number and subscriber name. The > article went on to say that this was unique where all other systems > only delivered the calling number. My Pacifc Bell friend knew something of this. When pressed for details, he indicated that it just used the name in the computer (the listed directory name, I believe), and had no provisions for several people at the same calling number. There may have been a way to specify an "override" string, whose sole purpose was for Calling Name delivery, but I'm not certain. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu
bcarter@claven.idbsu.edu (04/29/91)
> Actually that is coming. I was at a friend's house who works for US > West. I was reading their internal weekly newsletter, and it said > that US West was testing a Called ID scheme in Nebraska (I think) that > would deliver both the calling number and subscriber name. The > article went on to say that this was unique where all other systems > only delivered the calling number. Greetings, This service is currently available in (believe it or not) Boise, ID. I believe that we are a test area, and one of the first areas to be provided the service. Now if we can get the ACLU and certain other groups to quit howling about invasion of privacy we may get some decent peripherals, like intelligent call handling based on the caller. Bruce Carter, Courseware Development Coordinator Lab: (208) 385-1859 Faculty Development Lab - Room 213 Office: (208) 385-1250 Simplot/Micron Technology Center CompuServe ID: 76666,511 Boise State University CREN (BITNET): duscarte@idbsu 1910 University Drive Internet: duscarte@idbsu.idbsu.edu Boise, ID 83725 --> Preferred: bcarter@claven.idbsu.edu [Moderator's Note: If the Boys of Boise will be quiet for awhile, huh? Does anyone other than me remember the famous documentary by that name from the early 1960's which discussed the witchunt against people suspected of being gay in Boise during the 1950's? Fanned in large part by the {Idaho Statesman} and its infamous headline, "We Must Crush the Monsters", that was a sad era in your city's history. But I digress ... carry on! PAT]
peterm@rwing.uucp (Peter Marshall) (04/30/91)
area," but a signficant one, with results likely to have effects beyond Idaho, following a relatively large, six-month market trial incorporating NT's Calling Name ID. Yet, re: Bruce's comment about getting ACLU et.al. to "quit howling about invasion of privacy;" would seem he may have a bit of a sticky wicket as of yesterday, when the Idaho PUC granted part of an ACLU Petition for Reconsideration of the PUC's earlier decision that due to passage of a bill largely deregulating a range of US West services, the PUC lacked jurisdiction over CID. The IPUC has therefore decided to re-open the underlying question involved as to whether CID as per the Boise trial is a "basic" service under Idaho law, after previously assuming it wasn't, contrary to the position of its own counsel. The staff position stated more recently also viewed CID as a function of "basic" service as Idaho defines the term. Patience, Bruce.... Peter Marshall
Paul Sutter <sutter@apple.com> (05/03/91)
I really hope Pacific Bell adopts "caller-name" delivery, like the field trials in Idaho. As soon as the service is available, I will make two calls to the phone company: 1) "Please disconnect my phone, I am moving out." 2) "Please connect my phone, I am moving in; my name is Saddam Hussein" Just think of the fun when I get a call from "Sir Isaac Newton"; I will know it is my brother. When "Jack Daniels" is calling, I will know it's my old friend from school. This will be much easier to remember than the phone number, and no violation of privacy! Some caution should be exercised when selecting a new "name", however. If you choose "Dan Quayle" to appear on your outgoing calls, people will probably not answer just on the off-chance that it actually is Dan Quayle calling. Also, since I am the type to list my name in the phonebook, I will get a secondary listing with my true name. Of course, only the billing name will go out with my calls. I might have to add Saddam's name to my mailbox so that I can get the bills. A good idea? Paul Sutter sutter@apple.com [typical, unoriginal disclaimer about my opinion and those of my employer]