bill%gauss@gatech.edu (bill) (03/20/91)
Well, the first month of my Caller ID service has passed and I felt
that I should pass on my observations on the matter. It has pretty
much been as I expected. I'll explain what has taken place.
I've noticed a fair share of what is apparently telemarketing droids
who usually call close to dinner time. If I get an "Out-of-area" call
at dinner time, I usually let the machine pick it up. It has usually
been the telemarketers who will call at this most inopportune time -
they generally show up as out-of-area because I'd guess they use
out-WATS to call their suckers (I mean prospects). Some telemarketers
call locally - Sears Vinyl Siding called the other night, for example.
I told them the usual "not interested." A fax machine tried to call
me the other night, starting at 11:00 P.M. I let it call twice before
I blocked the number. I don't have a fax machine - apparently someone
misdialed my number into their fax machine.
Calls from either the "A" or "B" cellular systems in Atlanta show up
as "Out-of-area." I have found that this is because neither is hooked
up to SS-7 as yet. Calls from the centrex here at Georgia Tech show
up as their respective numbers, 894- or 853-XXXX. Calls that are Call
Forwarded to me show the originating, not the intermediary, phone
number (unless they are forwarded via cellular). Calls via Southern
Bell calling card show up as "Out-of-area." Calls placed via SB
operator show up as "Out-of-area." Calls from PBXs show up as what
I'd guess is a trunk on the PBX or as the main number - there seems to
be no consistency on PBX numbers displayed.
An interesting note: Caller ID went out on me for a day. I called
repair (of course) to resolve the matter. After they got me going
again, the QA person called to ask if I was okay again. I asked her
what caused the problem and she said that "a translator had gone out"
or some such. Apparently, translations are kept in a database and
they are the telco's record of the services which correspond to a
particular POTS line. Now I know something new. My translation
should have had "Caller ID" in it, among other things.
During this first month, I have called numerous businesses for various
reasons. I've called to order pizza, to ask the local Radio Shack for
a price or two, to ask the local Circuit City and Hi Fi Buys for
prices, you name it. As yet, I have not been sujected to any of the
alleged horrors which some naysayers had predicted with the advent of
caller ID. I have not been awakened at 2 A.M. to ask "Now that you
know how much the XVY color TV is, why don't you come in to get one?"
No one from Radio Shack has called me to ask why I never came by to
buy that TV antenna on sale, you know, the one you called in to ask
the price on? The pizza place still asks me for my phone number. And
even if a telemarketer does call, I just tell them "not interested,"
then hang up (unless the answering machine gets it first). No
invasion of privacy here. But then I have never been one to say that
what, at worst, is a minor inconvenience is actually AN INVASION OF MY
PRIVACY, because that's not the case by any stretch of the
imagination.
So, in it's first month on my line, it seems to me that Caller ID is
not "technology for its own sake," but is actually a handy tool. My
privacy has not been invaded. I've managed to surprise most of my
friends and such who call me by answering "Hello there, Joe Blow!," to
the point that they don't wonder how I know who's calling any more.
It's nice to know a little more about who's calling me. Obviously,
"they" know my number when they call me. Now I know theirs. I like
that option.
If anyone has any questions for me, please reply via e-mail and I'll
do my best to answer. I'm no Caller ID expert, just a consumer who
has come to like the service.
Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.eduRobert Jacobson <cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu> (03/21/91)
The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and penetration. The telcos commonly pass off one month tests of small service populations as scientific surveys and are always relieved for their customers when alleged horrors do not occur. The point is to wait a couple years when a few tens of millions of more people are forced into Caller ID and the files have started being built up. Then let's see if the horrors happen, Bill. Bob Jacobson [Moderator's Note: What about in places like New Jersey, where Caller*ID has been a reality now for about a year? Maybe one or more of the 'veterans' of Caller*ID will write on the topic of abuses -- if there are any -- now that this new technology has had a chance to get established. PAT]
sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) (03/22/91)
In article <telecom11.223.2@eecs.nwu.edu> Robert Jacobson <cyberoid@ milton.u.washington.edu> writes: > The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as > a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and > penetration. The telcos commonly pass off one month tests of small > service populations as scientific surveys and are always relieved for > their customers when alleged horrors do not occur. The point is to > wait a couple years when a few tens of millions of more people are > forced into Caller ID and the files have started being built up. Then > let's see if the horrors happen, Bill. > [Moderator's Note: What about in places like New Jersey, where > Caller*ID has been a reality now for about a year? Maybe one or more > of the 'veterans' of Caller*ID will write on the topic of abuses -- if > there are any -- now that this new technology has had a chance to get > established. PAT] Well, that might not be enough either. There may have to be a critical mass of users for some effects to manifest themselves. The uses and abuses of the service might not occur until there are enough of the devices around to be statisitically significant and this might depend upon a price that won't happen until the market is large enough on a national basis. Also, some of the commercial applications might be delayed by the fact that many potential users are parts of national chains that might hold off until the service is more uniformly available. They also might be sensitive to offending their customers over such privacy concerns for what would be a minor marketing advantage. They are _very_ PR sensitive.
cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) (03/23/91)
In response to the Moderator's question, Caller ID in New Jersey has a penetration of between three and ten percent, hardly an appealing marketshare for those planning various forms of universal databases based on telephone number IDs. Combined with the fact that New Jersey, grand as it is, does not constitute a broad geographical or demographic market (it's only about eight million people, of whom a third are children or retired without means), the NJ "experiment" is far too small to engender major abuses. What's needed is for a whole or a substantial part of an RBOC, combining several SMAs, to go Caller ID. Then we should see the information brokers at work! Bob Jacobson
TERRY@spcvxa.bitnet (Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr) (03/24/91)
In article <telecom11.223.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, cyberoid@milton.u. washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) writes: > [Moderator's Note: What about in places like New Jersey, where > Caller*ID has been a reality now for about a year? Maybe one or more > of the 'veterans' of Caller*ID will write on the topic of abuses -- if > there are any -- now that this new technology has had a chance to get > established. PAT] Well, I believe my employer (St. Peter's College) was the first non-internal installation of Caller*ID. We had just converted to Centrex from a Dimension PBX and started having problems like people calling the main number from the corner payphone and asking "May I have an outside line, please?". Since the Dimension consoles provided the extension number and the Centrex attendant position didn't, there was no way of knowing what was an inside call and what was not. This would have remained a minor nuisance except that the pranks were extended to bomb threats. In pursuing this with the authorities (both police and telco), we were informed of the plans for Caller*ID. We got display units (AT&T models, not the plastic ones the telco now offers) for the main numbers. At that time, ICLID was enabled for all Centrex lines, even though it didn't show up in the feature set in CCRS (I believe this was a special generic, if that makes any sense, which was loaded for us). It also delivered the information before _each_ ring instead of on the first ring only, as it does now. Somewhere along the way it was converted to a per-line basis and first-ring only. We stopped getting the threats and other harrasment. At this point I have ICLID enabled on my office phone, but don't have a display box. I haven't received any more or less sales calls than before Caller*ID was offered, and I don't recall any that were "targeted" at me (as some suggest Caller*ID would be used by merchants). The same is true for my home phone. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, US terry@spcvxa.spc.edu (201) 915-9381
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (03/27/91)
In article <telecom11.225.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes: > In article <telecom11.223.2@eecs.nwu.edu> Robert Jacobson <cyberoid@ > milton.u.washington.edu> writes: > > The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as > > a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and > > penetration... > > [Moderator's Note: What about in places like New Jersey, where > > Caller*ID has been a reality now for about a year? Maybe one or more > > of the 'veterans' of Caller*ID will write on the topic of abuses -- if > > there are any -- now that this new technology has had a chance to get > > established. PAT] New Jersey Bell has offered Caller*ID for about three years. I'm not sure how many people have the display devices, but most people have heard of the service. They advertise it on TV! The press has reported several times on the significant drop in the number of harassment or obscene call complaints received by authorities. Does this mean that individual subscribers are taking matters into their own hands? Does it mean that would-be prank callers are deciding not to call? I don't know. I once used it to call back a kid who bothered me early in the morning, and haven't been bothered since. Abuses? We get about the same number of telemarketing calls we used to. We don't get calls from merchants we called, unless we gave them our number. I have yet to see a retail store with a Caller*ID display unit in use. They seem to appeal mostly to residence subscribers. The advertising from NJ Bell shows the service being used by individuals at home. I called someone at home from a customer's premises, and left my office number as the call-back message. He called my customer and asked for me, apparently by looking at his Caller*ID display unit. Since I wasn't there when he called, it only delayed him, and bothered my customer. Abuse? I wouldn't call it that, would you? The customer knows me, and told the caller that I had been there, but that I had left. As a user of Caller*ID for about two years, I have found it helpful. As one who calls others who use it, I have not found it troublesome in any way. Horrors? Not in New Jersey! Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
gdw@groucho.att.com (Gordon D Woods) (03/29/91)
com (Dave Levenson): > The press has reported several times on the significant drop in the > number of harassment or obscene call complaints received by > authorities. Does this mean that individual subscribers are taking > matters into their own hands? Does it mean that would-be prank > callers are deciding not to call? I don't know. I once used it to > call back a kid who bothered me early in the morning, and haven't been > bothered since. I wonder if the reduction in complaints is actually due to the simultaneous introduction of CALL TRACE and CALLER*ID in NJ. With CALL TRACE you get a major advertised advantage of CALLER*ID with none of the disadvantages. You don't even have to subscribe to CALLER*ID; just enter *76 (I think. It's advertised) and the prankster's number is recorded for the police. Only the police know the caller's number. I think the prank callers have quickly learned this and reduced their calling.
grayt@uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) (03/29/91)
In article <telecom11.223.2@eecs.nwu.edu> cyberoid@milton.u. washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) writes: > The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as > a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and > penetration. The telcos commonly pass off one month tests of small > wait a couple years when a few tens of millions of more people are > forced into Caller ID and the files have started being built up. Then > let's see if the horrors happen, Bill. Well, we have had Caller ID here in Ottawa for over a year now. There are no reports of any horrors. Even the scandal a day radio and TV programs are silent on this. I personally have Caller ID and Call Barring. Caller ID really helps. I can determine who is calling befroe I answer the telephone. This allows me to prepare my greeting. I know this may sound trivial but it really helps a lot. You can greet a friend in a friendly manner while calls from unknown numbers can be greeted formally. No more occurances of waiting for a call from a friend and then being presented with a carpet cleaning call as a surprise. Call blocking allows at least some freedom from telemarketers. This service is a godsend. I look forward to the day of smart telephones which can bar an unlimited amount of numbers. Then we will be truely free of crank sales calls. Even a telephone which had a time of day feature to allow calls from friends during meal times but bar all others. The rest of the time let everybody through. Caller ID and CLASS serivice give me control over my own telephone. It allows me to decide wheteher to permit someone into my home. Would you ever think of dropping in on a friend during meal times? Most peopple would consider this the height of rudeness. How many of your meals have been interupted by a sales call? Plenty of mine have but not so many now that I have Call Barring. Tom Gray
David Gast <gast@cs.ucla.edu> (04/09/91)
Robert Jacobson wrote: > The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as > a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and > penetration. The telcos commonly pass off one month tests of small > service populations as scientific surveys and are always relieved for > their customers when alleged horrors do not occur. The point is to > wait a couple years when a few tens of millions of more people are > forced into Caller ID and the files have started being built up. Then > let's see if the horrors happen, Bill. The Moderator moderated: > What about in places like New Jersey, where Caller*ID has been a > reality now for about a year? I was at one of the CPUC Caller ID hearings. Sure enough one of the phone companies was there spouting off information from a small test in rural Kentucky (this is LA!) that lasted about one month. Of course, when one of the people in the audience asked to see the test questions, the test results, and the like to verify that the test actually proved what the company said it did, he was told that the information is not available to the public. (It is apparently available to participants in the formal hearings, however). Mr Jacobson, of course, is correct. Most businesses do not have devices to trap the incoming phone numbers at the present time, but per other messages "Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed" we know that they are available. Additionally, the value of the information will come as companies know not just one call, but hundreds of calls. When they can say "Oh, it's just Bill, he never buys, let's not answer the phone" or "It's Sam from redlined area Y, no need to answer," etc. Additionally, these people will not necessarily be calling you from intra-LATA phones, so if you have been ignoring out of area calls during dinner, you don't know if Radio Shack (or someone Radio Shacked disseminated the information to) has been calling you. Finally, you should not necessarily expect that these people will only call you up, they can also send junk mail, send you junk mail with different prices/specials, or adjust the prices at the store. In most respects, you cannot know how the information about you was used. David Gast gast@cs.ucla.edu [Moderator's Note: There was one thing I was mistaken about. In New Jersey, Caller-ID has not been around a year; it has been around for about three years. Still, no horror stories. PAT]
Scott Alexander <salex@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> (04/10/91)
In the latest {Unix Today}, there was an article saying that HP is
coming out with software for capturing Caller ID information.
(Unfortunately, in a fit of insanity, I threw that issue out. Perhaps
someone else can come up with more details.) Apparently they believe
that the availability of Caller ID is getting to the point where they
can market such a product. I would expect to start seeing other
companies making similar offerings until there is a cheap turn-key
system for the PC. That's when I expect the horror stories to start.
Scott Alexander salex@devvax.jpl.nasa.gov