SPGDCM@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU.UUCP (04/14/87)
MSG:FROM: SPGDCM --UCBCMSA TO: NETWORK --NETWORK 04/14/87 13:19:33 To: NETWORK --NETWORK Network Address From: Doug Mosher <SPGDCM at UCBCMSA> Title: MVS/Tandem Systems Manager (415)642-5823 Office: Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 Subject: telephone credit cards To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Does anyone know about the law and policy regarding charge cards following the divestment? I am puzzled by the following practice: Pacific bell sent me a card with the number consisting of my telephone number and a secret 4-digit code not on the card. ATT sent me a card with the same whole number INCLUDING the same 4-digit verifier embossed on the card. Both cards have magnetic strips. (I may have it reversed about which one was secret, which clear-text.) In any case, two facts appear: apparently there is still a "deal" between them about long-distance; I suppose in effect that when you charge, you needn't know whether the call is intra- or inter-lata, and the billing all gets done by Pac bell anyway. But it seems odd to have two cards from two different companies, that look different, that perform an identical practical and business function. Moreover it is interesting to see the choice of styles, whether you choose the secret or clear-text code to carry around. Thanks, Doug ; telephone credit cards