K4N@PSUVM.BITNET (Ken Nagelberg) (10/15/87)
[Article from CRTNET, October 14, 1987, Number 104]
On NBC's TODAY show (10/7/87), a gentleman from New Jersey Bell
demonstrated a device which will be available to N.J. Bell subscribers.
The device instantaneously provides a readout of the telephone number of
anyone calling the subscriber's phone. Thus, even if you have an un-
listed number or are calling an anonymous "hotline," your telephone
number would be in the hands of the person you called.
This innovation raises a number of questions. It breaks a number
of assumptions we have held about telephone use. The benefits have, of
course, been touted by the phone company (which stands to profit by its
use). A child picks up a phone in an emergency and dials 911 or 0, and
the operator instantly registers the orginating number. Obscene phone
calls are instantly traced to their source. On the other hand, so are
calls to the IRS, computer bulletin boards, and AIDS hotlines.
Many are concerned with the "chilling" effect of such devices--will
the potential presence of such devices cut down on potentially beneficial
uses of the telephone as well as potentially criminal (or at least annoy--
ing) uses? Perhaps the biggest effect will be an increase in pay telephone
use (again, more economic benefit to the phone company)! Any reactions?
Ken NagelbergOWENSJ@VTVM1.BITNET (John Owens) (10/16/87)
> ([C&P] stands to profit by [calling number ID devices'] use) Let's not just assume that. In what ways does it stand to profit? By selling the devices? Will they charge extra monthly for their use? It seems more like a "hey, look how good a phone company we are and how we make technological innovations (just like we did when we had Bell Labs :-)" kind of thing than a major profit-making venture. Phone companies have to compete with others for local monopolies.... Anyway, to the real issues: > A child picks up a phone in an emergency and dials 911 or 0, and > the operator instantly registers the orginating number. Almost all modern 911 systems already do this; from what I hear, the 911 operator gets a screen with the calling number, name(s), address, and any special medical information they may have on file. > Obscene phone calls are instantly traced to their source. But as you point out, these people can still use pay phones. Once it is known that this kind of device exists, people will find ways around it. > On the other hand, so are calls to the IRS, computer bulletin > boards, and AIDS hotlines. Exactly. That's why a method is needed of making "anonymous" calls; something the caller can do to cause their number not to be displayed. Does anyone know if anything like this is proposed? In any case, I can't see an AIDS hotline, for example, wanting to install one of these devices, and this would actually enhance computer security. Systems with modem lines would install recording versions of these devices on those lines, and if a break-in is attempted.... Many legitimate bulletin boards these days are requesting phone numbers and calling them back for verification before they allow access; only those using boards that encourage illegal activities should worry, but the owners of those boards would be very reluctant to give that information out, and we want to hamper criminal activities anyway, right.... > Many are concerned with the "chilling" effect of such devices--will > the potential presence of such devices cut down on potentially beneficial > uses of the telephone as well as potentially criminal (or at least annoy-- > ing) uses? I think it will just pose a new set of rules for interaction via telephone. Society has adapted to plenty of changes in the phone system; it will adapt as it adapted to party lines, direct dialing, call waiting, and other innovations. Phone Phreaks will use their current techniques of "bouncing" calls off of other numbers to hide their identity or figure out ways of sending their own "calling number" tones to override the phone company's; people will call BBSs through intermediaries like PC Pursuit more often, and the general public will become aware of the difference between incoming and outgoing PBX trunks :-). This sounds like a good subject for a good science fiction story (the kind that shows the subtle effects of a new technology on people's lives).... In general, it's important to look at this from the called party's perspective as well. The claim could be made that the person being called has a right to know who is calling, and that this applies to individuals, business, and government. (Remember, the government is just another user of the system; it's not taking advantage of any authority in using devices like these. In most other countries, the phone system is part of the national government, and is usually the same entity as the postal service; here we have the situation that the phone companies are as interested in serving private users and businesses as they are the government.) Any thoughts on my ramblings? John Owens
hunt@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM (Neil Hunt) (10/18/87)
Ken Nagelberg writes in CRTNet: > ... [with the new phone system] A child picks up a phone in an emergency, > dials 911 or 0, and the operator instantly registers the orginating number. When you dial 911 the operator not only gets your number, but also your address, displayed on a screen within seconds. This is according to the guy who was the instructor at our CPR and first aid classes. At least, this is the way it is in parts of the Bay Area. Apparently the system works well enough that in an extreme case, you can pass out while dialing 911, and as long as the call completes, an emergency response vehicle can be dispatched. Our instructor points out that response is often significantly faster if you can say what the problem is, though! When I called out the police the other night to get the stereo thief who was breaking into the car outside my house, I was very impressed by the speed of the response. I think they were there in less than a minute from when I started the call! They seemed to have more information than I told the operator over the phone; for example which side of the road the house was on. Neil/.
brewster@ihuxy.ATT.COM (Greg Brewster) (10/20/87)
John Owens replies to the comment: > > ([C&P] stands to profit by [calling number ID devices'] use) > > Let's not just assume that. In what ways does it stand to profit? Just so we are not too naive about this: I am a member of the AT&T Bell Labs software laboratory developing this feature for the 5ESS (tm) telephone switch. If C&P is using this feature on a 5ESS (tm) switch: (1) AT&T will profit in selling this software to C&P. (2) C&P will charge customers who wish to have this Calling ID feature a monthly fee per phone line, just as for Call Forwarding, Call Waiting, or any other feature. (3) C&P will also offer a "Calling ID Privacy" feature where, for an additional fee, a customer may specify that his/her number is NOT to be displayed if he/she calls a line with the Calling ID feature. The "device" required to get the number displayed is an ISDN-compatible "telephone/terminal" or CPE. These devices will be sold freely by various manufacturers just as telephones are sold today. Greg Brewster [These views aren't necessarily those of AT&T, C&P or anyone else]
gmp@rayssd.ray.com (Gregory M. Paris) (10/20/87)
Interesting it is how many articles I've read that have implied or declared that display of calling number is a violation of the caller's right of privacy. In my opinion, the telephone is the most intrusive device ever invented. If someday I can tell who is calling before I pick up the phone, I will consider that innovation the biggest boon to privacy since the device was invented. Greg Paris
hildum@iris.ucdavis.edu (Eric Hildum) (10/20/87)
Hello, I thought I would put in my two cents worth on this subject. As far as I am concerned, it is entirely reasonable for me to know who is calling me in advance - if someone is calling me, then presumably, they want me to know who they are and what they want. This system would allow me to know when people I want to talk to are calling, and when I should let the answering machine get the call for me (e.g. sales calls). To date, the only people who have not wanted me to know who they are are the obscene callers who have called me - I am not concerned about their privacy. One the calling side, I have never needed to conceal my identity from the person I am calling - even when I have called the IRS. I realize that their are people who feel that they should not be identified to such organizations; apparently, the identification feature can be overridden at the calling side (I will, however, not answer such a call). Apparently, if the identification feature is overridden when calling 911, the call will not be put through - which is apparently done to satisfy privacy requirements. A note - much of the this has also been discussed in the telcom discussion, which has included a more extensive description of the service provided. Eric Hildum
elisa@mmm.UUCP (Elisa Collins) (10/26/87)
Greg Brewster writes: > (2) C&P will charge customers who wish to have this Calling ID feature > a monthly fee per phone line, just as for Call Forwarding, Call > Waiting, or any other feature. > (3) C&P will also offer a "Calling ID Privacy" feature where, for an > additional fee, a customer may specify that his/her number is > NOT to be displayed if he/she calls a line with the Calling ID > feature. So your're selling a service which will allow people to invade the privacy of others, AND selling a service which people need to have to block such an invasion. I don't mean to flame YOU, Greg, but this is really rotten. I think you should tell your manager about this net discussion, and that people are objecting to this system on ethical grounds. Elisa Collins
bryan@seradg.Dayton.NCR.COM (Bryan Klopfenstein) (11/04/87)
Elisa Collins writes: > So your're selling a service which will allow people to invade the > privacy of others, AND selling a service which people need to have to > block such an invasion. I see no way anyone can make an anonymous phone call to someone who would recognize their voice, thus the "privacy" of the caller is not changed. If I am calling someone who does not know me, they will not recognize the number anyway - thus, the "privacy" lost is meaningless information to the callee. In addition, my privacy is invaded when someone else calls *me*, not when I call someone who will know the number I called from. As someone posted earlier, I would be glad to be able to screen calls before I answer. This way I could avoid such inconveniences as answering computer-originated advertising calls, and other such verbal junk mail. However, just to clarify (is this correct, Greg?): 1. If I buy the Calling ID feature, I will know what number called me. 2. If I buy the blocker, I will prevent others (with Calling ID) from knowing where I called from (useless feature in my opinion). For a caller without the blocker, the callee still does not know *who* called, just the number. If made from a number not yours, the callee still knows nothing of value to him. Bryan Klopfenstein
URJLEW%TUCCVM.bitnet@RUTGERS.EDU (11/12/87)
Suppose that I have an unlisted telephone number. I certainly don't want some/most of the people I call to know what number I am calling from as this is tantamount to giving out my number. Suppose that I am calling some bussiness establishment which has one of those call id things installed. It seems that blocking the call id needs to be made an automatic no extra cost feature of the unlisted number option.
Reneerb@byuvax.bitnet (Allen Reneer) (11/14/87)
Could it be possible for people with unlisted numbers ( or who don't want
their number shown ) to have some other type of information shown?
Let's say people with unlisted number have their name shown on the display
instead of the number. Then the person receiving the call will know where
the call is coming from but will not be able to get the unlisted number.
Allen Reneer Reneerb@byuvax