🚀 go-pugleaf

Daniel Lance Herrick notes:
 
>> *We* are not spending this money.  Our telephone system suppliers are
>> spending it

If the telcos are spending the money, you can bet they are charging us.
It all goes in the rate base.  If you don't or can't use the features,
you will pay anyway.  Now it is true that the telcos charge extra
for ISDN, but the last the time I saw the rates, they were extremely
cheap--that is, less than the cost of regular service.

Dave Caplinger writes:

> I imagine something similar to Prodigy ...

The risks-digest has had a number of messages regarding the risks of
using Prodigy.  Let's just say that I would not pay to use such a system.
Perhaps you would like ISDN so Prodigy can send those commercials even
faster.

geo@syd.dit.csiro.au writes:

> ISDN can be used to extend the local area networks we use. International
> file servers can be used from the comfort of your own home as the wire
> you currently use for the telephone can be the protocol connection of 
> tomorrow.

I can, of course, access international machines now if I want to pay
the international long distance charges--charges that the FCC recently
said were exhorbitant.

> The "Caller Identification" can be used to retrieve all the details
> of the last pizza you ordered. Same again?

With Caller-Id the same can happen without ISDN, so once again ISDN, per
se, does not offer much.  Further, Caller-Id (whether or not implemented
in ISDN) has been ruled illegal in some jurisdictions and is a terrible
system which invades the privacy of the caller.  While I can provide
further details, suffice it to say in this example "what if I don't want
the pizza place to know what pizza I ordered the last time or if there
has even been a last time."  If I walk in, they probably don't know so
why should they be entitled to extra information because I use a phone?

David Gast