🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BzD8s8.E0n@ns1.nodak.edu> csmith@plains.NoDak.edu (Carl Smith) writes:
>Just because we haven't had it doesn't mean we don't deserve it.
>
>People say that caller id is an invasion of privacy.  I say that everytime
>my phone rings it is an invasion of MY privacy.  The act of my answering the
>phone or not, and what the other party might hear in the background, could
>potentially reveal all sorts of info about myself that I might wish to keep
>private.  In the past that was just the price we paid for the convenience of
>the telephone.  In my opinion,  in return the caller OWES it to me to reveal
>who they are.
>
>Here's a similar scenario.  Suppose my doorbell rings.  I can look though
>the peep hole and see who it is.  If the person on the other side is
>carrying a case that says "Handy Dandy Brush Sales," or I just don't like
>their looks, I can choose to not open the door.  Also, if you knocked on
>the door and someone said "Who's there?" and you refused to answer, could
>you actually expect them to open the door?
>
>This all parallels caller id quite nicely.  If I don't recognize your number
>I won't answer the phone, just like I won't answer the door if I don't like
>the looks of the person on the other side.  And if you call with your ID
>blocked, I wouldn't even consider answering the phone, just like it would
>be totally out of the question to open the door to someone who refused to
>answer when I said "Who's there?"
>

Not Exactly.  It is more parallel to seeing the other person's address, not
their identity.  You wouldn't see "Handy Dandy Brush Sales", you'd see 
"1517 Route 681, Syracuse NY".  When you see the address, you wouldn't know
who it was unless you were to know that person very very well.  If the 
person wanted to block their number, it may be because they don't know you
well enough to give it to you.  It is the same thing with caller ID.  You
might need to call someone to arrange a business deal, or a meeting, but you
don't know them well enough to trust them with you phone number because, for
all you know, this person may be dangerous.  They could just call from a 
payphone once they knew your number, and get past your clever little filter.
Calling from a payphone would be analogous to having a motel address 
displayed at the door of my previous example.  However, there is a big 
difference between the door example and the phone.  If you let in someone
you don't know, they can kill you, beat you, rape you, or steal from you.
If you answer the phone from a blocked number, the most they can do is make
immature panting noises, or other phone harrassment, in which case you call
the Telephone Co. or the police, and they handle it.  It can be argued that
someone calling you could find out a few things about you from calling, but
those things (family members, your gender, perhaps what TV program you are
watching)  would only be useful to someone if they knew your address, and it
would be extremely unlikely that they'd find something useful in the few
seconds that it would take for you to say, "I'm sorry, I don't know you.
Please call back without the number block <click>." Another major difference
between the telephone and answering the door, is that if you find someone
offensive in any way on the phone, you just hang up, and *poof*  they're 
gone until they try calling back later.  What I'm trying to say is that
you're comparing apples and oranges.  Yes, they're both fruits, but the 
similarity stops there.  If you know all of the people you'd ever want to 
know, I imagine that the block filter would be a wonderful thing, but beyond
that, it seems that it would be more of a problem than an aid.


Louis Ruppert.