🚀 go-pugleaf

devildog@nic.cerf.net (Ren Hoek) writes:

 > This you can see would totally destroy obscene callers,
 > "stalker" calls and add heightened security to computer dialup
 > services that could defend against hackers by only answering
 > calls from approved phone numbers.

Not necessarily but it would be helpful.


 > It didn't work and I called Pac Bell to ask why and the told me
 > it was because the State Senate's Public Utilities COmmision
 > blocked them from selling or advertising that service after big
 > pressure from lobbist serving the Bill Collecting and
 > Telemarketing Industries...

If that's what they told you, they LIE.  The CPUC did not disallow
Pac Bell to offer CID.  Pac Bell chose NOT to offer it because the
CPUC would REQUIRE Pac Bell to offer line block along with per-call
block.  Pac Bell looks at this as a marketing angle and not as a
service that would help Californians.

I agree with the CPUC.  I'd love to have CID.  But Pac Bell was out
to make a buck and chose to with-hold the service until they could
work to the advantage of the business customer.  They are not
thinking about the benefit of the consumers.  It will resurface
again.  It will probably be over-priced and business will use it but
most consumers will pass due to cost.

So everyone, do write as suggested, but add this naughty baby bell
to your fan-out list.  ...Now you now the real story.

Follow-up to sdnet.general.  This looks like a spameroo...

--
   Mike Shirley    Lakeside, CA    HAM: WB6WUI    mikey@cts.com