Article View: va.general
Article #1064Re: Phone-spam zappers?
From: John Mazor
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 04:44
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 04:44
43 lines
3216 bytes
3216 bytes
Beartooth <karhunhammas@Lserv.com> wrote in message news:Pine.GSO.4.43.0203111057530.874-100000@saltmine.radix.net... > > I don't know if there's a generic term for these > things yet. The one I noticed was in a Radio Shack, but I > presume there must be competitors. I'm wondering first > whether they're a good thing, then whether RS's is a good > one at a good price (fifty bucks). > > According to the clerk, the gizmo detects the > phone-dialing machine, and sends it a message saying : > "This phone has been disconnected. Delete the number from > your list." He also said something to the effect that it was > compatible with existing answering machines. > > Upon being asked, he said the detection worked off > the delay between the time the machine connects to you and > the time it hands off the connection to a human -- or, I > suppose, to a phone-spam-machine that plays a recording ... > > I've got a sneakin' hunch this is going to be like > Call Intercept : some use for a while. Our trashcall volume > went way down with that -- and then up went the rate for > trashcalls that give a number, instead of just > "unavailable," or whatever your caller-ID machine shows. > > I also wonder how much risk there is of false > positives (the zapper killing someone it shouldn't) or > unanticipated interactions with either of my answering > machines (one turned off as to answering, but there on the > line) -- or any other home hardware : DSL filters, > splitters, answering-machine-shutter-uppers, surge > protectors, ..... > > Any experience/advice? I have one. I don't think the explanation was correct -- the manual says it sends a signal that tells the caller's computer that the number is no longer valid, or some such thing. It must work sometimes -- I once picked up the phone, only to have a computerized voice tell me "Sorry, wrong number." Of course, it's dependent on the caller's system bothering to recognize the signal from the zapper. My guess is that it is at best partially effective.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<a6k1pb$8f0$1@bob.news.rcn.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news-x2.support.nl!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!dca6-feed2.news.digex.net!intermedia!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mailReferences:
<Pine.GSO.4.43.0203111057530.874-100000@saltmine.radix.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 108b95,353f316d0e4f7eef X-Google-Attributes: gid108b95,public X-Google-Thread: 101049,353f316d0e4f7eef X-Google-Attributes: gid101049,public X-Google-Thread: fb785,353f316d0e4f7eef X-Google-Attributes: gidfb785,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-11 20:57:01 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news-x2.support.nl!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!dca6-feed2.news.digex.net!intermedia!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail From: "John Mazor" <mazorj@erols.com> Newsgroups: va.general,dc.general,md.general Subject: Re: Phone-spam zappers? Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 23:44:30 -0500 Lines: 46 Message-ID: <a6k1pb$8f0$1@bob.news.rcn.net> References: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0203111057530.874-100000@saltmine.radix.net> X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVa2bymLYbtbeKU86lXG8l9P+iHwWyU8qMHBNkQBWOO3A4QSluh7l6Bc X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Mar 2002 04:56:11 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Priority: 3 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal