Ross Herbert said:
When phones were few and far between they didn't want
everyone who couldn't or wouldn't pay to install their own
phone using the PT's to receive calls from those who could
afford to have one installed. Incoming calls to PT's were non
metering and in the days when techs could get the PT numbers
they were sometimes passed on to their girlfriends who could
ring them at an arranged time and talk for hours for nothing.
Doesnt explain why they are STILL mindlessly paranoid about
not making the phone numbers of public phones available.
The real reason for that sort of terminal stupidity doesnt have
a damned thing to do with any rational reason at all, its just
the usual thing you always see with massive bureaucracys,
they start using a particular approach for no good reason
and just mindlessly keep doing it forever.
Basically because massive bureaucracys 'work' like that.
Ah yes, but only because the govt insisted on providing the 1831
option for those who did want to bar CLI on a call by call basis.
If they hadn't done that it would have been totally unfettered.
I dont believe that Telstra only allowed the suppression of
the Caller ID because it was forced to do that by the govt.
The govt only forced Telstra to piss an immense amount
of money against the wall on the 'education' campaign on
its availability and the availablity of a permanent block.
I agree there was commercial gain in it for Telstra
to have as few restrictions as possible which would
maximise sales of CND add-ons and phones.
And thats why they chose to spend the money on that
'education' campaign and why Optus chose not to.
Sure, but in those days there was no way anyone
could obtain a reverse listing of all phone numbers
so privacy from that angle was ensured.
Irrelevant to whether you're welcome to have an unlisted
number if you're paranoid about being findable in a CD database.
Not just with a reverse lookup either, a CD database makes
it very easy to find people with more unusual names.
The only thing that makes any sense is the
availability of unlisted numbers for the paranoid.
And that has been true since long before the
recent wanking about 'privacy' ever started.
The issue concerning PT numbers had nothing to do
with the privacy angle. It was purely related to revenue.
Dont believe it.
And doesnt explain why they are STILL paranoid
about the availability of those numbers when there
is no revenue consideration.
The data in the phone book doesn't allow you to track down a person's
address simply by knowing a phone number, not unless you want to go
blind searching for that specific number in the first place.
It clearly aint 'confidential information' when its in the phone book.
Of course, but only if they knew my name
and were prepared to do some sleuthing.
Doesnt have a damned thing to do with Caller ID.
That's why a name like Smith or Tan would make
it so much more difficult to do. If all they had was
a phone number and no name it is not at all easy.
Easy enough with a name and rough location.
Assume you had not chosen to pay for an unlisted number and
had made a phone call to some person and for some reason you
rubbed him up the wrong way and he wanted to get back at you.
Mindless neuroticism.
Thanks to CLI, he now has your number and with his little
CD he finds where you live and then arranges to have a
load of chicken manure dumped on your front lawn.
He can do that if you piss him off in person
and he works out where you 'live' too.
If he was careful nobody would know who ordered the chicken
manure and you would also be unable to do anything. I have
seen this happen in reality. Even worse things are possible...
Your neurotic fears are your problem.
He can always follow you round the streets in a car etc too.
I don't regard myself as being particularly paranoid
You clearly are with that chicken shit example. Neurotic fears, anyway.
but I do value my personal privacy.
Then you get to pay forthe costs involved
in pandering to your neurotic fears.
You'd better wear a rubber mask when buying stuff too in case
you piss off the sales monkey and they decide to follow you
home and arrange the delivery of a truckload of chookshit.
Of course, but if anyone was going to mount a personal
attack on somebody by writing to the newspapers they
would be stupid to allow their name to be published.
Its never possible to predict who will get pissed off about
what is in a particular letter to the paper. Some complete
nutters can get pissed off about the most innocuous stuff.
One stupid fundy yank chucked a tantrum
about my use of the phrase 'a hell of a lot'
The rotty and the shotty will be quite adequate to
deal with him if he ever does show up in person.
The newspaper has to know details of the
writer in order to verify their identity if required.
And there is always some microscopic risk that an employee will
be the fruit loop who will arrange for the truckload of chookshit.
Life is never completely risk free. Even if you hide under your
bed and have the food passed in to you under there, there
will always be some risk of you carking it under there and
no one noticing untile the pile of food starts to build up etc.
However, they don't divulge that to anyone else
Thats just plain wrong too if the cops demand that.
and you don't have to pay to remain anonymous.
Their choice.
OK, get big gates that stop the chookshit truck instead.
And a security system that tapes the truck showing up.
You'll have to pay for that too if you're that paranoid.
