HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Chris_F_Chiesa@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 08:03:17 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

Re: caller ID, answering machines, and whether or not to answer the phone:

Do what I occasionally do by accident: turn off ALL the bells on ALL the 
phones in the house, and optionally leave the answering machine ON.  Then, 
your/my ONLY notification that someone is calling, is when they let it 
ring long enough for the machine to pick up - which filters out a LOT of 
people in this impatient age; I remember when I was a kid, the "proper
telephone etiquette" I was taught was to "let the telephone you're calling
ring seven or eight times..."; nowadays most people hang up if the thing
doesn't get answered by the third ring - then, you can hear who it is and
what they're calling about WITHOUT having to pick up and actually talk to
them, and can even fool yourself by rationalizing "oops, too late, the 
machine's got it."  Then when (if!) you call 'em back, if the person is
uppity about you "screening" your calls, you can always lie and say you
were in the bathroom/shower/back yard/etc. 

And of course ALL of this works EXACTLY the same way whether you have Caller
ID or NOT.  When will answering machines capable of recording and playing back
Caller ID information become available?  I note that the Caller ID is trans-
mitted between the first and second rings, whereas an answering machine typ-
ically is set to pick up on anything from the second to the fifth ring.  So
the machine would have to pick up Caller ID information BEFORE actually an-
swering the call, which would give you a record also of all the people who 
called you but DIDN'T LEAVE A MESSAGE...

The unique thing about Caller ID, and the reason so many people are so freaked
out by it, seems to be that it screws with the sequence of events as regards
transfer of information: in the past, you knew NOTHING about a caller until
AFTER you (or your machine) ANSWERED the call.  Now, you know something BEFOR
you answer, and it's a change of mindset.  Five years from now we'll wonder
what the fuss was about.  (Possibly because the idle hands at the phone 
companies will have thought up even more devious tricks by then...)

Just my two cents,

  Chris Chiesa
    Chris_F_Chiesa@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: sheilah@wam.umd.edu (Danny-Boy)
Subject: Re: Freaks
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:19:35 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.153716.1597@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca> gpeel@mta.ca writes:
>In article <18496@mindlink.bc.ca>, Clayten_Hamacher@mindlink.bc.ca (Clayten Hamacher) writes:
>	No I don't have two accounts! But I look forward to meeting Mr. Gray,



Notice how well behaved I am, not editting the subject line to facilitate
easy killing of this thread. Sigh, my humanity makes me weep.

Did I miss something? I thought Hgray made a nice female kinda name.
With no offence intended if I am wrong. I was thinking of something
like Heather Gray. Makes me think of a very wheaty field at night
or perhaps rain. ignorant of what heather actually looks like. Wuthering
heights - never read the book but watched a movie based on it a long
time ago on a classics movie channel at 2 am, most likely the night
when I watched the movie version of the one about the governess and the
guy with the crazy wife locked away in his mansion that burns down, my
favorite part of wich is when the lady startles his horse the first
time he sees her, a very surreal experience for him I suppose, the fog,
culpable.



-- 
I am always wrong. Don't believe me ever.
stark raving sane  sheilah@wam.umd.edu
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (ravE on)
Subject: Who's Who of the InterNet
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 01:37:59 GMT



 ______________________________________________________________________
|______________                        /                               |
|                                     /                                |
|                u  t  u  r  e       <___________  u  l  t  u  r  e    |
_______________________________________________________________________|


WHO are you?

Hi.  I publish the FutureCulture FAQ file, which is a self-described
"somewhat definitive guide to resources bringing you the future."  It
is basically an ever-growing guide to the new edge, technoculture,
cybperculture, etc., particular the relevant on-line aspects of the
aforementioned subculture(s)

One of the sections is a "who's who" of on-line 'celebrities', and
appears in the file like this:

	V. Important Person		Musician/Author 
	John Q. NetPublic		Hacker/Writer

So, if you are someone who would like to be mentioned in the file (no
email addrresses are given out), or if you know of someone who you
feel garners recognition, please send relevant info. (including a
basic summary of credentials in-case I fall knowledge-impaired) to:

      ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu

I am looking for on-line people from all walks of life, including:
hackers (in the underground sense), writers, magazine editors,
artists, musicians, DJs, NetGurus, authors, or any other
characteristic that might seperate onesself from the mass.net.public.

Thanks in advance.

--

    ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu	        FutureCulture:  In/f0rmation
    ahawks@mindvox.phantom.com		future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu

Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: djf@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Marvin Batty)
Subject: video phones (was Re: Caller ID)
Organization: Starfleet, Coventry, UK
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:41:13 GMT

I would suggest that a better system would be a video phone that gives caller 
ID (phone no.) only to those on a database. In addition, a voice changer
and even a picture changer could provide greater protection from the crazies.

Does anyone know if plans have been drawn up to create a computer interface
that changes the image of the receiver? There are photo booths with the ability
to show the subject against a computer stored background. Perhaps something
along these lines.

A follow on from this idea is to incorporate the false image/background/voice
into a vcr attached to the phone. This can act as an advanced answerphone.

When a computer can project an image of  the caller and his/her recorded voice,
how soon will computer simuulation of *conversation* follow?

Weird thought, huh?

-- 
                  Marvin Batty (AKA D. Fulford-Brown)
                         djf@cch.cov.ac.uk
                  THIS SPACE RESERVED  FOR WITTY .SIG
From: kucloak@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Bryan Kennedy Reed)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: 19 Dec 92 16:08:52 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <1992Dec19.162535.5006@lunatix.uucp>, chelf@lunatix.uucp (Chad Helfenberger) writes:
> In article <1992Dec18.192939.45771@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> kuloak@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>>> It seems that the reason most people here fail to see this is because they 
>>> DO understand all this technological flib-flab.  They are 'cyberpunks'.  
>>> They realize WHEN to block their numbers and when there is no need to.
>>
>>Just which amendment is being violated?  I assume you are saying it is
>>a violation of the right to privacy which is a penubra right derived
>>from the first and fouth amendments.  Just where does this violation
> 
> Partially, yes.
>

And what other rights are being violated?  You know some people
believe that the right to privacy does not exist, since it is not
litteraly in the constitution.
 
>>occur?  The constitution does not give someone the right to be stupid.
> 
> By this logic, you HAVE to be smart, or you are in violation of the law.
> The constitution does not care if you are smart or stupid.  This is TOTALLY 
> irrelevant.
>

No, you are not breaking the law, but you are giving up your rights.
If you don't protect your own rights, who will?  
 
>>A lot of people don't know they have the right to refuse to have their
>>house searched (without a warrant) or that once their garbage leaves
>>their property it can be searched (if the garbage company allows it),
>>etc.  If you are not forced to reveal your phone number, where is the
>>violation of the right to privacy?
> 
> The people who don't know they have the right to refuse a search (without a 
> warrant) are ignorant of the law.  That's their own fault.  However, most of 
> the people who use Caller ID do not realize (and don't have the resources to 
> LEARN) that giving your number to everyone you call is not only an issue of 
> privacy, it's an issue of legality.  
>

In my book it's the same thing.  What's the difference?  And the whole
issue here is privacy, because it is the law that is under question.  

One more thing, the whole point of the constitution is to protect us
from the Government.  And, as much as they act like it, the phone
company is not the government.  Private citizens can also violate your
rights, but your recourse is through laws that were passed to make
these provisions apply.  (Like civil rights violations in hate
crimes.)  But private citizens have a lot more leway than the
government does. 

> Those who know what's good for us must rise and save us from ourselves.

Going on a "Witch Hunt" are we?
> -- 
> Chad Helfenberger
> (chelf@lunatix.uucp) 
-- 
		
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Invincibility depends on one's self;	   kucloak@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
  The enemy's vulnerability on him.	    bkreed@oread.cc.ukans.edu
 		  --Sun Tzu 		      Bryan Kennedy Reed
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: chelf@lunatix.uucp (Chad Helfenberger)
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Organization: Lexington Public Access Unix. -KY- (606) 255-9121
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 16:45:01 GMT

In article <18666@mindlink.bc.ca> Clayten_Hamacher@mindlink.bc.ca (Clayten Hamacher) writes:
>Also, MCI sales reps are probably not all calling from the same phone #..
>Block one and you'll have to block the next one who calls. Either hang-up on
>them every time they call or tell them you'll take legal action if they don't
>stop..

EXACTLY.  Caller ID will NEVER change that.  Telemarketers are trained to be 
persistant.  Just placing them on a kill list will not keep them from 
calling.  People have to tell them to stop calling, and that requires 
picking up the phone and telling them so; not avoiding them.



-- 
Chad Helfenberger
(chelf@lunatix.uucp) 
Xref: sparky alt.cyberpunk:6737 sci.electronics:21084
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: 18 Dec 92 12:08:43 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH

chelf@lunatix.uucp (Chad Helfenberger) writes:

>If Calling-#-ID is not ruled unconstitutional (which it IS), then there must 
>be some sort of protocol which will be followed by called parties and 
>calling parties.  WHY in the HELL would you want to give out your number to 
>anyone you called?  Why don't you Caller ID freaks put yourself on the other 
>end of the line for a minute.

First, you assert that Caller ID is unconstitutional.  Do
you have the Supreme Court decision which says so?  On what
grounds do you make this assertion?

Second, no-one said PLM (people like me) were going to give
out our phone numbers to *everyone* we call.

When I make personal calls to friends, I'll give out my number
(why not - they already have it).

When I make a call to a business like the electric company, or
a bank, then I will give my ID (why not, the first thing I say
in such a conversation is something like "Good Morning, my name
is Brice Dowaliby and I'm a customer of yours".  In order to
deal with any problems with my account they have to know who I am
anyway, so I won't bother to block calls to them).

When I make calls to the local book store, video store, grocery
store etc. then I will block caller ID.  They have no reason
to know who I am.  As a business, I don't think they will block
calls without Caller ID.  If they do, then they will lose my
business.

Chad, why are you so insistent that you have the right to get
me on the telephone without identifying yourself?  Are you
a pollster or something?
-- 
   Brice Dowaliby, Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH  03766
                         bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu        
             I don't speak for them, they don't speak for me
                              DoD # 0698
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: steve@mikejag.wimsey.bc.ca (Steve (PrettyBoy) Barclay)
Subject: Re: new idea
Organization: mikejag (mike) is a private system in Vancouver, BC, Canada
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 05:10:46 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.015325.7235@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley ) writes:
>Sieg Heil!
>
>Ven do ve start brrhedink the master race, mein fuhrer?

You mean "hatching" the master race dontcha?

Steve

-- 
###############################################################################
# You have been listening to the erotic daydreams of an earthworm as it was   #
# sucked backwards through a French milking machine.  - George Carlin         #
###############################################################################.
Xref: sparky alt.cyberpunk:6759 sci.electronics:21172
From: morpheus <morpheus@entropy.mcds.com>
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 20:51:34 EST
Organization: No Pity For The Majority!  [private]

chelf@lunatix.uucp (Chad Helfenberger) writes:

> If Calling-#-ID is not ruled unconstitutional (which it IS),

If so, then that's more proof to the theory that the constitution has been
perverted into (or always has been) a piece of shit.

Look, I know people who will lose their primary hobby (making prank calls, that
is) when CND is available here.  Perhaps you are similiar?  I mean, really.
It is unconstitutional to have a little box saying who is calling you?
Maybe it should be ruled unconstitutional to have "From:" lines in message
headers?

Perhaps it causes problems in certain circumstances.  I know there are times
when I do not want my number revealed, but hey - there are ways of avoiding it
if the need is dire enough.  But on a regular basis, I don't care if the person
I call knows I'm calling, since they'll know in a matter of seconds anyway.
If I call someone who doesn't want to talk to me, I save the potential toll
charge of being told to fuck off.

> then there must
> be some sort of protocol which will be followed by called parties and 
> calling parties.  WHY in the HELL would you want to give out your number to 
> anyone you called?  Why don't you Caller ID freaks put yourself on the other 
> end of the line for a minute.

Why not?  Ok, maybe you're a loony-brain-tour-guide, and don't want your home
number to be known by Jon Q. Nutcase.  So - don't call from home!  Or, if you
must, set up something that you can call into your office and out on another
office number.  No biggie.


morpheus@entropy.mcds.com ("morph")   |   A name changes toys into tools..
Obsolete diety for hire.  Cheap.      |          - Skinny Puppy
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (man without a conscious)
Subject: Re: AGRIPPA
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 03:11:46 GMT

Somewhere in Cyberspace, kinsler@newton.physics.uq.oz.au said about 'AGRIPPA':
|In article <Bz3wnM.M8G@acsu.buffalo.edu>, cri@acsu.buffalo.edu (Mr. PlEaSanT) writes:
||> 	This was mailed to me earlier today.
||> 	it's copyrighted, so i may just get in trouble for doing this.
||> 	oh well, so kill my article.
||> 	criss
||> 
||> enjoy...
||> 
||> 
||> AGRIPPA
||> (A Book of The Dead)
||> Text by William Gibson
||> Etchings by Dennis Ashbaugh
||> (C)1992 Kevin Begos Publishing
||> 1411 York Ave.
||> New York, NY
||> All Rights Reserved
||> 
||> ..................
|
|I couldn't finish reading it. Dull, dull, dull.
|
|Give me "Beowulf" or "Rime of the Ancient Mariner" any day.

Obviously you didn't even read far enough to see it was a messed up
version.

|-- 
|+soluble fish+
|"You people, you do not see the grandeur in the wind and stone and stars,
| in the blood and fire and iron - but paint only the flowers."

--

    ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu	        FutureCulture:  In/f0rmation
    ahawks@mindvox.phantom.com		future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu
From: cri@acsu.buffalo.edu (Mr. PlEaSanT)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: AGRIPPA
Date: 12 Dec 92 17:55:27 GMT
Organization: We here at the Asylum don't think about that.
 School Groups: Treasurer A.R.S.A.
  Affiliations: None. I don't like anyone.
 Project: Twisting the minds of America's youth
 Where: Wish I could tell you...

ok, to all posting or mailing "this is incomplete" or some variation...

i posted it the way i got it.

if it's not right i'll go back and try to get the rest.

"We Apologize for the Inconveniance"

criss

"Lie down on the floor and stay calm."
		-J.Dillinger
cri@acsu.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (E)
Subject: Re: GET A LIFE; FREAKS; NEW IDEA
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 01:42:31 GMT

Somewhere in Cyberspace, SMCMILLN@NUACVM.ACNS.NWU.EDU said about 'GET
A LIFE; FREAKS; NEW IDEA': 
|In article <1992Dec14.224512.103@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca>
|gpeel@mta.ca writes:
| 
|>
|>        It's Mt.A not MAT butt-head.
| 
|Oh! Butt-head! It appears I've hurt the feeelings of a little neo-
|nazi freak. So what was your toilet training like? How do you
|feel about your mother?
|                                        -- St. Morphine

If you do not lower your defenses nothing can get accomplished.
Please take your flames to email, you're wasting time and money.

--

    ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu	        FutureCulture:  In/f0rmation
    ahawks@mindvox.phantom.com		future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu

Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (your unconscious mind)
Subject: Re: CyberTrendies - Mondo 2000, etc..
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Keywords: What is Cyberpunk?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 17:16:37 GMT

Somewhere in Cyberspace, ikuz@cs.vu.nl said about 'CyberTrendies -
Mondo 2000, etc..': 

|Well I suppose this doesn't have that much to do with Mondo 2000 or 
|CyberTrendies - too bad. One more question: Is it actually possible to be a 
|Cyberpunk now ( ie 1992/3) or does being a Cyberpunk just mean that you happen
|to live in that kind of a society?

What do *you* think? 

|		Ihor.

--

    ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu	        FutureCulture:  In/f0rmation
    ahawks@mindvox.phantom.com		future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu
From: roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 19:43:32 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN

Clayten_Hamacher@mindlink.bc.ca (Clayten Hamacher) writes:

> I said special equiptment was involved when I first described how it's
> done... You use a modifed phone (a linemans handset will do this as well) so
> listen to your phone line as a call is coming in...
                                         ^^^^^^^^^

Oops, I sure did miss that.  I thought you were referring to listening
to the _called_ party.

(I know... never post before coffee!)

Of course that works.  You can do much the same thing with a regular
phone and a couple of capacitors, if you're technically inclined.
--
Roy M. Silvernail --  roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu - OR-  cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu
   "I like Santa Claus as well as the next guy, but do you really want a
   hard drive that's spent 6000 miles at the bottom of a canvas sack in a
            wooden sleigh powered by airborne reindeer?" -- me
Xref: sparky alt.cyberpunk:6711 sci.electronics:20955
From: v067rcyf@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (AARDVARK)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:35:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: acsu.BzEty1.A40
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BzD8s8.E0n@ns1.nodak.edu>, csmith@plains.NoDak.edu (Carl Smith) writes...
>In article <1992Dec16.054235.13775@mtu.edu> cmwolf@mtu.edu (christopher m. wolf) writes:
>>roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) writes:
 [mild editing] 
>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.

now, what on earth are you all worried about?  background noise is not
a very compromising thing unless your parents call and hear the stereo
or a girl or sporadic gunfire, in which case, you should have control 
the situation and be able to turn down the noise.

>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?

nope nope nope nope
what you fail to recognize is this isn't a door into your house,
only an audio representation of what might be happening at your domicile

>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?"

the other thing is, while a person at the door may be able to physically
harm you or force its way into your house, there is _absolutely_ no
danger of that over the phone... you can just hang up and they can't
touch you

really people, it's just a phone
if people survived without knowing who was calling for the
past few generations and stayed sane,
i suspect our generation could do it too...
unless we're getting too soft.

---------------------------------------aardvark
Xref: sparky alt.cyberpunk:6627 sci.electronics:20726
From: roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Caller ID block?
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 19:00:50 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN

nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu writes:

> Can't you instead of blocking have the number be reported as something other
> than the number you are calling from, like the old blue/black box ttrick

I should certainly hope not!  I support CNID, CNID blocking and
blocked-ID blocking at the CO, but I do NOT support ID spoofing!

Wasn't it some Police Department in Florida that wanted to be able to
send spoofed ID from their undercover operatives' phones?  Nosirree,
that's just not playing fair.  (although whoever said LE types always
play fair?)

I don't mind when you don't tell me... but don't ever lie to me.
--
Roy M. Silvernail --  roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu - OR-  cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu
                         "I'm a model citizen."
                                      -- Warren Zevon
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk