HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: capturing caller id data
Date: 11 Apr 92 11:43:35 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973

In article <1992Apr8.202554.2332@sunb10.cs.uiuc.edu> epstein@cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>In <1992Apr04.091616.11784@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Apr3.203700.3116@tandem.com> Lyon_Jim@Tandem.Com (Jim Lyon) writes:
>>>
>>>Unfortunately, there is another reason why many businesses want CallerId:
>>>to generate directed phone lists for telemarketing.  These lists have a
>>
>>But as you say, the same feature lets me stop telemarketing on my home
>>phone.   Combine this with the new laws under review that require the
>>telemarketers to keep lists of people who refuse to be called, and to
>>not call them.  (Just as the DMA does for junk mail)
>
>Oh, great.  When someone objects to Caller ID because it will make
>their phone number more available, the phone companies can respond
>that you can solve the telemarketing problem by getting Caller ID.
>That's a great way for them to generate business for themselves -- to
>protect yourself from Caller ID, get Caller ID.  Sounds like a
>Catch-22, all-win situation for them.
>
>
>>>3.  Anyone paying for a phone line can decide whether CallerId information
>>>    is always blocked for calls originating from that line.
>>
>>Almost nobody would get this because a lot of people, myself included,
>>would block anonymous calls except at certain times of the day.
>>What you probably mean is to set the default, with per-call enabling of
>>caller-ID when you call a number that blocks anonymous calls.
>
>That would certainly be a more flexible way to do it -- the key point
>being that the caller not be required to enter the per-call blocking
>code each time.
>
>-- 
>Milt Epstein
>Department of Computer Science
>University of Illinois
>epstein@cs.uiuc.edu

A simple way to prevent a phone number from being transmitted from aa
residence to another residence is to NOT SUBSCRIBE TO CLASS AT ALL
(caller-id, blocking, tracing, etc. are all in this service).

Dave

-- 

Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
From: pjs@euclid.JPL.NASA.GOV (Peter J. Scott)
Subject: Re: How to end unwanted phonecalls
Reply-To: pjs@euclid.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 17:34:23 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.142715.17792@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>, smjeff@lerc05.lerc.nasa.gov (Jeff Miller) writes:
> 
> Someone (one of us?) should start a database of people who would
> never buy anything over the phone.  This list can be sold or given
> to the telemarketers.  I'm sure they would appreciate getting this
> information since it would make their operation more efficient.
> They don't want to call people who are not interested in their
> products.
> 
> Am I being too naive?

No, this is very smart.  So smart, in fact, that someone's already
done it: they're called Private Citizen.  They were on PBS once.
They add a little incentive (to prevent the calls from teleslime
of the form, "We know that you're a discriminating customer who
isn't interested in just *any* opportunity..."): they provide
the legal mechanism for exacting a $100 fine per phone call that
you receive from a telemarketing company they gave your name to.
And they've collected.  I'm afraid I don't have their address here -
I think they're in Illinois? - I've been careful enough about never
giving out my unlisted number that I don't get many sales calls at
home and so, paradoxically, I don't want to take the chance of it
getting on the wrong list at the telemarketing companies that get
it from Private Citizen.  I'm more interested in not being bothered
than the $100.

If you really need their address and no-one on the group knows it,
call WGBH in Boston and ask them to look it up in their file for
the NOVA program, "They Know Where You Live."

-- 
This is news.  This is your       |    Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/Caltech
brain on news.  Any questions?    |    (pjs@euclid.jpl.nasa.gov)


Newsgroups: misc.consumers
From: gadfly@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (Gadfly)
Subject: Re: Discrimination at Mitsubishi
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 18:04:55 GMT
Summary: I'm puzzled, too.

In article <1992Apr15.045941.20178@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
bf644@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (D. C. Chuang) writes:
>    After trying to follow the conversation I came away with some
> confusion as well.  The whole thing was so repetitive and choppy,
> not to mention the excessive vulgarities which the caller continued
> to take time after time.  Can someone explain this?  Kind of scary
> just to think there are people like Mr. Avery out there.

And while we're making explanations, I'm quite amazed that the
service manager had any knowledge of the events surrounding the
lost sale at his dealership.  In my experience these service guys
run an entirely separate empire--they know if you bought from
their dealership or not, but don't care about any of the particulars.
If Avery is the service manager, his concern about the salespeople's
lives is touching but truly bizarre.  If he's the general/sales manager,
how did he get sucked into a service call for warranty work?

Well, the lesson in all of this is to remember that every new car
will need service periodically.  Thus, the dealer's service
department is even more important to visit than the showroom floor.
And if you think you'll be getting service at a different dealer-
ship than where you buy, be sure to visit that other dealership
and see how they treat you--before you find yourself locked into the
kind of situation Rajiv is in.

For folks wondering about the warranty work game, there's a book
I remember flipping through at an airport when a flight was serously
delayed--the title was a play on "Mr. Goodwrench" (perhaps "Dealing with
Mr.  Badwrench", something like that, I can't remember).  Anyway,
the author used to be in the business and tells all.  Basically,
service managers can do all sorts of favors for you even after your
warranty has expired and always manage to charge the expense to the
manufacturer.  Thus, it pays to be real nice to these guys, even
when you have a dispute about their work or their charges.

               *** ***
Ken Perlow   ***** *****
15 Apr 92   ****** ******   26 Germinal An CC
            *****   *****   gadfly@ihlpa.ATT.COM
             ** ** ** **
...L'AUDACE!   *** ***   TOUJOURS DE L'AUDACE!  ENCORE DE L'AUDACE!
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
From: whall@cactus.org (J. Wayne Hall)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Sales Tax on Mail Orders
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:09:07 GMT
Reply-To: whall@cactus.org (J. Wayne Hall)
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Capital Area Central Texas Unix Society


barry@playfair.Stanford.EDU (Barrett P. Eynon) writes:
>
> I just ordered a computer from Dell in Texas and was charged sales
> tax.  I live in California.  I have heard several opinions(wife,
> friends, colleagues) about the legality of this. (My accountant,
> presumably the most likely of these personal sources, didn't know).
>
> Does anyone on the net have an *authoritative* source of information
> on this?
>

As many people don't know... if you buy something without the intention
of reselling it, you must pay a sales or use tax.  (assuming you're not
a tax-exempt organization).

Whether you buy it locally or out of state, you still have the obligation
of paying the tax.  

Now, if they don't charge you tax because they're out of state, then you
are obligated to contact the state and send the use tax of that item
voluntarily to them.  (of course, no-one does so)

An out of state purchase doesn't make it non-taxable, so when you tell a cop
that you bought it out of state so you could save on sales tax, watch it.

(well, maybe not a _cop_, but you get the idea...)

Wayne Hall
whall@cactus.org
From: anlst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Arthur N. Lilley)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: Ranger or S-10?
Date: 7 Apr 92 23:03:04 GMT
Distribution: all
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Hey ya'll.  I'm looking to buy a mini-truck here in the next few weeks.  I was
wondering if anyone out there could tell me which one was picked by Consumer
Reports, Ford Ranger or Chevy S-10.  As I can gaurantee you I will buy
American, I'm only interested in these two.  I'm not looking for a lifetime out
of this truck, just a few years.  I suppose it will probably come down to looks
and price, but I am interested which was rated higher(reliability, resale, 
etc.).  I'm also interested in experiences you may have had that turned you off
to one of these models(but let's not have a Ford - Chevy battle please).


                                  Any information at all is appreciated,
                      
                                                           Art
Xref: sparky misc.consumers:10509 alt.privacy:1042
From: Joe.Francis@dartmouth.edu (Joe Francis)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: capturing caller id data
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:03:43 GMT
 <SWARUP.92Apr10121443@hrothgar.linus.mitre.org> 
 <1992Apr12.232537.5638@clarinet.com> 
 <1992Apr13.025516.2543@mdd.comm.mot.com>  <35147@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <35147@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
edp@MATH.zko.dec.com (Eric Postpischil) writes:

> By the way, you asked for explanation of how calling-line identification
> would be used, and I explained clearly the advantages it would provide
> to me.  You have not responded.

Is he supposed to?  We already have enough people who are proud
graduates of the "he who posts last wins" school of USENET writing.  If
he asks a question, and you answer it, why is it a *bad thing* for the
exchange to stop there?
From: de@moscom.UUCP (David Esan)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: Re: WASHER and DRYER : Recommendations
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:28:44 GMT
Reply-To: de@moscom.UUCP (David Esan)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford, NY

In article <1992Apr2.162856.18302@infonode.ingr.com> murthy@infonode.ingr.com (Sunil Murthy) writes:
>I have just started evaluating washers and dryers and I would
>like your opinions and experience on them. Specifically I would
>like information on the following :
>
>1 )  Maytag / Kenmore / Whirlpool / G.E price/performance/service.
>     Please suggest Model Numbers.

We just bought a new washer.  Our GE died after 11 years.  I liked the GE,
it did what we needed.  Of course, with 4 kids (3 boys) we tend to do a 
lot of clothes.  Your mileage may vary.

We just bought a Magic Chef.  That's right, Magic Chef, the stove people.
They were bought out by Maytag.  So either you get Magic Chef quality or
Maytag quality.  In any case, both companies have good reputations.

The other advantage is that the machine has a 20 pound capacity.  A real
20 pound capacity.  We have cut the number of washes by 1/3.  Very nice.
Washes are clean.

We have an old old dryer.  It works.  Don't spend a lot of money here.  Even
think about a reconditioned dryer.  They don't really break down, they are
cheap to repair (or you can do it yourself), and one is pretty much like the
other.

>
>2 ) Any experience with Mail-order companies like CitiShopper etc ?
>    How is Sears after-sales service. Is the maintanence agreement
>    worth it ?

I think that you may do better at home.  Prices are not set in stone, so
you can dicker.  Ask around in your town.  We did.  Some dealers are slime
and some are really good.  We went to the slime and he lied to us (if you
read the company literature you know what you're talking about).  The good
guy not only told us the truth, but only mentioned one price.  "Retail is
X, we sell it for Y, I can give you 3% less for cash."  Local stores also
have a reputation for standing by their merchandise.  

Maintenance agreements are generally not worth the price.  There have been
many studies about this.  Most products will break during the warranty period,
or so far down the line that you have spent more on the maintenance agreement
than a new machine is worth.  This is also a good way to judge dealers.  Those
who push it, are generally slime.  Those who don't mention it, or mention it
once are generally better.

-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 -->     David Esan      de@moscom.com  
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: marzano@hp-ptp.ptp.hp.com (Lou Marzano)
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 16:47:18 GMT
Subject: BMG Phone Number?
Organization: HP Pacific Technology Park - Sunnyvale, Ca.
Newsgroups: misc.consumers


Does anyone know the customer service number for the BMG Compact
Disc Club?

Thanks,

Lou Marzano
lou@hpams0c.ptp.hp.com
From: garris6295@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Are You Still Cleaning Your Hard Contact Lenses By Hand???
Date: 13 Apr 92 11:08:00 -0500
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

>> 
>>>a "Cleansatron Auto Contact Cleaner",,,,,,I got mine from QVC,
>> 
>>>If you would like more info on what a GREAT little invention this is,
>>>please email, and I would be happy to pass along more info!

I have a Cleansatron Contact cleaner that I use with my gas permiable (sp?)
lenses.  It works great, but I have a hard time finding the right kind of
cleaning solution to use with it, so I only use it sparingly.  

If anyone knows the best type of cleaning solution to use with it, and/or where
I can get some, I'd appreciate it.
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
From: markd@locus.com (Mark Dubinsky)
Subject: Re: Outrageous telephone rate for local calls..
Organization: Locus Computing Corp, Los Angeles
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 19:39:43 GMT

At Caltech, they had Caltech extensions scattered throughout the campus.
Anyone could make free local calls to anywhere in the 213/818 (and now
probably 310), except for stuff like 976-xxxx.  If students wanted a regular
phone in their rooms, they only dealt with PacBell.  The most attractive
offer was the Lifeline service.  If you made less than something like
$13000/year, you could get installation for $17.50 and then 30 (and later
60) untimed local calls for about $1.50/month.  This was in 1985.  Later
PacBell added a requirement that to get this rate, you couldn't be claimed
on someone else's tax returns.
Xref: sparky misc.consumers:10342 rec.autos:11146
From: cantrell@seqp4.sequoia.com (Paul Cantrell)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,rec.autos
Subject: Re: Attempted cheating by Sears Auto
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:50:35 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Sequoia Computer Systems

In article <1992Apr8.172513.10198@csi.jpl.nasa.gov>, eldred@rrunner.jpl.nasa.gov (Dan Eldred) writes:
> In article <23636@scorn.sco.COM> garyh@sco.COM (< Gary H >) writes:
> >
> >Sear is only good for batteries.  Their DIE HARD batteries are great.
> >
> Well, I bought a Sears Diehard for my Rabbit, and after 2 years it 
> started leaking acid on the nearby fuel injection control unit.  I
> got a new battery after paying the pro-rated fee for the 2 years I
> had used it.  I paid as much as many batteries sell for outright in
> many discount stores.  When the replacement Diehard failed after 2
> years I decided I had had enough of premium grade batteries and got
> an el-cheapo at Pep Boys.

Sears DieHard was a great battery up until somewhere in the middle to late
80's. Then they apparently decided to replace it with a cheapo battery,
but what seems to be a good warrentee. However, because it's a prorated
warrentee, it's actually very poor since it locks you into this crappy
battery which fails every couple years even though it's warrented for 5
years.

You either have to keep replacing the battery halfway through the
warrentee period, shelling out half the price of the battery, or at some
point decide to just give up on it, warrentee not withstanding. I guess
Sears hopes you'll be a customer for life replacing the battery every
couple years. It's poor economically, not to mention damn inconvenient
when you get stranded in your car every couple years.

I think DieHard (and all Sears batteries) are a very bad deal now. I
avoid them.

					PC
-- 
cantrell@sequoia.com
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,alt.privacy
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: capturing caller id data
Organization: not very
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 21:52:27 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.025516.2543@mdd.comm.mot.com>
gilbert@mdd.comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) writes:

>There is no such thing as a "security aspect" to CLID.  CLID is not even
>close to a security feature.  For one thing, it assumes the line ID of
>the device used to place the call is somehow associated with the person
>placing the call.  In any area where CLID is implemented, anybody who
>wants to do bad things will do it from a phone that has nothing to do
>with them.

If I want my computer to be usable only be me and two trusted friends,
then CLID is an excellent way of preventing anybody else from getting
to it.  My friends will call from their (known) numbers, I sit at the
keyboard, and anybody else won't get my modem to answer.  And it's
true that my friends won't be able to access the computer while
travelling; that's ok, since they don't own portable computers,
anyway.

Sounds like security to me.

>CLID is a minor convenience, at best.  Well, for some, it is a HUGE,
>convenience, but ya gotta be willing to put up with a lot to get any
>use out of it at all.

At least you're admitting that it's useful.

According to Miss Manners, it is RUDE to use an answering machine to
screen calls.  There are many people I will not be rude to; therefore,
I cannot use an answering machine to screen calls.  I can use CLID to
screen calls, since other people will never know that I'm using it.
Hence, CLID is more useful to me for call screening than an answering
machine is.

I am aware of all the difficulties with CLID, and I agree that it
isn't perfect, I just think it's better than the nothing that I have
now.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
From: gwen@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu (Gwen Kuhns)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: SouthWestern Company
Summary: SW info wanted--experiences of others
Keywords: SW Summer Job Program
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:34:22 GMT

I have recently heard about the SW summer job program, and I was hoping to 
find out more from people outside the area.  If you have worked for them, 
known someone who has, or had a visit by a representative selling their 
product to you, please write back to me directly at gwen@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu   
relating your experiences, impressions, etc.  Thank you for responding to 
my inquiry.

Gwen
From: jjm@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (james.j.menth)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Fighting Traffic Ticket
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:47:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr2.214959.2267@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> berger@atropa (Mike Berger) writes:
>gah2468@bcsaic.UUCP (Geoffrey Hazel) writes:
>>You should present your case according to the facts you have at your
>>disposal, to wit: you observation of your own speed at the time of the
>>incident.  Is you speedometer calibrated?  If not, then do it now.
>>Hold 60mph on the freeway, and measure time for one mile.  Your true speed
>>is 120 - seconds for one mile ( or more accurately 3600/seconds per mile).
>>The 120 - s formula is quite accurate around 60mph.  Now, present your
>>evidence:  I looked at my speedometer, which is calibrated, and I was going
>>XX miles per hour, not YY like he said".  Don't be afraid to confessing to
>>a speed still in excess of the limit;  their case has to be true in all its
>>parts for you to be convicted.  And if you get off, you cant be tried again.
>*----

BAAAD advice!! Many states have what is known as strict liability--
If you admit to 36 in a 35 zone you are guilty of a violation.
They can't ask you how fast you think you were going but if
you volunteer it.....
I have witnessed such a judgement in court. The defendant said she
was doing 45 rather than 50-55 in a 35 zone and was found guilty. If 
you can't say you were going less than the limit it is probably
best to try some other defense.

>You've just made the case come down to the accused's word against that
>of a cop (with radar?).  Who do you think the judge is more likely to
>believe?  And you apparently also encourage perjury, if you think it's
>appropriate to calibrate your speedometer ex post facto and then submit
>your perceived speed as evidence.
>
>If the cop used radar, you won't stand a chance this way.  Consider what
>the judge will ask:  How do you know your speed was constant?  Were you
>watching your speedometer or the road?  How do you know that YOU were
>looking at the speedometer at the exact moment the cop clocked you?
>

GOOOOOOD advice: Providing the officer has an up to date certification
and the log of calibration procedures is correct it is unlikely that
you will overcome the testimony against you. ( If you really think
a mistake has been made ask to see the above items) 

>Some localities will plead a speeding ticket down a few mph if you
>don't contest it.  If you're guilty, that might be your best bet.
>
>--
>	Mike Berger
>	Department of Statistics, University of Illinois
>	AT&TNET     217-244-6067
>	Internet    berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu

Also some locations have probation programs and/or driving schools
for people with no previous (3 years) violations that may let you
avoid points on your license. You pay for the school rather than a
fine and if you have no violations for some period (Usually six
months) your record stays clean. If you get caught during probation
you get both violations on your record!

Jim Menth    jmenth@att.com
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
From: Lyon_Jim@Tandem.Com (Jim Lyon)
Subject: Re: Privacy (Was Caller ID)
Organization: Tandem Computers, Inc
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 18:49:05 GMT

In article <1992Apr06.174137.16375@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>, cooper@endeavor.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Bob Cooper - Extension 7429 external 739-7429) writes:
> 
> On a related note.  I was just wondering if it is legal to record
> incoming phone calls without notifying the caller?  Anyone have any
> real knowledge on this one?

Quoting from the blurb at the front of the phone directory:

        It is a crime under Federal law for any person, including a
        telephone subscriber, to wiretap or otherwise intercept a
        telephone call unless that person has obtained the consent of
        one of the parties participating in that call.

        Under California law, the consent of ALL parties participating
        in the call must be obtained before any person may record a
        telephone conversation or before a person who is not a party
        to a call may eavesdrop or wiretap the call.

Other states may have similar laws.  Check your local phone directory.
Now for my question:  Does the [more restrictive] state law apply to
interstate calls?

-- Jim Lyon                      "... where the work is NonStop,
   Lyon_Jim@Tandem.Com                and we do everything twice."
From: ashabana@agsm.ucla.edu (Ahmed Shabana)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Outrageous telephone rate in HOTELS(was local)
Distribution: usa
Date: 17 Apr 92 10:03:53 PDT

I was charged about $20.00 in Copenhagen for a local call that didn't
go through (busy signal). Each time I tried the number I was charged
$2.00.... you should have seen me at checkout time.....

A freind was charged a dollar for each call he made from his hotel
room. The problem is that these were in house rooom to room calls... 

Go figure..
     
Ahmed
--
_________________________________________________________________________
Ahmed A. Shabana	          |'There is no reason for any individual
Anderson Graduate School Of Mgmt. |to have a computer in their home'  
U.C.L.A.                          |Ken Olson, President of DEC, 1977 
Newsgroups: misc.consumers