At 19:46 5/11/98 -0700, you wrote: >----Original Message----- >From: Bob Drzyzgula >--snip-- > >>I would say then, that a device that could spot a call >>with no ID and immediately hand it over to the answering >>machine (and a message that politely says "we do not respond to >>telephone solicitations"), would probably be quite effective. >> > > >As an enhancement to this approach, I remember reading recently about a >service one of the RBOC's is going to offer for a monthly fee. > >If the phone company detects someone is calling you without proper caller-ID >information, they intercept the call and play a message to the caller >telling them that the phone number doesn't automatically accept non-ID >calls. It then asks the caller to leave his/her name, which it records. If >the person doesn't leave a name, the caller is hung up on. If the caller >does leave a name, the phone company calls you and plays the recorded name, >and asks if you want to accept the call. Only if you accept at that point >does the call actually go through. > >I would guess that this system is pretty foolproof, since most solicitors >won't be willing to leave a name, in which case you won't even be >interrupted. > >Now, if someone could come up with a PIC and ISD voice chip approach to >avoid the monthly fee.... :-) (Although you might want to do a patent >search first -- I understand the RBOC has some patents on portions of the >process). > >Just some thoughts... > >Mark > > This would work, pitty that the line would be tied up during the message bit though. That's where the RBOC system is best. It is quite easy to do at home, a few components a PIC and wahlaa! There it be, but the voice mail bit would be a little tricky, so just divert the call to an answering machine (Cheep one that is). While other systems exist, it would be fun to put the data into the PC, and let it do a directory search to find the owner of the number. Just for interset sake, and the caller ID be turned off by the calling party as it can in Australia? Dennis