It's nine o'clock, you're listening to WBAI New York.
Time for Off The Hook.
Let's go!
And tonight on Off The Hook, the theme is privacy and surveillance.
Do you ever get the feeling that you're being watched?
You're every movement being scrutinized?
Every change in behavior carefully noted?
Have you ever felt that way?
Well, it would be a good idea to get used to it.
I don't start the talking.
I could talk all night.
My mind goes sleepwalking while I'm putting the world to right.
Calculator's information.
Have you got yourself an occupation?
All of us are here to stay.
All of us are underway.
And I would rather be anywhere else but here today.
There was a check for Charlie.
It didn't crack a smile.
But it's no laughing party.
When you've been on the murder map.
Only takes one itchy trigger.
One more widow, one less white nigger.
All of us are here to stay.
All of us are underway.
And I would rather be anywhere else but here today.
Hong Kong heals up the craps.
London is full of apps.
We could be in Palestine.
Overrun by the Chinese land.
With the fires from the Mersey Hill, the Thames and the Tyne.
But there's no danger.
It's a professional career.
Oh, it could be arranged.
We're just awaiting Mr. Churchill's ear.
If you're out of luck or out of work.
We could send you to Johannesburg.
All of us are here to stay.
All of us are underway.
And I would rather be anywhere else but here today.
And I would rather be anywhere else but here today.
And I would rather be anywhere else but here today.
It's not a question of wanting to be anywhere else but here.
But it's a question of being awake while you are here.
There's so much happening.
There's so many changing developments going on in the world of technology.
You just have to keep awake every day.
Or you're going to fall so far behind, you won't ever be able to catch up.
Good evening, this is Off The Hook.
Emmanuel Goldstein with you up until 10 o'clock.
And some good news.
First the good news.
Let's get that out of the way.
For you Off The Hook fans.
We are now on every week at this time, at least over the summer.
And that's real good news because I feel at last we'll be able to develop some consistency.
Which is so important when you're dealing with a changing world such as ours.
And things certainly are changing.
They're changing a lot faster than many of us want them to.
Privacy.
Privacy issues are just so frighteningly volatile.
And so fragile.
Some people are calling it the death of privacy.
We're going to take a look at some articles from the Risks Digest.
The electronic newsletter that's available over the Internet.
And we do this as a public service to those of you that don't have access to computer networks such as the Internet.
And we'll be talking a little bit more about the Internet in the moments ahead.
This is an article from Richard Johnson.
Talking about some of the problems associated with automated systems that detail specific information about our personal and financial lives.
To summarize.
One. Undesired access to data.
Undesired manipulation of data.
Undesired offerings of data.
And undesired large scale changes of public opinion.
It seems this is just the tip of the iceberg though.
Recently released footage from the Persian Gulf conflict show a sophisticated airborne battle management system.
Capable of spotting movement, location, and identification of literally everything within several hundred miles.
Several states are experimenting with barcodes for vehicle location, speed detection, and identification.
While officially not for criminal investigation purposes, I doubt most anyone would object to a search of the records to locate the perpetrator.
I would say a felony hit and run.
Birth, death, marriage, licenses, education, service, and major property occasions are all publicly recorded and often required.
Our employers often know where to find us even when we are not at work.
Our neighbors often know the roads we use to drive to work.
Our grocers often know the days we get paid and the times we like to shop.
The problem is not just technology.
The problem is how much an individual is willing to waive control of information about her or himself.
If we don't actively guard our privacy, we shall surely fall prey to those who would profit from that information, perhaps at our expense.
And this is an article from Robert Allen, also on the Risks Digest.
To my mind, there is a more serious problem responsible for our loss of privacy, not to mention other rights.
It's the attitudes towards convenience.
Every time you use one of the electronic fund transfer devices at a store, gas station, etc., you're giving up significant portions of your privacy.
By buying gas this way, someone can closely figure your driving habits.
Did you go somewhere this weekend?
Where did you go?
Where did you use electronic fund transfer to buy gas?
What kind of mileage did you get?
Is it possible you took a side trip where you used gas but didn't buy any until later?
What kind of food do you buy?
How much do you normally spend on food versus getting cash back?
Why do you get so much cash back from a grocery store instead of a bank?
Are you trying to hide something?
We are well on our way to a cashless society.
I predict that it will eventually be illegal to own cash.
And certainly, whenever a drug dealer is busted today, you hear all about the several thousand dollars in cash found.
Heck, I know people who keep that much at home, and they are definitely not drug dealers.
Once we become cashless, operating on credits, the only people with any true freedom will be the hackers who are able to crack the systems and pilfer.
You all and I will be at the mercy of both the hackers and the government.
By that time, it will be impossible to break the sequence since literally every purchase you make,
from birth control to books to how much you give to your church, will be tracked.
And you will be at the mercy of any future laws passed such as, say, anti-birth control, anti-gun, anti-drug, anti-pornography, etc.
It's already happening today, and it will only get worse.
That article from Robert Allen on the Risks Digest.
If you are currently on the Internet, if you have access to it, and if you don't know what I'm talking about, then you obviously don't have access to it.
If you do, however, it can be addressed by reading news from comp.risks.comp.risks.
Too bad it doesn't come out on paper because it's a compilation of opinions from people that do a lot of thinking about this kind of thing.
A response to the article I just read, this one comes from Roger Crewe over in Stanford.
It is already the case under the RICO laws that large amounts of cash can simply be confiscated.
No warrant is necessary.
I'm not sure what the necessary preconditions are, but evidently the standard road stop to check for license and registration, together with some notion of probable cause, suffices.
Police in South Africa... I'm sorry, South Florida.
Oh, that's a Freudian slip.
Police in South Florida are using this against suspected drug runners with devastating effect.
To get the money back, even if no charges are ever filed, one has to bring a civil suit against the police department in question...
...and demonstrate that the money was not illegally obtained.
And we all know the Supreme Court has upheld RICO.
Another response to that article from Mark Eichen over at MIT.
I stumbled across a television show recently on some cable channel about the evils of the cashless society...
...and how it will become impossible to survive without being part of the system...
...and thus being tracked down by the system.
It was titled, The Number of the Beast...
...and alternated between detailed explanations of the data flow and electronic funds system used now...
...and biblical quotes regarding being marked with the number of the beast...
...being marked with the number was supposed to be a metaphor for being identified in the electronic funds system.
And you know, I have to wonder...
...if perhaps those programs aren't produced by the people that want the cashless society to succeed.
I mean, who is going to, in their right mind, believe that this has got anything to do with Satan?
I mean, come on people, really.
This is insanity.
Well, here's another perspective on it all.
This person is coming out of the NSA, dare I say it, the National Security Agency.
And at least that's the account he's using.
I can recognize the computer address here. His name is W.H. Murray.
And a lot of people work for the NSA, so that's not too surprising.
There's probably a couple in your neighborhood.
The National Security Agency, or no such agency as some people might still refer to it as.
I was around 30 years ago. I remember what privacy meant.
I remember how it was compromised and manipulated for the purpose of achieving social conformity.
I remember women who lived alone being ostracized from the church because they might be divorced...
...and they certainly were not married.
I remember talking about unmarried men on the assumption that they were homosexual...
...and therefore fair game for gossip, if not violence.
The mechanism was gossip, and the idea was that if one did not conform...
...that was how they would be talked about.
I remember that it was considered perfectly proper to ask a job applicant what church they belonged to...
...and what political party.
It was not that anyone seriously believed that churchgoers were any more reliable than non-churchgoers...
...only that they were subject to social pressure to conform...
...and excommunication if merely accused of non-conformity.
I remember the activities of the FBI, the files collected by the director.
The political and economic pressure to identify one's associates as communists.
Now we call it McCarthyism, but the idea was ideological conformity.
I remember the gossip about whether such and such a movie star was queer...
...whether that one had Negro blood, or this one drank.
John Garfield never made another film after being associated with communists...
...and Ingrid Bergman could not work in this country after her divorce.
Do not hold up to me as an ideal the privacy of thirty years ago...
...that these things were only talked about over the back fence...
...and never in the papers only made it worse.
The problem may not have been any worse then, but it was certainly no better.
No one cares about divorce anymore.
Political ideology is out of favor everywhere except on college campuses.
Now it's worse to be a racist than to be of mixed race.
Today the assumption is that everyone has been in therapy...
...but just twenty-five years ago it was a disqualifying defect in a vice-presidential candidate.
Actually, I believe that was less than twenty-five years ago if he's talking about Thomas Eagleton.
When I was growing up, the suspicion of Jewish heritage...
When I was growing up, the suspicion of Jewish heritage...
...was enough to keep you out of the country club.
Now, membership in the club is enough to keep you out of office.
Today the issues are communicable diseases, high-risk behavior, child abuse...
...sexism, seduction, abortion and drug use.
But the intent is still conformity.
Robert Bork was denied a seat on the Supreme Court...
...for opinions that would have recommended him thirty years ago.
The fact is that there has always and everywhere been...
...a battle between freedom and information.
Every society in every age has used what information it had about its members...
...in an attempt to control behavior.
In France, the police know who sleeps in every bed every night.
Now they use computers, but they have always known.
In China, the party knows who comes and who goes.
They do not use computers, but they certainly know.
We do not gather at the well anymore.
We go to the mall rather than the general store.
We go to McDonald's rather than the diner.
In our age, the communities are so large that it takes computers...
...to keep up with everyone, but the intent and the damage are no different.
The good old days never were that good.
The price of freedom is still eternal vigilance.
Technology does not govern. We do.
And that article from William Hugh Murray of New Canaan, Connecticut...
...from the Risks Digest on the Internet.
You know, I have to go a step further than that...
...because when you say that it's similar to what it was in the past...
...well, take a look at the tremendous technological advances there have been.
We now have the ability to track people in all kinds of different ways...
...whether by video camera, by telephone call, by credit card purchase...
...by gasoline card purchase, whatever.
We have a way of tracking people, and it's developing more and more...
...and becoming more and more integrated with every passing year.
So the same attitude is not the same.
The same attitude becomes much, much worse.
Imagine the tools of today in the hands of a Hitler.
Imagine. Imagine what could have been done.
That's why we have to be so careful, so incredibly careful...
...as to what we agree to and where we're going.
Here's an article somebody sent in to Off The Hook.
And it's one that I was aware of what was going on...
...but I missed the actual article from the New York Times on April 17th.
It's called, Move on Unscrambling of Messages is Assailed.
A measure tucked inside a recently proposed Senate bill...
...calls on telephone and computer companies to give the government the means...
...to unscramble private electronic messages and telephone conversations...
...that have been encrypted to ensure privacy.
The provision is defended as a way to prevent the concealment of illegal activity...
...but it has alarmed business executives and civil libertarians.
They're becoming very alarmed these days, and it's something that we should not ignore.
Sophisticated new equipment that can encrypt voice and data...
...and conceal it from even the most powerful government computers...
...is now cheap enough to be sold for use in personal computers or telephones.
This means basically that you can attach a device to your telephone or computer...
...and be completely private.
But that is not what the government wants.
The Senate proposal calls on phone companies and computer equipment manufacturers...
...to permit the government to obtain unscrambled voice and computer data transmissions...
...when searches are authorized by law.
Of course, that's what it's going to say inside a bill or a law.
But abuses of these kind of things are always going to be possible.
And setting the framework for such abuses is a questionable act in my mind.
Continuing with the article, the proposal is worded as a resolution in a counter-terrorism bill...
...introduced in January by Senator Joseph Biden, who we all know is a Democrat in Delaware.
But computer industry executives say such proposals would allow troubling invasions of privacy.
D. James Bidzos, president of RSA Data Security Incorporated in Redwood City, California, says...
...people have no idea what kind of threat to personal privacy this is.
He added that such legislation could ruin the market for encryption devices.
The debate illustrates the challenges facing government officials...
...attempting to cope with the power of new technologies while protecting civil liberties.
Or, at least, pretending to.
The section as it is now written is not legally binding.
It reads,
It is the sense of Congress that providers of electronic communications services...
...and manufacturers of electronic communications service equipment...
...shall ensure that communications systems permit the government...
...to obtain the plain text contents of voice, data, and other communications...
...when appropriately authorized by law.
Plain text meaning unscrambled.
But legal experts said that the language left great room for misinterpretation.
It's deliberately vague, said Yale Kamasar, a law professor at the University of Michigan.
Why don't they make it a law and set out the procedures the government is required to follow?
Senator Biden could not be reached for comment.
I guess the thesaurus wasn't around.
But several people in Congress familiar with the resolution...
...said it had been inserted because of Justice Department concerns...
...about new encryption systems that circumvent wiretapping techniques.
A Senate aide who spoke on the condition that he not be identified...
...said that the language was intended to serve as a compromise...
...against a more restrictive White House counterterrorism bill...
...which proposes sweeping new search powers over telephone and related records.
But a number of civil liberties experts said that if such a resolution became law...
...computer makers and communications companies...
...would be forced to place special trap doors in their products.
These are special software entrances that would permit law enforcement officials...
...to read scrambled text or voice messages.
And I should put a little asterisk next to that and say...
...it's intended for law enforcement officials.
But you and I both know that if a trap door is there...
...a trap door is going to be used by unauthorized people.
And those unauthorized people will include curiosity-seeking kids...
...but it will also include some rather malevolent folks out there.
And that's what you really got to watch out for.
Anyway, Mr. Bidzo's continued...
...such a change would ruin the effectiveness of current cryptographic equipment.
He added that it was becoming routine for makers of personal computers...
...to add cryptographic features to their systems as standard equipment.
What do you think? Do you think we should have the right to be private...
...when we speak over the telephone and when we speak over the computer lines?
Does the government have the right to demand to know what we are saying...
...if we want to remain private?
It's a good question, isn't it?
Give us a call at 279-3400.
We'll be taking phone calls in about...
...oh, I'd say about ten minutes, give or take a couple.
And we'll be talking about privacy and the technological pros and cons.
Continuing with the Risks Digest, responding to a comment...
...it's hard to see how we could have medical insurance on today's scale...
...without computerized records and their relatively wide availability...
...Jeff Cunning says, I couldn't disagree more.
It's trivially easy to see how we can get along without such records.
The whole purpose of the records is to help insurance companies...
...avoid the self-selection problem...
...where their pocketbooks are emptied by people who get insurance...
...because they know that they have a serious illness.
But in a GASP national health care system...
...this becomes a non-problem.
And there is no longer any need for widespread exchanges of medical records...
...except, of course, that the patient may find it in his or her best interest...
...to make full information available to the doctor.
But that's by choice.
And also, continuing along the lines of...
One moment, please. I seem to have misfiled these papers here.
Oh, yes.
Technological advancements.
Smart highways.
As vacationers flocked to the beaches on this Memorial Day...
...the Washington Post reported that smart highways...
...which would relieve traffic congestion...
...may soon be a reality.
About $20 million will be spent this year in federal funds...
...to develop intelligent vehicle highway systems.
Yes, IVHS.
Last week, a Senate committee approved a measure...
...that would devote $150 million a year...
...for the next five years to IVHS.
And according to the Post, proponents call that cheap.
Estimates for lost productivity resulting from traffic congestion...
...are pegged at $100 billion annually.
Bet you didn't know that.
The GAO estimates that a full-scale IVHS system...
...could cut commute time by 50% in such places as Los Angeles.
The article describes technologies...
...that range from variable message signs that are tied to networks...
...which monitor traffic flow...
...to roadway-based guide wires with radio-controlled autopilots.
Now get this.
The story also describes toll gates that will read code...
...radioed from a rolling car...
...and automatically bill a credit card.
The article notes that in Europe and Japan...
...trials of such systems have been underway for years.
Privacy aside...
...I'm fond of a song by the police that begins...
...every step you take, every move you make...
...I'll be watching you.
Maybe it's time for an update.
Every turn you take, every time you brake...
...I'll be watching you.
It's worth finding out whether the Senate Committee...
...has considered the privacy implications...
...of gathering this data on drivers...
...and whether there are any proposals...
...to restrict the secondary use of the information.
Likely buyers? Marketing firms and insurance companies.
And this final warning from Jim Sims.
The government already has electronic access...
...to your phone call transactions.
Numbers, length of call...
...but not content.
At least not without a court order.
They just have to show probable cause...
...for a warrant to tap the contents of your calls.
Of course, when pressing a button...
...is all you have to do to get the contents.
That's something that...
...makes it a bit more troublesome, wouldn't you say?
And this humorous note...
...I received in the mail today...
...a new product announcement.
This comes from Ed McGuire in Iowa.
The new product is software...
...that tutors new computer users...
...in basic operating system concepts...
...thereby bringing an end to repetitive questions...
...about logging in, current working directory...
...and so forth.
And the announcement included comments...
...from users of the product...
...including this direct quote.
I am very excited about this product...
...and highly recommend its use...
...to finally accomplish the goal...
...of computer illiteracy.
And yes...
...illiteracy was spelled wrong.
I guess somebody let Dan Quayle in on this.
279-3400 is our telephone number...
...area code 212.
We'll be taking phone calls...
...in just a couple of minutes.
I am starting to function...
...in the usual way...
...everything is so provocative...
...very, very temporary...
...I shall walk...
...I shall walk...
...out of this place...
...out of this place...
...I shall walk out on you...
...sugar, cigarette, hip shoes...
...we were trying...
...so hard...
...to be like the big boys...
...so you take into the pictures...
...trying to become a fixture...
...inch by inch...
...trying to reach her...
...all the way through second feature...
...worrying about your physical fitness...
...don't know how you got the sickness...
...sickness...
...I was caught in the suction...
...by a face like a junction...
...I was down upon one knee...
...stroking a vanity...
...I was stuck on a hammerhead...
...I came alive and left for dead...
...as my vision...
...every breath you take...
...every move you make...
...every bond you break...
...every step you take...
...I'll be watching you...
...generalize about a group of people...
...unless that group of people...
...happen to be in a band called the police...
...enough of that...
...our phone number is...
...212-279-3400...
...and...
...we will be taking phone calls on...
...privacy issues...
...and things like that...
...let's see who's out there...
...good evening...
...hi...
...a few weeks ago...
...you had a show on the...
...900 numbers...
...and...
...also on the point...
...that on the 800 numbers...
...there's a kind of automatic national caller ID...
...sort of concealed in it...
...could you go over the other...
...I've been curious...
...the other 100 numbers...
...the 200 numbers...
...and 300 numbers...
...and so on...
...what are they used for...
...I've been curious about that...
...well, right now there are no...
...area codes...
...200, 300, 400, 500 or 600...
...the only ones in use...
...are 700, 800 and 900...
...it's doubtful that those...
...other area codes will ever be used...
...for anything special...
...they may just be used as an overflow...
...when we run out of area codes...
...now, it's in 1993...
...or 1994...
...that the whole area code system...
...is going to change...
...and...
...it won't be necessary anymore...
...to have a 1...
...or a 0...
...as the middle number...
...so...
...when was that announced...
...I hadn't heard about that...
...that's...
...that's been in the works...
...for a couple of years now...
...I don't know when exactly...
...that was announced...
...but...
...for instance...
...it will be possible for there...
...to be a 279 area code...
...so you can dial 279...
...279-3400...
...and...
...what will probably come out of that...
...is we'll just have...
...10 digit phone numbers...
...and...
...area will start to mean...
...less and less...
...so...
...I don't know what's going to happen...
...to those area codes...
...but to get back to your question...
...700 numbers...
...are carrier specific...
...in other words...
...every carrier has...
...its set of 700 numbers...
...they're...
...one of the first...
...conference lines...
...I don't know if you recall this...
...on the...
...late night TV...
...was this huge...
...huge number...
...that was...
...I think...
...10441...
...700...
...yeah...
...but it was...
...an incredibly long number...
...and that was because...
...it was going through...
...all net...
...and...
...it was an all net service...
...that was being...
...billed through a 700 number...
...it's kind of...
...it's kind of unclear...
...as to what...
...the differences are...
...between 700 and 900 services...
...except that 700...
...are...
...carrier specific...
...you can also...
...find out what your carrier is...
...by calling 700...
...555...
...4141...
...that will tell you...
...what your long distance company is...
...and that is a free call...
...I think that's about the only...
...free call you can get...
...on the 700 number...
...800 of course...
...we know what that is used for...
...that's for toll free calls...
...900 is for...
...mass announcement...
...and...
...mass caller...
...when you have...
...thousands and thousands of people...
...calling a certain number...
...as kind of a poll...
...all 900 numbers...
...except for 900 information...
...are...
...expensive...
...usually...
...and...
...you know...
...you had...
...several times...
...been very...
...negative...
...on these...
...I forget...
...the 540 numbers...
...or the...
...976 numbers...
...that type of...
...you know...
...a dollar a minute...
...thing...
...it does...
...I've always thought...
...that that was...
...an excellent...
...development...
...not a bad one...
...that...
...there are all of these...
...innovative things...
...that you could...
...you could punch into...
...you know...
...through all these...
...little channels...
...and...
...you know...
...through all these...
...little services...
...through these...
...numbers...
...the...
...the only problem being...
...that...
...they don't make it clear enough...
...how much it will cost you...
...up front...
...that's...
...that's the problem...
...but the idea...
...of all of these...
...new services...
...just at the touch...
...of a touch-tone phone...
...struck me as an extremely...
...innovative...
...and creative thing.
Well, I agree with that...
...I...
...I think it's good that...
...such services are being developed...
...but there's...
...there's two factors...
...the first you mentioned already...
...is the fact that...
...it's so easy to...
...it's so easy to...
...get lost in what you're getting into...
...and I don't think...
...that has to be that way...
...I think it...
...it can be...
...made very clear...
...I mean...
...you left out two of the exchanges...
...and most people don't know...
...any of these exchanges...
...but 540...
...550...
...970...
...and 976...
...are exchanges that...
...are going to cost you...
...a different amount...
...than calling...
...a regular exchange.
Right.
It's that simple.
Now...
...the other problem is...
...of course...
...the fact that it...
...it costs...
...a large amount of money...
...a lot of times...
...why you should have to pay...
...so much...
...for a phone call...
...I mean...
...what can possibly be transmitted...
...over phone lines...
...that is worth that much...
...to you?
Well, you know...
...CBS now...
...has a...
...a weather number...
...if you may have...
...tried it yourself...
...an excellent...
...gives you the...
...weather report...
...anytime for the cost...
...of a local call...
...or you know...
...if it's on Saturday...
...for 4 cents...
...or something like that.
That's great...
...I mean...
...that's the kind of thing...
...that should be encouraged...
...why...
...why cannot systems...
...pay 6 cents...
...to find out what time it is...
...you know...
...it doesn't seem right.
Yeah, that's true...
...well it didn't used to be that way...
...it used to be a regular call...
...as you recall...
...one other thing...
...I wanted to ask you was...
...this...
...cordless phones...
...on the matter of...
...cordless phones...
...now...
...I've never been...
...stuck with...
...somebody else's bill...
...on a cordless phone...
...the way many people...
...apparently have...
...however...
...I do have the...
...the problem...
...of getting...
...of my phone...
...ringing off the hook...
...you know...
...getting of my phone...
...ringing off the hook...
...with...
...apparently...
...somebody else's...
...phone...
...and you know...
...you pick it up...
...and you get a dial tone...
...is there any way...
...to...
...to take care of that...
...that very...
...annoying...
...situation?
How old is your cordless phone?
How old is it?
It's not old...
...it's about 2 years old.
Well...
...do you live in a heavily...
...congested area?
Well...
...Manhattan.
Yeah, okay...
...well that probably explains it...
...there are so many...
...cordless phones out there...
...almost everyone seems to have one...
...the odds of someone...
...having a...
...you know...
...a similar frequency...
...or a harmonic...
...or something like that...
...that will...
...trigger your phone...
...to do...
...to either chirp...
...or to actually ring...
...you might even get...
...cross conversations.
If that has happened...
...that doesn't happen often...
...but...
...I've actually heard...
...other people...
Do you have a...
...a channel selector...
...on your cordless?
I do not.
You do not, okay...
...well...
...if you had one...
...you'd be able to switch...
...to a channel that...
...doesn't give you as much interference.
How often does this happen to you?
As far as just...
...the ringing...
...it happens a few times a day.
Really?
Yeah.
As far as...
...hearing the other person's...
...conversation...
...that only happens...
...now and then...
...but now...
...when that has happened...
...I've tried to break in...
...you know...
...I thought maybe...
...this is the other person...
...who is ringing and...
...we could get together on it...
...but they can't hear me...
Uh-huh.
...only I hear them.
Now the...
...of course...
...the thing I've...
...I've wondered is...
...maybe on my...
...many of my conversations...
...they hear me...
...and I don't hear them.
I would...
...I would assume that.
Yeah.
I would assume that...
...and...
...everyone who has a cordless phone...
...I mean...
...all I have to do is...
...go into your neighborhood...
...with a scanner...
...and I can find you...
...when you're on your cordless phone.
Uh-huh.
It's...
...and anybody that lives within a...
...say a square mile of you...
...and that's a lot of people...
...they can all listen to what you say...
...on your cordless phones.
I see.
And no matter what kind of...
...crazy laws they come up with...
...saying that's illegal to do that...
...it's still going to happen...
...until some kind of encryption device...
...is put into place.
...on the encryption device...
...so they can listen to you anyway.
So it's...
...the whole thing is...
...is anarchy.
Yeah, you're absolutely right.
Absolutely right.
One last question.
This is absolutely the last one.
Is it possible...
...when you're speaking...
...to a phone company office...
...or an operator...
...for them to...
...to block your line?
In other words...
...if they're angry at you...
...or something like that...
...can they do something...
...at their end...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...so that you can...
...at their end...
...so that you cannot...
...get a dial tone...
...on your end?
They can...
...well, if you're talking...
...to an operator...
...and you...
...upset an operator...
...and I know this from...
...from doing this as a kid...
...they have a...
...a little feature known...
...as back hold...
...where they can...
...even though you call them...
...they can...
...hang your line...
...so that you can't...
...get a dial tone back.
You can do that, huh?
Oh, sure.
And it's happened...
...out of incompetence, too.
Lots of times you talk...
...to an operator...
...and she forgets to hang up.
And you have a...
...until she finally...
...figures it out...
...or until the next shift...
...comes on.
I see.
So, yeah, that's...
...that's something...
...you should be careful.
It has happened to me...
...out of...
...hostility.
It has happened to you...
...out of hostility?
Hostility, yes.
Information operators...
...can't do it.
It has to be an operator...
...that can actually...
...connect you to something...
...and that is...
...fairly local.
Right now, AT&T can do it...
...your local company...
...can do it...
...but I don't believe...
...MCI or Sprint...
...are capable of that yet.
Are you having a meeting...
...on Friday?
Usual place?
Usual place.
Okay, thanks a lot.
Bye.