My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine had
gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one.
Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the
new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box with your phone?

On 12/20/2015 10:56 PM, puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine had gone
bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one. Can any
one tell me how to correct rhis?

Did you buy another of the EXACT SAME MODEL?

If yes, then go buy one that's a different make & model and ask again!
Or, walk over to your neighbor's and try it there.

There's no way to correct something if its inherent in the design of
the device (hence the suggestion to try a different unit) *or* in
the characteristics of the line to your home (hence the suggestion
to try it at a neighbor's)

On 12/21/2015 7:11 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/20/2015 10:56 PM, puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone
bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one.
Can any
one tell me how to correct rhis?

Did you buy another of the EXACT SAME MODEL?

If yes, then go buy one that's a different make & model and ask again!
Or, walk over to your neighbor's and try it there.

There's no way to correct something if its inherent in the design of
the device (hence the suggestion to try a different unit) *or* in
the characteristics of the line to your home (hence the suggestion
to try it at a neighbor's)



Without knowing the make and model of his TAD, or what other devices he
may have on his line (nuisance call intercept, Caller ID device, etc)
it's pretty hard to diagnose.

With it being set on 4 rings and answering on 1½-2, it had me thinking
there was a problem with the Toll Saver feature (if it has one) on the
device(s).

On 12/21/2015 6:20 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 12/21/2015 7:11 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/20/2015 10:56 PM, puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone
bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one.
Can any
one tell me how to correct rhis?

Did you buy another of the EXACT SAME MODEL?

If yes, then go buy one that's a different make & model and ask again!
Or, walk over to your neighbor's and try it there.

There's no way to correct something if its inherent in the design of
the device (hence the suggestion to try a different unit) *or* in
the characteristics of the line to your home (hence the suggestion
to try it at a neighbor's)

Without knowing the make and model of his TAD, or what other devices he may
have on his line (nuisance call intercept, Caller ID device, etc) it's pretty
hard to diagnose.

With it being set on 4 rings and answering on 1½-2, it had me thinking there
was a problem with the Toll Saver feature (if it has one) on the device(s).

Possible. But, that would have to be documented as picking up on the
second ring in some case (messages waiting) and fourth otherwise (no
messages waiting).

The fact that the behavior allegedly *changed*:
"all of a sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings"
suggests something BROKE (but, his purchase of a replacement discounts
that possibility -- replacement was broken, too??) *or* something
in his environment has changed that "he" can't see -- but that his
machine can! *Both* of the machines (the original and replacement)!

There are lots of different ways to "detect ring" that can be employed
in an answering machine. A crude one looks for a "high" voltage
that is associated with the ring signal (higher than "talk battery").
You can also look at the frequency ("tone") of the signal as it
is much lower than any speech signal. Finally, you can look at the
cadence (the "pattern" -- ring..... ring..... ring.....).

Ideally, you look at some combination of these so you don't get
tricked. I.e., the high voltage AT the low frequency HAPPENING
in the expected pattern.

But, some places have "distinctive ring" -- so, the pattern
can change from one call to the next. E.g., if the ring pattern
for this particular CALLER was ring,ring..... ring,ring..... etc.
you could trick an algorithm that wasn't smart enough into thinking
this was 4 rings instead of two.

Likewise, if there is a tiny break in the ring -- too short for
a person to perceive -- a detector might conclude that the
"first ring" is over and get ready to count the *next* ring;
not clever enough to realize that two rings occurring so close
together are really just ONE ring cycle with a glitch between.

[One could argue that a "bug" in the "distinctive ring"
pattern generator could cause these gaps to occur in normal
operation]

Also, caller ID imposes tones on the line before you lift the handset
(i.e., while the phone is still on-hook, ringing). It is conceivable
that the machine is detecting these. Or, that these have become
exaggerated in some way from the central office.

shrug Without being able to look at the line (oscilloscope)
it's hard to GUESS how the detector is designed or anticipate
how it may be mistriggering.

Return the "new" machine -- cuz it hasn't fixed the problem!
ASSUME the old one is working properly -- cuz the new one
behaves identically. The next step is to swap out the
telephone *line* -- by trying it at a neighbor's house!

[Of course, this could be a systemic problem that affects
all lines served by that CO. Or, a problem related to the
branch that feeds your neighborhood, etc. Or, "user error"
for failing to understand all of the available settings
in the machine]

Or, learn to pick up the phone quicker. Or, apologize to callers
that you were "slow getting to the phone".

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the
new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden
it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my
machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing
happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden
it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my
machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing
happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away from home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the first ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter the code and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on the toll"

Mark

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:13:48 -0800 (PST)
wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a
sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my
machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing
happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to correct
rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the
first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away from
home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the first
ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter the code
and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so
you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on the
toll"

Mark


I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 12:18:41 PM UTC-6, burfordTjustice wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:13:48 -0800 (PST)
wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a
sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my
machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing
happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to correct
rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the
first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away from
home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the first
ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter the code
and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so
you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on the
toll"

Mark


I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

If you had a home business you might!

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:23:37 -0800 (PST)
bob_villain wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 12:18:41 PM UTC-6, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:13:48 -0800 (PST)
wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a
sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe
my machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same
thing happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to
correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the
first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away
from home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the
first ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter
the code and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so
you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on
the toll"

Mark


I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

If you had a home business you might!

Then I would have someone to answer the phone.,

If and butts were candy and nuts every day would be
Christmas.

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 12:26:39 PM UTC-6, burfordTjustice wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:23:37 -0800 (PST)
bob_villain wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 12:18:41 PM UTC-6, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:13:48 -0800 (PST)
wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a
sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe
my machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same
thing happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to
correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the
first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away
from home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the
first ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter
the code and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so
you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on
the toll"

Mark


I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

If you had a home business you might!

Then I would have someone to answer the phone.,

If and butts were candy and nuts every day would be
Christmas.

€œIf ifs and buts were candy and nuts, wed all have a merry Christmas.€� ¯\_(Š™ï¸¿Š™)_/¯

OLD and Mighty says that doing time when he
was in school they did not have Digital system's.

"puzzlement" wrote in message ...

My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine had
gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one.
Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

On 12/20/2015 9:56 PM, puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the
new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

That's Homeland Security for you.
LOL

On 12/21/2015 11:13 AM, wrote:
On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700 Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it
has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the
new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the first ring
if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away from home,
you can call your own number. If it picks up on the first ring, you know
there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter the code and it will play them
back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so you can
hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on the toll"

OP's *replacement* machine answered on 1.5 rings. Was it telepathic and
"sensed" the messages waiting on the other, old/disconnected machine?
Or, did he plug it in, wander away so someone could call and leave a
message, *then* noticed that it was ALSO answering on the second ring?

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:35:38 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 12/21/2015 6:20 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 12/21/2015 7:11 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/20/2015 10:56 PM, puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has
started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine
had gone
bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one.
Can any
one tell me how to correct rhis?

Did you buy another of the EXACT SAME MODEL?

If yes, then go buy one that's a different make & model and ask again!
Or, walk over to your neighbor's and try it there.

There's no way to correct something if its inherent in the design of
the device (hence the suggestion to try a different unit) *or* in
the characteristics of the line to your home (hence the suggestion
to try it at a neighbor's)

Without knowing the make and model of his TAD, or what other devices he may
have on his line (nuisance call intercept, Caller ID device, etc) it's pretty
hard to diagnose.

With it being set on 4 rings and answering on 1½-2, it had me thinking there
was a problem with the Toll Saver feature (if it has one) on the device(s).

Possible. But, that would have to be documented as picking up on the
second ring in some case (messages waiting) and fourth otherwise (no
messages waiting).

The fact that the behavior allegedly *changed*:
"all of a sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings"
suggests something BROKE (but, his purchase of a replacement discounts
that possibility -- replacement was broken, too??) *or* something
in his environment has changed that "he" can't see -- but that his
machine can! *Both* of the machines (the original and replacement)!

There are lots of different ways to "detect ring" that can be employed
in an answering machine. A crude one looks for a "high" voltage
that is associated with the ring signal (higher than "talk battery").
You can also look at the frequency ("tone") of the signal as it
is much lower than any speech signal. Finally, you can look at the
cadence (the "pattern" -- ring..... ring..... ring.....).

Ideally, you look at some combination of these so you don't get
tricked. I.e., the high voltage AT the low frequency HAPPENING
in the expected pattern.

But, some places have "distinctive ring" -- so, the pattern
can change from one call to the next. E.g., if the ring pattern
for this particular CALLER was ring,ring..... ring,ring..... etc.
you could trick an algorithm that wasn't smart enough into thinking
this was 4 rings instead of two.

Likewise, if there is a tiny break in the ring -- too short for
a person to perceive -- a detector might conclude that the
"first ring" is over and get ready to count the *next* ring;
not clever enough to realize that two rings occurring so close
together are really just ONE ring cycle with a glitch between.

[One could argue that a "bug" in the "distinctive ring"
pattern generator could cause these gaps to occur in normal
operation]

Also, caller ID imposes tones on the line before you lift the handset
(i.e., while the phone is still on-hook, ringing). It is conceivable
that the machine is detecting these. Or, that these have become
exaggerated in some way from the central office.

shrug Without being able to look at the line (oscilloscope)
it's hard to GUESS how the detector is designed or anticipate
how it may be mistriggering.

Return the "new" machine -- cuz it hasn't fixed the problem!
ASSUME the old one is working properly -- cuz the new one
behaves identically. The next step is to swap out the
telephone *line* -- by trying it at a neighbor's house!

[Of course, this could be a systemic problem that affects
all lines served by that CO. Or, a problem related to the
branch that feeds your neighborhood, etc. Or, "user error"
for failing to understand all of the available settings
in the machine]

Or, learn to pick up the phone quicker. Or, apologize to callers
that you were "slow getting to the phone".

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

Isn't technology wonderful??! :
You forgot (i think) the most important question - what epse, if
anything, changed at the same time? Did he start or stop using some
feature of the answering machine or phone, add another phone, etc.???

If 2 machines behave the same, and one previously worked properly, it
os almost obvious that something else changed. The questio is what?
and where? and who or what was responsible. When that's figured out it
should be easy to fix --- unless it was something outside the user's
control.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 13:18:38 -0500, burfordTjustice
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:13:48 -0800 (PST)
wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a
sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my
machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing
happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to correct
rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the
first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away from
home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the first
ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter the code
and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so
you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on the
toll"

Mark


I would never phone home to see if I had messages.
If you are not home and whant to know if someone was trying to reach
you, you have no other choice - other than going home. Lots of people
use a phone and answering system for business purposes and don't give
out their cell number to just anyone - they use the landline for
business use, and the answereing system as an answering service -and
call in from cell or elsewhere to check messages on a regular or
semi-regular basis. VERY common - whether YOU would ever find a need
to do so or not.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 13:26:38 -0500, burfordTjustice
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:23:37 -0800 (PST)
bob_villain wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 12:18:41 PM UTC-6, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:13:48 -0800 (PST)
wrote:

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 11:23:57 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:14:09 -0700
Tony Hwang wrote:

puzzlement wrote:
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a
sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.

It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe
my machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same
thing happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to
correct rhis?

Thanks,

Puzzlement

No voice mail box?

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.

my machine will answer on the 4th ring if it is empty and on the
first ring if there is 1 or more unread messages on it.

This is so that if you want to retrive your messages when away
from home, you can call your own number. If it picks up on the
first ring, you know there are messagesto retrieve, so you enter
the code and it will play them back

If it waits till four rings, then you know thee are no messages so
you can hang up on the third ring before it answers and "save on
the toll"

Mark


I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

If you had a home business you might!

Then I would have someone to answer the phone.,

If and butts were candy and nuts every day would be
Christmas.
No ifs or buts about it. I bought my first "Code-a-Phone" answering
machine back in the late seventies for exactly that reason - and it
was not cheap - but cheaper than paying an answering service - and
that was before cell phones, when mobile telephone service was also
prohibitively expensive!!!.

I'd call in from a customer's phone, or a pay phone, to check
messages. The "toll saver" saved a lot of change when using the pay
phone (you DO remember those, right??)

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all the
calls I get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city,
state like "AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't
answer unless I see a familiar caller ID, and in that case will be
holding the phone and can answer quickly.

--
4 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"By simple common sense, I don't believe in God." -- Charlie Chaplin

[snip]

No voice mail here nor on cell phone.
****'em leave on answering machine or go away.
Answers on third ring so **** heads have to pay
for the call.


Junk callers can't have unlimited long distance :-)

[snip]

I would never phone home to see if I had messages.


My home phone (cable) now allows forwarding calls to a cell phone. Most
of the time, I wouldn't do that (since it would forward all the junk
calls). I'll do it if I'm expecting an important call.


--
4 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"By simple common sense, I don't believe in God." -- Charlie Chaplin

On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all the calls I
get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city, state like
"AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't answer unless I see a
familiar caller ID, and in that case will be holding the phone and can answer
quickly.

Ours is set to 2 rings but the ringer is turned off. We try to look
at the machine every day or two to see if anyone called AND waited through
the outgoing message (if they hang up before then, the machine doesn't
record the call -- so we see no notification).

Folks that want to get in touch with us use email or the front door.
Cuts down on the "nuisance contacts" as very few junk callers are
willing to come to the door *or* know any of our email addresses! :

On 12/21/2015 9:05 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]

I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

My home phone (cable) now allows forwarding calls to a cell phone. Most of the
time, I wouldn't do that (since it would forward all the junk calls). I'll do
it if I'm expecting an important call.

Years ago, I had some software to implement an answering machine
with a PC (and modem). When a call arrived, it could be configured
to email a notification *or* WAV file of the incoming message to
an email address. This was handy when I was traveling as I didn't
have to tell people I was traveling, where I was, etc. And, didn't
have to keep checking the machine to see if anyone had called
since the last check!

On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number
you see on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the
few that could really fool you. CID is still useful.

BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone
function.

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all
the calls I
get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city, state
like
"AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't answer unless
I see a
familiar caller ID, and in that case will be holding the phone and can
answer
quickly.

Ours is set to 2 rings but the ringer is turned off. We try to look
at the machine every day or two to see if anyone called AND waited through
the outgoing message (if they hang up before then, the machine doesn't
record the call -- so we see no notification).

I'm about to do that (turn off the ringer). There's just too many of
those annoying calls.

BTW, I also never answer calls from charities. If I did I feel like
saying "I'm not your ATM" and hanging up.

Folks that want to get in touch with us use email or the front door.
Cuts down on the "nuisance contacts" as very few junk callers are
willing to come to the door *or* know any of our email addresses! :


There's also cell phones. AFAIK, most allow you to assign a different
ringtone to a specific number. You may even be able to make others
silent. Then you know which calls to ignore.

--
3 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"To depend upon God is like holding on to the tail-end of nothing."
[Lemuel K. Washburn, _Is The Bible Worth Reading And Other Essays_,
1911]

On 12/21/2015 10:43 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 9:05 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]

I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

My home phone (cable) now allows forwarding calls to a cell phone.
Most of the
time, I wouldn't do that (since it would forward all the junk calls).
I'll do
it if I'm expecting an important call.

Years ago, I had some software to implement an answering machine
with a PC (and modem). When a call arrived, it could be configured
to email a notification *or* WAV file of the incoming message to
an email address.

Hopefully ignoring those unknown callers that left a "blank" message
(just enough noise to trigger the machine, but no meaningful content).

This was handy when I was traveling as I didn't
have to tell people I was traveling, where I was, etc. And, didn't
have to keep checking the machine to see if anyone had called
since the last check!



--
3 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"To depend upon God is like holding on to the tail-end of nothing."
[Lemuel K. Washburn, _Is The Bible Worth Reading And Other Essays_,
1911]

On 12/22/2015 12:51 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number you see
on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the few that could
really fool you. CID is still useful.

BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone function.

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the
phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to
answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the
"interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution
is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it
is more convenient for me.

This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has
access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my
phone number without involving TPC!)

So, I can monitor particular email accounts based on the sorts of
people with which I might want to interact at any given time
(e.g., don't watch the email account that friends use if I'm
busy working but *do* watch the one associated with business
contacts).

My goal has been to come up with a scheme whereby the "watching"
can be done by something intelligent -- the equivalent of a
"secretary" -- so I need only specify the criteria that are
important to me at any given time (e.g., I'm asleep! I sure
as hell don't want to be disturbed by a friend calling to chat!)

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all
the calls I
get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city, state
like
"AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't answer unless
I see a
familiar caller ID, and in that case will be holding the phone and can
answer
quickly.

Ours is set to 2 rings but the ringer is turned off. We try to look
at the machine every day or two to see if anyone called AND waited through
the outgoing message (if they hang up before then, the machine doesn't
record the call -- so we see no notification).

I'm about to do that (turn off the ringer). There's just too many of those
annoying calls.

Yup. There are some times when we are waiting a "call back" from
a friend, provider, etc. In even those narrow windows (where we
have to actively be prepared to interact with the phone) it is amazing
how many "hang up" calls come in (folks who encountered the outgoing
message and aborted the call).

BTW, I also never answer calls from charities. If I did I feel like saying "I'm
not your ATM" and hanging up.

SWMBO is slowly beginning to understand my preference for "anonymous
giving"; cut a cashier's check for the amount you want to give,
save the receipt and then mail the check with no return address.
Worst case, the check gets lost in the mail (but never cashed
by anyone other than the intended recipient).

Regardless, there's no trail BACk to you from the charity. No way
they can spend THAT money trying to get MORE MONEY from you!

I.e., think of it as doing them a FAVOR by cutting that potential
expenditure! :

Folks that want to get in touch with us use email or the front door.
Cuts down on the "nuisance contacts" as very few junk callers are
willing to come to the door *or* know any of our email addresses! :

There's also cell phones. AFAIK, most allow you to assign a different ringtone
to a specific number. You may even be able to make others silent. Then you know
which calls to ignore.

I refuse to carry a cell phone (other than one with no service for a
"911 phone" -- or, one to use solely as a portable WiFi terminal!)
If I need to make a call, I can *find* a phone. Somewhere. If
someone needs to get in touch with me, they can leave me a voice message
or an email and I'll get back to them. Rarely is anything THAT
important that it needs to be addressed IMMEDIATELY.

"Your failure to plan ahead does not obligate me to respond immediately"

On 12/22/2015 12:55 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/21/2015 10:43 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 9:05 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]

I would never phone home to see if I had messages.

My home phone (cable) now allows forwarding calls to a cell phone.
Most of the
time, I wouldn't do that (since it would forward all the junk calls).
I'll do
it if I'm expecting an important call.

Years ago, I had some software to implement an answering machine
with a PC (and modem). When a call arrived, it could be configured
to email a notification *or* WAV file of the incoming message to
an email address.

Hopefully ignoring those unknown callers that left a "blank" message (just
enough noise to trigger the machine, but no meaningful content).

It's relatively easy to detect "no message" as most folks drop the connection
before the OGM has completed.

The problem with this solution was that it was too much of a "toy";
having to set aside an entire PC (tower, keyboard, display) -- big,
power hungry, noisey (fan), etc. -- for the functionality of an
"answering machine".

An answering machine is "worth" ~20 cubic inches, ~4 oz and ~2 Watts.
Anything beyond that is "waste". In the timeframe when I was using
this, that was closer to a cubic foot (or two), 10 pounds and 100+
watts.

Today, an answering machine with those capabilities is "worth"
considerably less (size/power). But, getting to that point with a
flexible solution is tricky...

This was handy when I was traveling as I didn't
have to tell people I was traveling, where I was, etc. And, didn't
have to keep checking the machine to see if anyone had called
since the last check!

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:51:03 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number
you see on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the
few that could really fool you. CID is still useful.

BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone
function.

My answering system is part of my cordless phone "network" - one base
connected to my VOIP box, with hadsets scattered around the house in
different rooms - CID is on the base and the handsets courtesy my VOIP
provider.


Isn't technology wonderful??! :

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all
the calls I
get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city, state
like
"AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't answer unless
I see a
familiar caller ID, and in that case will be holding the phone and can
answer
quickly.

Ours is set to 2 rings but the ringer is turned off. We try to look
at the machine every day or two to see if anyone called AND waited through
the outgoing message (if they hang up before then, the machine doesn't
record the call -- so we see no notification).

I'm about to do that (turn off the ringer). There's just too many of
those annoying calls.

BTW, I also never answer calls from charities. If I did I feel like
saying "I'm not your ATM" and hanging up.

Folks that want to get in touch with us use email or the front door.
Cuts down on the "nuisance contacts" as very few junk callers are
willing to come to the door *or* know any of our email addresses! :


There's also cell phones. AFAIK, most allow you to assign a different
ringtone to a specific number. You may even be able to make others
silent. Then you know which calls to ignore.

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:10:51 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 12/22/2015 12:51 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number you see
on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the few that could
really fool you. CID is still useful.

BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone function.

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the
phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to
answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the
"interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution
is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it
is more convenient for me.

This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has
access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my
phone number without involving TPC!)

So, I can monitor particular email accounts based on the sorts of
people with which I might want to interact at any given time
(e.g., don't watch the email account that friends use if I'm
busy working but *do* watch the one associated with business
contacts).

My goal has been to come up with a scheme whereby the "watching"
can be done by something intelligent -- the equivalent of a
"secretary" -- so I need only specify the criteria that are
important to me at any given time (e.g., I'm asleep! I sure
as hell don't want to be disturbed by a friend calling to chat!)

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

Automatic blacklist/whitelist management on the VOIP means I can get
the rings from those I want to hear from, and not from thespammers.

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all
the calls I
get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city, state
like
"AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't answer unless
I see a
familiar caller ID, and in that case will be holding the phone and can
answer
quickly.

Ours is set to 2 rings but the ringer is turned off. We try to look
at the machine every day or two to see if anyone called AND waited through
the outgoing message (if they hang up before then, the machine doesn't
record the call -- so we see no notification).

I'm about to do that (turn off the ringer). There's just too many of those
annoying calls.

Yup. There are some times when we are waiting a "call back" from
a friend, provider, etc. In even those narrow windows (where we
have to actively be prepared to interact with the phone) it is amazing
how many "hang up" calls come in (folks who encountered the outgoing
message and aborted the call).

BTW, I also never answer calls from charities. If I did I feel like saying "I'm
not your ATM" and hanging up.

SWMBO is slowly beginning to understand my preference for "anonymous
giving"; cut a cashier's check for the amount you want to give,
save the receipt and then mail the check with no return address.
Worst case, the check gets lost in the mail (but never cashed
by anyone other than the intended recipient).

Regardless, there's no trail BACk to you from the charity. No way
they can spend THAT money trying to get MORE MONEY from you!

I.e., think of it as doing them a FAVOR by cutting that potential
expenditure! :

Folks that want to get in touch with us use email or the front door.
Cuts down on the "nuisance contacts" as very few junk callers are
willing to come to the door *or* know any of our email addresses! :

There's also cell phones. AFAIK, most allow you to assign a different ringtone
to a specific number. You may even be able to make others silent. Then you know
which calls to ignore.

I refuse to carry a cell phone (other than one with no service for a
"911 phone" -- or, one to use solely as a portable WiFi terminal!)
If I need to make a call, I can *find* a phone. Somewhere. If
someone needs to get in touch with me, they can leave me a voice message
or an email and I'll get back to them. Rarely is anything THAT
important that it needs to be addressed IMMEDIATELY.

"Your failure to plan ahead does not obligate me to respond immediately"

On 12/22/2015 7:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:10:51 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 12/22/2015 12:51 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number you see
on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the few that could
really fool you. CID is still useful.

BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone function.

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the
phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to
answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the
"interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution
is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it
is more convenient for me.

This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has
access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my
phone number without involving TPC!)

So, I can monitor particular email accounts based on the sorts of
people with which I might want to interact at any given time
(e.g., don't watch the email account that friends use if I'm
busy working but *do* watch the one associated with business
contacts).

My goal has been to come up with a scheme whereby the "watching"
can be done by something intelligent -- the equivalent of a
"secretary" -- so I need only specify the criteria that are
important to me at any given time (e.g., I'm asleep! I sure
as hell don't want to be disturbed by a friend calling to chat!)

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

Automatic blacklist/whitelist management on the VOIP means I can get
the rings from those I want to hear from, and not from thespammers.

How do you deal with the local library calling to tell you
a book is overdue?

Or, the store that you had back-order a pair of slacks calling
to tell you they've arrived?

Or, a friend calling from someone else's phone?

Or...

Black/white-lists don't work, in practice. There are too
many exceptions.

An organization can have many telephone numbers; how do I
know which one will be placing the call to me?

What you want/need is something that is tied intimately to
individuals, not their phones or phone numbers. And, something
that allows the system to adapt to new conditions as they
arise without having to be "reprogrammed" (adding/removing
numbers from black/white lists is considered programming)

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:22:11 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 12/22/2015 7:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:10:51 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 12/22/2015 12:51 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the
*eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned
the call (and you've no record of it).

You have the caller ID record.

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number you see
on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the few that could
really fool you. CID is still useful.

BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone function.

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the
phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to
answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the
"interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution
is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it
is more convenient for me.

This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has
access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my
phone number without involving TPC!)

So, I can monitor particular email accounts based on the sorts of
people with which I might want to interact at any given time
(e.g., don't watch the email account that friends use if I'm
busy working but *do* watch the one associated with business
contacts).

My goal has been to come up with a scheme whereby the "watching"
can be done by something intelligent -- the equivalent of a
"secretary" -- so I need only specify the criteria that are
important to me at any given time (e.g., I'm asleep! I sure
as hell don't want to be disturbed by a friend calling to chat!)

Isn't technology wonderful??! :

Automatic blacklist/whitelist management on the VOIP means I can get
the rings from those I want to hear from, and not from thespammers.

How do you deal with the local library calling to tell you
a book is overdue?

Or, the store that you had back-order a pair of slacks calling
to tell you they've arrived?

Or, a friend calling from someone else's phone?

Or...

You use the basic blacklist - whitelist basically not required. The
library or store won't be on the "universal" blacklist.. Nor will your
friends' friend's phone your friend borrowed. If you get a call from
a caller you don't want to hear from a gain you add it to the
"personal" blacklist.

Black/white-lists don't work, in practice. There are too
many exceptions.

An organization can have many telephone numbers; how do I
know which one will be placing the call to me?

You don't have to. As I said, the whiltelist is only for "bad guys"
you want to hear from.

What you want/need is something that is tied intimately to
individuals, not their phones or phone numbers. And, something
that allows the system to adapt to new conditions as they
arise without having to be "reprogrammed" (adding/removing
numbers from black/white lists is considered programming)

Perfect it and be the "Next American Billionaire"

On 12/22/2015 7:38 PM, wrote:

What you want/need is something that is tied intimately to
individuals, not their phones or phone numbers. And, something
that allows the system to adapt to new conditions as they
arise without having to be "reprogrammed" (adding/removing
numbers from black/white lists is considered programming)

Perfect it and be the "Next American Billionaire"

Goal is not to "perfect" anything but, rather, put a framework
in place (hardware and software) that allows others (who typically
can't do BOTH hardware and software NOR "design from scratch)
to "enhance it" to more easily address these needs. I.e.,
speech recognizer, voice recognizer, expert system, TELCO
interface, subscriber set interface, etc. and *they* figure out
how to exploit each of these mechanisms!

Like providing basic tools to some "craftsman" so he can perfect his
craft -- instead of having to first figure out how to make the
tools that he will need!

On 12/22/2015 02:10 PM, Don Y wrote:

[snip]

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the
phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to
answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the
"interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution
is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it
is more convenient for me.

IIRC, I've never seen a CID device that doesn't store the info.

This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has
access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my
phone number without involving TPC!)

Yes. Of course, I'm now dealing with someone who takes months to read email.

[snip]

--
2 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"An idea is an eye given by God for the seeing of God. Some of these
eyes we cannot bear to look out of, we blind them as quickly as
possible." [Russell Hoban, "Pilgermann"]

[snip]

It's relatively easy to detect "no message" as most folks drop the
connection
before the OGM has completed.

Most drop the connection. That's been true until recently. I've been
getting a lot (I think those CID shows as "TOLL FREE CALL") where
there's just a grunt or vague mumble.

The problem with this solution was that it was too much of a "toy";
having to set aside an entire PC (tower, keyboard, display) -- big,
power hungry, noisey (fan), etc. -- for the functionality of an
"answering machine".

It doesn't take an "entire PC" if the software runs in the background,
or in a virtual machine. It could be the same PC you're using anyway.

[snip]

--
2 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"An idea is an eye given by God for the seeing of God. Some of these
eyes we cannot bear to look out of, we blind them as quickly as
possible." [Russell Hoban, "Pilgermann"]

[snip]

You use the basic blacklist - whitelist basically not required. The
library or store won't be on the "universal" blacklist.. Nor will your
friends' friend's phone your friend borrowed. If you get a call from
a caller you don't want to hear from a gain you add it to the
"personal" blacklist.

That blacklist won't include the 8 numbers junk callers use today, the
12 (different) ones they use tomorrow, the 9 new ones they use the next
day, ....

[snip]
--
2 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"An idea is an eye given by God for the seeing of God. Some of these
eyes we cannot bear to look out of, we blind them as quickly as
possible." [Russell Hoban, "Pilgermann"]

On 12/23/2015 1:27 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/22/2015 02:10 PM, Don Y wrote:

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the
phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to
answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the
"interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution
is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it
is more convenient for me.

IIRC, I've never seen a CID device that doesn't store the info.

There's also an issue of buffer depth...

One of our friends has a telco service that refuses to accept
inbound calls from folks who've "blocked" CID's (i.e., us).
"Press 1 to unblock your id for and be connected to the caller".

So, I've been dutifully pressing 1 to get through to him.

Recently, he mentioned (in passing) that we appear as
"Tucson caller" when I do this. So, he's never had any
indication as to *who* we are! He's just as likely to
let our call go through to his voice mail (which is
almost always "full")

I've now reprogrammed his number in the autodialer to
preface it with *82 so our real names are conveyed through
to him. He was surprised the first time he saw it in
his CID display (which is apparently a voice display
that often mangles the pronunciation of names!)

This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has
access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my
phone number without involving TPC!)

Yes. Of course, I'm now dealing with someone who takes months to read email.

shrug You have to hope they have an incentive for reading YOUR
email. It took a while for me to "train" clients to avoid using
the phone and, instead, use email. I simply took a week to
return voice mail (often "after hours"/weekends so they had to call
me *back* the next day -- getting routed to my voice mail, again)
and PROMPTLY (less than 24 hours) to return email.

Wasn't long before folks "learned" that the best way to get an answer
was to put it in writing! Which saved me the hassle of transcribing
telephone calls so I had a record of what was said, agreed to, etc.
in a "searchable" form! Goes a long way to keeping folks honest
when you can send a copy of THEIR email back to them at a later date:
"I thought THIS is what we agreed to? Do you have something more
current that I've misplaced??" (knowing, of course, that there
IS nothing more current!)

On 12/23/2015 1:32 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]

It's relatively easy to detect "no message" as most folks drop the
connection
before the OGM has completed.

Most drop the connection. That's been true until recently. I've been getting a
lot (I think those CID shows as "TOLL FREE CALL") where there's just a grunt or
vague mumble.

When we sort through our messages, we sometimes encounter "dumb"
robodialers that just recite their "payload" without regard to
whether or not there is anything listening. The local public
library is like this. And, must know how stupid their approach
is as the repeat the message several times -- in English
and Spanish -- in the hope that ONE of them is caught by
whatever is "listening"

The problem with this solution was that it was too much of a "toy";
having to set aside an entire PC (tower, keyboard, display) -- big,
power hungry, noisey (fan), etc. -- for the functionality of an
"answering machine".

It doesn't take an "entire PC" if the software runs in the background, or in a
virtual machine. It could be the same PC you're using anyway.

It means a PC needs to be on 24/7. And, to not be a "superfluous
PC", needs to be the one you *want* to use for whatever else.

Nowadays, you can find small, low power machines (I have some that
run on less than 10W that I have "up" 24/7/365). That wasn't the
case decades ago.

I just rescued a pair of SFF PC's (Optiplex 745's) one of which will
replace the tower that's been our HTPC/DVD player. They were chosen
for their small size and (relatively) low power consumption. Plus
the fact that I can swap out the DVD player easily if it fails,
over time (this was a concern with the original tower -- I could
replace the half-height optical drive with another far easier than
buying a new "DVD player").

But, any PC based solution ties my hands with the approach I can
take to the problem. What happens when that PC dies? Will the
PC available 5 years hence support the same peripherals that
I'm using for that feature? The same physical busses, etc.?
And, what about the OS? If I have to code on bare iron, then
the PC is the LEAST desirable hardware platform!

So, instead, I'm pursuing a VoIP gateway sort of approach:
an appliance that has an FXO port on one side and an RJ45 on
the other. Bury all the telco interface (hardware) in the
device and just deliver network packets to my software.

This allows my software to run on anything that I choose -- as
long as there is a way to "get to a network connection".

But, it adds other complexities that a PC-as-answering_machine
doesn't have to address -- mainly latency. The gateway has
to buffer audio content before delivering it to the network.
It has to then compete with other network traffic and travel
to my "machine" (whatever it may be), percolating up through
the network stack before my software can "see" it. This
all takes time. And, can vary from one instant to the next!

In an exaggerated example, imagine your phone buffered up
entire sentences from the calling party before delivering them
to your ear. You'd *hear* everything the caller said. But,
while you are hearing them, the caller is wondering why you're
not SAYING anything -- he/she stopped speaking moments ago
and you've not yet replied (because you are only, just now!,
hearing those statements).

"No free lunch." To gain some measure of independence/isolation,
I have to assume some additional design complexities.

*UNLESS* I can get my code to run *in* the VoIP gateway!
There, it could access the incoming analog audio as it
arrives -- without having to buffer it and transfer it
over the network...

On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:39:46 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

[snip]

You use the basic blacklist - whitelist basically not required. The
library or store won't be on the "universal" blacklist.. Nor will your
friends' friend's phone your friend borrowed. If you get a call from
a caller you don't want to hear from a gain you add it to the
"personal" blacklist.

That blacklist won't include the 8 numbers junk callers use today, the
12 (different) ones they use tomorrow, the 9 new ones they use the next
day, ....

[snip]
You'd be surprized how quickly the "global" blacklist gets updated.

I get about 1 a month now instead of 5 or 6 a day!!!!

On 12/23/2015 03:03 PM, Don Y wrote:

[snip]

When we sort through our messages, we sometimes encounter "dumb"
robodialers that just recite their "payload" without regard to
whether or not there is anything listening. The local public
library is like this. And, must know how stupid their approach
is as the repeat the message several times -- in English
and Spanish -- in the hope that ONE of them is caught by
whatever is "listening"

And, when you use an answering machine, they're too stupid to WAIT FOR
THE BEEP. Some or all (depending on length) of the message isn't recorded.

BTW, I once tried one of those "challenge / response" systems, where the
caller gets a "please press 1" message. Using it made the "dumb
robodialer" problem worse (considering that the ring-ring-message-beep
sequence becomes ring-ring-messsage-ring-ring-message-beep).

[snip]

--
1 day until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00 AM
for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Heaven might be defined as a place men avoid." -- Henry David Thoreau
(1817-1862), Excursions, 1863

On 12/24/2015 1:16 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 12/23/2015 03:03 PM, Don Y wrote:

[snip]

When we sort through our messages, we sometimes encounter "dumb"
robodialers that just recite their "payload" without regard to
whether or not there is anything listening. The local public
library is like this. And, must know how stupid their approach
is as the repeat the message several times -- in English
and Spanish -- in the hope that ONE of them is caught by
whatever is "listening"

And, when you use an answering machine, they're too stupid to WAIT FOR THE
BEEP. Some or all (depending on length) of the message isn't recorded.

The more amusing cases are the (real) folks who ramble on and on -- until
the machine hangs up on them!

We had a friend who would call after having a few drinks. One time,
she talked to the machine for so long that the *tape* (back when
you had dual cassettes in the machine) ran out! (half an hour or more!)

BTW, I once tried one of those "challenge / response" systems, where the caller
gets a "please press 1" message. Using it made the "dumb robodialer" problem
worse (considering that the ring-ring-message-beep sequence becomes
ring-ring-messsage-ring-ring-message-beep).

Handling incoming calls -- wanted and unwanted -- is an amusingly difficult
problem!

Historically, it's been such a ubiquitous medium that it was hard to
impose any rules/constraints on callers; someone legitimate might
call and be incapable of complying with whatever "system" you'd
imposed!

[I had a scheme35 years ago where you had to key in a number.
Worked great -- except for my folks (who had a dial-pulse telephone!]

As a result, I've decided that *you* have to bear the responsibility
for making it work; you can't just "impose" something on your callers
because they're not accustomed to "having to comply" with a
dictatorial phone system!

[How many folks lean on '0' when faced with endless voice menus?]

OTOH, with email, I can "force" certain contacts to use PEM if
they want to correspond with me -- without imposing that on
other contacts!