You got the wrong number. This is 91…2

From the risks_digest


This is what we call today a “public-private partnership”. This is why I flinch whenever people talk about database integration and homeland security and using various Wackenhuts and Pinkertons to guard us.

God help us, they’re using the direct marketers to decide who shall be saved now.

6 thoughts on “You got the wrong number. This is 91…2

    1. Re: Hmmm.
      I disagree. Opting out of marketing shouldn’t opt you out of the warning that San Onofre has just blown its top and the plutonium cloud is coming.

      1. Re: Hmmm.
        And get trampled by 10,000,000 other Orange Countians in a stupid lemming-like act of ‘only the stupid, inhumane, and violent will survive’.
        But your point stands. 911 is a special number, and that should probably go both ways. Even if I were to adopt some uber-conspiracy theory that ‘only unquestioning capitalist drones will be allowed to survive the fallout’, it still does not make sense that only those people would be allowed to track down the kidnapping victims. Unless, of course, they’re assuming that I have her locked in my crawl-space or something…

  1. Uh, this isn’t about calling 911, this is about the cops sending out pre-recorded voice-spam about missing kids and stuff.
    I don’t want to get that crap either! So I’m glad that having an unlisted number will result in that.

      1. What a messed-up way to broadcast emergency info!
        It seems to me that if you watch the news (or listen to a local NPR affiliate religiously like Kate and I do), you will be informed enough and in a timely enough manner to cover what a phone call could convey. If everyone in a populated city gets a phone call, but you are at the bottom of the list, it could be a good number of hours before you get the call. If you happen to be listening to the local news (or a local station that can interrupt for Emergency Broadcast Network sort of stuff–not the band, but the news), you would be better covered than a phone call.
        It seems to me that the whole issue would be moot if they were able to work out a better system for informing people than a phone call. What do they do if nobody is home and has no answering machine? A number of single broadcasts–whether via EBN, the news, or air-raid klaxons–would seem to be more efficient than a number of one-on-one directed broadcasts. Imagine the traffic if all local area network broadcasts were TCP instead of UDP.
        If we were to rely on phone calls, my cellphone is not on any lists and our home phone (not yet on any opt-out lists) has the ringer turned down and an answering machine that answers on the first ring. We check the answering machine about once a week. I guess if it were just up to the phone calls, we would be choking on toxic gasses.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.