> Ok, thanks, I think I got it now. If different carriers are charging
> different rates, you wouldn't know what a call will cost until after
> you've made it, which isn't cool.
IIRC, the carrier can be deduced from the number- I don't think they
"port" mobile numbers in the UK, (but I could be mistaken .)
> As an abstract concept, however, I
> think "caller pays" is the fairest. Implementation details probably
> prevent it from being as fair as it needs to be, though.
Perhaps. I look at it like this, however: I use cellular as my
service of choice, so I should bear the cost of that service. If I
don't want to pay for incoming calls, I shouldn't give out my number!
In my case, one of my cell phones is a business line. I doubt any
potential customers would pay $0.15/minute to talk to me if my
competition has a "free" number to call, despite how good I think I
am! ;-)
--
"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003
Hertz_Donut wrote:
> Larry is an idiot, the result of several generations of in-breeding
> within his
> not-so-extended family. He believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter
> Bunny, and
Re: Make them say "It's the FCC"! 
Linear Mode
