The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> Some number of area codes (LIKE MINE!) use that same 3-digit prefix as
> part of the normal phone number. I think there are 26 in the country,
> but I'm unwilling to look it up. So that weak-willed potential suicides
> won't have to bother looking up a 10-digit number (generally posted at
> both ends of likely suicide sites like Suicide Bridge in Pasadena) or
> just calling 911 everybody in those areas will have to dial 1+10 digits
> to make local calls.

I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!
That kind of thing could never happen here. We never have numbers
that are prefixes of other valid numbers. Never had.

Area codes start with 0. Local numbers never do.
International prefix is 00 (followed by country code etc).
Mobile has the areacode 06, other areas are 01x-05x, 07x.
08 and 09 are special areas.

Special numbers like the above start with 1.
e.g:
112 = emergency
113 = suicide prevention line
144 = animal emergency
1888 = directory services (several of them with similar numbers)

Subscriber numbers start with 2..9. I think 8 and 9 are reserved.

There is never any ambiguity caused by pausing while dialling.
Nobody can have a subscriber number that looks like an areacode
or special number plus some extra digits.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> it wasn't just cellphones that caused the number exhaustion.
>
> it also included fax machines and pagers, and these days, it also
> includes iot devices, cars, medical equipment and quite a bit more.

We have a special area code 097 for those devices that normally nobody
ever calls, and only need to have a number for the network administration.

It has 12 digits instead of the usual 10, to have more space for
expansion. And it prevents overuse of the standard area codes.

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> THEY would have their own liability insurance. Perhaps there would be
> penalties for driving while NOT insured, although the illegals solved
> that problem by just running away if they crashed a car.

Ah is that happening over there as well?
It used to be culture here to stay at the place and possibly help others
when you are in an accident. Nobody ever would think about leaving
before having arranged everyone's wellbeing and exchanging insurance
information.

But lately, we have "imported" folks which do not have that culture,
and we read on the news every day that people have been hurt or killed
on the road and the car or the driver fleed the scene.
Seems to be normal in some cultures.

Rob wrote:
> It used to be culture here to stay at the place and possibly help others
> when you are in an accident. Nobody ever would think about leaving
> before having arranged everyone's wellbeing and exchanging insurance
> information.
>
> But lately, we have "imported" folks which do not have that culture,
> and we read on the news every day that people have been hurt or killed
> on the road and the car or the driver fleed the scene.
> Seems to be normal in some cultures.

We've had criminals in the past as well as now doing such things.
Nothing to do with "imported" or "culture'.

-p

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/2021 1:33 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > when your [US] system is broken by design, you're faced with the
> > consequences, news at eleven.
>
> After I pay my $20/mo/phone (plus tax, fees and data) I can make all the
> calls I want from anywhere to anywhere in the US, no time limit, no
> extra charges. That system is just fine with me. When I was a kid I used
> to make many cross country ham phone patches for folks trying to beat Ma
> Bell's horrendous long distance charges. There was even a long distance
> charge to call to the other side of my city. The good old days just
> weren't all that good...

Yes, for most people it's a non-issue, both in the USA and elsewhere.

But that doesn't mean there's any merit to the US system of not having
a specfic number range for mobile phones.

Anyway, all this is just another (non-)discussion triggered by another
one of nospam's silly arguments/opinions. So proceed at your own risk! :-)

Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> wrote:
> Rob wrote:
>> It used to be culture here to stay at the place and possibly help others
>> when you are in an accident. Nobody ever would think about leaving
>> before having arranged everyone's wellbeing and exchanging insurance
>> information.
>>
>> But lately, we have "imported" folks which do not have that culture,
>> and we read on the news every day that people have been hurt or killed
>> on the road and the car or the driver fleed the scene.
>> Seems to be normal in some cultures.
>
> We've had criminals in the past as well as now doing such things.
> Nothing to do with "imported" or "culture'.

The newly imported cultures show this behavior in much higher figures.
No denying that...

In article <slrnsqbs9e.hoi.nomail@xs9.xs4all.nl>, Rob
<nomail@example.com> wrote:

> I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!
> That kind of thing could never happen here. We never have numbers
> that are prefixes of other valid numbers. Never had.

only because you haven't hit the limits yet.

> Area codes start with 0. Local numbers never do.
> International prefix is 00 (followed by country code etc).
> Mobile has the areacode 06, other areas are 01x-05x, 07x.
> 08 and 09 are special areas.

originally, area codes began with 2-9 and had a 0 or 1 for the second
digit. exchanges had 2-9 for the second digit. neither ended in 0 or 1.
there was no overlap, nor could there be. phone numbers are a fixed
length of 7 digits, 3 of which is the exchange.

it was impossible for an area code to be an exchange and vice versa.

one exception to that rule was 800, which was not actually an area
code, and used for toll-free numbers. there was also 900, which was
surcharged (usually quite a bit), often used for phone sex lines and
similar.

3 digits that ended in 11 were used for special purposes, such as
directory assistance (411), repair (611) and emergencies (911).

dialing 1 as the first digit meant area code followed, i.e., long
distance call, versus a local call (no area code).

for example, someone outside of area code 212 would need to dial
1-212-555-1234, while those within area code 212 would dial 555-1234.

dialing an area code without the 1- prefix would fail, usually with a
message to dial a 1. without a 1- prefix, the system was expecting an
exchange and area codes are not valid exchanges.

0 by itself was for the operator, and if a phone number followed, an
operator would intercept for assistance.

international calls originally required operator assistance, but with
the advent of electronic switching (ess), they could be direct dialed
with 011, followed by country code and the rest of the number.

the system was very straightforward and worked quite well, up until the
number space was exhausted, at which point, it had to change. there's
no getting around that.

at first, area codes were split into smaller areas, and later overlays
were added, where two (or more) area codes covered the same area.

area codes were also no longer were restricted to 0 or 1 as the middle
digit and both could end in 0.

area codes with 9 as the second digit are reserved for future
expansion, such as 8-digit phone numbers. when or if that happens is
unknown at this time.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnsqbs9e.hoi.nomail@xs9.xs4all.nl>, Rob
> <nomail@example.com> wrote:
>
>> I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!
>> That kind of thing could never happen here. We never have numbers
>> that are prefixes of other valid numbers. Never had.
>
> only because you haven't hit the limits yet.

We have hit the limits in the past. At that time an extra digit
was added to the local subscriber numbers.

>> Area codes start with 0. Local numbers never do.
>> International prefix is 00 (followed by country code etc).
>> Mobile has the areacode 06, other areas are 01x-05x, 07x.
>> 08 and 09 are special areas.
>
> originally, area codes began with 2-9 and had a 0 or 1 for the second
> digit. exchanges had 2-9 for the second digit. neither ended in 0 or 1.
> there was no overlap, nor could there be. phone numbers are a fixed
> length of 7 digits, 3 of which is the exchange.
>
> it was impossible for an area code to be an exchange and vice versa.
>
> one exception to that rule was 800, which was not actually an area
> code, and used for toll-free numbers. there was also 900, which was
> surcharged (usually quite a bit), often used for phone sex lines and
> similar.
>
> 3 digits that ended in 11 were used for special purposes, such as
> directory assistance (411), repair (611) and emergencies (911).
>
> dialing 1 as the first digit meant area code followed, i.e., long
> distance call, versus a local call (no area code).
>
> for example, someone outside of area code 212 would need to dial
> 1-212-555-1234, while those within area code 212 would dial 555-1234.
>
> dialing an area code without the 1- prefix would fail, usually with a
> message to dial a 1. without a 1- prefix, the system was expecting an
> exchange and area codes are not valid exchanges.

But there you clearly see the bad design. There are way too many
restrictions in the numbers for areas and exchanges, therefore you
run out of available numbers.
Also the validity of a number can only be checked when a certain
number of digits has been entered, you know the length of the number
only after at least 3 arbitary digits have been entered.

> 0 by itself was for the operator, and if a phone number followed, an
> operator would intercept for assistance.

and 00 was for the international operator. So when you enter 0 the
result will depend entirely on your timing of entering additional
digits. that can never happen here.

also, operators were phased out decades before that happened in the
USA. when I was on vacation in the USA in the late eighties, I got
an operator when trying to dial long distance from a payphone.
at that time that was unheard of in the Netherlands, our network
was fully automated in the fifties, before my birth.
it was also very inconvenient that to make a call, I had to name a
carrier to be used. and the operator was not allowed to suggest one.
how could I know what valid names of carriers are, and which one
to choose?

> international calls originally required operator assistance, but with
> the advent of electronic switching (ess), they could be direct dialed
> with 011, followed by country code and the rest of the number.

we had automated (international) calls before electronic switching...

> the system was very straightforward and worked quite well, up until the
> number space was exhausted, at which point, it had to change. there's
> no getting around that.

well, it helps when the number of restrictions in the number plan is
less, so more of the available number space can be actually allocated.
also, it helps when the structure of the numbers is not so rigid.
in our system of number plan, extra digits can be inserted in front
of the local subscriber number without breaking the whole plan.
in fact, we have variable-length numbering: the area code can be either
3 or 4 digits (including the 0 which in fact is not part of it, but only
introduces the area code), and the local subscriber number will be
7 or 6 digits, the total always being 10. Cities and their suburbs
have a 3-digit area code and 7-digit subscriber number, and smaller
towns have 4-digit area code and 6-digit subscriber. in the old days
we also had 5-digit area codes, but they have been phased out.
that would not be possible in the US system.

exchange numbers have been completely abandoned about 25 years ago,
the local subscriber number is portable across exchanges in the area
without any restrictions. before that, with mechanical switches,
this was not possible.

For example, I originally had a 6-digit number in the 030 area, at the
71 exchange. so 030-71xxxx. at the 1995 restructuring operation it would
have changed to 030-271xxxx. all numbers in the 030 area got an extra 2
in front. Just before that time I moved to another quarter in the city
where the exchange code was 87 so I could not keep my existing number.
3 months later that would have been possible. So I got a 030-87xxxx
number and it was then changed to 030-287xxxx. Now I can move that
number to anywhere within the 030 area.
(and beyond that, when using VoIP)

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/2021 12:26 PM, sms wrote:
> > On 11/29/2021 9:47 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> So the rate you pay could be based on the most dangerous car you own.
> >> When they were first required, motorcycle liability rates were something
> >> like half that for cars. I defy anyone to do half as much damage with a
> >> 500cc bike as a 1970 pickup truck. No idea what they settled down at,
> >> we stopped riding before that.
> >
> > The excuse is that even though YOU can only drive one car at a time, you
> > could lend out your vehicles to others so they could all be driven at
> > the same time.
>
> THEY would have their own liability insurance.

Different kind - and additional - liability insurance. If I visit you
in your home and knock over the TV, *my* *personal* liability insurance
covers it [1]. If I drive your car - with your consent - and cause an
accident, *your* *car* insurance covers it.

[1] Not bloody likely, because the insurance will say you accepted the
risk of letting such an idiot into your home.

Rob <nomail@example.com> wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > it wasn't just cellphones that caused the number exhaustion.
> >
> > it also included fax machines and pagers, and these days, it also
> > includes iot devices, cars, medical equipment and quite a bit more.
>
> We have a special area code 097 for those devices that normally nobody
> ever calls, and only need to have a number for the network administration.
>
> It has 12 digits instead of the usual 10, to have more space for
> expansion. And it prevents overuse of the standard area codes.

Don't rub (Rob? :-)) it in! Now nospam has to do more 'explaining'/
'justifying' to do.

[Breaking my EOD in order not to let nospam get away with yet another
misinterpretation/misrepresentation.]

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <so3imd.mqk.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
> <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
[...]

> > > there is no need for the caller to know what type of phone the
> > > recipient has, nor should a caller pay for whatever choice the
> > > recipient has made about their phone service.
> >
> > Totally agreed. Hence there is so such need here, nor are there any
> > extra/higher costs for the caller who - knowingly or unknowingly - calls
> > a mobile number. Bummer heh?
>
> then where you are is unique. why haven't other countries done the same?

Nope. As others have mentioned, most countries do the same. Whether
you like/admit it or not, the US is the odd-one-out.

EOD^2.

Rob <nomail@example.com> wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Some number of area codes (LIKE MINE!) use that same 3-digit prefix as
> > part of the normal phone number. I think there are 26 in the country,
> > but I'm unwilling to look it up. So that weak-willed potential suicides
> > won't have to bother looking up a 10-digit number (generally posted at
> > both ends of likely suicide sites like Suicide Bridge in Pasadena) or
> > just calling 911 everybody in those areas will have to dial 1+10 digits
> > to make local calls.
>
> I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!

Yes, it boggles the mind that this is yet another area where the US
apparently didn't learn from how other countries approached and solved
those problems.

Of course sometimes one has to re-design/change things. We (for some
of the audience: NL) also did, but only once in my lifetime and rather
elegantly and with limited impact.

> That kind of thing could never happen here. We never have numbers
> that are prefixes of other valid numbers. Never had.
>
> Area codes start with 0. Local numbers never do.
> International prefix is 00 (followed by country code etc).
> Mobile has the areacode 06, other areas are 01x-05x, 07x.
> 08 and 09 are special areas.
>
> Special numbers like the above start with 1.
> e.g:
> 112 = emergency
> 113 = suicide prevention line
> 144 = animal emergency
> 1888 = directory services (several of them with similar numbers)
>
> Subscriber numbers start with 2..9. I think 8 and 9 are reserved.
>
> There is never any ambiguity caused by pausing while dialling.
> Nobody can have a subscriber number that looks like an areacode
> or special number plus some extra digits.

In article <slrnsqc9hq.3qf.nomail@xs9.xs4all.nl>, Rob
<nomail@example.com> wrote:

> >> I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!
> >> That kind of thing could never happen here. We never have numbers
> >> that are prefixes of other valid numbers. Never had.
> >
> > only because you haven't hit the limits yet.
>
> We have hit the limits in the past. At that time an extra digit
> was added to the local subscriber numbers.

the usa uses a fixed length numbering scheme because that's the easiest
for people to remember (many studies were done about that).

although it's easy to remember numbers, it also means it's a *huge*
obstacle to change because just about everything hardcodes 10 digit
numbers.

as i mentioned, area codes with 9 as the second digit are reserved in
case longer numbers becomes a reality. that isn't something that's
going to happen anytime soon, but if it does, it's going to be a mess.

> >> Area codes start with 0. Local numbers never do.
> >> International prefix is 00 (followed by country code etc).
> >> Mobile has the areacode 06, other areas are 01x-05x, 07x.
> >> 08 and 09 are special areas.
> >
> > originally, area codes began with 2-9 and had a 0 or 1 for the second
> > digit. exchanges had 2-9 for the second digit. neither ended in 0 or 1.
> > there was no overlap, nor could there be. phone numbers are a fixed
> > length of 7 digits, 3 of which is the exchange.
> >
> > it was impossible for an area code to be an exchange and vice versa.
> >
> > one exception to that rule was 800, which was not actually an area
> > code, and used for toll-free numbers. there was also 900, which was
> > surcharged (usually quite a bit), often used for phone sex lines and
> > similar.
> >
> > 3 digits that ended in 11 were used for special purposes, such as
> > directory assistance (411), repair (611) and emergencies (911).
> >
> > dialing 1 as the first digit meant area code followed, i.e., long
> > distance call, versus a local call (no area code).
> >
> > for example, someone outside of area code 212 would need to dial
> > 1-212-555-1234, while those within area code 212 would dial 555-1234.
> >
> > dialing an area code without the 1- prefix would fail, usually with a
> > message to dial a 1. without a 1- prefix, the system was expecting an
> > exchange and area codes are not valid exchanges.
>
> But there you clearly see the bad design. There are way too many
> restrictions in the numbers for areas and exchanges, therefore you
> run out of available numbers.

maybe so, but in the 1940s, when the north american numbering plan
(nanp) was designed, people didn't expect everyone to have multiple
devices and multiple phone numbers.

in fact, back then, multiple people often shared one number, aka party
lines. in rural areas, you could often ask the operator to be connected
by name (not a number).

they did expect that it would fill ~50 years later, an estimate that
turned out to be fairly accurate.

they weren't the only ones to make assumptions that turned out to be a
problem. people assumed years could be denoted with only two digits,
and then along came y2k.

hindsight is 20-20.

> Also the validity of a number can only be checked when a certain
> number of digits has been entered, you know the length of the number
> only after at least 3 arbitary digits have been entered.

yep. it's variable length in certain cases.

very old switches (step) could dial the last 5 digits if the call was
within the same exchange, but with crossbar and ess, that was no longer
an option.

> > 0 by itself was for the operator, and if a phone number followed, an
> > operator would intercept for assistance.
>
> and 00 was for the international operator. So when you enter 0 the
> result will depend entirely on your timing of entering additional
> digits. that can never happen here.
>
> also, operators were phased out decades before that happened in the
> USA. when I was on vacation in the USA in the late eighties, I got
> an operator when trying to dial long distance from a payphone.

that's because the operator had to verify the amount deposited.

that became automatic in the 70s and 80s. you may have been in an area
where that was not yet deployed.

> at that time that was unheard of in the Netherlands, our network
> was fully automated in the fifties, before my birth.

technology did not allow for fully automated deposits for long distance
calls in the 1950s, where the amount depended on where you were calling
and the length of the call.

> it was also very inconvenient that to make a call, I had to name a
> carrier to be used. and the operator was not allowed to suggest one.
> how could I know what valid names of carriers are, and which one
> to choose?

that's because of the bell system breakup, so that people could choose
their own long distance carrier, who competed for the best rates,
rather forcing people into using only one option. blame politics.

payphones should have a default, which could be overridden if someone
preferred a different long distance service.

there were also privately owned payphones (cocot) that had their own
rates (usually much more expensive), possibly restricting long distance
calls.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> that's because the operator had to verify the amount deposited.
>
> that became automatic in the 70s and 80s. you may have been in an area
> where that was not yet deployed.
>
>> at that time that was unheard of in the Netherlands, our network
>> was fully automated in the fifties, before my birth.
>
> technology did not allow for fully automated deposits for long distance
> calls in the 1950s, where the amount depended on where you were calling
> and the length of the call.

Back then, our payphones had a "hold area" for coins to be deposited,
when you wanted to make a call you needed to insert at least one coin
and it would be in the hold area, you got dialtone, dialed the number
and only when it answered a coin would be taken from the hold area.
For a local call, that would be it. For a long distance call, another
coin would be taken every 45-90 seconds or so. When no coin was
available at that time, the call would be disconnected. So it was
your responsibility to insert sufficient coints into the hold area ahead
of the time they were needed. When you hung up the receiver, any coins
still in the hold area would be returned. (including your first coin
when the call had not been answered)

This was all electro-mechanical, the taking of the next coin was triggered
by a "charge pulse" which was a common-mode pulse on the line relative
to ground. One could get an electro-mechanical counter for installation
at home to track the costs, e.g. in case of shared phones, cafes, etc.

>> it was also very inconvenient that to make a call, I had to name a
>> carrier to be used. and the operator was not allowed to suggest one.
>> how could I know what valid names of carriers are, and which one
>> to choose?
>
> that's because of the bell system breakup, so that people could choose
> their own long distance carrier, who competed for the best rates,
> rather forcing people into using only one option. blame politics.
>
> payphones should have a default, which could be overridden if someone
> preferred a different long distance service.

Yeah but for long-distance one would have to go via the operator, and
she had no default. Well, after explaining we had difficulty with
that question she probably selected AT&T.

This was in southern Utah, I think. We travelled through Colorado,
Utah, Arizona etc and sometimes it seemed a good idea to book a motel
beforehand. Normally we just started looking for one with vacancy
at 5 o'clock or so, but in this area there were not so many places
to stay. Very beautiful area, BTW.

On 11/29/2021 4:45 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <so3nir$kfe$2@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> At one point Los Angeles ran out of phone numbers.
>
> many places ran out of phone numbers, not just los angeles. that's why
> there have been *many* splits and overlays over the years.

Instead of splits and overlays, I wish they would have just added one
digit to the phone number. That would have created ten times as many
numbers.

On 11/29/2021 4:45 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <so3nbb$kfe$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Some number of area codes (LIKE MINE!) use that same 3-digit prefix as
>> part of the normal phone number. I think there are 26 in the country,
>> but I'm unwilling to look it up. So that weak-willed potential suicides
>> won't have to bother looking up a 10-digit number (generally posted at
>> both ends of likely suicide sites like Suicide Bridge in Pasadena) or
>> just calling 911 everybody in those areas will have to dial 1+10 digits
>> to make local calls.
>
> using the area code for all calls has been the norm nearly everywhere
> for a very long time, around when overlay area codes first appeared.

Not on my landline and not on my cell phone. I never use the area code
for local calls.

On 11/30/2021 6:54 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Rob <nomail@example.com> wrote:
>> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Some number of area codes (LIKE MINE!) use that same 3-digit prefix as
>> > part of the normal phone number. I think there are 26 in the country,
>> > but I'm unwilling to look it up. So that weak-willed potential suicides
>> > won't have to bother looking up a 10-digit number (generally posted at
>> > both ends of likely suicide sites like Suicide Bridge in Pasadena) or
>> > just calling 911 everybody in those areas will have to dial 1+10 digits
>> > to make local calls.
>>
>> I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!
>
> Yes, it boggles the mind that this is yet another area where the US
> apparently didn't learn from how other countries approached and solved
> those problems.

I never though of it before, but I suppose you're right.

On 11/30/2021 1:38 AM, Rob wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Some number of area codes (LIKE MINE!) use that same 3-digit prefix as
>> part of the normal phone number. I think there are 26 in the country,
>> but I'm unwilling to look it up. So that weak-willed potential suicides
>> won't have to bother looking up a 10-digit number (generally posted at
>> both ends of likely suicide sites like Suicide Bridge in Pasadena) or
>> just calling 911 everybody in those areas will have to dial 1+10 digits
>> to make local calls.
>
> I was often amazed by how badly thought out the USA number plan is!
> That kind of thing could never happen here. We never have numbers
> that are prefixes of other valid numbers. Never had.

Originally, Area Codes always had 0 as the second digit, then 1 was
added as an allowable second digit. Prefixes and Area Codes never had 0
or 1 as the second (or first) digit.

Originally, calls to directory assistance, repair service, etc., were a
three digit number beginning with 1. Directory assistance was 113, and
some South American countries still use that. When direct dialing of
long distance calls began to require a 1 as the first digit, the 1xx
numbers were changed. Directory assistance became 411. Repair service
became 611.

When they realized that they were going to run out of area codes (limit
of 128 under the 0/1 system) they changed the rule so the second digit
could be any digit, though I don't believe any area code uses a 9 as the
second digit (not sure if it's allowed or not). By that time, every
exchange that mattered had an ESS (Electronic Switching System) so it
was no problem.

Had they realized that there would be such a proliferation of mobile
phones, they could have assigned four of the second digits for mobile
and four for landlines. But adding an extra digit for mobile phone
numbers would have very difficult. Also, in the early 1990's there was a
huge increase in the number of landlines as households added second and
third lines (one for a FAX, one for use with a modem). aDSL, which
didn't require a separate copper pair, then let people drop the modem
line, and soon there was no need for a FAX line anymore.

It ended up working out okay in the end. The U.S. did not end up with
the "Caller Pays" system that other countries are now burdened with and
the cost of mobile network usage is paid by the person actually choosing
to use the mobile network, which is much fairer. If a mobile user
doesn't want to accept calls, because they have a per minute cost
associated with their plan, then they can just not answer the call.

On 11/30/2021 7:40 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On 11/29/2021 4:45 PM, nospam wrote:
>> In article <so3nbb$kfe$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Some number of area codes (LIKE MINE!) use that same 3-digit prefix
>>> as part of the normal phone number.  I think there are 26 in the
>>> country, but I'm unwilling to look it up.  So that weak-willed
>>> potential suicides won't have to bother looking up a 10-digit number
>>> (generally posted at both ends of likely suicide sites like Suicide
>>> Bridge in Pasadena) or just calling 911 everybody in those areas will
>>> have to dial 1+10 digits to make local calls.
>>
>> using the area code for all calls has been the norm nearly everywhere
>> for a very long time, around when overlay area codes first appeared.
>
>
> Not on my landline and not on my cell phone. I never use the area code
> for local calls.

nospam is wrong of course™.

A lot of areas still had seven digit dialing until last month. The FCC
said that 82 of the area codes with 988 prefixes still allowed
seven-digit dialing. Even now, there are area codes without the 988
prefix, and without overlays, that may still allow seven digit dialing.

When I moved to California, there was 415 for San Francisco and 408 for
San Jose, but originally there were no overlapping prefixes and 10 digit
dialing was not required, even when calling between area codes. It was
very strange. Eventually they had to use the same prefixes in both area
codes and then you had to dial the area code for calls outside your own
area code.

On 11/30/2021 7:37 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On 11/29/2021 4:45 PM, nospam wrote:
>> In article <so3nir$kfe$2@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
>> <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> At one point Los Angeles ran out of phone numbers.
>>
>> many places ran out of phone numbers, not just los angeles. that's why
>> there have been *many* splits and overlays over the years.
>
>
> Instead of splits and overlays, I wish they would have just added one
> digit to the phone number. That would have created ten times as many
> numbers.

There were still a lot of mechanical cross-bar switching systems in
rural areas when they ran out of 0/1 (second digit) area codes. There is
no way that those systems could have accommodated an eighth digit.

In article <j0muqiF6bv7U1@mid.individual.net>, Ken Blake
<Ken@invalidinvalid.com> wrote:

> >> At one point Los Angeles ran out of phone numbers.
> >
> > many places ran out of phone numbers, not just los angeles. that's why
> > there have been *many* splits and overlays over the years.
>
>
> Instead of splits and overlays, I wish they would have just added one
> digit to the phone number. That would have created ten times as many
> numbers.

that would break pbxes, databases, etc., which are hardcoded for 10
digits (and sometimes only 7 digits).

there are reserved set of area codes (n9x) where longer phone numbers
are possible, but that isn't something that's going to happen any time
soon, if ever.

In article <j0muvsF6bv7U2@mid.individual.net>, Ken Blake
<Ken@invalidinvalid.com> wrote:

> >
> > using the area code for all calls has been the norm nearly everywhere
> > for a very long time, around when overlay area codes first appeared.
>
>
> Not on my landline and not on my cell phone. I never use the area code
> for local calls.

i said nearly everywhere, but at some point, your landline will require
it.

for cellphones, you should always use 10 digits so the call always
connects, no matter where you are. since numbers are stored, there is
no advantage to not doing so.

In article <slrnsqcg60.38e.nomail@xs9.xs4all.nl>, Rob
<nomail@example.com> wrote:

> >> at that time that was unheard of in the Netherlands, our network
> >> was fully automated in the fifties, before my birth.
> >
> > technology did not allow for fully automated deposits for long distance
> > calls in the 1950s, where the amount depended on where you were calling
> > and the length of the call.
>
> Back then, our payphones had a "hold area" for coins to be deposited,
> when you wanted to make a call you needed to insert at least one coin
> and it would be in the hold area, you got dialtone, dialed the number
> and only when it answered a coin would be taken from the hold area.
> For a local call, that would be it.

same here, until the roughly the 1980s (depending on area), when
'dialtone first phones' started to appear, where there was a dialtone
without inserting a coin, then you dialed the number and it asked for
the necessary coins depending on the call.

> For a long distance call, another
> coin would be taken every 45-90 seconds or so. When no coin was
> available at that time, the call would be disconnected. So it was
> your responsibility to insert sufficient coints into the hold area ahead
> of the time they were needed. When you hung up the receiver, any coins
> still in the hold area would be returned. (including your first coin
> when the call had not been answered)
>
> This was all electro-mechanical, the taking of the next coin was triggered
> by a "charge pulse" which was a common-mode pulse on the line relative
> to ground. One could get an electro-mechanical counter for installation
> at home to track the costs, e.g. in case of shared phones, cafes, etc.

the old 3-slot payphones had bells to make audible sounds when coins
were inserted, one ding for a 5c nickel, two dings for a 10c dime and a
lower pitch bong for a 25c quarter. the operator listened for the
sounds to determine how much was paid.

coin return was an electromechanical lever. one polarity pulled it one
way to drop the coins into the coin box and the opposite polarity
pulled it the other way and dropped them into the coin return. not
surprisingly, this could be (and was) abused and later changed.

<https://www.beatriceco.com/bti/porticus/bell/images/we_233g/-frontview_
topsection_leaningforward1.jpg>

those old payphones were replaced with ones that had one slot, which
sent audible 2200 hz beeps, depending on the coins. the called party
could hear them as additional coins were inserted.

<https://www.beatriceco.com/bti/porticus/bell/images/payphoneclosed.jpg>

some people recorded the 2200 hz beeps (and previously, the dings) to
spoof payments, aka red box. to prevent this, payphones soon muted the
microphone until the call connected and also added a 2200 hz notch
filter.

> >> it was also very inconvenient that to make a call, I had to name a
> >> carrier to be used. and the operator was not allowed to suggest one.
> >> how could I know what valid names of carriers are, and which one
> >> to choose?
> >
> > that's because of the bell system breakup, so that people could choose
> > their own long distance carrier, who competed for the best rates,
> > rather forcing people into using only one option. blame politics.
> >
> > payphones should have a default, which could be overridden if someone
> > preferred a different long distance service.
>
> Yeah but for long-distance one would have to go via the operator, and
> she had no default. Well, after explaining we had difficulty with
> that question she probably selected AT&T.

there should have been a default, but if you were on a privately owned
payphone, anything goes. those were best avoided if at all possible.

> This was in southern Utah, I think.

which would have been rural and almost certainly not the latest
technology.

> We travelled through Colorado,
> Utah, Arizona etc and sometimes it seemed a good idea to book a motel
> beforehand. Normally we just started looking for one with vacancy
> at 5 o'clock or so, but in this area there were not so many places
> to stay. Very beautiful area, BTW.

indeed.

In article <so5ifk$pre$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> A lot of areas still had seven digit dialing until last month.

very few. as i said, 10 digit dialing (11 in some cases due to
politics) has been required nearly everywhere.

In article <so5i2c$m7u$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> Originally, Area Codes always had 0 as the second digit, then 1 was
> added as an allowable second digit.

nope. originally, area codes had both 0 or 1 as the second digit.

0 was intended for rural states with only one area code and 1 was for
more populous states with two or more area codes. not surprisingly,
that did not last long.

area codes were also prioritized by number of pulls, since touchtone
did not exist and everything was a rotary dial. lower numbers meant
shorter dial times. new york city was 212, los angeles was 213 and
chicago was 312.

> Prefixes and Area Codes never had 0
> or 1 as the second (or first) digit.

exchanges did not. only area codes did.

nothing had 0 or 1 as the first digit, except internal numbers that
were only accessible by operators and techs (and phone phreaks who
could spoof things).

> Originally, calls to directory assistance, repair service, etc., were a
> three digit number beginning with 1. Directory assistance was 113,

not as part of the nanp, it wasn't.

> and
> some South American countries still use that.

maybe, but that's not part of nanp and irrelevant.

> When direct dialing of
> long distance calls began to require a 1 as the first digit, the 1xx
> numbers were changed. Directory assistance became 411. Repair service
> became 611.

long distance always required 1- prefix to denote area code follows.

> When they realized that they were going to run out of area codes (limit
> of 128 under the 0/1 system) they changed the rule so the second digit
> could be any digit,

152 area codes total, although not all were originally assigned and
some were special purpose, such as 800 for toll-free. the 8
combinations that end in 11 (211..911) are for specific purposes such
as emergency, repair, directory assistance, etc., and not actual area
codes.

> though I don't believe any area code uses a 9 as the
> second digit (not sure if it's allowed or not).

9 as the second digit is reserved for future expansion, in particular,
longer phone numbers.

> By that time, every
> exchange that mattered had an ESS (Electronic Switching System) so it
> was no problem.

nope. the change happened before ess was fully deployed.

> Had they realized that there would be such a proliferation of mobile
> phones, they could have assigned four of the second digits for mobile
> and four for landlines.

that would not have worked, nor was that even a consideration in the
1940s when nanp was designed.

> But adding an extra digit for mobile phone
> numbers would have very difficult.

adding an extra digit for *any* number would break just about
everything because it's hardcoded for 10 digits (sometimes 7). it's
simply not an option.

> Also, in the early 1990's there was a
> huge increase in the number of landlines as households added second and
> third lines (one for a FAX, one for use with a modem).

well before that.

> aDSL, which
> didn't require a separate copper pair, then let people drop the modem
> line, and soon there was no need for a FAX line anymore.

there still is. banks and lawyers still use fax, with a dedicated
number.

> It ended up working out okay in the end. The U.S. did not end up with
> the "Caller Pays" system that other countries are now burdened with and
> the cost of mobile network usage is paid by the person actually choosing
> to use the mobile network, which is much fairer. If a mobile user
> doesn't want to accept calls, because they have a per minute cost
> associated with their plan, then they can just not answer the call.

yep. it's the only equitable system.