3 ms·
Back in the early 80s (before caller ID), we’d use a collect call. “Do you accept the charges from <XYZ>?” “No.” <then place a call to a known number in t
by sokoloff 3y ago
Back in the early 80s (before caller ID), we’d use a collect call.
“Do you accept the charges from <XYZ>?”
“No.” <then place a call to a known number in the other direction>
- 7thaccount 3y agoI made a collect call (~several states away) home when I was a kid and didn't have a cell phone. I forgot all about that. I feel old now. I remember my dad had to accept and kept it short to reduce costs even though I'd been away for weeks.
- jsnell 3y agoI don't get it. If the collect call from A to B is accepted, B pays the cost of the call. In your scenario B instead calls A directly... and B still pays the cost. Where's the savings here? (And there's a pretty clear downside to this. What if it's an actual emergency from a different phone than the standard. E.g. the only time I can remember answering a collect call, it was my sister calling from a foreign hospital after a serious accident. Trying to call back at a different number wouldn't have been great. I guess you could have a protocol involving multiple collect calls, and hope that there's no record that the first one was rejected.)
- woleium 3y agoCollect calls carry an additional operator fee, unless rejected.
- myself248 3y agoThe A-B collect rate might be $3/min because collect calls carry absurd, insane, incomprehensibly whackass surcharges. The B-A call back rate might be $0.20/min because it's just a normal call, not subject to the above fees. There's the savings.
- sokoloff 3y ago"Collect call from Bob Weaddababyeetzaboy" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JxhTnWrKYs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JxhTnWrKYs
- failrate 3y agoWe had more subtle encoding, but important messages could be sent by collect calls that would definitely be refused.