Comments on: Hackit: Why we don’t need phone numbers

By: Chip Punk

Chip Punk — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:46:42 +0000

It’s all numbers in the end – ie, binary, octal, hex, or decimal address locations.
Assign whatever mnemonic you like. I have yet to see a system that actually “maps” alpha-numerically, but there are lots of systems like domain servers/names that convert alpha-numerics to their numeric addresses.

By: stib

stib — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:27:15 +0000

it already exists: you know those 1800 numbers, where the letters on the numeric pad form words, like “1800 donuts” or whatnot. It doesn’t need to be a 1800 number, my number (without country code or area code) spells “wet fowls” (or yev enyks). Done.

By: Digitürk

Digitürk — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:28:41 +0000

thanks admin for

By: Digitürk lig tv

Digitürk lig tv — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:26:55 +0000

nguage, GStreamer fram

By: Dawn Cornog

Dawn Cornog — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:18:57 +0000

Hi,I thought I’d post and let you know that your blogs layout is really messed up on the k-melon browser.Anyhow keep up the good work

By: Ty Johnson

Ty Johnson — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:36:01 +0000

This is basically, in a nutshell, an audible Death Sentence for IPv4. I memorized my IP, it’ll suck when it looks like my mac address.(hex scares me :)

By: Tim

Tim — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:55:45 +0000

The problem I see with this approach is that it completely locks out the non-Latin character set world. They recently approved non-Latin domains, but trying to standardize a similar approach for this phone DNS would be a huge headache.

I work for a local telco and while the SIP protocol is very good for VOIP phones, applying this same solution to POTS phones would require some hardware changes to link the “address” with the specific copper-loop circuit for a given phone. You would effectively have to treat the POTS phone as a modem, but for voice instead, at the central office.

Having a unique phone number is a far better solution than a text-based addressing system for all phones, because of name collisions. Without some location or ISP based gobbledigook that would assure people with the same name wouldn’t collide, a name-based addressing system for phones just plain won’t work. In fact with a location or ISP based “subdomain” sort of fix, you’d probably still have name collisions (especially in population-dense areas) so you’d still need a unique number to assure that you’re getting the right “John Smith” in NYC.

By: Mic

Mic — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:57:39 +0000

*an average, a a area. Sry me fail English, that’s unpossible…

By: Mic

Mic — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:55:33 +0000

Seven digits is the highest average sequence of numbers that a average person can easily memorize also the average phone number without a a area code or extension is seven numbers. This is obviously a coincidence and not relevant.

By: M

Fri, 16 Oct 2009 00:02:10 +0000

Hey, looking for a hack to lookup unlisted
numbers without paying for it. Tired of
people calling and asking for Jim Smith,
when my name is John smith. (not my real
name of course). Then I do a *69 (cause I
am still in the dark ages and do not have
caller ID), get the number, do a reverse
phone lookup on some whitepages website,
only to find out the general city location
of the call, but not the actual caller info.
Sometimes I get the phone carrier, but who
cares. So, I need a free way to lookup
unlisted numbers so I can tell whether it
is a prankster, telemarketer, or maybe an
old friend I lost touch with who might be
calling me.

By: M

Thu, 15 Oct 2009 23:57:02 +0000

Many ideas touched upon here. Sounds like
each individual at birth will receive a
universal communication number unique to
the individual which can be appended to add
a unique suffix for each device/location
a persons uses for communication. The IPhone
is doing this now for the most part – it is
a universal communication device, access
email, web, phone, chats, IM etc. all from
one device. We say that we are all going to
have multiple calling locations, but in the
end, I think location will be superfluous,
because all our calling networks will
eventually be wireless. Of course, if some
eh hmmm, “gov’t agency” is going to hand out
a unique communications number for each
individual at birth, I sure bet that that
same gov’t agency will keep tabs on each
and every communication you make. It’s a
nice concept, but it makes me worry about
big brothers usurpous power. Also, who
actually dials a phone number anymore? My
guess businesses are the only real users
of phone numbers anymore, where as private
citizens program their home or cell phones
once with a bookmark, and just dial by
pressing one button on the phone, or hell,
some phones even have voice activated
dialing. So, to the end private user,
the actual phone number is used once as a
means to an end to create a bookmark.
How cool is that?! So, since the end users
essentially no longer need a 7 or 10 digit
number to dial anymore, then conceivably,
the telecommunication companies can change
the user IDs to anything they want, what
does it matter to the end user who just
creates a bookmark.

By: Ygr

Ygr — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:46:44 +0000

The possibility to change my phone number is what I consider an advantage, not a flaw.
With the proposed system pretty much everyone who knows my name would be able to guess my voice ID.

By: Bri

Bri — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:58:46 +0000

It would be nice to have the option of dialing by an alternative means ie. an URL if the provider chooses to provide it.
Cellphone users currently have a personal DNS system, a phone book on your phone:
search> “john doe”> call

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:15:43 +0000

With respect, you obviously don’t know very much about phone networks, call routing or the outside world.

There is a very large international network of phones in place around the world – and they are not all digital yet.
Copper is still the ‘last mile’ for most of the world’s phones, and shared telephone line – common carries etc still exists, even in countries with an otherwise moderns digital phone system.
Many places still rely on R2 phone signalling etc… should we just cut off these countries from the rest of the world because of some perceived need to replace phone numbers. Any phone in the world can be contacted with a Max of 12 digits – and you want to replace that with an IP6 addresss (that’s what is would take)
Many important phone numbers are still location dependent.
In the USA dialing 911 will get you the LOCAL emergency services- not some call center in India who will then ask you what country/city/street you are in etc.
Even when you are on a cell phone, it will quickly route you locally, because it’s important.

Phone numbers allow for short codes, if its a local call just dial 555-1234 , different city ring (212) 555 1212.

Many countries outside the USA have local phone numbers of 4 and 5 digits only. Countries will smaller populations have 3 digit country codes – and the first digit of a country code tells you the geographic area it’s in.

The first comment posted was correct- this is yet another solutions, looking for a problem.

By: chad

chad — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:20:48 +0000

What about folks with the same name? I mean, how many John Smiths do you think are out there? And instead of getting a wrong number, how many people will want to say, “I’m sorry; must have the wrong URL.”