You got the wrong number. This is 91...2

[substitute]

From the risks_digest

OPT IN OR DIE.

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.

Comments

[substitute.livejournal.com]

well, it might come in handy when the toxic cloud is bearing down on you, was my thought.

What a messed-up way to broadcast emergency info!

[brianenigma.livejournal.com]

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.