Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

lookify.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#51

Post by rippercushions »

FPGAhacker wrote: post #48
mynameisvlad wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there is nothing different about 555 numbers than any other, and Verizon certainly doesn’t charge $2500 for a normal number.

The point is you don’t have to dial an area code with the 555. 555-abcd, sans area code, would just work and route to you no matter where (in the USA) a caller was calling from. Therefore it is equivalent to having that number in every area code. Now there is a good chance you aren’t old enough to know/remember this, but people in the US didn’t have to dial an area code (and occasionally nearby area codes) when calli…

Thanks for filling in the gaps in my explanation. Sigh, I feel old...

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#52

Post by RainaRelanah »

tokumei wrote: post #23

I grew up Austin, off the top of my head I remember (512) 485-5555 for Time Warner Cable and (512) 459-2222 for Gatti’s Pizza. I have no use for remembering these phone numbers anymore but I’ll probably never forget them.

Real cheese, real hot. Real taste is what we got!

Gatti's nostalgia will never be useless.

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#53

Post by googlryas »

WalterBright wrote: post #34

Every time I see a 555 number in a movie, I'm reminded that it's a movie and am dropped out of immersion. So what if the movies use a real number? They could just sign up for a number, use it, and no harm done. Or just use 867-5309. Wherever that number goes, the person there is expecting it.

Better Call Saul had real phone numbers which you can call and get a little prerecorded clip which ties into the show. Almost every time these numbers were not a main focus of the single shot they appeared in - most people wouldn't even notice them.

Short list:

Need an Attorney? Better Call Saul! (505) 503-4455

Need a Will? Call McGill! (505) 842-5662

Retirement Funds Drained? Call Davis & Main! (505) 242-7700

Want a Gangster who’s macho? You got Nacho! (505) 242-6087

Tips are Frail? Go to Day Spa & Nail! (505) 842-5325

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#54

Post by eru »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #46
WalterBright wrote: post #34

Every time I see a 555 number in a movie, I'm reminded that it's a movie and am dropped out of immersion. So what if the movies use a real number? They could just sign up for a number, use it, and no harm done. Or just use 867-5309. Wherever that number goes, the person there is expecting it.

> Every time I see a 555 number in a movie, I'm reminded that it's a movie and am dropped out of immersion. What about a cut? A camera zoom? A title screen? Sub-titles? I am intrigued about how you experience films.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspension_of_disbelief

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#55

Post by 1123581321 »

WalterBright wrote: post #34

Every time I see a 555 number in a movie, I'm reminded that it's a movie and am dropped out of immersion. So what if the movies use a real number? They could just sign up for a number, use it, and no harm done. Or just use 867-5309. Wherever that number goes, the person there is expecting it.

I experience the immersion drop as well. However, a fake area code for a number registered by the production can have the same effect if it doesn’t match the city or character in the scene. The older you get, the more of them you know. :)

If you don’t use an area code in the shot (looks natural, especially in productions set in the past or when handwritten), you really need a fake number because a production is not going to be able to scoop up that number for every area code. Dozens or hundreds of random people will end up being harassed.

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#56

Post by boomboomsubban »

hgsgm wrote: post #14
boomboomsubban wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good thought. It made me wonder if they used to advertise like that but stopped as that style of phone has all but vanished. From 2005-2010, they used 800-555-8778. In 2011, they used 800-555-4477, and then switched to 3453 in 2012. In none of the years from 2012-2015 did they advertise on the homepage with 555-file, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone originally did pick that number for that reason and after th…

my Android smartphone and iPad have letters on the number pad.

I honestly can't remember the last time I used the dialer. I either call a contact or copy/paste a number.

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#57

Post by throwaway675309 »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #46
WalterBright wrote: post #34

Every time I see a 555 number in a movie, I'm reminded that it's a movie and am dropped out of immersion. So what if the movies use a real number? They could just sign up for a number, use it, and no harm done. Or just use 867-5309. Wherever that number goes, the person there is expecting it.

> Every time I see a 555 number in a movie, I'm reminded that it's a movie and am dropped out of immersion. What about a cut? A camera zoom? A title screen? Sub-titles? I am intrigued about how you experience films.

Or a lens flare for that matter

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#58

Post by kergonath »

alex_young wrote: post #22
valleyer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Could" can be both the conditional present tense or preterite tense in English (at least AmE). It's ambiguous. See: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/could#Verb

The point I was attempting to make is that the usage is incorrect and misleading in this context. The way the title is worded is indeed the past tense usage.

The point the parent was making is that it is not incorrect or misleading, just ambiguous. And even then, it’s ambiguous only if you leave out the second clause.

“I could have a banana” has two perfectly correct meanings: it is possible for me to have a banana right now depending on some factor (conditional), or I had the possibility to have a banana in the past (preterite).

A preterite in the second clause eliminates the possibility of a present conditional in the first one.

Re: Overview of the 555-XXXX phone number

#59

Post by mynameisvlad »

FPGAhacker wrote: post #48
mynameisvlad wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there is nothing different about 555 numbers than any other, and Verizon certainly doesn’t charge $2500 for a normal number.

The point is you don’t have to dial an area code with the 555. 555-abcd, sans area code, would just work and route to you no matter where (in the USA) a caller was calling from. Therefore it is equivalent to having that number in every area code. Now there is a good chance you aren’t old enough to know/remember this, but people in the US didn’t have to dial an area code (and occasionally nearby area codes) when calli…

Paying X per area code is justified, nobody is arguing against that.

Paying $2500 per area code is unreasonable, as, like I said, there is nothing inherently special about 206-555-1234 vs 206-689-5312.

Post reply on HN