4 ms·

The difference is regulation. The US is firmly gripped by the belief that "regulation doesn't work", and keeps electing people who try to prove that true via i

by __jal 8y ago

The difference is regulation. The US is firmly gripped by the belief that "regulation doesn't work", and keeps electing people who try to prove that true via incompetence, cronyism and ideological malice.

MockObject 8y ago
We have plenty of regulation and government attention on the issue, and I somehow doubt Congressional pockets are being lined by the campaign contributions from Big Spam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Do_Not_Call_Registry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Do_Not_Call_Registry
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  The problem is that a lot of spam callers are not based in the US, and it is incredibly time consuming and expensive to prosecute spam callers outside the US. The wheels of justice work, but they don't move very quickly. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/23/business/irs-phone-scams-jeff-sessions.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/23/business/irs-phone-scams-...
- adrr 8y ago
  Carriers make money terminating the calls both in terms of using people’s cell minutes but all reciprocal compensation for terminating the call on their network. Carriers can get rid of it any time they want. Some even offer services to block the calls for a price like Att call protect.
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 8y ago
  Politicians are not being supported by the spammers themselves, but by the telecoms that do not want to make costly changes to their network to stop or enforce this problem. This couldn’t be more obvious in our fcc chair who is basically against any kind of government regulation.
  - JohnFen 8y ago
    And don't forget the little fact that the telecoms make money from providing service to the spammers.
freedomben 8y ago
It's amazing how often I hear this kind of argument. "<Xyz> didn't work because it wasn't done correctly" Why do we humans do that? Why doesn't failure cause introspection/examination rather than excuse making? On a side note, it feels conspiratorial to explain failure as, "there's double agents on the inside sabotaging the effort"
- kevinh 8y ago
  > On a side note, it feels conspiratorial to explain failure as, "there's double agents on the inside sabotaging the effort" There are people currently heading government agencies that lobbied or fought against those agencies. See the CFPB and EPA. It's not a conspiracy–it's reality.
- randito 8y ago
  Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture for a discussion of this topic.
- Can_Not 8y ago
  > conspiratorial Politicians underfunding programs, then suggesting we should cut or privatize them because they performed poorly, all intentionally, is a well known and mostly open fact, not a closely guarded secret conspiracy.
nonbel 8y ago
Nope, turns out it is some sort of crappy regulation preventing providers from stopping the robocallers from spoofing numbers in the US: >"The FCC last year authorized voice service providers to block more types of calls in which the Caller ID has been spoofed or in which the number on the Caller ID is invalid." https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/robocallers-evolved-to-sidestep-new-call-blocking-rules-ags-tell-fcc/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/robocallers-evol...
- lazyasciiart 8y ago
  Nope, turns out there is virtually no downside to making spam calls in the US, and so companies continue to do it. The spoofed numbers are just a way they implement that to get around consumer efforts to prevent it.
  - nonbel 8y ago
    I'll take your word for that. But the problem is that bad regulation has created a downside for providers to block spam calls so they continue not to. I would easily switch providers tomorrow if one of the features was "no spoofed numbers". This would be a giant market advantage if not prevented by this regulatory issue (whatever it is).
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      T-Mobile offers it for free: https://www.t-mobile.com/resources/call-protection https://www.t-mobile.com/resources/call-protection Verizon Wireless offers it for $2.99 a line: https://www.verizonwireless.com/support/call-filter-faqs/ https://www.verizonwireless.com/support/call-filter-faqs/ Not sure about the other major carriers.
      - nonbel 8y ago
        Neither of those block spoofed numbers, both work by creating a blacklist.
      - 8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

by __jal 8y ago

MockObject 8y ago

We have plenty of regulation and government attention on the issue, and I somehow doubt Congressional pockets are being lined by the campaign contributions from Big Spam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Do_Not_Call_Registry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Do_Not_Call_Registry

bobthepanda 8y ago
The problem is that a lot of spam callers are not based in the US, and it is incredibly time consuming and expensive to prosecute spam callers outside the US. The wheels of justice work, but they don't move very quickly. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/23/business/irs-phone-scams-jeff-sessions.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/23/business/irs-phone-scams-...
adrr 8y ago
Carriers make money terminating the calls both in terms of using people’s cell minutes but all reciprocal compensation for terminating the call on their network. Carriers can get rid of it any time they want. Some even offer services to block the calls for a price like Att call protect.
eeeeeeeeeeeee 8y ago
Politicians are not being supported by the spammers themselves, but by the telecoms that do not want to make costly changes to their network to stop or enforce this problem. This couldn’t be more obvious in our fcc chair who is basically against any kind of government regulation.
- JohnFen 8y ago
  And don't forget the little fact that the telecoms make money from providing service to the spammers.

freedomben 8y ago

It's amazing how often I hear this kind of argument. "<Xyz> didn't work because it wasn't done correctly" Why do we humans do that? Why doesn't failure cause introspection/examination rather than excuse making? On a side note, it feels conspiratorial to explain failure as, "there's double agents on the inside sabotaging the effort"

kevinh 8y ago
> On a side note, it feels conspiratorial to explain failure as, "there's double agents on the inside sabotaging the effort" There are people currently heading government agencies that lobbied or fought against those agencies. See the CFPB and EPA. It's not a conspiracy–it's reality.
randito 8y ago
Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture for a discussion of this topic.
Can_Not 8y ago
> conspiratorial Politicians underfunding programs, then suggesting we should cut or privatize them because they performed poorly, all intentionally, is a well known and mostly open fact, not a closely guarded secret conspiracy.

nonbel 8y ago

Nope, turns out it is some sort of crappy regulation preventing providers from stopping the robocallers from spoofing numbers in the US: >"The FCC last year authorized voice service providers to block more types of calls in which the Caller ID has been spoofed or in which the number on the Caller ID is invalid." https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/robocallers-evolved-to-sidestep-new-call-blocking-rules-ags-tell-fcc/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/robocallers-evol...

lazyasciiart 8y ago
Nope, turns out there is virtually no downside to making spam calls in the US, and so companies continue to do it. The spoofed numbers are just a way they implement that to get around consumer efforts to prevent it.
- nonbel 8y ago
  I'll take your word for that. But the problem is that bad regulation has created a downside for providers to block spam calls so they continue not to. I would easily switch providers tomorrow if one of the features was "no spoofed numbers". This would be a giant market advantage if not prevented by this regulatory issue (whatever it is).
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    T-Mobile offers it for free: https://www.t-mobile.com/resources/call-protection https://www.t-mobile.com/resources/call-protection Verizon Wireless offers it for $2.99 a line: https://www.verizonwireless.com/support/call-filter-faqs/ https://www.verizonwireless.com/support/call-filter-faqs/ Not sure about the other major carriers.
    - nonbel 8y ago
      Neither of those block spoofed numbers, both work by creating a blacklist.
    - 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]