5 ms·

If Robocalls are the problem, Truecaller isn't the solution. Regulations against unwanted harassment is. Robocalls are not a force of nature where our only reco

by mola 7y ago

If Robocalls are the problem, Truecaller isn't the solution. Regulations against unwanted harassment is. Robocalls are not a force of nature where our only recourse is a technological solution. They are a result of a human choice, where the absolute majority of individual think it's a menace. So our recourse is legal. band-aid solutions like Truecaller cause more problems. The Truecaller product is not a usual commodity where you choose it, and pay a known price. The actual price you pay is totally unknown. Because they require total access to your device without genuine disclosure of their intended use for it.

tty2300 7y ago
It also seems to be a problem unique to location. I have never in my life received a robo call in Australia but I did start to get sales calls until I put my number on the do not call list.
neilalexander 7y ago
At the end of the day, someone somewhere is granting robocallers access to the public telephone network. Hold those service providers legally responsible until they start taking action - it's not like there is no way to find out who they are.
- Piskvorrr 7y ago
  A shell company, operating out of Vanuatu, with VoIP servers in Vietnam and Venezuela? Gl;hf.
  - PeterisP 7y ago
    International phone calls aren't free and unrestricted. It's quite feasible to arrange a regime where such inbound spam calls are economically unfeasible, and legally unfeasible within a regulatory regime e.g. apply large financial penalties to the originating phone company, of which there's a limited number, all are licensed, and can be prohibited from obtaining new licenses.
  - neilalexander 7y ago
    At some point those VoIP servers connect to PSTN. Someone is responsible for that.
    - sterwill 7y ago
      The non-spammy network operators that interconnect to the spammy network operators make money through that interconnection. If you want them to disconnect their spammy customers, you have to convince them that it's worth it to lose them. This is a manual process and takes time.
      - MiddleEndian 7y ago
        This is where infrastructure level legislation comes in. They should be required to provide the full originator information all the way to the people who receive the call, they should block known spammers, they should block other networks that do not do this, and they should be fined heavily if they do not. Otherwise the phone system will become a relic.
Piskvorrr 7y ago
In essence, this is the spam debate all over again, with some extra seasoning. (The permissions are incidental - other apps exist that are polite in this respect.) So, out comes the canned spam response: Your post advocates a ( ) technical (X) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea.) (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money (X) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once Specifically, your plan fails to account for (X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (X) Open relays in foreign countries (X) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (X) Asshats (X) Jurisdictional problems (X) Extreme profitability of spam (X) Technically illiterate politicians (X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves and the following philosophical objections may also apply: (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical Furthermore, this is what I think about you: (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
- tomp 7y ago
  > Lack of centrally controlling authority for email That's the key difference with phones - phone numbers and call are (quasi-)centrally controlled - by your network provider. A simple legislative solution is just "user gets $10 discount on their phone bill for each spam call" and watch the problem solve itself...
  - Piskvorrr 7y ago
    (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money Where does the $10 come from? (Who pays it? Who collects it?) Also, you just invoked a Cobra Effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
    - tomp 7y ago
      Users collect $10 from their network operator by filling a claim in an online form. Burden of proof on the network operator to prove it wasn't a spam call (e.g. originated from a known number, lasted more than some number of minutes, metadata indicates that it was a two-way conversation, etc.). Huge fines if users complain to the regulator that any of the above isn't true.
inapis 7y ago
While I agree with your sentiment, in practice, relying on legislative options is not foolproof and is also a band-aid. You require a lot of human cooperation which, to be honest, is not trivial to achieve in 2019. Second, technology frequently outpaces legislative actions. You can relay a spam call/sms around the world and the receiver, her ISP or her government would still be completely unable to fix the issue. Honestly, I want disposable phone numbers (which are still compatible with public networks) something akin to email aliases. So if one number gets a lot of spam calls, I can just route it to /dev/null. We need a complete array of legislative + technological solutions.

by mola 7y ago

tty2300 7y ago

It also seems to be a problem unique to location. I have never in my life received a robo call in Australia but I did start to get sales calls until I put my number on the do not call list.

neilalexander 7y ago

At the end of the day, someone somewhere is granting robocallers access to the public telephone network. Hold those service providers legally responsible until they start taking action - it's not like there is no way to find out who they are.

Piskvorrr 7y ago
A shell company, operating out of Vanuatu, with VoIP servers in Vietnam and Venezuela? Gl;hf.
- PeterisP 7y ago
  International phone calls aren't free and unrestricted. It's quite feasible to arrange a regime where such inbound spam calls are economically unfeasible, and legally unfeasible within a regulatory regime e.g. apply large financial penalties to the originating phone company, of which there's a limited number, all are licensed, and can be prohibited from obtaining new licenses.
- neilalexander 7y ago
  At some point those VoIP servers connect to PSTN. Someone is responsible for that.
  - sterwill 7y ago
    The non-spammy network operators that interconnect to the spammy network operators make money through that interconnection. If you want them to disconnect their spammy customers, you have to convince them that it's worth it to lose them. This is a manual process and takes time.
    - MiddleEndian 7y ago
      This is where infrastructure level legislation comes in. They should be required to provide the full originator information all the way to the people who receive the call, they should block known spammers, they should block other networks that do not do this, and they should be fined heavily if they do not. Otherwise the phone system will become a relic.

Piskvorrr 7y ago

In essence, this is the spam debate all over again, with some extra seasoning. (The permissions are incidental - other apps exist that are polite in this respect.) So, out comes the canned spam response: Your post advocates a ( ) technical (X) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea.) (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money (X) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once Specifically, your plan fails to account for (X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (X) Open relays in foreign countries (X) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (X) Asshats (X) Jurisdictional problems (X) Extreme profitability of spam (X) Technically illiterate politicians (X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves and the following philosophical objections may also apply: (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical Furthermore, this is what I think about you: (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.

tomp 7y ago
> Lack of centrally controlling authority for email That's the key difference with phones - phone numbers and call are (quasi-)centrally controlled - by your network provider. A simple legislative solution is just "user gets $10 discount on their phone bill for each spam call" and watch the problem solve itself...
- Piskvorrr 7y ago
  (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money Where does the $10 come from? (Who pays it? Who collects it?) Also, you just invoked a Cobra Effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
  - tomp 7y ago
    Users collect $10 from their network operator by filling a claim in an online form. Burden of proof on the network operator to prove it wasn't a spam call (e.g. originated from a known number, lasted more than some number of minutes, metadata indicates that it was a two-way conversation, etc.). Huge fines if users complain to the regulator that any of the above isn't true.

inapis 7y ago

While I agree with your sentiment, in practice, relying on legislative options is not foolproof and is also a band-aid. You require a lot of human cooperation which, to be honest, is not trivial to achieve in 2019. Second, technology frequently outpaces legislative actions. You can relay a spam call/sms around the world and the receiver, her ISP or her government would still be completely unable to fix the issue. Honestly, I want disposable phone numbers (which are still compatible with public networks) something akin to email aliases. So if one number gets a lot of spam calls, I can just route it to /dev/null. We need a complete array of legislative + technological solutions.