4 ms·

Already three down-votes, but not a single explanation or repudiation as to why this particular problem isn’t solved more easily by markets.

jjoonathan 7y ago
The technological and legislative infrastructure required to turn this into a market far exceeds what would be required for simpler anti-spam measures. It comes across as unhelpful and detached, like suggesting world peace as the solution to gang violence in your neighborhood.
- nobodyandproud 7y ago
  What technical limitation? There is nothing simpler, except that some very well-funded special interest groups never want to see this happen. When I was on a limited plan, the amount of spam messages and calls were virtually zero because the limit would run up and be charged against the caller (internationally). The month I switched to an unlimited, I started getting spammed. Now much of the spam is domestic, but I fail to see how this is possibly unfeasible technically.
  - weberc2 7y ago
    Why should we artificially charge law abiding people for making a call? Why not disallow call spoofing? Why should we allow telecom fraud, especially when there are obvious technical solutions? And what well-funded SIGs are our to get your phone call tax plan?
    - nobodyandproud 7y ago
      What’s artificial about it? Are you old enough to remember when calls cost money, and we didn’t have these problems?
    - manigandham 7y ago
      Phone calls do cost money. Unlimited mobile calling plans are very recent, and many areas in the world are still by the minute and rather expensive.
dredmorbius 7y ago
Markets actually create the conflicts of interest which cause this situation to exist in the first place. By way of indirect response, Bernard J. Stern's "Resistances to the Adoption of Technological Innovations" (1937): https://archive.org/details/technologicaltre1937unitrich/page/39 https://archive.org/details/technologicaltre1937unitrich/pag... In Markdown: https://pastebin.com/raw/Bapu75is https://pastebin.com/raw/Bapu75is

jjoonathan 7y ago

The technological and legislative infrastructure required to turn this into a market far exceeds what would be required for simpler anti-spam measures. It comes across as unhelpful and detached, like suggesting world peace as the solution to gang violence in your neighborhood.

nobodyandproud 7y ago
What technical limitation? There is nothing simpler, except that some very well-funded special interest groups never want to see this happen. When I was on a limited plan, the amount of spam messages and calls were virtually zero because the limit would run up and be charged against the caller (internationally). The month I switched to an unlimited, I started getting spammed. Now much of the spam is domestic, but I fail to see how this is possibly unfeasible technically.
- weberc2 7y ago
  Why should we artificially charge law abiding people for making a call? Why not disallow call spoofing? Why should we allow telecom fraud, especially when there are obvious technical solutions? And what well-funded SIGs are our to get your phone call tax plan?
  - nobodyandproud 7y ago
    What’s artificial about it? Are you old enough to remember when calls cost money, and we didn’t have these problems?
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Phone calls do cost money. Unlimited mobile calling plans are very recent, and many areas in the world are still by the minute and rather expensive.

dredmorbius 7y ago

Markets actually create the conflicts of interest which cause this situation to exist in the first place. By way of indirect response, Bernard J. Stern's "Resistances to the Adoption of Technological Innovations" (1937): https://archive.org/details/technologicaltre1937unitrich/page/39 https://archive.org/details/technologicaltre1937unitrich/pag... In Markdown: https://pastebin.com/raw/Bapu75is https://pastebin.com/raw/Bapu75is