3 ms·

> The most interesting parts of the bill are pretty much "FCC will decide how it works", but some bits are better defined. For example the call authentication f

> The most interesting parts of the bill are pretty much "FCC will decide how it works", but some bits are better defined. For example the call authentication framework can add no line item to the consumer bill. Sure... they could raise the price across the board, but that's a cynical realist view :-) To be fully cynical would be to predict that in five years Congress will be calling the wireless providers to testify as to why prices are increasing at such a high rate.

perl4ever 7y ago
What's the reason to expect that? Adding reasonable security doesn't need to add a large and increasing amount to prices, and it doesn't make sense that they need an excuse if they are able to raise prices.
- Fjolsvith 7y ago
  And, the first carrier to effectively enforce no robocalls will receive a massive influx of subscribers, so much so it will force everyone else to get on board.
  - generalpass 7y ago
    > And, the first carrier to effectively enforce no robocalls will receive a massive influx of subscribers, so much so it will force everyone else to get on board. Why didn't they do that already?
    - viraptor 7y ago
      1. You need cooperation to ensure valid callerid (mobile telcos can't do much call authentication on their own). It will take a long time for this be fixed. 2. There was supposedly a confusion around whether they were allowed to block anything. That's gone now.
      - generalpass 7y ago
        > 1. You need cooperation to ensure valid callerid (mobile telcos can't do much call authentication on their own). It will take a long time for this be fixed. > 2. There was supposedly a confusion around whether they were allowed to block anything. That's gone now. Under the current system, it seems 100% of spam gets through that could so easily be filtered. At an old small business I worked at, we received ~10 calls per day from an identical caller ID number robocaller and ~20 calls per day from a robocaller always using a slightly different very long string of characters. Due to the nature of the company, the main line had to be manned by a human being, so even just the time to look at the caller ID, ignore the caller, and then re-focus back on task was at least 15 minutes of lost productivity every day, yet this is about the easiest type of spammy activity to filter. No need to cooperate with anyone but your customers. The second could be interpreted as: regulations caused the proliferation of robocalling, as we can see in the unregulated email space that far more spam is sent yet far less ever makes it through the filters. What problems will the new regulations cause?
  - chipperyman573 7y ago
    Personally I would not put effort into switching just to avoid robocalls. Especially because I'm still paying off a phone.

perl4ever 7y ago

What's the reason to expect that? Adding reasonable security doesn't need to add a large and increasing amount to prices, and it doesn't make sense that they need an excuse if they are able to raise prices.

Fjolsvith 7y ago
And, the first carrier to effectively enforce no robocalls will receive a massive influx of subscribers, so much so it will force everyone else to get on board.
- generalpass 7y ago
  > And, the first carrier to effectively enforce no robocalls will receive a massive influx of subscribers, so much so it will force everyone else to get on board. Why didn't they do that already?
  - viraptor 7y ago
    1. You need cooperation to ensure valid callerid (mobile telcos can't do much call authentication on their own). It will take a long time for this be fixed. 2. There was supposedly a confusion around whether they were allowed to block anything. That's gone now.
    - generalpass 7y ago
      > 1. You need cooperation to ensure valid callerid (mobile telcos can't do much call authentication on their own). It will take a long time for this be fixed. > 2. There was supposedly a confusion around whether they were allowed to block anything. That's gone now. Under the current system, it seems 100% of spam gets through that could so easily be filtered. At an old small business I worked at, we received ~10 calls per day from an identical caller ID number robocaller and ~20 calls per day from a robocaller always using a slightly different very long string of characters. Due to the nature of the company, the main line had to be manned by a human being, so even just the time to look at the caller ID, ignore the caller, and then re-focus back on task was at least 15 minutes of lost productivity every day, yet this is about the easiest type of spammy activity to filter. No need to cooperate with anyone but your customers. The second could be interpreted as: regulations caused the proliferation of robocalling, as we can see in the unregulated email space that far more spam is sent yet far less ever makes it through the filters. What problems will the new regulations cause?
- chipperyman573 7y ago
  Personally I would not put effort into switching just to avoid robocalls. Especially because I'm still paying off a phone.