5 ms·
> whatever "why don't you just" you're about to reply with, I love that you added this. So many armchair experts with brilliant solutions to problems they know
by rco8786 5y ago
> whatever "why don't you just" you're about to reply with,
I love that you added this. So many armchair experts with brilliant solutions to problems they know nothing about.
- Nowado 5y ago'I could fix it over a weekend' is pretty much the motto of this page.
- Grimburger 5y agoThese two smug all-knowing above comments aside, how do you actually get charged money for dialling numbers that don't exist?
- Operyl 5y agoCorrupt carriers in other countries splitting the money, etc.
- Grimburger 5y agoSo stop dialling out to these few places? Otherwise it's a cost of doing business if you insist on keeping at it knowing full well what happens.
- Operyl 5y agoThis is what most people do, at my employment we restricted it to US/Canada with a reach out for other countries.
- noAnswer 5y agoThey do usually exist. They answer immediately and than play the "it is ringing"-sound forever. (Some SIP providers allow you to disallow expensive numbers to be called and/or state the minute costs before the call starts (giving you time to hang up.))
- aaaaaaaaata 5y agoCountries are demanding access to private citizen encrypted messages, but can't legislate away the basic 1980s phone scam. Wonder why their priorities are so skewed.
- Grimburger 5y ago> They answer immediately and than play the "it is ringing"-sound forever. Except that clearly is a number which exists? One that answers, GP isn't fighting 1980's phreakers with a bluebox, they are using Twilio, Signalwire, etc to make automated verification calls/sms for a very large company as far as I understood it. The call being answered is baked entirely into your programmatic logic. Unless I'm missing some niche telco semantics or lingo here? Or they are rolling their own? To embrace the "don't question it, you don't understand" narrative, I'm actually quite stunned someone would let this go on for such a long time, if this is corruption, crime or some other sort of telecom fraud aided and abetted by foreign governments/companies why not just turn off the tap and ban the country code if it was such a cost sink? Why not use some of the many alternative (and significantly more secure) verification methods for your customers?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- gavinhenry 5y agoThe project page?
- Nowado 5y agoThe HN page.
- gavinhenry 5y ago:-D
- d0mine 5y agoIt is arrogant to assume that if you haven't found a solution then nobody will. (trust expert when they say something can be done, ignore them if they say it can't be done, just do it)
- cortesoft 5y agoIt is also arrogant to assume you can find a solution in a few minutes after reading a HN comment when an entire team couldn’t think of one in years.
- Grimburger 5y ago> an entire team couldn’t think of one in years There's literally no other solution for customer verification other than an automated phone call into third world countries with corrupt telcos? We clearly aren't talking about the engineering team here.
- cortesoft 5y agoThere are clearly other constraints involved that we don’t know.
- rco8786 5y agoNobody is assuming that. The arrogance is when people with no knowledge of the people, systems, or problem at hand jump in as though they’re experts. It happens all the time here (hell I’m guilty myself)