2 ms·
> In the US the receiver pays so there is no system in place to verify who the caller is. What? That's bonkers. Why on earth should the receiver pay?
by kwhitefoot 5y ago
> In the US the receiver pays so there is no system in place to verify who the caller is.
What? That's bonkers. Why on earth should the receiver pay?
- Monotoko 5y agoI almost forgot about this rule, the receiver and the caller both pay for calls.
- hansel_der 5y agostill bonkers until proven otherwise
- mrkstu 5y agoWell, no one pays for a 'call'- generally in the US inbound/outbound calls are unlimited on a landline and lately on cell lines as well as minutes restrictions have dissipated. Growing up in the US you only had to worry about long distance or 'local long distance,' which, ironically, was often more expensive than regular long distance.
- pards 5y agoThis is the root cause of North America's broken telephony system. $30/month buys you a landline with unlimited outbound calls to both landlines and mobile phones. The system has no facility to meter outbound calls from a landline.