3 ms·

I get an e-mail and they show up on a web UI and it is instantaneous more or less. And I don't know why I have to get robocalls because gramma can't operate th

I get an e-mail and they show up on a web UI and it is instantaneous more or less. And I don't know why I have to get robocalls because gramma can't operate the internet. And both my 80+ year old parents can navigate the internet well enough to get lab test results off of websites.

kube-system 4y ago
We should still take into account the usability of public utilities for those who struggle with internet illiteracy or disabilities, regardless of how well your parents can cope. A full 25% of people 65+ don't use the internet in any capacity at all.
- lamontcg 4y ago
  Again, why does this mean that I have to suffer from robocalls, other than cynical justification to defend robocalls in the abstract and continue to inflict them on everyone?
  - kube-system 4y ago
    I suppose if you have enough money, you might be able to convince AT&T or your local lawmaker to cater specifically to your desires. I just doubt that the result of your stated preference is a solution that would be workable enough for the general public. The rest of the world just wants the spam calls to go away but still get calls from their bank/pharmacy/doctor/school/etc. Asking them to choose between the two is not a solution for them, even if it is for you. No law maker is going to propose that. And your carrier already DGAF.
    - lamontcg 4y ago
      If this was an option available to every consumer I suspect uptake would be closer to 50% or more. It would look a lot more like Apple's privacy features than some bespoke setting that I'm the only person in the world who cares about it. And this is probably what you're actually afraid of for some reason.
      - kube-system 4y ago
        I don't doubt that, I'm sure 50% of people will check the option thinking it'll just block spam. The problem is that blocking robocalls entirely would block legitimate calls that they're not aware of until it'll cause pain and frustration down the line. Most people do want fraud notifications from their bank, notifications from their utilities about maintenance, notifications that their kid's school is closed today, a call back from customer service when they ask for one, etc. But nobody would think or even have the ability to know about this when checking your "block all robocalls" option, and now you have created a new problem. If you give people a footgun, they will use it, and they will blame whoever came up with the idea. This is why nobody will do what you are asking.
- philistine 4y ago
  What's the number of people 65+ who don't use a phone in any capacity at all? It's not zero. There will always be people left to the wayside, and we need to act when that number is manageable. 25% might be way too much to legislate against robocalls in all forms, but we need to weigh the loss against the gains; how many seniors would benefit from less scams?
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Of course, there are always exceptions. 25% of a major demographic is not one, though. I know that young people and those working in tech are totally over voice calls, but outside of our bubble, people still use telephones as telephones.

kube-system 4y ago

We should still take into account the usability of public utilities for those who struggle with internet illiteracy or disabilities, regardless of how well your parents can cope. A full 25% of people 65+ don't use the internet in any capacity at all.

lamontcg 4y ago
Again, why does this mean that I have to suffer from robocalls, other than cynical justification to defend robocalls in the abstract and continue to inflict them on everyone?
- kube-system 4y ago
  I suppose if you have enough money, you might be able to convince AT&T or your local lawmaker to cater specifically to your desires. I just doubt that the result of your stated preference is a solution that would be workable enough for the general public. The rest of the world just wants the spam calls to go away but still get calls from their bank/pharmacy/doctor/school/etc. Asking them to choose between the two is not a solution for them, even if it is for you. No law maker is going to propose that. And your carrier already DGAF.
  - lamontcg 4y ago
    If this was an option available to every consumer I suspect uptake would be closer to 50% or more. It would look a lot more like Apple's privacy features than some bespoke setting that I'm the only person in the world who cares about it. And this is probably what you're actually afraid of for some reason.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      I don't doubt that, I'm sure 50% of people will check the option thinking it'll just block spam. The problem is that blocking robocalls entirely would block legitimate calls that they're not aware of until it'll cause pain and frustration down the line. Most people do want fraud notifications from their bank, notifications from their utilities about maintenance, notifications that their kid's school is closed today, a call back from customer service when they ask for one, etc. But nobody would think or even have the ability to know about this when checking your "block all robocalls" option, and now you have created a new problem. If you give people a footgun, they will use it, and they will blame whoever came up with the idea. This is why nobody will do what you are asking.
philistine 4y ago
What's the number of people 65+ who don't use a phone in any capacity at all? It's not zero. There will always be people left to the wayside, and we need to act when that number is manageable. 25% might be way too much to legislate against robocalls in all forms, but we need to weigh the loss against the gains; how many seniors would benefit from less scams?
- kube-system 4y ago
  Of course, there are always exceptions. 25% of a major demographic is not one, though. I know that young people and those working in tech are totally over voice calls, but outside of our bubble, people still use telephones as telephones.