5 ms·

iMessages are tied to Apple serial numbers, making spamming a lot harder. RCS would bring the spam protection to sms levels, i.e. absolutely non-existant

by nikanj 4y ago

capableweb 4y ago
SMS spam can be solved on the operator level instead of forcing devices/software to protect against it. Just because your country has poor telecom operators doesn't mean that applies to the rest of the world. My main phone number is a western Europe number that is added to all my outgoing emails + visible on my public website (and lots of other places) and I almost never receive spam SMSes. Last one was pretty much exactly one year ago.
- preisschild 4y ago
  Funfact: The only spam I got was by my phone operator (Magenta / T-Mobile Austria, the same guys that save passwords in plaintext). Never by someone else though, but im wary where I publish the number.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  The less the network operator does, the better imo. Just let them be dumb data types. Apple and Google will always be vastly superior at keeping out spam.
bastawhiz 4y ago
RCS improves SMS, it doesn't replace iMessage.
throw0101a 4y ago
> iMessages are tied to Apple serial numbers, making spamming a lot harder. Except that you can already get spam "in iMessage" because the iMessage app is also the (default) SMS app on iPhones, and so anyone can send an SMS to your phone number and you'll receive it. > RCS would bring the spam protection to sms levels, i.e. absolutely non-existant You already have no protection against SMS on your iMessage app, so not having protection against RCS spam is no worse than the current situation in that regard, but at least RCS has extra things like group chat which would be nice for cross-platform interoperability.
- jaywalk 4y ago
  > Except that you can already get spam "in iMessage" because the iMessage app is also the (default) SMS app on iPhones The app is Messages, the protocol is iMessage. Don't confuse the two, it's an important distinction. There is practically zero iMessage spam.
  - throw0101a 4y ago
    Nothing you have said invalidates my point: * You can get spam in the app because it displays SMS. * If it implemented RCS you could also get spam in the app too. * But RCS also gives you extra capabilities. How is this a worse situation?
    - jaywalk 4y ago
      The point is that if we're going to finally replace SMS (which we should) then we should replace it with a protocol that's better. Saying "you can get spam on SMS, so who cares if RCS can spam you too?" is ridiculous. Maybe 20 years ago RCS would have been a nice protocol. Nowadays, it's utter trash. We need a proper, interoperable standard that doesn't involve carriers. RCS is not even remotely it.
      - throw0101a 4y ago
        And in the meantime, I—an iPhone owner—should not be able to have group chats with my Android-using friends? "The perfect is the enemy of the good." RCS may not be perfect, but it seems to have nice things over and above SMS. I have no objections to adding more nice things to RCS (or whatever comes after it), but why shouldn't we implement the nice things of RCS in the meantime?
        jaywalk 4y ago
        For all intents and purposes, progress stopped with carriers after MMS came around. Hey, you can send pics and videos now! And group messages! It's good! RCS requires carriers to implement it. We don't need RCS, we need something better. I'm not opposed to stopgaps, but the complexity involved with RCS makes it much more than just a stopgap. Which is why it needs to die.

iMessages are tied to Apple serial numbers, making spamming a lot harder. RCS would bring the spam protection to sms levels, i.e. absolutely non-existant

by nikanj 4y ago

iMessages are tied to Apple serial numbers, making spamming a lot harder. RCS would bring the spam protection to sms levels, i.e. absolutely non-existant

capableweb 4y ago

SMS spam can be solved on the operator level instead of forcing devices/software to protect against it. Just because your country has poor telecom operators doesn't mean that applies to the rest of the world. My main phone number is a western Europe number that is added to all my outgoing emails + visible on my public website (and lots of other places) and I almost never receive spam SMSes. Last one was pretty much exactly one year ago.

preisschild 4y ago
Funfact: The only spam I got was by my phone operator (Magenta / T-Mobile Austria, the same guys that save passwords in plaintext). Never by someone else though, but im wary where I publish the number.
Gigachad 4y ago
The less the network operator does, the better imo. Just let them be dumb data types. Apple and Google will always be vastly superior at keeping out spam.

bastawhiz 4y ago

RCS improves SMS, it doesn't replace iMessage.

throw0101a 4y ago

> iMessages are tied to Apple serial numbers, making spamming a lot harder. Except that you can already get spam "in iMessage" because the iMessage app is also the (default) SMS app on iPhones, and so anyone can send an SMS to your phone number and you'll receive it. > RCS would bring the spam protection to sms levels, i.e. absolutely non-existant You already have no protection against SMS on your iMessage app, so not having protection against RCS spam is no worse than the current situation in that regard, but at least RCS has extra things like group chat which would be nice for cross-platform interoperability.

jaywalk 4y ago
> Except that you can already get spam "in iMessage" because the iMessage app is also the (default) SMS app on iPhones The app is Messages, the protocol is iMessage. Don't confuse the two, it's an important distinction. There is practically zero iMessage spam.
- throw0101a 4y ago
  Nothing you have said invalidates my point: * You can get spam in the app because it displays SMS. * If it implemented RCS you could also get spam in the app too. * But RCS also gives you extra capabilities. How is this a worse situation?
  - jaywalk 4y ago
    The point is that if we're going to finally replace SMS (which we should) then we should replace it with a protocol that's better. Saying "you can get spam on SMS, so who cares if RCS can spam you too?" is ridiculous. Maybe 20 years ago RCS would have been a nice protocol. Nowadays, it's utter trash. We need a proper, interoperable standard that doesn't involve carriers. RCS is not even remotely it.
    - throw0101a 4y ago
      And in the meantime, I—an iPhone owner—should not be able to have group chats with my Android-using friends? "The perfect is the enemy of the good." RCS may not be perfect, but it seems to have nice things over and above SMS. I have no objections to adding more nice things to RCS (or whatever comes after it), but why shouldn't we implement the nice things of RCS in the meantime?
      - jaywalk 4y ago
        For all intents and purposes, progress stopped with carriers after MMS came around. Hey, you can send pics and videos now! And group messages! It's good! RCS requires carriers to implement it. We don't need RCS, we need something better. I'm not opposed to stopgaps, but the complexity involved with RCS makes it much more than just a stopgap. Which is why it needs to die.