4 ms·

> But telcos are competitors, and getting them together to agree on how to handle this kind of thing is hard. No one can agree on who should pay for it, and no

> But telcos are competitors, and getting them together to agree on how to handle this kind of thing is hard. No one can agree on who should pay for it, and no one wants to go first. Every telco basically passes the buck. So if you are on Verizon and you get a fake caller ID spam call, Verizon will say "we're just forwarding the call from X, go complain to X". This is why making telcos explicitly, legally, financially responsible for the forwarding garbage calls would fix this really, really fast. The telcos would figure it out, no need to dictate a system.

sbarre 3y ago
Sure, and how do you plan to do that globally, all at once, in a fair manner, and with everyone (regulators and telcos) on the same page? If you think no one has proposed this or tried this before, you'd be incorrect. :-) Don't get me wrong, you're right that would work, but getting it to work is near impossible. Don't forget that every telco would lobby against this, and they are some of the most well-connected enterprises around.
- viraptor 3y ago
  >how do you plan to do that globally, all at once, in a fair manner, and with everyone (regulators and telcos) on the same page? That's the trick, you don't. The US has enough influence that its telcos should be forced to say "from date X international peers that send spam will be disconnected, because we're directly liable for it". There's no serious telco in the world that would say "ok, so our customers won't be able to call the US anymore". It's a bit like the Brussels effect.
- yamtaddle 3y ago
  Applying it only to the ones in US jurisdiction would fix it. Telcos in other important markets would comply with the demands of the US telcos, or get cut off (and lose business to other telcos in those markets that did comply). Regardless of which option the foreign telcos pick, US robocall volume would plummet. Give it a 1-2 year notice before enforcement starts. I would expect little or no disruption by the time the deadline hit.
  - sbarre 3y ago
    Yeah that's just not how it works, sorry. Look I get it, you've imagined a very reductive simple solution to a hugely complex problem and I know it makes sense to you, but you're really drifting into the Dunning-Kruger zone here.. Telcos are hugely, stupidly, complex operations, and all the international inter-connectivity between them even more so. You can do whatever you want of course, but perhaps consider just trusting me when I say if this was as simple and effective as you put it, it would have been done by now.
    - yamtaddle 3y ago
      > You can do whatever you want of course, but perhaps consider just trusting me when I say if this was as simple and effective as you put it, it would have been done by now. > > > Don't forget that every telco would lobby against this, and they are some of the most well-connected enterprises around. Oh, you already covered the reason I think this actually hasn't already been done.

sbarre 3y ago

Sure, and how do you plan to do that globally, all at once, in a fair manner, and with everyone (regulators and telcos) on the same page? If you think no one has proposed this or tried this before, you'd be incorrect. :-) Don't get me wrong, you're right that would work, but getting it to work is near impossible. Don't forget that every telco would lobby against this, and they are some of the most well-connected enterprises around.

viraptor 3y ago
>how do you plan to do that globally, all at once, in a fair manner, and with everyone (regulators and telcos) on the same page? That's the trick, you don't. The US has enough influence that its telcos should be forced to say "from date X international peers that send spam will be disconnected, because we're directly liable for it". There's no serious telco in the world that would say "ok, so our customers won't be able to call the US anymore". It's a bit like the Brussels effect.
yamtaddle 3y ago
Applying it only to the ones in US jurisdiction would fix it. Telcos in other important markets would comply with the demands of the US telcos, or get cut off (and lose business to other telcos in those markets that did comply). Regardless of which option the foreign telcos pick, US robocall volume would plummet. Give it a 1-2 year notice before enforcement starts. I would expect little or no disruption by the time the deadline hit.
- sbarre 3y ago
  Yeah that's just not how it works, sorry. Look I get it, you've imagined a very reductive simple solution to a hugely complex problem and I know it makes sense to you, but you're really drifting into the Dunning-Kruger zone here.. Telcos are hugely, stupidly, complex operations, and all the international inter-connectivity between them even more so. You can do whatever you want of course, but perhaps consider just trusting me when I say if this was as simple and effective as you put it, it would have been done by now.
  - yamtaddle 3y ago
    > You can do whatever you want of course, but perhaps consider just trusting me when I say if this was as simple and effective as you put it, it would have been done by now. > > > Don't forget that every telco would lobby against this, and they are some of the most well-connected enterprises around. Oh, you already covered the reason I think this actually hasn't already been done.