4 ms·

That’s awful but why is the onus on random sys admins around the world to deal with this correctly and not the government hosting the problem entities?

belk 2y ago
That's like asking why don't we expect burglars to not burgle, they won't, but that doesn't mean walling off a whole neighborhood is the solution either.
- tracker1 2y ago
  You haven't seen new construction in many upper end places then... High exterior walls and gated entry. Not that it adds much practically.
AJayWalker 2y ago
I would say because it’s their job to serve their customers, even if they’re abroad? Especially for a travel insurance company.
kjkjadksj 2y ago
Government needs lobbying to act
krsdcbl 2y ago
if the government in question is supportive of said problem entities, they won't "deal" with it If the government in question has free reign on regulating said traffic, it's an avenue for repressions and censorship Otherwise it's a legal matter to seek action against such entities, which is already how it works (... but I'm afraid we're actually mostly talking about "scenario 1 entities" here, which makes it futile to seek action from the very offices that already play a role in making it harder to use existing legal means)
- bobthepanda 2y ago
  And it’s not like we will invade countries to stop spam calls, although China is probably the closest to getting to that stage given that the scam centers in Myanmar seem to be a deciding factor in who they throw their support behind: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/31/myanmar-hands-over-junta-backed-warlords-china-telecoms-scam-case-fraud-trafficking https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/31/myanmar-hands-...
Thorrez 2y ago
It's not a random sysadmin. It's a sysadmin of a travel insurance company.
account42 2y ago
You don't think a travel agency selling policies covering china should have their sysadmins ensure that their customers can actually make use of those policies? They can always explicitly exclude china if they don't want to deal with this but then they wouldn't have gotten GP's money.

belk 2y ago

That's like asking why don't we expect burglars to not burgle, they won't, but that doesn't mean walling off a whole neighborhood is the solution either.

tracker1 2y ago
You haven't seen new construction in many upper end places then... High exterior walls and gated entry. Not that it adds much practically.

AJayWalker 2y ago

I would say because it’s their job to serve their customers, even if they’re abroad? Especially for a travel insurance company.

kjkjadksj 2y ago

Government needs lobbying to act

krsdcbl 2y ago

if the government in question is supportive of said problem entities, they won't "deal" with it If the government in question has free reign on regulating said traffic, it's an avenue for repressions and censorship Otherwise it's a legal matter to seek action against such entities, which is already how it works (... but I'm afraid we're actually mostly talking about "scenario 1 entities" here, which makes it futile to seek action from the very offices that already play a role in making it harder to use existing legal means)

bobthepanda 2y ago
And it’s not like we will invade countries to stop spam calls, although China is probably the closest to getting to that stage given that the scam centers in Myanmar seem to be a deciding factor in who they throw their support behind: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/31/myanmar-hands-over-junta-backed-warlords-china-telecoms-scam-case-fraud-trafficking https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/31/myanmar-hands-...

Thorrez 2y ago

It's not a random sysadmin. It's a sysadmin of a travel insurance company.

account42 2y ago

You don't think a travel agency selling policies covering china should have their sysadmins ensure that their customers can actually make use of those policies? They can always explicitly exclude china if they don't want to deal with this but then they wouldn't have gotten GP's money.