Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 184 posts

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#171

Post by shstalwart »

notfromhere wrote: post #148
linuxftw wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies like these are worse than worthless. Just look at any recent major public works project for an example of cost overruns. Here's how we could lower costs for Americans overnight: Allow importation of prescription medicines. Medicare for all will lead to doctors for none. It's really hard to get appointments from places that accept Medicare, it's just not worth the hassle for many doctors to deal with them.

"This study is worthless, but here's my unsubstantiated opinion instead" is a weird argument.

Not really. It's pretty evident at this point that most publications are basically worthless.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#172

Post by al2o3cr »

chapium wrote: post #5

I disagree with having the service providers block the calls. Shouldn't that be up to the consumer? Having your carrier block a call seems like an overreach. I feel this erodes trust in the phone system even more.

99% of the robocalls I see nowadays are using forged caller ID.

Having the provider drop them is analogous to having ISPs drop packets with forged source IPs.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#173

Post by teknopaul »

ghaff wrote: post #122
teknopaul wrote: post #108

Is there any legitimate use case for robocalls at all? Can we not make it illegal punishable with the death sentence? Would any law abidng citizen be affected? Presuming post and sms messages are still allowed. Hypothetically, natch.

Certainly less than there used to be. But there are people who still use phones who don't/won't use SMS and/or may not have good cell reception at home. So reminders about pickups, appointments, flight changes, etc. can't necessarily just assume everyone has SMS on a cell phone.

Ok good pount. I've been living in EU with 100% mobile coverage for so long I forgot. Someone needs to invent sms over landline.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#174

Post by Wheaties466 »

ranie93 wrote: post #123
Wheaties466 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately completely socializing the healthcare system would tank the economy thats why no serious person in washington is pro universal healthcare.

"a new study [0] from the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst finds that single-payer health care will save the US $5.1 trillion over a decade while drastically cutting working-class Americans’ health spending." [1] "Blahous’s paper[2], titled “The Costs of a National Single-Payer Healthcare System,” estimates total national health expenditures. Even though his cost-…

I have no doubt it would save money. But my point was that healthcare companies would no longer be seeing that 5.1 trillion dollars and as a result those companies would lose value and tank the economy.

I just counted 62 Healthcare companies in the S&P 500. 5.1 trillion of lost revenue to those companies would be detrimental to the economy.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#175

Post by kevstev »

xbkingx wrote: post #145
js2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anveo Call Flow. Numbers not on a whitelist get a recording "press 1 to be connected" which repeats three times a couple seconds apart. If they don't press 1 they get sent to voice mail. I also have a blacklist that gets a captcha which says "press 1 to leave a voice mail" and hangs up if they don't.

I've always thought that binding robocallers in a contract that they must accept to speak or leave a message would be fun. Notify the caller that you charge a fee that's your state's maximum small claims award and add that the fee to be waived at your discretion for legit business. The big problem is spoofing and overseas calls, but I'd bet you could nab a few cases. I'm thinking something like, "All unsolicited call…

I actually got so fed up with robocallers, and really people just calling me in general that I looked into setting up a 900 number. If people really want to intrude and take up my time, they can compensate me for it.

Unfortunately, 900 numbers apparently went away in the 2000s. Such a shame, it really would have solved the problem quite efficiently.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#176

Post by fulldecent2 »

There is only one actual solution to this problem.

1. Get the list of phone numbers of everybody working at AT&T (Sony style) 2. Set up robocalls randomly from each of these numbers to each of the other numbers 3. Share this list and your specific howto instructions with three other people

Every other solution fails.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#177

Post by inetknght »

logfromblammo wrote: post #98
politician wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a much better solution that has no chance of seeing the light of day because it keeps your contact information and routing preferences private.

Ernestine strikes again.

I don't understand this reference. Can you elaborate?

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#178

Post by myu701 »

bcheung wrote: post #82
frosted-flakes wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that why I need to enter a passcode? I always thought that was stupid.

If you call from another number you get prompted for the passcode. If you call from your "own" number no passcode is needed.

I'm not certain that's the case. At least since I've had a phone (~8 years), I've always had to enter a VM password.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#179

Post by notfromhere »

shstalwart wrote: post #171
notfromhere wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This study is worthless, but here's my unsubstantiated opinion instead" is a weird argument.

Not really. It's pretty evident at this point that most publications are basically worthless.

You've said the same thing with zero evidence, again.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#180

Post by ranie93 »

Wheaties466 wrote: post #174
ranie93 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"a new study [0] from the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst finds that single-payer health care will save the US $5.1 trillion over a decade while drastically cutting working-class Americans’ health spending." [1] "Blahous’s paper[2], titled “The Costs of a National Single-Payer Healthcare System,” estimates total national health expenditures. Even though his cost-…

I have no doubt it would save money. But my point was that healthcare companies would no longer be seeing that 5.1 trillion dollars and as a result those companies would lose value and tank the economy. I just counted 62 Healthcare companies in the S&P 500. 5.1 trillion of lost revenue to those companies would be detrimental to the economy.

My own back of the napkin calculation:

5.1T / 10 Years = .51T / Year

Current US Stock Market Cap: 153% of 21T = 53T [0][1]

.51T of 53T = 0.9%

For reference; the 2000s bubble had the stock market decrease by 36% over 3 years, the 2008 bubble 45% over 2 years [0].

I'd say "tank the economy" is an overstatement. I'm glad to be shown otherwise _with sources_

[0]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDDM01USA156NWDB

[1]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDP

Post reply on HN