241–250 of 432 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A perfectly valid construction. My science teacher once insisted rivers couldn't flow north because on a globe, north is up. So, yeah, education is a bit of a mixed bag.
> My science teacher once insisted rivers couldn't flow north because on a globe, north is up. Did he just not consider, say, the Nile?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The phone company has a source number for calls coming from outside their system for billing purposes. I want that number. Edit: At a minimum, an out of system call should display what system / exchange it originates from. That at least helps solve neighbor spoofing.
Yeah it's bonkers they allow this still. No good actor ISP is going to knowingly let improperly sourced traffic transit networks...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack The problem here is that the origin can be spoofed. You are imagining a system where a telco like T-Mobile connects the caller directly to you. That's not how it works. The connection chain could look like this. bad caller 111-1111 -> A -> B -> C -> T-Mobile -> you 999-9999 All T-Mobile knows is that 111-1111 is calling 999-9999…
So then T-Mob calls the NOC at C. Tells them to get this stopped and they have 24 hours, or they'll depeer. 6 hour later, C's NOC calls B's NOC, saying to knock it off, and they have 18 hours or they're getting booted. 6 hours later, B's NOC calls A's NOC, saying to knock it off, and they have 12 hours to figure it out or they're getting booted. In under 12 more hours, A cuts off 111-1111. If peeringDB is to be belie…
I worked in this business briefly, the economics are fascinating. Your average mom and pop restaurant is very likely buying its VoIP transit from an entity like "B" in this story.
I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…
Yup. It’s amusing to see people think there is some hard technical problem here. Tie the problem of robocalls to the telcos losing money, and this problem will solve itself in months.
I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…
Isn't modern phone infrastructure all over IP for the backbone, anyway? I was under the impression that it was only the line to the house that was analog.
I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…
I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…
What's wrong with relying on your terminal device to decide whether to ring the call? That's the definition of a smartphone . In fact, Android has native spam blocking: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brookecrothers/2018/12/30/in-20... but it's quite reasonable for you to install whatever filtering app you choose. If you don't feel safe installing software on your phone, that's a problem with your phone OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And then they'll add on a monthly robocall prevention fee to your bill. :P
They're testing the waters for that already, https://www.zdnet.com/article/at-t-to-auto-block-fraud-roboc...
I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…
> because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack The problem here is that the origin can be spoofed. You are imagining a system where a telco like T-Mobile connects the caller directly to you. That's not how it works. The connection chain could look like this. bad caller 111-1111 -> A -> B -> C -> T-Mobile -> you 999-9999 All T-Mobile knows is that 111-1111 is calling 999-9999…
It's very hard to reform the whole system, but you have to start somewhere and this could be how.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the US, where money is speech and one dollar is one vote. Individual consumers don't have enough money to matter compared to BigCorp.
Clinton outspent Trump nearly 2:1 in the last election ($768m, $398m respectively) and still lost. Yes she won the popular vote by about 3m votes but that’s hardly a dollar to vote ratio. People vote their emotions, and emotions are surprisingly difficult to buy.
When its plastered all over TV. We just had elections days ago - obviously turnout is even worse than year than last where the national average was 50%. But nobody was voting emotionally there because largely you weren't voting for people or even positions you knew or recognized. You voted for the names you were familiar with - put in your head by advertising. Because there isn't a large central institution around your county commissioner election where media will give all candidates ample airtime to actually know who they are.
I remember last year my district had a major election for the federal house - I live in PA and due to redistricting by the state supereme court we were having an election without an incumbent. Only 3,000-25,000 people in a district of 250,000 adults watched their public TV debate. The winner was just the guy that outspent his opponent by an order of magnitude via local companies subsidizing his campaign with 10 million bucks.