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

The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 432 posts

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#291

Post by Karunamon »

x13 wrote: post #275
Karunamon wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sssssorta. The cool thing is you need no familiarity with the SIP protocol. What you'd do is port your cell number to the provider, get a new cell number, and then set up a call flow that answers the number, eventually forwarding to your real phone after the caller has a chance to record their name and hit a key.

What about returning a call? do you dial your sip number and input the number you want to be connected to? I think calling folks back from a number different than what they dialed to reach me.. might defeat the purpose. Thanks for sharing your setup.

That is an option - the other thing you can do is get a Softphone app on your phone and log into the service with it. They work with text messages as well.

That is the one downside of this is now having two numbers to deal with. I was getting so many garbage calls though, the trade off has been worth it.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#292

Post by tbabb »

ikeboy wrote: post #114

The solution is simple, and I've proposed it before. If someone used spoofing to break the law, there's strict liability for some kind of statutory damages, say $100, applicable to everyone across the chain. I.e. I can sue Verizon for sending the call to my phone, Verizon can sue whoever connected to their network, they can sue whoever spoofed on their network, etc. This will quickly lead to networks requiring proof…

So carriers are responsible for policing the content of calls?

I can think of no more blatant way to ruin net neutrality.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#293

Post by throwaway4120 »

codeplea wrote: post #224
throwaway56564 wrote: post #38

Twilio, when do they become accountable for enabling robocallers.

I've been a Twilio customer for a long time. They don't allow you to spoof caller ID. You can only set outgoing caller ID to a real number that you own or have access to.

How does not allowing spoofing caller ID help defeat robocallers.

People use twilio to robocall individuals from their same area code. No “spoofing” caller ID is needed. Twilio makes is stupid simple for robocallers and I can speak with authority on this matter hence why this is a throwaway account.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#294

Post by ikeboy »

tbabb wrote: post #292
ikeboy wrote: post #114

The solution is simple, and I've proposed it before. If someone used spoofing to break the law, there's strict liability for some kind of statutory damages, say $100, applicable to everyone across the chain. I.e. I can sue Verizon for sending the call to my phone, Verizon can sue whoever connected to their network, they can sue whoever spoofed on their network, etc. This will quickly lead to networks requiring proof…

So carriers are responsible for policing the content of calls? I can think of no more blatant way to ruin net neutrality.

Not the content. The caller ID.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#295

Post by pandaman »

Semaphor wrote: post #182
pixl97 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know what an Indian call center is? A huge amount of international phone traffic comes to the US every day

Hm, guess that would be the pro/con with us not being able to easily set up virtual numbers here. But otoh I wonder why the UK doesn’t seem to suffer in the same way. Same lack of easy virtual numbers?

I might be mistaken but are not mobile numbers in the UK in their special area code/exchange so calling them costs extra? Calling landlines does not seem to be profitable anymore (my home landline gets almost 0 calls now, my work phone gets maybe 3-4 calls a week) so the scammers only want to call mobile numbers and in the US it's not different from calling a landline while it might cost extra in the UK.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#296

Post by jlarocco »

lukebuehler wrote: post #274

A lot of people point out that telecom companies should do something but aren't because it's lucrative for them or too expensive to fix. Are telecom companies not realizing how much they are hurting themselves with this in the long term? People will stop using phone numbers altogether. Using the phone has become such a pain, at least in the US, that whenever I can, I used different ways of communicating. WhatsApp, iM…

Is there a reason the FCC can't fine the telecoms for allowing the illegal calls? My guess is they'd fix the problem pretty quick.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#297

Post by [deleted] »

ikeboy wrote: post #260
michaelt wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, my $20 prepaid cell phone would only have one number, and would be blocked after my friends report the robocalls. But whence comes the $1000 my friends are now owed, for the calls made before their complaints were filed?

I specified the fine would be for spoofing that broke the laws. That would eliminate spoofing, which would make it much easier to identify where the bad calls are actually coming from.

[deleted]

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#299

Post by adrr »

jlarocco wrote: post #296
lukebuehler wrote: post #274

A lot of people point out that telecom companies should do something but aren't because it's lucrative for them or too expensive to fix. Are telecom companies not realizing how much they are hurting themselves with this in the long term? People will stop using phone numbers altogether. Using the phone has become such a pain, at least in the US, that whenever I can, I used different ways of communicating. WhatsApp, iM…

Is there a reason the FCC can't fine the telecoms for allowing the illegal calls? My guess is they'd fix the problem pretty quick.

They could easily fine the carrier that is interconnecting the robo callers. The telecom lobby doesn’t want to fix the issues since they make money from robo callers and also selling services to block the robo callers.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#300

Post by duahncjak »

busyant wrote: post #253
elif wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(US) Politicians already gave themselves a loophole into unlimited unsolicited spam. So cleaning up other spammers would strengthen the quality of their spam channel, as consumers would be less jaded/more likely to pick up.

My non-tech savvy 82yo father has made a similar point to me: all these garbage phone calls that I get every day make me not trust ANY phone call that I receive. You'd think this would upset legitimate businesses that need to make calls.

Business would be a bit better if there weren’t robocalls. But free-rider/coordination challenges make it difficult for the diffuse category of all businesses to group together and fight it.
Post reply on HN