[dead]
A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
231–240 of 248 posts
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs are really good at making backronyms, in fact it might be one of the things they're best at. Try prompting any soulless overlord with "give me a backronym for that relates to ". So maybe it's bad backronyms that demonstrate the soul. I don't know who's idea it was to allow a computer to generate whimsy, that should be interdicted by a fourth law of robotics.
Agreed. Aggressively whimsical chatbots should be in the Geneva convention somewhere.
You agree that LLMs are good at making backronyms yet they still make you feel like a human was involved?
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems that we can’t both get what we want. Why can't you? They don't want to provide info for a credit check, you want human accountability. All that requires is for them to use a debit card for whatever service (prepaid or postpaid). Law enforcement can trace that if needed. No need for credit checks or really any other information directly in the hands of the telco.
This is an argument in favor of KYC requirements for telcos, just that it assumes they can outsource it to banks.
This is neither KYC nor would that be relevant even if it were. The whole point is you could get traceability without a credit check just fine.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I agree that the tech's complex, but the R&D for the stuff I'm talking about has been over and done with for at least thirty five years. Sure, but now have a look at the infrastructure that's physically deployed. Hell in Germany (!), it took until 2020 to finally disable the old and truly horribly aged ISDN infrastructure. When it takes the third-richest nation by GDP that long to replace technology, I am not going…
> When it takes the third-richest nation by GDP that long to replace technology, I am not going to demand better from nations that are a few dozen places below us on the economy rankings. It's odd that you talk about "demanding" nations to foot the bill for upgrades even though I talk about paying "Western" telcos to give it to them, install it, and teach them how to use and maintain it for free. You even quote this…
Your points would come across a lot better if you turned the sarcasm & condescension in your tone down like 15 notches. You're being bizarrely rude & aggressive for a conversation about telcom tech.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
It did in every other country that did it. What's different about this one? If you get a spam call in Europe from Europe, you call the police and the spammer gets located and punished.
Has it? Spam calls frequently don't have a source in the same country as their target victim.
International calls are very expensive. Remember the proposals to stop spam by charging $0.01 to send an email?
I believe India even leaned into this by charging a $1/minute tax on incoming international calls.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your telecom provider stopped carrying unverified calls you'd cancel your service because you'd miss a lot of important calls. If the government required it for all calls though...
> you'd miss a lot of important calls Like what? Who is both a legitimate caller and also trying to call me through one of these unverified legacy services? If their calls stopped going through to a huge chunk of their customers (this is one of the reasons receiving unvalidated calls should be opt in, not opt out), why wouldn't they switch to a verified service?
Your bank is calling you from a verified network, unverified number, because it's one of their employee's phones but they want the caller ID to be from the main switchboard, and they didn't bother to do the extra work with their telecom to make this verify as a correct number.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably, maybe not. Yeah it'd be great if the entire world were prosperous and happy, until then we need a way to make spam calls harder.
Then propose something that doesn't infringe on privacy.
Treat foreign scammers as enemy combatants unless their own country does something about it.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d say to use a payphone if you need to do that, but then my age is showing, as this is not possible anymore.
My country has online anonymous tips online, and pay phones. I don’t think caller id blocking would work with the police, they almost certainly have the ability to unmask your number if they want.
And why would they want to do that? The police relies on anonymous tips.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
My country has online anonymous tips online, and pay phones. I don’t think caller id blocking would work with the police, they almost certainly have the ability to unmask your number if they want.
And why would they want to do that? The police relies on anonymous tips.
Because they almost certainly have fake tip-offs, they’re not going to ignore those.