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

US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

thecentersquare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 223 posts

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#51

Post by dymk »

thfuran wrote: post #21
nikanj wrote: post #7

1) Let my filter out all calls not originating on an US/Canadian landline/mobile carrier 2) Yes, I’m happy to lose all calls that come via VoIP. 3) I don’t answer my phone anymore, so I miss those calls anyway 4) I’m very happy to sacrifice 1% of signal for 100% of noise

>Yes, I’m happy to lose all calls that come via VoIP At that point, why not just block everything other than contacts?

Because lots of legitimate callers to me are located in the US, calling from a cell phone or landline, and I don't have them in my contacts.

For instance, contractors coming to do work on the house may be calling from any number of cell phones, or people buying things from Craigslist. For Craigslist, if I were to filter out all the non-US originating calls and texts, would probably result in all the spam being dropped and at no expense to legitimate buyers.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#52

Post by simion314 »

mrandish wrote: post #16
IntrepidWorm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The effective result of GDPR has been less than ideal, but was a step in the right direction. Abolishing it entirely in favor of a vacuum would carry a more weighty cost.

The frustrating part is that the unintended consequences of GDPR were inevitable and clearly foreseeable, yet it was passed into law anyway and now it's incredibly difficult (if not practically impossible) to fix through iterative adjustment. It often seems like politicians and bureaucrats are incapable of seeing the myriad ways their well-intended rules will fail in the real-world. Maybe all legislation should first…

>Meanwhile, GDPR is yet another disruptive annoyance to users, a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams and isn't delivering the benefits promised.

Users can now demand we delete their account and data and we have to do it, this is some work for us but it is good for users.

Also do you forget that popups were a thing before GDPR? Modal for you to subscribe to some shit,monthly Terms of Service changes, notifications to see what new feature was added, to see what new stuff some contact posted were a thing, with GDPR you get a one time popup , you make your choice and you should be done.

In summary

Pros for users:

- transparency, you now know about the 100+ partners and you can decide

- you can ask for your data and ask for it to be deleted

- you will get notified if your private data is lost(mioght be adifferent law for security breaches)

Cons:

- Shit websites use dark patterns and annoy you with a popup one time

No Pros for developers, companies: Cons for devs and companies:

- you need to research the law and find ways to screw the user with dark patterns

- you need to update some old project and remove tracking or implement some popup , implement account deletion, data demands etc

- you need to update your ToS documents, privacy policies

- almost never happens, you remove tracking or configure your ad script to don't track and you don't store private data.

From what I see users EU ones) have a lot to win, I assume if you are not in EU seeing the popup is a bug and would be fix .

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#53

Post by woevdbz »

nus07 wrote: post #13

90% of those scam calls originate from one city in India- Kolkata. It’s a state that has had communist rule for over 30 years and now a government which also runs on anti-corporate agenda. As a result there are no industries and all jobs have dried up in that state of West Bengal. This is the only industry left and the local government and police turn a blind eye since they get kickbacks and is the only source of inc…

There is never a shortage of desperate people living under corrupt regimes. That's the wrong problem to focus on

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#54

Post by enlyth »

cr1895 wrote: post #39
lotsofpulp wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My wide-open Verizon cell-phone number is my least preferred method of contact by far, due to the fact that I cannot trust that unknown numbers are high-value incoming calls. I thought it was a legal requirement for phone network operators to leave phone numbers accessible to all, and hence their inability to effectively fight spam. Otherwise, what would stop the situation from becoming like email, where email is mo…

What does “accessible to all” mean in this context? Why do I in Europe get almost zero spam calls or text while in the US it seems like a plague?

UK here, we get tons of scam robocalls to the point where I leave my phone on airplane mode with Wi-Fi enabled like 95% of the time.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#55

Post by 0xC0ncord »

TameAntelope wrote: post #38
jhot wrote: post #9

This spring I was applying for jobs so I answered my phone for more unknown numbers than usual. This has lead to a huge increase in spam calls that I receive on a daily basis and Google Phone's spam filter isn't strict enough for my liking (not to mention no longer available since I'm running GrapheneOS). If you're an Android and Tasker user you can take matters into your own hands and set Tasker as your call screen…

I dunno how successful this is, but when I get spam called, I do what I can to reach a person and then say, "Put me on the do not call list, please!" and (possibly) as a result, I really don't get as many of these spam calls as it sounds like folks here are getting.

I found that when I started doing this I would just get even more calls, just not the same ones.

I presume this is because these spammers just keep selling other spammers valid phone numbers to add to their own lists.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#56

Post by lotsofpulp »

cr1895 wrote: post #39
lotsofpulp wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My wide-open Verizon cell-phone number is my least preferred method of contact by far, due to the fact that I cannot trust that unknown numbers are high-value incoming calls. I thought it was a legal requirement for phone network operators to leave phone numbers accessible to all, and hence their inability to effectively fight spam. Otherwise, what would stop the situation from becoming like email, where email is mo…

What does “accessible to all” mean in this context? Why do I in Europe get almost zero spam calls or text while in the US it seems like a plague?

Accessible to all meaning the rules for being part of the public switched telephone network:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_switched_telephone_netw...

Again, I am not sure and very well may be wrong, but I think I recall reading or maybe just assuming that the FCC or maybe a global agreement bars individual network operators from not accepting calls from others within the network.

I imagine this gets very hairy due to international jurisdictions and things like caller ID spoofing.

See section on Legal Considerations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caller_ID_spoofing

An interesting conversation that came up in my research about this topic for why a telco might be barred from blocking against certain numbers:

https://www.techdirt.com/2007/03/16/can-a-telco-block-phone-...

I have no idea why European numbers might not get spam calls with the same frequency as American. Maybe the spammers are looking for English speaking people, or Americans are richer or easier to scam?

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#57

Post by flerchin »

nus07 wrote: post #13

90% of those scam calls originate from one city in India- Kolkata. It’s a state that has had communist rule for over 30 years and now a government which also runs on anti-corporate agenda. As a result there are no industries and all jobs have dried up in that state of West Bengal. This is the only industry left and the local government and police turn a blind eye since they get kickbacks and is the only source of inc…

Nothing is true here. The government of West Bengal is BJP. There's tons of industries and jobs there. This is easily Googled.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#58

Post by babypuncher »

btilly wrote: post #3
rightbyte wrote: post #2

The piece is censured in the EU ...

Websites have been given a practical choice between annoying popups and blocking Europe. It makes my life better when they block Europe, and I wish more did. I also wish Europe got rid of the GDPR.

Wouldn't you rather websites just stop invading your privacy? The EU is not to blame for the shitty business practices of these websites.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#60

Post by pdpi »

enlyth wrote: post #54
cr1895 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does “accessible to all” mean in this context? Why do I in Europe get almost zero spam calls or text while in the US it seems like a plague?

UK here, we get tons of scam robocalls to the point where I leave my phone on airplane mode with Wi-Fi enabled like 95% of the time.

You mean you haven’t been in an accident that wasn’t your fault?
Post reply on HN