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

91–100 of 184 posts

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#91

Post by duxup »

joshAg wrote: post #80
duxup wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish there w as a party interested in free markets and fostering competition. Rather the GoP whose rhetoric talks about free markets, is really just all about picking winners themselves and legislating profits for their allies.

It's the same thing. In order to create any free market and foster competition, an entity has to decide and then enforce the rules for the market, which allows that entity to pick a winner by the rules it choose to write and then enforce. Plus, in mature markets, fostering competition is antithetical to maintaining the "freeness" of the market, because it requires punishing the "winners" in order to ensure competitor…

I don't buy into the implication that any decision is picking winners the outcomes don't have to be that absolute.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#92

Post by deathanatos »

js2 wrote: post #3

I've been getting this call[1] literally every month for about a year now. It goes straight to voicemail because their dialer can't get past my voice captcha. I tried blocking the caller id but they keep using a different last four numbers. I've now configured the call flow so that this entire exchange now has to pass the captcha to even get to voice mail. What I'm saying is, this proposal can't come soon enough. 1.…

> this will be my final attempt to notify you

It's always the final attempt/notice. Every time. I've received dozens of "final notices" that my 22 year old car's factory warranty (10 yrs, 100k miles) is "about" to expire.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#93

Post by RNCTech »

wpietri wrote: post #76
hedvig wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more I look at things as I age, the more I see market based solutions as only benefiting the supplier and always hurting the consumer.

Honestly, it's not clear to me that most "pro-market" advocates even understand markets. They work best when purchasers have many options, clear information, easy switching, and equal power to sellers. But at least in the US, most of the "pro-market" voices in practice seem to be in favor of oligopoly and the absolute right of businesses to exploit information, wealth, and power asymmetries. It makes me a bit bonkers…

You are one of the few people I have ever seen articulate the problem online. Free marketeers are always conflating a free market with an efficient market. We are aiming for efficient not necessarily free. The two only overlap as you described--basically when all participants have no power and good information. Those circumstances are rarely present.

Another analogy I like to give blind conservatives has to do with referees in their favorite sport. Yes, you don't love referees, but when they are doing a good job and seem to be calling it squarely, you know the overall game is better for have their involvement.

It helps but orthodoxy is hard to break.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#94

Post by rconti »

mehrdadn wrote: post #40
js2 wrote: post #3

I've been getting this call[1] literally every month for about a year now. It goes straight to voicemail because their dialer can't get past my voice captcha. I tried blocking the caller id but they keep using a different last four numbers. I've now configured the call flow so that this entire exchange now has to pass the captcha to even get to voice mail. What I'm saying is, this proposal can't come soon enough. 1.…

For the captcha, do you have any proposal for what to do when the caller is legitimate but doesn't speak English?

If parent only speaks English, I don't see the problem.

As a proposal for wider implementation, you could just select the languages you speak to be valid languages for the captcha. Seems like a feature rather than a problem.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#95

Post by bluGill »

adamch wrote: post #32

I'm curious why robocalls aren't protected by freedom of speech. This is the government censoring small businesses from doing direct marketing. I don't actually believe this argument, but I'm curious what self-described free speech absolutists think.

Fraud, harassment, and robot. You can call all your want.

I do not give robots rights. You - or your representative -can personally call anyone you want to. You can have a robot dial the phone even - but you need to be personally on the line when the call connects, not a millisecond latter.

Harassment is illegal so you won't be calling me more than once. Even without a do not call, you won't call more than once unless you can show the call is different from the last time in a significant way. You won't get out of this by starting a different "shell company" to call me again either.

Fraud is also illegal. This stops most instances right there. Note that it is also fraud to take up excessive time, if I've "won a car" I better get a car with not much more than the legal paperwork.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#96

Post by anthonybsd »

the_pwner224 wrote: post #69
hedvig wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more I look at things as I age, the more I see market based solutions as only benefiting the supplier and always hurting the consumer.

The market works pretty often when it is fair. The cell phone market is not, at least in the US. The providers maintain high costs of switching via contracts and phone leases and radio fragmentation (Verizon/Sprint/TMo/ATT use different frequencies, all but the highest end new phones generally only work on one or two) and carrier locking. If I could just put a different SIM in my phone anytime to switch carriers, the…

Don't forget coverage issues. IPhones have been worldphones (i.e. works on every carrier) for the past 6+ years. Contracts and termination fees have been phased out for most people for 4 and all people for 2 years. Yet in my case despite paying full price for the latest IPhone I'm stuck with Verizon. Why? Because in one key location where I live it's the only carrier with data coverage.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#97

Post by nartz »

deathanatos wrote: post #92
js2 wrote: post #3

I've been getting this call[1] literally every month for about a year now. It goes straight to voicemail because their dialer can't get past my voice captcha. I tried blocking the caller id but they keep using a different last four numbers. I've now configured the call flow so that this entire exchange now has to pass the captcha to even get to voice mail. What I'm saying is, this proposal can't come soon enough. 1.…

> this will be my final attempt to notify you It's always the final attempt/notice. Every time. I've received dozens of "final notices" that my 22 year old car's factory warranty (10 yrs, 100k miles) is "about" to expire.

Get this one all the time. I did have a car warranty that expired (a while ago), so I always wondered if its just a stock message, or if someone actually sold the data of my car warranty.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#98

Post by logfromblammo »

politician wrote: post #85
logfromblammo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Network contacts device with a request for synchronous voice communication, including identifying information from the originating party. 2. Device consults its own program, controlled by the subscriber-recipient, and responds with a signal to the network regarding the disposition of the call. 3. The network will then relay that signal to the originator, who may be required to respond one or more times before any…

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.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#99

Post by groovybits »

nartz wrote: post #97
deathanatos wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this will be my final attempt to notify you It's always the final attempt/notice. Every time. I've received dozens of "final notices" that my 22 year old car's factory warranty (10 yrs, 100k miles) is "about" to expire.

Get this one all the time. I did have a car warranty that expired (a while ago), so I always wondered if its just a stock message, or if someone actually sold the data of my car warranty.

In a similar vein: warnings for your 'last chance' to apply for house insurance. As someone who likes to keep physical mail to a minimum, all of the above are rather annoying.

Re: FCC Chairman Proposes Robocall Blocking by Default

#100

Post by howard941 »

wavefunction wrote: post #26
bcheung wrote: post #24

How will this be implemented from a technology and policy perspective? The idea is one I am definitely supportive of. My phone rarely comes out of DnD now because of the robocallers. But the devil is in the details. Forcing people to add someone to their contact list before being able to receive calls from them will probably be a bit draconian. Another possible solution would be that someone can request access to cal…

I'd settle for non-spoofable CallerID

Like ANI? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number_identificatio...
Post reply on HN