Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A lot of the time, as with robocalls, the calls originate from some other jurisdiction that either does not have a law against the practice or is simply impractical to try and force compliance from. IIRC, California outlawed robocalls long before most states... but the callers simply moved their call point to Nevada or wherever, effectively mooting the law. Ditto for most regs about cal times, Caller ID, etc.
Yep, it makes it pretty much worthless. I simply don't answer any call I don't recognize and wait for a voicemail notice. Every so often, I go through the list and block the repeated offenders.
I assume most or all of my robocalls and spam texts are not from legitimate companies or people based/located within the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg
Exactly. My cell phone allows me to send calls from people not on my contact list straight to voice mail. I also block all calls, except for about three people on my contact list, between the hours of 8 pm and 9 am.
A smart phone is a wonderful device. Everyone should use one.
Except that iPhone is supposed to send all text messages from someone not in my contacts to a different folder... but doesn't. I don't know how they've gotten around it, but they have (and yes, it does do this for "normal" calls-- like coworkers who aren't yet in my contacts-- but not the spam-texters).
folder... but doesn't. I don't know how they've gotten around it, but they have (and yes, it does do this for "normal" calls-- like coworkers who aren't yet in my contacts-- but not the spam-texters).
Phone connection "handshaking" has zero security. It still lives in a world where there's one and only one player, so security wasn't needed. And now that security hole basically threatens no one, so it's left unpatched. Not that there's any way to patch it...
There is a "professional" grade caller identification technology known as ANI (Automatic Number Identification), but it's never been implemented down to regular subscriber lines. It's used for commercial service and requires (what used to be) costly hardware to process.
CID, again like texting, was patched into an unused corner of standard phone service tech, which is why it's free.
No CID used to have a charge but it is free now because market pressure made everyone offer it because a few did.
Quote:
But if you want ANI, you can have it. Just open up that wallet and ask.
And like you said earlier it USED TO BE costly hardware. If implemented on a network level the cost would not be that much per user and especially if mandated by regulators would become a cost of doing business.
As competitive as the phone market is today if a vendor offered ANI ('true caller ID') to its subscribers they would probably gain a lot of market share. This would force other vendors to provide it to compete.
I assume most or all of my robocalls and spam texts are not from legitimate companies or people based/located within the U.S.
That is why the requirement needs to be put on the carrier that provides it to the subscriber. IF the carrier for the enduser is required to confirm the validity of the source they will refuse to accept calls from soiurces they can't verify. The validation will work its way back to the source. They could still accept calls from questionable sources but would label them as Unknown (or something similar)
Quote:
Except that iPhone is supposed to send all text messages from someone not in my contacts to a different folder... but doesn't. I don't know how they've gotten around it, but they have (and yes, it does do this for "normal" calls-- like coworkers who aren't yet in my contacts-- but not the spam-texters).
that sounds like a problem with either the configuration or the basic software and should be addressed by the vendor/provider depending on who is not processing the call properly.
No CID used to have a charge but it is free now because market pressure made everyone offer it because a few did.
Well, it's not that simple. It was a basically costless addition to the system that could be charged for, for a short while, and for which display units could be leased/sold. Neither lasted very long and universal CID with a $10 box from Radio Shack came about a year down the pike.
Quote:
And like you said earlier it USED TO BE costly hardware. If implemented on a network level the cost would not be that much per user and especially if mandated by regulators would become a cost of doing business.
As competitive as the phone market is today if a vendor offered ANI ('true caller ID') to its subscribers they would probably gain a lot of market share. This would force other vendors to provide it to compete.
And again it's not that simple. You're essentially saying the phone companies should give away a free data pipeline because texting isn't good enough. CID and ANI are different technologies, implemented differently, and ANI is part of high-grade commercial connectivity, not something easily ported to every subscriber. It needs special hardware that is unlikely to be any cheaper than it was when I designed systems around it.
None of this is going to be fixed until we start implementing a truly second-generation phone system, and since what we have is reliable, functional, almost wholly amortized and largely "ain't broke," don't hold your breath.
I'd actually fear a phone system designed with... modern sensibilities in mind. It was bad enough to have to take control of it from kindly ol' Ma Bell.
Caller ID spoofing is legal in most cases but it shouldn't be. When you think of the original idea of caller ID - if advertisers and crooks can do it, there is almost no point in having caller ID.
And telemarketers always do it. They also make it seem like they are calling from my own area code, so I will think it's somebody nearby. But they do this so much, it just tells me it's somebody I don't know.
Are the laws different if someone is calling from outside the US? If so, they need to work on that too.
The govt needs to write new laws about it or they need to enforce the laws more. I have a right to know who is calling me. It does work if a real friend is calling me.
I started reporting spam calls on a site called Report Unwanted Calls. You tell them the number that called, your own number and the time and date. I have no idea if it will help.
Just because a phone rings doesn't mean you have to ANSWER it. (From the way you wrote your post, I can't tell if you ANSWER those calls that seem to be from your area code or not -- I got the impression that you DID.)
I am always astonished by people who answer calls when they don't know who's calling. I sometimes report spam/scam calls to 800notes.com and I can't believe how many people write things like "Called me 5 times in 2 days so I finally answered." WHY would you answer?!!
My default ringtone is SILENT, which means unwanted calls NEVER get through to me -- I don't even hear them. Friends and family members have their own ringtones so I don't miss their calls (unless I want to!).
that sounds like a problem with either the configuration or the basic software and should be addressed by the vendor/provider depending on who is not processing the call properly.
I doubt it. Like I said, it'll filter "regular" texts from real phone numbers, just not the ones that are scammy.
It's my understanding that many decades ago, Ohio Bell proposed giving all phone users the same caller id authentication that 800 numbers have. Unfortunately, it was successfully opposed by an unholy alliance of law enforcement and privacy rights advocates.
I just got a call from my sister. Her cell phone number came up with her name this time. It sure beats looking at the number and wondering "Should I answer this call; I think the number looks familiar?"
I just got a call from my sister. Her cell phone number came up with her name this time. It sure beats looking at the number and wondering "Should I answer this call; I think the number looks familiar?"
CID, especially through cell providers, often doesn't include the name; it's sort of the reverse problem of why it's so easy to spoof.
But if the number is in your contacts list, it will match to that name, of course.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
