Slashdot Mirror


Cell Phone Directory Coming Soon

applemasker writes "According to this story on Yahoo News via the L.A. Times, an upcoming cell phone directory which supposedly includes 75% of all cell users is in the works. Some people are already receiving cell phone spam and telemarketing calls. Worse yet, unless you opt-out at the beginning of your contract, some carriers such as T-Mobile can gladly hand over your info (though the article says that T-Mobile is changing the contract now). Some good news though, Verizon Wireless has said that it will not share its customer lists. Still, maybe it's time to submit your cell number to the Do Not Call List if you haven't done so already." We had a related story last year.

219 comments

  1. Do Not Call List by davidmcn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just assumed the Do Not Call list was to apply to cell phones too, so when it came time to enroll, every number in my household, cell and not, became a "Do Not Call" number.

    --
    Memories become legend, Legend fades to myth, and even myth is forgotten by the time that age comes again.-Robert Jordan
    1. Re:Do Not Call List by baudilus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Do Not Call list could not have applied to cell phones because previously, telemarketers were barred from calling any phone where the receiver of the call could be charged for it (i.e. cell phone minutes). I guess that law has changed since inception, or otherwise, the cell phone companies have found a way to make incoming telemarketer calls "free."

      Conversely (and perhaps slightly O/T), I've always been suspicious of the Do Not Call list, because if you consider it, on one hand it's like a free list that unscrupulous telemarketers can get and spam, and on the other hand, the "gub-mint" can link you email address to your phone number. (We can't call but we can sure spam that email account!) Of course you can get around it by using a quick free e-mail (like yahoo or hotmail) but who do you know outside of us savvy /.'ers, who probably have "junk" accounts anyway, would go through the trouble of setting one up just for this?

    2. Re:Do Not Call List by strictnein · · Score: 2, Informative

      one hand it's like a free list that unscrupulous telemarketers can get and spam

      I believe there is a charge for the list, and they have to get the list quarterly.

      Strangely enough, the Direct Marketing Association feels that it is necessary to charge people $5 to help get them off the list if they do it online! What a scam. They don't link to the official site at all.

    3. Re:Do Not Call List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like how the phone companies have gotten around the do not call list. They start the call with, "We would like to thank you for paying your bill on time" then launch into the same old advertising.

    4. Re:Do Not Call List by Senior+Frac · · Score: 2, Informative

      https://www.donotcall.gov/FAQ/FAQConsumersNew.aspx

      Q: Can I register my cell phone number?
      A: Yes.

      This was true when the list was first started as well.

    5. Re:Do Not Call List by ericspinder · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I still get sales calls on phone sometimes, they say that they are "surveys" and once an extermination service called just "because someone in the area needed their service". Those kind of calls are allowed by the DNC list. Trust me you will see more and more of them and with cell phone number avaiable, they might be hitting them hard. Right now telemarketers have a good list of people who will take the time to listen, but cell phones are a fresh market. Heck there are many teenagers and young adult who only use cell phones, they will want to tap that market. If the value of this fresh market is judged by the telemarketers to be greater than the costs (fines), we'll be seeing bunches of calls on our once private numbers, at least until it levels out.

      I still use the same old line that I used before the DNC list "I do not ever, ever respond in any way to unsolisited telephone calls of any type. Please take me off your list and I hope that you have a nice day ".

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    6. Re:Do Not Call List by T-Ranger · · Score: 1
      Security is like an onion. Layers and layers.

      Get on the national DNC list(s). Get on any local ones. If/When you get calls anyway, get on their company specific list. Put your dog on the list.

    7. Re:Do Not Call List by kookbox · · Score: 1

      Funny, when I signed up for the Do Not Call list, it was by phone number, not by household.

    8. Re:Do Not Call List by Dunarie · · Score: 1

      Any company that you have a, uh... 'relationship' with, can telemarket you legally, unless you tell them not to.

    9. Re:Do Not Call List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I just assumed the Do Not Call list was to apply to cell phones too, so when it came time to enroll, every number in my household, cell and not, became a "Do Not Call" number.

      Yes, that's how it is in most countries of the world (such as, for example in Britain or many other European countries).

      The US however, are once more for big business (the telemarketers) and anti-people, and word their laws in such a way that you need a different Do Not Call list per different media!

    10. Re:Do Not Call List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I use dial-up or DSL to connect to the Internet, could the spam I receive in my inbox be considered a telemarketer and thus the rules with the DNC list apply?

    11. Re:Do Not Call List by gitana · · Score: 1

      A good free tool for having unlimited throw away email addresses is spamgourmet

    12. Re:Do Not Call List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I registered my home, cell, and work cell on the DoNotCall list before October of last year. I was in the process of buying a house, and moved in in December. I got a new home number due to the move crossing city lines. I registered the new number on the DoNotCall list. About a month later I started getting telemarketers calling. I never picked up, just let the caller ID and answering maching do the work. At first they called once a week, then twice a week. Then every night. About two weeks before my "three months" was up they were calling two to three times a day 7 days a week. Three months to the day of my registration on the DoNotCall list, the calls stopped. They are using the list to get verified numbers. I wish I had answered the phone once and got their information. I have never recieved SPAM as a result.

    13. Re:Do Not Call List by aaronl · · Score: 1

      It costs per area code, per year. If you purchase more area codes, the "year" you have it started from the date of your first area code's purchase. The only leeway they give is that if you purchase another area code more than six months after your first, it costs 15$ instead of 25$. Getting the full US list costs thousands of dollars per year.

      25$ per area code after first five
      15$ per area code after six months from 1st purchase
      7,375$ max per year for full US listing

    14. Re:Do Not Call List by BlueCup · · Score: 1

      I still use the same old line that I used before the DNC list "I do not ever, ever respond in any way to unsolisited telephone calls of any type. Please take me off your list and I hope that you have a nice day ".

      I worked for a while as a telepoller (Gallup Organization) doing surveys for CNN and a bunch of other companies (Wal-Mart, Bank of America, etc) And I just want to say that you were one of my favorite people. (Except for people that did the survey of course) because I didn't want to bug people that didnt want to be bugged (but I did feel that the polls, for the most part, were important) When someone says something like "Oh I'm busy" "The person who does that isn't here right now" "Can I call you back later at your house while you're eating?" I was required to mark as a soft refusal... what this did was ensure that this person would be called atleast once more, sometimes more than once. But if someone asked me to take them off of the list, they were never called at that number again (assuming it was marked correctly), and that was a nice feeling.

      Thanks for adding the nice day part too =D

      --
      WANNAWIKI Wannawiki WannaWiki WANNAWIKI!
    15. Re:Do Not Call List by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      The DNC does NOT allow for 'survey' calls. The only calls allowed are 1. Companies that have a pre-existing relationship with you, such as your cable company. 2. Political ads 3. Non-profits. I had a call from a non-profi the other day, that was not really non-profit. My State's DNC complaint was rejected but they forwarded the info to the State's Charitable Business section for review.

    16. Re:Do Not Call List by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      The DNC does NOT allow for 'survey' calls.

      Actually, it does. I work for a survey center and the do not call list does not apply to us. The key thing is that you have to actually NOT be selling or advertising anything. Most of the studies at the call center I work for are paid for by the government (usually the Department of Health and Family Services or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), so we're for sure not breaking the laws relating to the do not call list.

      And it's not just my state, either, BRFSS is a telephone survey (about health issues) conducted in all 50 states (even Puerto Rico and Guam) for the DHFS and CDC.

    17. Re:Do Not Call List by Erasmus+Darwin · · Score: 1
      "Please take me off your list"

      I've heard that it's better to say "please put me on your 'do not call' list", instead. Asking to be removed from the company's calling list may result in your number being added back to the database later while being explicitly added to the company's own DNC list will keep them from calling you for as long as they're required to keep the entry.

    18. Re:Do Not Call List by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      The Do Not Call list could not have applied to cell phones because previously, telemarketers were barred from calling any phone where the receiver of the call could be charged for it (i.e. cell phone minutes). I guess that law has changed since inception, or otherwise, the cell phone companies have found a way to make incoming telemarketer calls "free."

      I don't think the The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (quoted here) has been repealed or amended to remove the prohibition on calling numbers where the consumer would pay for the call. However, that prohibition only restricts *autodialers*, not humans. How is someone supposed to prove without a subpoena that this has occurred?

      Plus, very, very few people actually use the private right-of-action supported by that statute, so the telemarketers who do break the law get away with it. My workplace receives tons of unsolicited faxed advertisements, but the company's legal department doesn't want to pursue them and says the equivalent of "Just Hit Delete".

    19. Re:Do Not Call List by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      I've heard that it's better to say "please put me on your 'do not call' list", instead. Asking to be removed from the company's calling list may result in your number being added back to the database later while being explicitly added to the company's own DNC list will keep them from calling you for as long as they're required to keep the entry.

      I believe you are correct. Although IANAL, asking to be removed from their list does not seem equivalent to asking them to not call again. The law, the FTC regulations regarding telemarketing, and (I believe) the FCC regulations regarding use of telephone equipment usually refer to "do not call" requests, not "remove from list" requests, so that would seem to be the prudent approach.

      Keep logs. On the second violation, you can sue them for $500 per violation based on 47 USC 227, with treble damages ($1500) per violation if you can show they knowingly and willfully violated the statute.

      Don't let them claim your DNC request will take X number of days to take, either. IIRC, the law and the supporting regulations state that they must honor your request from the time of the request. I argued with a telemarketing supervisor for a number of minutes about this on one occasion. Curiously, the copy of their Do Not Call procedures they sent me at my request (another legal right you have) DID NOT support that claim.

    20. Re:Do Not Call List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of the time I got called by someone claiming to be from Gallup. I thought, "Oh, sure you are," and proceeded to get a number to contact to verify. After checking to see that the number did indeed belong to Gallup, and that the poll was legit, the poller called back. He asked one question, and bam, I wasn't in the target audience.

  2. Expensive by thgreatoz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought telemarketing to a cell phone was illegal, due to the fact that you are charged for both incoming and outgoing calls on a cell phone. As I understood it, it's similar to the anti-junk fax laws, which were put in place because you pay for the ink and paper that is wasted.

    --
    When their numbers dwindled from 50 to 8, the dwarves began to suspect Hungry.
    1. Re:Expensive by cavemanf16 · · Score: 0, Troll

      You're right, but this is Slashdot where FUD is decried when it relates to Linux, but reigns supreme when posted to the front page by an "editor."

    2. Re:Expensive by TheBeardIsRed · · Score: 5, Informative

      it is, read more here: How To Make A Telemarketer Cry (or, Suing Bozos for Fun & Profit) - http://www.panix.com/~eck/telemarket.html

    3. Re:Expensive by periol · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, and I'm sure you know just how well the "anti-junk fax laws" work. Or maybe you don't have one of them fax machines.

    4. Re:Expensive by MrBlackBand · · Score: 1
      ...FUD is decried when it relates to Linux, but reigns supreme when posted to the front page by an "editor."

      What FUD are you talking about? People do get telemarketing calls on their cell phones. So what's your problem?

      --
      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
    5. Re:Expensive by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What if they call you on nights or weekends when you happen to have free minutes? I bet the law doesn't consider that, but a telemarketer could make a good argument in court with that defense...

    6. Re:Expensive by thedillybar · · Score: 1

      The fact that it costs my company money hasn't stopped people from spamming the hell out of me. Why should it stop people from telemarketing to our cell phones?

    7. Re:Expensive by hinterwaeldler · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What? You actually have to pay for incoming calls on cell phones in the US? Poor bastards :-(

    8. Re:Expensive by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      it's similar to the anti-junk fax laws, which were put in place because you pay for the ink and paper that is wasted.

      Its a damn good thing(tm) that bandwidth, disk storage, and my time are not wasted on other unwanted marketing ploys.

    9. Re:Expensive by thgreatoz · · Score: 1

      Good point.

      --
      When their numbers dwindled from 50 to 8, the dwarves began to suspect Hungry.
    10. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least Simoniker and CowboyNeal do a pretty good job.

    11. Re:Expensive by Zed2K · · Score: 1

      But you are still paying for the priviledge of having unlimited nights/weekends. And not everyone gets that kind of plan either.

    12. Re:Expensive by ForestGrump · · Score: 1

      what if im on the 10 dollar/mo prepaid plan and don't get "free mins"?

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    13. Re:Expensive by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      Yes, but there's really no way for them to know if you have a plan that has free nights and weekends.

      Unless, of course, the phone company gives them your number AND what kind of plan you have, which would be really, really scummy.

    14. Re:Expensive by MrBlackBand · · Score: 1
      Okay, I understand now. Sorry if I seemed to over react a bit. Still, I gotta do some commenting.

      ...but I simply can't stand michael's version of "journalism."

      Who says that it's journalism? It's not journalism to post news stories by other people on a popular website. Slashdot is not a place for "journalism". It's a place were you can go and see headlines that appeal to nerds, and then comment on them as you see fit. There's nothing that says the "editors" have to be unbiased or not insert snarky comments. To me, that's all a part of the fun.

      --
      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
    15. Re:Expensive by pavon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The fact that it costs my company money hasn't stopped people from spamming the hell out of me. Why should it stop people from telemarketing to our cell phones?

      1) Telemarketing cell phones is definately illegal while the spam laws are worthless.
      2) Telemarketers can be easily traced and caught while spammers cannot.

      I have gotten two telemarketing calls on my cell phone (both of which were quasi-legitimate purchase "follow-up" calls) and both times when I told them I was on a cell phone they immediately appologized, voluntarily put me on their DNC list and hung up. That is what accountability gets you, and it doesn't exist for email.

    16. Re:Expensive by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1

      In the US, you usally pay for all minutes your phone is active. Incoming and Outgoing.

    17. Re:Expensive by JuggleGeek · · Score: 1
      The law says that unsolicited telemarketing to cell phones is illegal. The law doesn't say it's illegal only if you are paying for minutes, it just says it's illegal. The telemarketer can argue 'till he's blue in the face, and that won't change the law.

      At the same time, like spammers, many telemarketers don't care about the law.

      I never put my cell phone on the national (or state) Do Not Call list, because I'm not receiving telemarketing calls to it anyway. I've had 2-3 since I've had it, and I've had it for 4-5 years, I think. If I started receiving telespam, I'd add it to the DNC list.

    18. Re:Expensive by rwiedower · · Score: 5, Informative

      And here's the official FCC link to the TCPA which details that it is illegal to call not only a cell phone, but also hospitals or any service where someone is charged for the call. Read. Learn. Fight back.

    19. Re:Expensive by Spellbinder · · Score: 0, Redundant

      what the fuck???? you pay for incoming calls???
      here they stopped that many years ago
      the only situation you pay for incoming calls is if you are abroad with your cell phone
      i think you need better consumerism laws or something

      --


      stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
    20. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple solution: Give them my phone-number! Its in europe, and I'll gladly listen to them pour money out the window!

    21. Re:Expensive by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      My work still gets junk faxes so I'm pretty sure that they won't mind calling your cell phones once they buy the list from the carriers.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    22. Re:Expensive by PW2 · · Score: 1

      I have been cell phone SPAMed during the day. (not free) That cell number is in the DNCL.

    23. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The telemarketers want to get that regulation changed. Their argument is that they are loosing so much money due to the do not call lists, that they have to make it up somewhere so they should be allowd to annoy us when we are driving, shopping, whatever.

    24. Re:Expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how many people try to pull the "But slashdot isn't a news site!" argument

      Until its motto is changed from "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" motto." to "News for liberals, stuff to whine about", I'll continue to join the crowd complaining at editors like michael who post articles filled with bias and low on facts.

    25. Re:Expensive by Hallow · · Score: 1

      Ok. It's illegal for them to call if you have to pay for the inbound call. But I don't think there's a price limit. So could someone like Vonage step up to the plate and charge .0000000000000000001 cents per incoming call (effectively nothing, but legally something? Would we then be allowed to sue? $500/violation sounds nice to me.

    26. Re:Expensive by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 1

      The law says that unsolicited telemarketing to cell phones is illegal. The law doesn't say it's illegal only if you are paying for minutes, it just says it's illegal. The telemarketer can argue 'till he's blue in the face, and that won't change the law.

      Good point. Well it's good for once to have a law written for the protection of the consumer, rather than the business.

    27. Re:Expensive by Patik · · Score: 1
      What if they call you on nights or weekends when you happen to have free minutes?
      What about those of us who have prepaid plans or some other plan without any free time? I have Virgin Mobile, but since they use Sprint my phone number has the same first three digits as Sprint customers in my area, so it'll be hard to tell what carrier I'm really using.
    28. Re:Expensive by aceat64 · · Score: 1

      Actually they work very well, at our office we get maybe 2 junk faxes a month, and it's going down.

    29. Re:Expensive by periol · · Score: 1

      I'm not at all surprised you're getting fewer faxes. But the chances are really good that has nothing to do with "laws". Rather, it's probably an indication of... 1. How little business they generate 2. Spam 3. The decline of fax machines

    30. Re:Expensive by Herschel+Cohen · · Score: 1

      RE:FUD -Maybe.

      Nonetheless, I have received marketing calls with the originating number blocked to my cell phone. Moreover, my cell is a company phone and offically billed as such.

      When the blockhead got thru he kept repeating he was not a company - whereas I kept saying I was and did not want any unsolicited calls.

      Regarding faxes: on my last assignment a very large firm was receiving unwanted faxes. Some could be easily classed as spam. There I saw nothing done to stop the practice. Hence, while illegal, unwanted faxes are sent without consequence.

      So even though these calls should not be made it probably will not stop a significant fraction from pursuing this opportunity to reach their under served clientele.

    31. Re:Expensive by elcanon · · Score: 1

      I'm *happy* to continue paying for incoming calls on my mobile if it means not having to deal with telemarketing and the other crap.

    32. Re:Expensive by Etobian · · Score: 1

      > As I understood it, it's similar to the anti-junk fax laws, which were put in place because you pay for the ink and paper that is wasted.

      I haven't received an illegal junk fax in ages. Yeah, right.

    33. Re:Expensive by RabbiRob · · Score: 1

      You do have to pay for the call right now. Unless the first incoming minute is free (which is becoming more and more infrequent), one second of an inbound call deducts a full minute from your prepaid minutes. You paid for that minute, therefore the caller is costing you money. 'nuff said.

  3. existing customers by commo1 · · Score: 1

    What happens to existing customers who have had the same number for 10 years and enjoyed 10 years of bliss? (or as much bliss as one can expect owning a device with which you be reached anywhere)

  4. illegal??? by (54)T-Dub · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I thought it was illegal for business to make unsolicited phone calls to cell phones because the customer gets charged for it. Am i wrong?

    --

    "I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
    1. Re:illegal??? by (54)T-Dub · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Doh, now i'll be modded redundant because someone asked the same question on Thu May 20, '04 05:12 PM

      --

      "I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
    2. Re:illegal??? by SuperChuck69 · · Score: 1

      I believe it's on a state-by-state basis.

      --
      :wq
    3. Re:illegal??? by JuggleGeek · · Score: 4, Informative
      I believe it's on a state-by-state basis.

      No, it's not. Telemarketing to cell phones is already illegal and has been for some time.

      The FCC has information on their website.

  5. Never get calls by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I almost never get telemarketing calls on my cell. I get a wrong number sometimes.

    As soon as I get a telemarketer calling my cell phone, I demand their name, number, organization, address, etc. (as the DNC registry stipulates). Then I will inform them that I will be sending a bill to that address to recover the cost of the minutes that their company just used for me.

    Once, I got a telemarketer and as soon as I realized who it was I informed them that it was a cell. She apologized profusely and voluntarily put me on their do-not-call list.

    I'm in Indiana, so we have a stricter DNC anyway. :)

    1. Re:Never get calls by cexshun · · Score: 1

      God, isn't it cool to be a Hoosier? I know I love it. I did the same thing you did to a telemarketer. Although the cost of the minutes was less then the postage I had to pay to send them a bill, it was well worth it to make my point!

    2. Re:Never get calls by transient · · Score: 1

      I've had similar experiences with my phone at work. Somehow a telemarketer got my work number, and as soon as I told them they'd called a business number, they split. Too bad it doesn't work with Oracle salespeople though. (I'm in Indiana too, incidentally.)

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
    3. Re:Never get calls by T-Ranger · · Score: 2, Funny

      Tell the Oracle salesdroids that it is a home number.

    4. Re:Never get calls by DJStealth · · Score: 1

      You ever get calls where the number on the display is FAKE?

      I get those from telemarketers all the time; when I come home in the evening, I check my call display, and call back #'s I don't recognize.. At least once every week I get a call from a phone # that the number is not in service.

    5. Re:Never get calls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day you'll get a # you don't know: +331xyzabc.

      - I will call back the poor guy, maybe it was important.
      - Bonjour monsieur, comment allez vous ?
      - AAAAHHHHHHHH!!!

    6. Re:Never get calls by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I'm in Indiana, so we have a stricter DNC anyway. :)

      I thought the Federal DNC law pre-empted any local laws. I thought that's why some people were upset at the federal law when their state had a perfectly good law in place already.

    7. Re:Never get calls by PW2 · · Score: 1

      The cell phone spam I've been getting has been recorded ads being played back...

    8. Re:Never get calls by B.D.Mills · · Score: 1

      You can send them a bill for $500 per call because that is the statutory damages for telemarketing to a mobile phone under the TCPA.

      I think a better approach would be to bill the telemarketers for a smaller amount, say $200, and if they challenge it take them to small claims court for the full $500.

      --

      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
    9. Re:Never get calls by B.D.Mills · · Score: 1
      That's illegal on two counts under the TCPA.
      • Telemarketing to a mobile phone, pager or other similar device is illegal.
      • Telemarketing with an artificial or prerecorded voice is illegal.
      --

      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
  6. Maybe I'm Naive but..... by MacGod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe I'm naieve, but I personally think this would be a good idea. Telemarketers are irriting, no question, but worse still is losing a phone number and being unable to find it. I don't have to refer to the phone-book too often for landlines, but every time I do, it saves me mucho effort or results in me being able to contact someone I otherwise would not be able to.

    --
    "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    1. Re:Maybe I'm Naive but..... by sixteenraisins · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I understand that for many of us, a mobile phone is as fundamental as a land line phone at home. For many others, a mobile phone is the only phone they have.

      However, I'm sure I'm not the only one who views a mobile phone as follows: The phone is for ME to call PEOPLE, not the other way around. The only people I want to receive mobile calls from (indeed, this applies to home line calls as well) are the people to whom I GIVE the number. That's why my home number is unlisted.

      I can count on both hands the number of people who have my mobile number, and I like it that way. I would much rather see this directory be opt-in only.

      --
      When you're not looking, this sig is in Latin.
    2. Re:Maybe I'm Naive but..... by Pantheraleo2k3 · · Score: 1

      Simple solution. We need a cell phone that suppors whitelisting. Maybe someone can implement a tool for Palm OS that restricts incoming calls to people in the address book. It's not perfect, but it would work for a lot of people

    3. Re:Maybe I'm Naive but..... by MacGod · · Score: 1
      The phone is for ME to call PEOPLE, not the other way around.

      I actually am one of those people who has a cell phone as their only phone, hence my point of view that a phone book would be nice. However, for people such as yourself, it seems that you could just get an unlisted number. You already can with a landline, why not a cell phone?

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    4. Re:Maybe I'm Naive but..... by drafalski · · Score: 1

      I don't see why my phone number should be exposed to telemarketers (or even people that know me whom I don't want to have my number) because other people have trouble keeping track of phone numbers.

  7. even if you don't register by atari2600 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is like a firewall - take the call once.
    *Phone rings*
    Me: who's this? Them: We are calling to see how many children you have..
    Me:I have registered this number in the Do not call registry
    *click*
    There you go :)


    What can i say? I am a lonely guy :)

    1. Re:even if you don't register by baudilus · · Score: 3, Funny
      *Phone rings*
      Me: who's this?

      I love how you answer the phone. No business calls on your cell, eh?
    2. Re:even if you don't register by atari2600 · · Score: 1

      Mum's the word

    3. Re:even if you don't register by forevermore · · Score: 1
      Them: We are calling to see how many children you have..

      Except that survey calls are explicitly allowed by the national DNC list (along with charities and political organizations, and anyone else not selling anything - which unfortunately includes those companies who want to schedule an appointment with you where they will THEN try to to sell you something)

      --
      Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
    4. Re:even if you don't register by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      I work for a survey center, and if you just say you're on the Do Not Call list (which doesn't apply to surveys - esp. since most of them are actually sponsored by the government), you're likely to get marked down as a callback instead of a refusal. Let them tell you what they're about, and then tell them that you're not interested and to not call back. Explicitly telling them not to call back is the key part - otherwise call back is okay. Just saying you're on the do not call list isn't enough because the dnc list doesn't apply to surveys.

    5. Re:even if you don't register by jafuser · · Score: 1
      You gotta love loopholes... What's to stop someone from doing something like this, and calling it a "survey"?

      Hello. I'm an "independent" survey agent for SlimFatty Weight Loss Services. We're taking a survey of lucky individuals in your area who may not know about SlimFatty Weight Loss Services's wonderful line of products and services which will help you lose up to 30 pounds in 30 days! Before we begin with the survey, let me give you some background on some of the unique and amazing products SlimFatty Weight Loss Services can provide to you at great rates. ...

      Now that you know about some of the great SlimFatty Weight Loss Services products and services, we'd like to have you take a brief survey...

      Would you be willing to pay $[amount] for [package 1]? ["survey" answer recorded]

      How about $[alternate amount] for [package 2]? ["survey" answer recorded]

      Are you sure you would not be interested in paying such a small amount for such a "great" deal? ["survey" answer recorded]

      How could you pass up this great offer? ["survey" answer recorded]

      ThankYouForTakingTheSurvey*click*
      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  8. Instant obsolescence? by darth_MALL · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Admittedly, I know only a bit about cel-phones, but the many people I know and work with tend to change numbers frequently. What's practical about a list like this, if the information is consistantly out-of-date? I realise an electronic DB would be easy enough to keep current, but who's goign to use it (besides spammers?)

    1. Re:Instant obsolescence? by Mz6 · · Score: 1

      Well.. now that the cellular number portability laws are in effect nationwide (atleast it will be in a couple days), many will be able to keep thier numbers to switch to different carriers. However, there still might be those that do switch their numbers. However, it makes it tough say, for example, if that number was on the list and the new owner of the number doesn't want it posted. You might run into a few problems.

      --
      Hmmm.
  9. Already on the DNC list by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    funny- when I first signed up for the Federal DNC list, it asked me to provide up to 5 phone numbers. Didn't anybody else enter their cell numbers at that point?

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    1. Re:Already on the DNC list by JuggleGeek · · Score: 2, Informative

      I didn't enter my cell phone number when I joined the DNC list. It isn't getting any telemarketing calls anyway, and telemarketing to cell phones is illegal according to the TCPA already, so it seemed unnecessary. If I start getting telespam calls to my cell, *then* I'll register it.

  10. Great! by stinkyfingers · · Score: 5, Funny

    So the bastard next to me in the movie theater can ruin the experience by getting a call from a jackass he *doesn't* know?

    1. Re:Great! by MrBlackBand · · Score: 2, Funny
      It's Inconsiderate Cell Phone Telemarketing Guy!

      ICPTG (Shouting at a funeral): I can save how much on my long distance? Sweeeeeeeet!

      --
      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
    2. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he can ruin the experience by not turning the cell phone off.

    3. Re:Great! by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      Years ago, when people were polite and understood that a movie theater was not the same as their own livingroom, there was an "experience" worth not being ruined.

      Nowadays, the only experience you get in a movie theater is seeing how other people act when they think you don't deserve an "experience" of any value.

  11. Terrible!!!!! by Mz6 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    With the abundance of web pages that allow users to simply type in a cell-phone number and a text message, I feel this might be a huge mistake publishing all of these numbers. How long would it take for a spam bot to cultivate through the database, pick-up all the numbers and spam them? My guess is that it shouldn't take more than a day to do.

    "Wireless carriers say they doubt there will be widespread abuse. They point out that most mobile phones come equipped with caller ID, distinctive ring tones, call blocking and other tools to manage unwanted calls. And several carriers say they have made refunds to subscribers who have received unwanted calls. "

    What they fail to understand is that, atleast with my carrier (Sprint), text messages pop up all the time. I have no options to block text messages from certain users, or only allow messages from those in my phone book. I think the biggest area won't be the unwanted calls, but rather the unwanted text messages that cost about as much as it does to send spam messages.

    By far.. Worst idea EVER!

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:Terrible!!!!! by euphonaesthesia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention, on most plans, one pays for text messages received [either deducted from a package of a number messages that one buys for a certain amount of money each month or charged a fee for using more messages than the number bought]. The inbox sizes are also quite small; even a small bit of spam would be even more annoying as it could quickly fill a relatively small quota.

    2. Re:Terrible!!!!! by prshaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>How long would it take for a spam bot to cultivate through the database, pick-up all the numbers and spam them?

      Why bother go through the database? Why not just spend a message to every number possible? It doesn't cost them anything to send the message, so they don't care if it is really in use or not.

    3. Re:Terrible!!!!! by The_K4 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have sprint and have only gotten 1 spam sms message to my phone in 5 years i've had a cell. I reported it to SPRINT PCS and the tech said that with the exact time of the message and the number it was sent to they could get the IP address of the sender's computer. If you get spam on your phone report it!

    4. Re:Terrible!!!!! by sootman · · Score: 1

      Why even bother with a database or a web frontend?
      for ($i=1111111111;$i<=9999999999;$i++)
      {
      spam($i@most.cell.providers.(com|net));
      }

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  12. The solution? by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 0, Troll

    Don't get a cell phone. Not only will you not get annoying calls but you also won't be one of the lucky recipents to get a brain tumor 20 years from now. Oh you know it's coming.......

    1. Re:The solution? by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Don't get a cell phone. Not only will you not get annoying calls but you also won't be one of the lucky recipents to get a brain tumor 20 years from now. Oh you know it's coming....... "

      You should get rid of your computer. Not only will you not get those annoying spams, but you also won't be one of the lucky recipients to get skin cancer 20 years from now because you didn't switch to LCD soon enough. Oh, you know it's coming....

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:The solution? by Cooke · · Score: 0

      add to the list; RSI, bad posture and four eyes.

  13. old news by arabagast · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This has been avaiable here in Norway for several years now.. allthough I do imagine there is a certain difference in volume between Norway and the US. Had a funny experience with this btw, one day when I was bored, I looked up my number in one of the online catalogs - and behold, they had gotten hold of even more information about me than I ever gave my cell provider, it was kinda scary I can tell you :)

    --
    Doolittle : ...What is your one purpose in life?
    Bomb no.20 : To explode of course.
  14. may not be as bad as it sounds by winsk · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to this article , the CTIA claims that all the carriers who are going along with the plan are doing so on an opt-in basis for existing customers, and an opt-out basis for new customers, without any additional fees.

  15. My contract... by SeaFox · · Score: 1
    Opt out at the beginning of my contract?

    That was over three years ago! I'm not under contract with T-Mobile now but I still am a customer, I wonder if they'll say I have to get back ON contract to get off the directory. My plan's so old I still get the first incoming minute free. Does that mean I can't sue for cost of minutes if I get telemarketer calls?

    1. Re:My contract... by B.D.Mills · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can sue for up to $500 per call under the TCPA (law since 1991). You don't have to demonstrate damages, just that you received the call. It can be argued that it DID cost you money to receive the call - it drained your battery a bit, and when you recharge your phone you pay for the power, right?

      Look elsewhere for information about the TCPA, especially the messages here modded up as Informative.

      --

      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
  16. Costs by elrick_the_brave · · Score: 1

    Hmm.. I think it would be prudent to document all the incoming calls/spam. Given that most companies charge per.. it now costs you money. It would be worthwhile to take up your cell provider's customer service time by requesting documentation on who is using up your paid resources. If you run into any roadblocks, IANAL, bring up your lawyer. You can use that effectively I think. Complain enough and you could be put on the do not call list.

    --
    (1st sig) If this were a snappy sig, you'd be reading it right now. (2nd sig) I'm a karma whore. >Insert FUD here
  17. can you hear me now? by syschker · · Score: 1

    Not only is a business risking loss of clientel,I feel the cell companys involved are at risk too. Besides that you know somewhere down the line there will be a law suit (or two). ----- "you are unique, just like everybody else"

    --
    You are unique, just like everybody else.
  18. Most cell phone plans have free nights and weekend by voxel · · Score: 1

    So they just telemarket you on friday night, saturday and sunday :-).

    --
    Modesty is one of life's greatest attributes
  19. Before banning a directory... by djeaux · · Score: 1

    ... outlaw the use of the "star codes" that block caller ID (*67).

    --
    "Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
    1. Re:Before banning a directory... by pknoll · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is already illegal for telemarketers. In 2004, the government's amended telemarketing sales regulations proscribed the sending of their phone number when calling and, if possible, their name.

    2. Re:Before banning a directory... by baudilus · · Score: 2, Informative
      There are already facilities to block calls block their caller ID information. Not only for cell phones, but for land lines as well.

      From this site (which I believe is standard across land lines):

      Anonymous Call Block--(Included with Caller ID and Caller ID on Call Waiting, and available as a stand alone feature.) This option has some notable caveats, so please understand what it will and will not do before ordering or activating. Basically, this features allows you to reject calls coming from parties who have enabled Caller ID block on their line, thus preventing the display on your ID display unit of their name and/or number (you see "Private Caller"). Such callers are redirected to a message telling them you are not accepting ID-blocked calls and that they need to remove the block and call back if they wish to each you.

      Note: This means that some cellular calls and calls from business's PBX phone systems may not get through to you. Callers on those systems may not be able to remove the ID block in order to have their call ring through.

      This feature will not screen out most telemarketers' calls, nor any other calls where the caller's telco does not transmit ID info or the info is not available (these display as "Unavailable," or "Unknown Caller," or similar). Again, it works only on calls where the caller has enabled their own Caller ID block ("Private Caller").

      * To activate: press *77
      * To deactivate: press *87
    3. Re:Before banning a directory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have caller ID in most markets, you can use another * code to block calls with blocked caller ID. This only applies to POTS, since a PRI or T1/channelized system will provide the support for blocking the "private" caller ID calls. Translation: your office phone may require the phone administrator to block these calls, if the software/hardware allows it.

    4. Re:Before banning a directory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Proscribed?" I think this word does not mean what you think it means. Try "prescribed" or "ordered."

      Granted, proscribing telemarketers would be an excellent idea....

    5. Re:Before banning a directory... by pknoll · · Score: 1
      You are correct, sir. I meant prescribed; meaning "required". My earlier post suggests the gov't prohibited telemarketers from sending their number; the exact opposite is true.

      Apologies.

    6. Re:Before banning a directory... by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      To deactivate: press *87

      I have my cell setup to not send Caller ID, but have it programmed to *82 turn it on selectively only to people I know that have anonymous call blocking.

      Most businesses are smart enough to not block anonymous calls. It coulda been a sale. But, then, I sure don't want them logging my sacred cell number.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  20. Jerks by thebra · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Until recently, when customers switched carriers, their numbers changed as well, so marketers were reluctant to invest much in compiling databases.

    For once I thought that something good was being done for the consumer...my mistake.

  21. Re:Most cell phone plans have free nights and week by baudilus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is no guarantee that you have "Free Nights and/or Weekends."

    The law still applies, as does the one that telemarketers cannot call you on Sunday.

  22. OK and? by isa-kuruption · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's about time there was a cell phone directory. I can't remember how many times I've lost someone's cell phone number when I need it. It exists for landlines, why not cell phones?

    I think the underlying excuse from the parent is the "right to privacy" which doesn't exist in the first place. This is just an example of privacy activism gone awry.

  23. Verizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good! For the premium they charge, they'd better offer all of the "default protections" they can come up with.

  24. i have the opposite problem by claykarmel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I run my business from my PCS phone.

    Did you know that you CANNOT get a white pages listing for your cell phone unless you get your cell phone service from your local RBOC?

    Try getting a D&B on a number they can't verify with the RBOC!

    1. Re:i have the opposite problem by Ween · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I currently run my business with my cell phone. What I did was contact my local land line phone provider (sprint) and asked for a business forwarding number. It is about $12 a month, gets you a listing in the white pages and most importantly, gets you a listing in the yellow pages under the heading of your choice. They then give you a unique local number and that number just forwards calls to whatever number you tell them. In my case, it was my cell phone. You give people your local number number and magically your cell phone always rings. I have not once ever gotten a long distance bill, even if the people who called me were far away, not so far away, or just in the extended local long area. Seems to be quite a good deal.

      --


      Tis better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt --Abraham Lincoln
  25. Call Me Paranoid... by rinkjustice · · Score: 1

    but I wouldn't trust any "do not call" registry. You're handing out your cell number in blind trust that the list won't be adulterated in the future. It's just like those opt-out links at the bottom of spam - it will likely only alert spammers that it's a "live" and important contact.

    Trust no one.

    1. Re:Call Me Paranoid... by JuggleGeek · · Score: 1

      You may not trust the DNC list, but my experience is that we received a *lot* of telemarketing calls to the landline phone prior to the DNC list. Then both the national DNC list and the Texas DNC list went into effect, we were on both, and the number of telemarketing calls dropped dramatically. I'm much happier for it.

    2. Re:Call Me Paranoid... by br0d · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but due to the low cost nature of spamming, spammers can afford to be indiscriminate scavengers, ie they don't care if a user has openly declared a disinterest in marketing, because it wastes almost no resources to spam their email. *Phone calls* are a little more expensive, so even if the DNC list fell into the wrong hands, it would probably not be economically viable to spam it.

  26. Wish that worked for spam by Mz6 · · Score: 1

    Thank god the DNC doesn't work like the CAN-SPAM act... I couldn't handle getting so many calls for V1@g.RA.

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:Wish that worked for spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't listen to SPAM on your cell phone, but still can listen to Spam Radio!

  27. Can't they make money from a telephone service!? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Really! What is it with these companies, and screwing over their customers for an extra few dollars? No spammer is going to pay as much per number as the user is going to pay making and receiving calls.

    This shows a total disregard for their customers. This is a stupid attitude, towards the people who actually pay the bulk of their income. They need to stop courting the extras, and make sure those who supply their primary income are as happy as possible with the service.

  28. bluetooth as well? by Cooke · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Will the Do Not Call list include a do not bluetooth spam? Im more worried about shops and like offering me things on a more personal level direct to my phone whenever I enter a mall or go to the bar.

    1. Re:bluetooth as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You like to hear yourself speak, don't ya? I hope so because your posting has no value to the world if you didn't get anything out of it.

  29. SprintPCS by wytcld · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With SprintPCS I was getting occassional spam text messages, so I when to their Website and turned that feature off - except then I kept getting spam text messages from ... SprintPCS. I had to call and have them "unprovision" text messaging entirely in order to get any assurance that they could stop themselves from spamming me!

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  30. Cell phone spam by maeltor · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Some people are already receiving cell phone spam and telemarketing calls.
    I've gotten cell phone spam on every carrier i've been with for the past 2 years (3 carriers). TMobile was the worst....i got 25 spam messages in one day. I also got billed for it (SMS overuse). They claimed that since I never logged in to change my "cell phone number email address" on TMobile's site, I was getting the messages and didn't try to prevent them. Man did that customer retention supervisor get her ass chewed. After I got done with her, I ended up with a new phone, a changed "email address" and 4 months free :)
  31. Re:Verizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...and that's why you never, ever sign up for a contract for cellular service.

    Of course another great reason is that at the rate technology is improving, in a year or two the contract will become a noose. How about when the new plans include unlimited data transfer for less than you're paying for voice only now?

    Try one of the prepaid plans. At AT&T for example it's 25 cents/minute (which is high if you use it a lot so it's not suitable for everyone), but there is no contract, no hidden fees like the fake taxes that were dicussed here recently, and unused minutes roll forward. For very light use, you can have a cell phone for $3.50/month including extras and taxes with AT&T. That $3.50 doesn't force you to use 14 minutes either; if you use less than 14 they still roll forward.

  32. Pay for incoming calls? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Crazy talk, who the fuck pays for incoming calls?

  33. FCC and Rulemaking! by enforcer999 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The FCCis in the process of making rules to protect consumers regarding cell phones and spam. On another related note: The American Teleservices Association filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the National Do Not Call Registry. If the Court takes the case, I do not believe that they will over turn the 10th Circuit's decision.

  34. Re:Verizon by falcon5768 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    apparently your the minority since verizon was rated the best in customer service and support recently (with at&t as the worst, no surprise there)

    As for picture phones, there are a ton of them for verizon, infact i know of one that is great and by LG.... but it begs the question.... who really needs their phone to take pictures... PDA replacement i can see, ability to be used as a modem yes... but PICTURES?

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  35. Verizon sucks by -tji · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Verizon already phone spams their own customers.

    About a month ago, I got one of those annoying automated calls offering me "great new services" through Verizon. The recording said "Push 1 for more information".

    So, I pushed '1' and waded went through several levels of systems until I could talk to a human. I asked him to set all my privacy preferences to prohibit any further calls or sharing of my personal information, and he was totally lost at how to proceed. He acted as if this was an unprecedented request.. "I don't have any idea how I could do that. We don't have any settings for that in the user accounts."

    After spending 30 minutes on the phone with this guy, I was pissed to have wasted so much time and just wanted to hang up. But he agreed to submit some paper form that was supposed to ensure this did not happen again.. He did not inspire a lot of confidence, but I haven't gotten another call.. yet.

    1. Re:Verizon sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Verizon or Verizon Wireless?

      They are NOT the same.

    2. Re:Verizon sucks by B.D.Mills · · Score: 1

      Telemarketing calls using an artificial or prerecorded voice are illegal under the TCPA.

      --

      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
    3. Re:Verizon sucks by ImpTech · · Score: 1

      Funny... never had any problems with spam on my Verizon Wireless phone (3 years, same number). Not from them, not from anybody. I keep *wanting* to hate them because they're a big evil phone company, but the bastards just won't do anything sufficiently dastardly. Though I hear their land line stuff is a bit shadier.

    4. Re:Verizon sucks by nbvb · · Score: 1

      The only thing VZ and VZW shares is the name.... the companies are run completely independently, for regulatory reasons ...

      Oh, and the fact that the death spiral at landline won't infect the cash cow (wireless) that way!!

    5. Re:Verizon sucks by LaForce · · Score: 1

      I just downloaded the TCPA from the FCC web site, curious to know what exactly the wording for cellular restrictions was. I was suprised to find this entry:

      160. In the 2002 Notice, the Commission noted that the TCPA permits the Commission to exempt from the restrictions on autodialer or prerecorded message calls, "calls to a telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service that are not charged to the called party, subject to such conditions as the Commission may prescribe as necessary in the interest of the privacy rights [the TCPA] is intended to protect." In the 1992 TCPA Order, the Commission concluded that calls made by cellular carriers to their subscribers for which the subscribers were not charged do not fall within the prohibitions on autodialers or prerecorded messages.

      So what Verizon does was actually legal. That said, I still don't like it.

    6. Re:Verizon sucks by LaForce · · Score: 1

      Additionally, I found:

      166. Although the same economic and safety concerns apply to all telephone solicitation calls received by wireless subscribers, the Commission has determined not to prohibit all live telephone solicitations to wireless numbers. The national do-not-call database will allow for the registration of wireless telephone numbers for those subscribers who wish to avoid live telemarketing calls to their wireless phones. Wireless subscribers thus have a simple means of preventing most live telemarketing calls if they so desire. Moreover, relying on the do-not-call database to control live telephone solicitations recognizes that prohibiting such calls to wireless numbers may unduly restrict telemarketers' ability to contact those consumers who do not object to receiving telemarketing calls and use their wireless phones as either their primary or only phone.

      Fair enough... This is actually turning out to be a good read. :)

    7. Re:Verizon sucks by polyiguana · · Score: 1

      And the fact that Verizon (VZ) owns 50% of the company, with Vodaphone owning the other half.

    8. Re:Verizon sucks by nbvb · · Score: 1

      55% VZ
      45% VOD

  36. I love telemarketers by CatPieMan · · Score: 1

    I can never remember my home phone number and they are always kind enough to inform me what my number is, right before I call hang up on them.

    They are so much fun. As soon as I realize it is them, I put the phone down and walk away for a few minutes. Political callers are the best, as, I usually spout some anti-Capitalist, anti-Democratic stuff their way.

    Hm, maybe I should un-register my home phone, I do so love messing with the telemarketers.

    Now, my cell is another story. I have an international cell, as in, I can take it to other countries and it still rings with my USA-based number. I would not be happy to recieve a call from a telemarketer while in Australia, 11 hours ahead, and at a cost of US$1/min.

    Oh, I use T-Mobile, so, this does not make me too happy.

    -CPM

    --
    ---You're all I need, When the water runs deep, You're all I need, Now I cry my soul to sleep -- Collective Soul, Needs
    1. Re:I love telemarketers by lebowsky · · Score: 1

      I called T-Mobile and they told me they do not give out numbers for ANY reason. Personally I haven't had any telemarketer calls since I got the thing 3/4year ago.

    2. Re:I love telemarketers by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      ...while in Australia, 11 hours ahead, and at a cost of US$1/min.

      T-Mobile rates for US phones in Australia is $1.49/minute. And if it is "someone" calling and you don't answer, you pay for the call to your phone, and then you pay for the forwarding of that call to your voicemail. Even if you have forwarding to voicemail turned off.

      I know, they just tried billing me for 127 bogus calls at that rate. It was a "courtesy" for them to correct the bill. At least, that's what the credit said on the next bill.

  37. completely off-topic by chimpo13 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    http://www.vintagepork.com/ isn't working, damn it. What's it about?

  38. Spam-Filter for Cell phones by rennen · · Score: 1

    I will start writing a spam filter for cell phones.
    Make sure you set your rules wizard on your phone to only accept calls from your address book. =>

    1. Re:Spam-Filter for Cell phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, my phone actually does that.

  39. What a coincidence.... by NIN1385 · · Score: 2, Informative
    I have wireless service through iwireless(formerly Iowa Wireless) who is an affiliate of tmobile. They recently sent me a notice that they were raising their prices by like 3 dollars. The reason they said they were raising the price is because of the bill that passed allowing a customer to take their cell phone number with them anywhere they go.

    I have many friends with cell phones through different companies, and none of the other companies seem to be raising their prices at all because of this bill. T-mobile is a horrible company that doesn't give a shit about the customer, everytime I had a problem with them they simply told me that is the way it is and they wont make any effort to change it. I don't know where they got their business practices but where I come from the customer is ALWAYS right!

    I am now switching to Verizon for reasons such as them not giving out the personal information of customer THAT PAY FOR THEIR SERVICE! Until companies start caring about the customers and not their profits...their profits will continue to go down.

    I highly reccomend to anyone that is considering moving to T-Mobile or any of their affiliates to think twice and look at Verizon or Nextel instead. Peace...

    --

    If carrots got you drunk, rabbits would be fucked up. - Comedian Mitch Hedberg R.I.P. 03/30/68-2/24/05
    1. Re:What a coincidence.... by ELiTeUI · · Score: 1
      most cell companies did raise the amount you pay at the end of the month, due to the FTC's mandated number portability. However, most cell companies also kept rates exactly the same. Have your friends check for a "regulatory fee" or other such bullshit, it's probably hidden there. On my $65 nextel bill, it was in the $2-3 range.

      ELiTeUI

  40. Callers pay! by Codeala · · Score: 1

    I think except in US, calls to cellphones are usually only charge to the callers. That makes sense...

    --

    Codeala - Just another mindless drone
    1. Re:Callers pay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because in other countries, cellphones have different number ranges than other phones. For example, in Norway they always start with the digits 4 or 9. Hence, the caller can know how much the call will cost, and the extra charge can be put on him.

  41. In Europe... by Jott42 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You have to remeber that they are talking about the US. It is new there. And it is a problem, as they are paying for incoming calls. And they seem to not have a general, working do-not-call registry(?).
    Strange, but true.

    (Have Karma, flame away...)

  42. In Soviet....err by martingunnarsson · · Score: 0

    In Sweden, where I live, anybody can look up any cell phone number. That is, unless it's an unregistered pre-paid card (then there's no way to tell who's using it) or the subscriber chose not to be listed. I don't think it's a big deal.

    --
    Martin
    1. Re:In Soviet....err by ElNeo · · Score: 0

      Same thing in Norway - you could probably find the cell-phone number to 80% of the population in the online-phonebook. We only pay for outgoing calls unless you are abroad.

      Telemarketing or text-message-SPAM has never been a problem, since this is not legal.

  43. Then how come i see MSCE CISCO BOOT CAMP faxes.. by adamgeek · · Score: 1

    every day i see the fax machine out by the server room near my office, spitting out worthless faxes about vacations to tahiti and MCSE bootcamps.

    not calling you a liar, just saying i wasnt aware that this practice (junk faxing) was illegal.. and if it really is, how come every business i've worked at that has a publically accessable fax machine, seems to get these faxes everyday (i.e. why isnt the law being enforced). i dont /expect/ you to necessarily know the answer haha.. but does someone? =D

  44. whitelist sms by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

    Here's a place where a whitelist would work without being a problem.
    A feature to block all messages from numbers not in the phones directory. The phone should just discard them without notifying you at all.

    1. Re:whitelist sms by Shurhaian · · Score: 1

      Better: A carrier-supported whitelist so that even when your phone is off, the messages won't fill your inbox and crowd out the ones you DO want to receive. (Ideal for GSM users with multiple devices, too; only one list to maintain.)

      --
      NB: YMMV. IANAL. Take the above with a grain of salt.
  45. T-Mobile by JuggleGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not surprised that T-Mobile has been selling personal information. They also send email spam, via "affiliates". I'm shopping for a new cell phone (camera phone) to replce my old cell phone, and the spam they sent me kept them from consideration. Never do business with spammers.

    1. Re:T-Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nowhere in the article does it say that T-Mobile is selling personal information. In fact, the PR agent is quoted as saying it will be strictly "opt-in". This would seem to mean that they will only include your name in the directory if you request. I would imagine that people who rely on their phone for clients to call them would consider this to be a great feature. Everybody else would simply not opt-in. I don't see the big deal.

    2. Re:T-Mobile by JuggleGeek · · Score: 1
      The AC says : Nowhere in the article does it say that T-Mobile is selling personal information.

      Yet the /. headline says :

      Worse yet, unless you opt-out at the beginning of your contract, some carriers such as T-Mobile can gladly hand over your info
      Sounds like they *are* selling personal info, no?

      I also said that T-Mobile has sent email spam to me, and I'll stand by that. And that is why I will not do business with them.

    3. Re:T-Mobile by Geoff-with-a-G · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Friggin' slashdot.
      Let's look at the quote again:
      Worse yet, unless you opt-out at the beginning of your contract, some carriers such as T-Mobile CAN gladly hand over your info

      No, it does not sound like they are selling personal info. It sounds like the boiler-plate contract that their lawyers created to be as all-encompassing as possible grants them the right to do that (along with probably the right to eat your children and harvest your organs). That is not at all the same thing as actually acting upon those rights. This particular clause in the contract just came under scrutiny, and the first thing they did was say "don't worry, we'll fix it."

      Look, I agree that it's important to review these contracts, and to reign them in to prevent abuse. But there's this absurd mentality that all big corporations are like a ship full of Borg, bearing down on you, bent on destruction. There are good companies, and there are bad companies, but pretty much every large company has lawyers, else they would have been sued back to being a small company over something ridiculous (think googol-family suing Google). Those lawyers write the contracts, and they try to write them so that there's no chance their company can ever be held liable for anything bad at all. That doesn't mean the company is evil and intends to actually do all the things that it's allowed to.

      As soon as you have credible reports of T-Mobile selling personal information, then feel free to start yelling about it. But right now the only facts that we have are that their contract would have allowed them to do that, and that as soon as this was pointed out, they said they're changing it.


  46. ... similar in UK by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

    A couple of times I tried calling back the caller number after a TM call. In UK you can dial a number to get the number of the last incoming call. When I tried the number, I got a message saying the number was for outgoing calls only. In other words the caller ID is spoofed because the number is useless.

    Clever idea though.

    1. Re:... similar in UK by DJStealth · · Score: 1

      I got ones that were actually OUT OF SERVICE (not for outgoing calls only). You can call the phone company and ask them for an outgoing line; I doubt they'll give you one with a truly fake phone #.. I wonder how they did it.

  47. Re:Verizon by The_K4 · · Score: 1

    In most case in 1 or 2 years the contract ENDS!
    Also most compaines let you start a new contract with a new plan without penalty even if you are in the middle of a current contract. The contract is just to stay a customer of that carrier, not to make you hate that carrier!
    Most prepaid also don't have data, pictures, games, ringtones, and all the other "features" that many people want.

  48. Roaming by grahamsz · · Score: 5, Funny

    How can a telemarketer know if you are roaming or not?

    Sure i might have free minutes when i'm in colorado, or even the usa. But if i fly home to britain i'll be paying for every second.

    Another peeve of mine is that they don't consider the time of day where your phone terminates.. as such when i was living in the UK, i'd get telemarketer calls at 1am since I found it convenient to have a 303 (Denver) number.

    It should be illegal to call a phone if it's possible that it rings in a country where it's after 9pm.

    1. Re:Roaming by Patik · · Score: 1
      It should be illegal to call a phone if it's possible that it rings in a country where it's after 9pm.
      What about people who work weird hours? A call at noon might interupt their sleep. How about just no telemarketing calls ever?
    2. Re:Roaming by jafuser · · Score: 1

      How can a telemarketer know if you are roaming or not?

      Perhaps they could be using information that they paid your mobile phone provider for real-time access to?

      They could also find out how many free minutes you have left, and limit the length of their call to you to this duration (a countdown timer shows up on the telemarketing agent's computer screen).

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    3. Re:Roaming by Erasmus+Darwin · · Score: 1
      "They could also find out how many free minutes you have left, and limit the length of their call to you to this duration (a countdown timer shows up on the telemarketing agent's computer screen)."

      If they're using up "free" minutes, then there's still a cost the receiver is paying to take the call (other than the "time wasted" cost that all telemarketing carries). Even though the time the telemarketer spends on the phone with you doesn't correlate to a dollars-and-cents item on your monthly bill, they're still using up a limited, prepaid resource that the phone user has paid for (in the form of a monthly fee).

    4. Re:Roaming by jafuser · · Score: 1

      If they're using up "free" minutes, then there's still a cost the receiver is paying to take the call (other than the "time wasted" cost that all telemarketing carries).

      Unfortunately, something like this isn't certian fact; it would be up to the courts to decide.

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  49. Do not call list doesn't Work Outside of IE by fernd1 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It's a damn shame that the US gov can't write a simple reg program that will work cross platform. I simple see no reason to write IE dependent code. Especially when the code is related to a government service. When will people learn that by writing IE dependent code, they are only hurting themeselves and their users.

    1. Re:Do not call list doesn't Work Outside of IE by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      I just used it in Mozilla 1.6 without a problem.

    2. Re:Do not call list doesn't Work Outside of IE by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Works fine in Galeon 1.3.12...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    3. Re:Do not call list doesn't Work Outside of IE by Mr.Mysteriosity · · Score: 1

      Works for me in Firebird 0.8

    4. Re:Do not call list doesn't Work Outside of IE by fernd1 · · Score: 1

      Seems you are correct. I just tried it again, and it worked fine. It seems odd that it would only work on IE the other day and now when I try it again with Moz Firefox it works fine. Maybe I was just too quick to react.

  50. Alternatively by NoWhere+Man · · Score: 1

    Alternatively, what about the customers who go through cell phone numbers, plans and services like there's no tommorrow?

    I've gone through 5 different plans in the past 3 years (pay as you go, 1 year plan, etc).
    My phone got deactivated once and I had to get a new number.

    This book might be horribly inaccurate at some points.

    --

    "Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
  51. Re:Verizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny, my Verizon picture phone works fine....methinks you work for Sprint.

  52. Very Insightful! Mod up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod parent up!

    1. Re:Very Insightful! Mod up by aceat64 · · Score: 1

      Not insightful, higher up in the thread someone quotes the DNC List site saying that you can register your cell phone.

  53. Re:Verizon by Le+Marteau · · Score: 1

    Your sig:

    "Slashdot, where saying something everyone hates turns you into a Troll even if it makes a point."

    You don't seem to truly grok what the purpose of moderation is. Properly understood, it is not a 'reward' or 'penalty'. It is to be ultimately used by readers so that they can read what they find interesting, and block out the "things everyone hates".

    --
    Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
  54. This is a pretty pointless story... by Caeda · · Score: 3, Informative

    All cell phones are already a "Do Not Call" telemarketing item. You don't have to be on any list because its the same as a fax machine. You pay the charges for the call because its your minutes, and so they can be reported and fined with no signup.

    --
    ~~ Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times. Thank You ~~
  55. Re:Verizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know the contract ends in 1 or 2 years. Everyone on slashdot should know that's an eternity in technology.

    Most of those are purely features of the phone. I have custom ringtones on my prepaid phone.

    In my experience, if the phone supports data, it still works on a prepaid plan, though there is probably an extra fee...they're not going to let you pay $3.50/month for unlimited data service.

    On my AT&T plan, I pay 10 cents to send a text message or email. Receiving messages is free. I also have free voicemail (as long as I check it from a landline, otherwise I'm billed normal airtime rates). A voicemail service with my landline is twice what I'm paying for my cellphone including the free voicemail.

    Pictures are purely a function of the phone as are game. I'm very happy with my Nokia 5165 and I wouldn't trade it for a brand new picture phone if the offer was for free (except maybe to sell the new phone on ebay and buy a new 5165), so I couldn't tell you how it would work on my plan.

    The contract sure don't say you can switch to a new plan, and they usually force you into a larger plan to get the phone subsidy, so I doubt you can switch to a smaller plan before the contract expires.

    Even if you are simply locked to one carrier, it means if another carrier comes up with a better plan, your carrier has no incentive to match it because you're stuck with them anyway.

  56. do-not-call webbots by mabu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    a scan of the do-not-call registry page reveals this little tidbit:
    src="http://g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net/DCS000003_6D4Q/ njs.gif?dcsuri=/nojavascript"

    Nice of AT&T to be monitoring/logging all the traffic to that site.

    I won't register because they have no business associating an IP or e-mail with a telephone number in an opt-out list.

    1. Re:do-not-call webbots by dr+bacardi · · Score: 1

      That's because the page is *hosted* by AT&T.

      Anyway, turn off javascript if it worries you... They are still gonna get your ip address of course, even w/o JS, so you can still be paranoid.

    2. Re:do-not-call webbots by mabu · · Score: 1

      All the other references are under the main domain. It's obvious AT&T wants to log the traffic to that page. It's none of their business. Yes, they may have access to the info anyway, but it's sleazy and unethical in my opinion.

      I wouldn't sign up for the list regardless. It's not a question of paranoia. It's a question of common sense. There are as many loopholes in the DNC system as there are creative ways the government will probably use the information beyond its original intent.

  57. sweet by geekoid · · Score: 1

    I can cross index this the liscense plates, and I can call the bozo who just cut me off, when they get off th phone.
    I can see it now:
    "Hello"
    "Is this Paul?"
    "yes"
    Paul Bozo?"
    "yes, who is this?"
    "This is the person you just cut off. Have a nice day."

    Let the paranoia begin!

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  58. Re:Verizon by geekoid · · Score: 1

    People who dont want to carry around another thing to take pictures?

    Plus, it's handy. Pretty soon you will be able to take a picture of something, send it to a supplier, and say "You got any of these?"

    It will also be intersting as more and more people have with cameras in everything. Prety soon any event that happens will have dozens of pictures from dozens of angles.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  59. two different networks by mabu · · Score: 1

    Name: g6589dcs.nyc2.aens.net
    Address: 63.240.16.174

    Name: donotcall.gov
    Address: 206.16.196.198
    Aliases: www.donotcall.gov

    No ethical reason for a webbot to be in that page, going to a completely separate network. Period.

    1. Re:two different networks by dr+bacardi · · Score: 1

      hey again... not trying to argue, but rdns doesn't show who owns the network.

      try whois:

      whois +206.16.196.198

      OrgName: CERFnet
      OrgID: CERF
      Address: 5738 Pacific Center Blvd
      City: San Diego
      StateProv: CA
      PostalCode: 92121
      Country: US

      NetRange: 206.16.0.0 - 206.19.255.255
      CIDR: 206.16.0.0/14
      NetName: CERFNET-BLK-206
      NetHandle: NET-206-16-0-0-1
      Parent: NET-206-0-0-0-0
      NetType: Direct Allocation
      NameServer: DBRU.BR.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET
      NameServer: CBRU.BR.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET
      NameServer: DMTU.MT.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET
      NameServer: CMTU.MT.NS.ELS-GMS.ATT.NET
      Comment:
      Comment: Contact AT&T Abuse ( abuse@att.net ) for policy abuse issues.
      Comment: All policy abuse issues sent to other POCs will be disregarded.
      RegDate: 1995-05-17
      Updated: 2002-10-18

      different network, same building.

      I do, however, agree w/ your other post regarding too many holes... I use a cell phone as my only phone, and have no problems w/ telemarketers... I do have a dial tone at my house, and just let a modem pick it up ;)

  60. Not news by giaguara · · Score: 1

    Cell phone directory or catalog is not worth news.

    It has been talked about for a long time - the first time I heard it being talked seriously was in Italy in 1998.

  61. Re:Verizon by virtual_mps · · Score: 1

    > People who dont want to carry around another thing
    > to take pictures?

    What about people who don't want to carry around anything that takes pictures? It's getting damn hard to find a new cell phone that doesn't have one of those stupid cameras in it. I can only hope it's a short-lived fad.

  62. Re:Then how come i see MSCE CISCO BOOT CAMP faxes. by Detritus · · Score: 1

    It is being enforced. It's just that the legal process is slow and the perpetrators are weasels who will start up a new company when their old company is shut down.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  63. 75%, I think not... by the-build-chicken · · Score: 1

    75% of _all_ mobile users is a big call...I don't think all the Australian cell users will be too worried about this.

  64. Off topic a bit but... by Proc6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just got a new cellphone yesterday and I started thinking... I have 5 phone numbers in my area code just of my own and Im just an average guy. With so many people having a home phone, a cell phone, a work phone, often a fax number or a second line for (heaven forbid) dialup access, that kind of thing... it sure seems like 9 million phone numbers isn't very many for a given area code... Maybe it is, I dont know, but I think theres a few million PEOPLE in my city, let alone the other 1/3 the state that share the same area code, and if most of those have 2-3 phone numbers... seems suprising to fit them all within that 9 million cap?

    --

    I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!

  65. Buy A land line service by ad0gg · · Score: 1

    Then forward that number to your cell. Its extra $30 a month or a $1 day.

    --

    Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

  66. why are we paying for incoming calls? by cstream_chris · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Personally, I think it's a sham that US phone services charge for incoming calls. In no other country is this the case? I mean, when I call from a Verizon cell phone to a Verizon cell phone why should both people be paying?

  67. Telemarketing outside the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    As far as I know it, in New Zealand, Australia, Europe and Asia, it's free to receive cellphone calls, generally speaking. Callers can tell by the phone number prefix that it's a cell phone, and they pay when they call.

    (Yes, that means you can receive all the calls you like on your cellular phone for something like $10 US per year to stay connected.)

    There are schemes like call-diversion that send calls to (e.g.) your home phone line to your cellphone. In these cases the cellphone user pays because they made the decision to send the call over the cellular network.

    It's no wonder cellphone penetration is so low in the states when having a cellphone means taking on a huge liability for bozos ringing you up!

    Why is the system so different in the US to everywhere else?

  68. calls to cell phones are illegal..clearcut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I am about to file a lawsuit against traffic-power.com. They called my cell phone advertising search engine optimization services (I run an informational site for a niche sport [floridacaves.com]). The number they called was listed in my website whois data, however that really doesn't matter.

    1) The website is not business related, no advertising, no banners, and nothing commercial related. If they were calling a business, there might be an excemption, however there is not.

    2) In order for an entity to call solicit by junk fax, prerecord, or to a cell phone, you must have given express prior permission. The mere listing in a directory (i.e. membership list, phone book, etc) does not constitute express permission.

    Had they even ettempted to talk to me once, I wouldn't be likely filing, but they failed to send me a copy of their company do-not-call policy, didn't train the reps in the use of a DNC list, and failed to follow state and federal law. They leave me little choice but to file suit, and I have a pretty substantial bit of case-law backing it up. I've done a lot of research into this. If anyone has goten a call from these people (or even email) then I'd love to hear it and will keep you updated as how the case goes. Right now I'm looking at at a $4500 suit in trebled statutory damages.

  69. "Block the blocker" doesn't always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These types of services (nicknamed "block the blocker") often work only if the caller's caller ID is actually blocked by *69 or per-line blocking. Depending on the telco, block the blocker won't block calls when "out of area" is sent (which means the caller's originating telco doesn't support caller ID transmission, or the call was manually dialed by an operator, there was a failure in transmission of caller ID from the business' PBX to the telco, etc.).

    These services also won't block anyone with, say, a Cisco CallManager configured to send 000-000-0000 as the calling number. Where I work we can set our CallManager to send *anything* to the telco as caller ID (and toll-free ANI too!). Whatever we send the telco over our digital trunks will show on your caller ID box. For a while we had it misconfigured to send only the 4-digit extension number as caller ID, so when calling home from work caller ID would be only "0123."

  70. Cell phone been registered by SnapperHead · · Score: 2, Informative

    I registered my cell phone and house line at the same time. Since I use my cell more then my house line, I figured it was important.

    However, there are a lot of ways for telemarketers to get around it. First off, they claim its not a sales call, when it fact it damn sure is. Second, they make it look like it was something I requested.

    I got 5 calls total from a local (same state) car dealer. They claim I submitted a request via car.com and couldn't verify anything beyond that. They also claimed all of this was via E-Mail and I was talking to a rep for 2 weeks about a car.

    a) They couldn't verify my E-Mail address, opps sorry, its listed as unknown or invaild.
    b) Its a car I never would buy to begin with.
    c) I called there managment each time telling them to stop calling me before I file a complaint.

    Needless to say, not only did I file a complaint with the FTC, I also filed a complaint with the BBB and the local police. They are looking into changes being pressed for harrasment.

    This is the only problem I have had so far with cell phones and telemarketers. Eitherway, I would be VERY pissed if they called my phone, if I didn't have an unlimited package through nextel, so for me its not a big deal.

    I just hope if they are building a directory of cell phone numbers, they include some sort of feature to allow customers to request there names and numbers NOT be included.

    --
    until (succeed) try { again(); }
  71. I don't ansewer unless I KNOW who it is... by sadler121 · · Score: 1

    I don't ansewer my cell if I the person isn't in my address book (Meaning there name doesn't show up when the phone rings). If its important they'll leave a voice message, which if they do, my phone beeps at me and I check right away (say if it was an emergancy of something) otherwise I if its a tele, I just delete the message with in the first 10-20 seconds).

    Sure its a hassle, but it keeps me from having to listen and argue with a telemarketer, and I end up using less minutes by just checking voicemail than ansering the bleeping phone.

    Obviously I'm not one of those Americans who HAVE to check there phone when ever it rings, (no matter where they are).

  72. Re:Verizon by incubusnb · · Score: 1

    i have a 3 Year Contract with Telus(Canadian, Alberta & BC) on my Cell Phone and the Contract clearly states that i can change my Plan up to 3 times within a 3 year Contract, as well, after a year and a Half i can upgrade my phone without having to sign a new contract

    --
    /. is overrun by bed-wetting elitist nerds
    let it be known, for anything other than servers, a *nix OS sucks
  73. I have a simple solution that works for *me* by frinkster · · Score: 1

    My cell phone is set so that if the calling number is not stored in my phone book, the ring tone is "silent."

  74. It will take minutes. by ezraekman · · Score: 1

    Most carriers already have yourphonenumber@carrier.com set up for text messaging, and most of the ones who don't have forms that are easy to hack and use yourself. (I've done it before, for specific clients to reach me.)

    Step 1: Download entire list of available numbers.
    Step 2: Sort list into sublists based on carrier, if available.
    Step 3: Write a <20 line script to send your "important message" to yourphonenumber@carrier.com.
    Step 4: Ignore the rule in Step 3, and add another 5-10 lines of code to make sure your spam goes to yourphonenumber@everycarrier.com, just to be sure.
    Step 5: Profit! (Via your spam clients.)

    Yes, report spammers! But don't expect them all to stop. Most of the spam we all get these days isn't legal, but it still comes.

  75. If you paid for your calls ... by Mr_Silver · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It's worth pointing out that in the UK (and most of Europe) the caller pays for the call and not the receiver.

    After all, if you want a service (eg. to talk to someone) it seems only fair that you should pay for it and not someone else - when I go to get my hair cut, it's not as if the barber pays me for the privilidge of me coming to him.

    Because of this, cold calling by companies to mobile phone users is virtually non-existant.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  76. Re:Verizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A hammer is the best thing to crack eggs with too.

    Slashdot moderation is not fine grained enough to actually solve any problems.

    I don't log in anymore, when I do I have checked I don't wish to moderate or meta moderate.

    I know many others like myself, the only people left moderating and meta are trolls themselves.

    Slashdot has become a pit of sewage,
    where the lowest common denominator now rules,
    it's not news for nerds,
    it hamsters in a cage hitting the little bar to get their daily dose of mod points.

  77. Re:Verizon by The_K4 · · Score: 1

    Sprint's contract says I can switch to ANY then currently offered plan. If I switch to a plan (I have switched to a less expensive plan when I no longer needed as many min) that requires a coontract i need to re-start my contract. So you can easily switch, to ANY plan they offer as log as you don't mind starting another contract. I'll also point out that with MOST of sprint's plans you can chose to pay an extra $10 a month and NOT have a contract. If the contracts were as harsh as you seem to think they are then more people who rebel against them. Most people don't mind them because they take into account that people might want to change their plan. (In fact it's actually BETTER for the co if you do, because now your contract has restarted and therefor is in effect longer!)

  78. Nextel too! by chrwei · · Score: 1

    When I got a Nextel phone i didn't get the text messaging service. Next thing I know I get couple ad type text messages from Nextel, when I got the bill I was charged $0.25 for each! They said I hadn't asked to have text message ads blocked, I said why would I ask, I wasn't paying for the text messaging option and thus couldn't recieve messages anyway from what I understood. They credited me the charges and put the block on.

    --
    - Disclaimer: Information in this post deemed reliable but not guaranteed.
  79. Re:Verizon by falcon5768 · · Score: 1
    if recent rumblings in goverment has anything to say, most likely it will be a short live fad that is banned since it has become a privacy risk.

    as it is kids are using them to copy tests but think about what else might be done with them.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."