Slashdot Mirror


FTC Offers $50,000 For Best Way To Stop Robocalls

coondoggie writes "It's not clear if the Federal Trade Commission is throwing up its hands at the problem or just wants some new ideas about how to combat it, but the agency is now offering $50,000 to anyone who can create what it calls an innovative way to block illegal commercial robocalls on landlines and mobile phones."

10 of 614 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Death Penalty by Kergan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No need to be that extreme... A hefty fine for companies that do it and another to the carriers that put the calls through should be enough.

  2. Ok, how about this by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have some feds buy some land lines and cell phones. Give them a few credit cards. Then when the robocall comes in, answer it and buy whatever they are selling.

    Track the transaction, figure out who is responsible, and then arrest them.

    If they are in another country, contact that government and have them arrest them. If they won't, sanctions. If that doesn't work threaten to cut their cable.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Ok, how about this by dargaud · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's a good solution. Another one would be to require the phone companies to have a 'declare spam' number. After receiving a spam call, you call that number and simply say "the last caller was a scammer". They are obliged to track down the number (even if hidden), put it in a database, and after enough complaints show up they have to investigate, fine them and cut them off.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  3. A truly heafty fine by Kolisar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree with the Hefty fine, but I think that the fine should be a calculated as a percentage of the company's worth, with a minimum of $200,000 if the company is not worth anything. Then a fairly large percentage (25%), that way, a large company that has 100's of millions of dollars will not just laugh off a $50,000 fine. The fine has to truly hurt the company for it to be a deturrent.

  4. Re:A modest proposal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It isn't effective because it isn't done in public. Back in the good old days you'd strap a crook to a rack and pull out his innards in the middle of a town square. Then you'd use a couple of horses and pull of his limbs, which you would display all around town. That scared the shit out of people. Nowadays all that you do is give a lad a couple of injections in front of maybe a dozen people. People can get "deterred" by reading the news of the event if they want. Waste of time if you ask me. If you want to deter crime, then the criminals-to-be need to hear the screaming.

  5. Re:Death Penalty by dywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear FTC,

    Grow a pair, ban robo-calls, and follow through on enforcement.
    You can send me my check at your convenience.

    Signed,
    Me

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  6. Re:You cannot fine that which does not have a numb by Senior+Frac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh that's easy.

    Huge fines, but with the added requirement that the phone company must pay it if the caller cannot be identified.

    "The phone company" being the company where the trace gets lost. The concept that the sender is responsible for provisioning his own caller id is a ludicrous design flaw. Something more akin to ANI is needed (host based)... plus some very aggressive regulatory enforcement. It's a political 3rd rail, however.

  7. Re:A modest proposal by RabidReindeer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It isn't effective because it isn't done in public. Back in the good old days you'd strap a crook to a rack and pull out his innards in the middle of a town square. Then you'd use a couple of horses and pull of his limbs, which you would display all around town. That scared the shit out of people. Nowadays all that you do is give a lad a couple of injections in front of maybe a dozen people. People can get "deterred" by reading the news of the event if they want. Waste of time if you ask me. If you want to deter crime, then the criminals-to-be need to hear the screaming.

    One of the signature characteristics of criminals is that they're "special". Only Other People get caught. I'm too smart. So seeing Other People get executed in gross and painful ways does little to deter criminals, although it may make them think about using more extreme measures to avoid getting caught.

    On the other hand, we're well aware of the desensitizing effects of repeated spectacles. When a Drawing and Quartering replaces Monster Truck Pulls as a place to take the kiddies, don't be surprised if the kiddies end up with rather brutish ideas of how to interact with other people.

    While I would definitely enjoy seeing a few telemarketers being given an up close and personal exploration of their entrails, this kind of stuff isn't really about punishment, it's about revenge. Consider the quality of life in countries where revenge is the accepted means of dealing with injury. Even the so-called civilized ones. Where simply riding the bus can turn out to be an unexpected adventure.

  8. Re:You cannot fine that which does not have a numb by NevarMore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is how we lose our freedoms. An annoyance leads to bans and requirements that impact much more important matters.

    rtfa-troll points out below that anonymous calls are vital for tipsters and whistleblowers. Are you willing to sacrifice that very important check for the sake of not getting a robocall?

    More importantly, there are bans and requirements in place *now* that should prevent these robocalls from happening. Where did you get the idea that criminals follow the law?

  9. Re:You cannot fine that which does not have a numb by Dishevel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I run the phone system for a taxi company.
    I need the ability to control the number that shows up on a caller ID system.
    I do not want 1 of 165 numbers I have showing up on a customers phone when a calltaker calls them back of the callout system tells them their cab is at the location.
    Our recognizable 800 is what I want to show up. So that people know who is calling. Not giving me control causes confusion of who is calling.
    Taking away the power of responsible businesses is not the way to fix a problem with fuckwads.
     

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?