[Discuss] Consumer's Union attempts to end robocalls [OT]

[mbr at arlsoft.com (MBR)]

Could we please change the Subject line to "Consumer's Union attempts to 
end robocalls"? Every time I see "CU attempts to end robocalls" the 
subject line, I think we're talking about the venerable Unix utility 
'cu', and I wonder what clever technique someone's come up with to use a 
modem dialer from the early 1980s (late 1970s?) to stop robocalls.  ( 
1/2 :-) )

    Mark Rosenthal

On 12/8/15 10:10 AM, Grant M wrote:
> On 12/08/2015 07:27 AM, Michael Tiernan wrote:
>> On 12/7/15 5:05 PM, Grant Mongardi wrote:
>>> I always thought this would be simple for the major carriers [...]
>> Doesn't that assumption (which I'm sure we've all had) predicate 
>> itself on them
>> *wanting* to stop this traffic? Traffic=$$$$ so why interfere with 
>> it? They'd
>> have to spend money to prevent money from coming in. Doesn't seem to 
>> be a good
>> choice from a strictly business standpoint.
>
> Yes, that was my final point:
> > I can't imagine it's that difficult to do. But they get revenue from 
> those
> > calls even if they don't originate on their network. It's traffic and
> > someone pays for it.
>
> So yes, it is better for them to *not* do this as they still get 
> revenue for the traffic. And in reality they don't really care about 
> individual customers as they have no voice. Spending even $200/month 
> doesn't get you any attention from a company whose net last year was 
> over $9 billion. Until the FTC decides that they *can* actually 
> identify and regulate this traffic and that it serves the consumer 
> better then it's not actually going to happen.
>
> Grant M.