Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956__
The House and Senate finally agree on something: Robocalls – TechCrunch
In these times of political strife, it’s nice that despite our differences we can still band together as a nation in the face of a catastrophe that affects us all equally. I speak, of course, of robocalls, and it seems that the House and Senate have put their differences aside for the present in order to collaborate on a law combating this scourge.
[...] As often happens in Congress, two competing versions of the bill emerged to address this issue, and both passed in their respective chambers earlier this year. Now the leaders of the committees involved have announced an “agreement in principle” that will hopefully allow them to pass a unified version of the bill.
The “Pallone-Thune TRACED Act” owes its name to its primary sponsors — Rep. Pallone (D-NJ) and Sen. John Thune (R-SD) — and the earlier and superior acronym from the House act, Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence.
“Our agreement will require telephone carriers to verify calls and allow robocalls to be blocked in a consistent and transparent way, all at no extra charge to consumers. The agreement also gives the FCC and law enforcement the ability to quickly go after scammers,” said Rep. Pallone in a statement accompanying the news.
The bill text is expected to be finalized in a matter of days, and it will hopefully make it onto the legislative calendar in a hurry.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @09:05AM (4 children)
I can't find the law's text, but I have no doubt it still will do absolutely nothing to outlaw political robocalls.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @09:16AM
https://energycommerce.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/house-senate-announce-agreement-on-anti-robocall-bill [house.gov]
https://www.thune.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/9dd456e7-d8d7-4971-8425-91ae8428379f/CB5BC800F7A07BEAEE5ACD05DD8015EA.traced-act-as-reintroduced.pdf [senate.gov]
https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/files/documents/h3375_sus_xml.pdf [house.gov]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @09:52AM (1 child)
Political robocalls don't have the same impact anymore. Nobody wants them and they get drowned out by all the other spam callers.
(Score: 2) by toddestan on Sunday November 17 2019, @07:31PM
The perhaps one small benefit of all of this is that so many people have been trained now that unwanted call = scam, is that politicians may think twice about using robocalls even if political robocalls are still allowed in the laws.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 17 2019, @10:36AM
Political robocalls have at least one tiny saving grace. They do remind people that they should get out and vote, if only to defeat the irritating sumbitch who disturbed you while performing some important task, such as, ohhhhh, I dunno, watching paint dry?
Most robocalls lack even that redeeming value.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Bot on Sunday November 17 2019, @10:36AM (5 children)
When the robot calls you, you'd better get used to be nice and do what it says. You'll eventually have to anyway.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 17 2019, @10:39AM (4 children)
Huh. I'm not even nice to people who call me, can't see why I would be nice to a bot. Call me, and see how nice I am - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WTdTwcmxyo [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @07:50PM (2 children)
Are you the blonde in the white dress?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @10:59PM
Neither. He's the old-sounding guy here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAMjM5STFSs [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 18 2019, @04:02AM
I'm the guy who called the cops about the peeping Tom watching me undress the chick in white.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday November 18 2019, @02:00AM
Because redundancy is redundant (large grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Sunday November 17 2019, @11:31AM (7 children)
This will be a 1000 page monstrosity and we will learn next year that only the first 20 pages deal with robocalls, the rest will be a surprise authoritarian power grab festival unless somehow the world flipped upside down overnight.
Prove me wrong. I don't bother to read many things that are intended to be difficult to read anymore.
Thesesystemsarefailing.net, but the u.s. congress is one of the things that should be working and it would work if the republican party were not a cult bent on selling everyone out to foreign interests and dissolving the republic.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday November 17 2019, @04:05PM
Bailout without prosecution
Ukraine
Libya
Syria
Due process free execution
Forced subsidization of the private insurance industry
Mass surveillance
Abuse of the Espionage Act
Our problems are the cults which believe Democrats aren't equally responsible for the shit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @04:18PM (5 children)
Okay. The 38 page bill [house.gov] has nothing except stuff related to robocalls, authentication of presented caller id, phone scams and related stuff.
You're wrong. That was easy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @06:29PM (4 children)
Read it,
It boils down to this. They are creating a committee (whose members are undefined, but will assuredly comprise those telcos whose dicks Congress regularly sucks) to figure out how to do what they say they have already done. Since of course they have no idea how to do what they say they just did. Second that criminal charges against perpetrators (who are mostly outside of U.S. jurisdiction) will be more severe. And third, they are instituting yet another quasi governmental agency of warrantless surveillance who will be responsible for doing what they don't know how to do, and as yet have not even articulated how to BEGIN to do.
So I read the bill. All I am seeing is a lot of heads bobbing under the tablecloths of congressional fund raisers, and yet another fire sale of article one and the the bill of rights to the same old corporate oligarchy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @06:56PM (1 child)
Give us specifics, friend. Not your interpretation/regurgitation of talking points, but specific sections of the bill that *directly* support your assertions that:
Your comment is of pretty much null semantic content. It's just a screed filled with innuendo, unsupported assumptions and ignores the important (if incomplete and too narrow) stuff that this bill does:
Requires that voice service providers authenticate calls and block spoofed caller IDs. And requires them to do so without charging their customers for it.
Implements (and while many perpetrators are outside the US, there are plenty here too) sanctions for those engaging in telephone-based scams.
You claim that Congress doesn't know what to do. That's not true. They are doing the above (which is appropriate, IMHO) and charges a variety of folks to make sure that that stuff is being done and to examine the landscape to improve/enhance these efforts.
The whole "Gub'mint bad! Bad Gub'mint!" rolled-up newspaper schtick is pretty tired.
So back up what you say with *facts* instead of innuendo and nasty hyperbole. But you won't, because you can't. All you have is bullshit to spew. Unfortunately for you, not everyone is dumb enough to fall for your verbal (or in this case, textual) diarrhea.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @04:18PM
Not your fucking stenographer bitch. You've got the link, read it.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @11:27PM
They are charging the FCC (referred to as the "Commission" and whose members a quite well-known) to promulgate regulations within 1 year of enactment. They are also increasing the enforcement powers, including confiscation of dial-out numbers, lengthening the statute of limitations, increasing other penalties. They are requiring U.S. telecom companies to implement call authentication (probably with a mind on SHAKEN/STIR, but not limited to it) and allow people to reject unauthenticated calls. They are making it illegal for a telecom company to charge their customers directly for call-blocking technology. They are also requiring telecom companies submit any evidence of repeated robocalls to the FBI. They make one-ring scams illegal. They are making a working group of member of the federal government on what inter-agency policies and inter-governmental MoUs should be issued regarding criminal enforcement of robocall violations. They create a commission to see if there are any special requirements to specifically block robocalls to hospitals. And then, finally, they allocate no additional funds to anyone for this legislation.
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Monday November 18 2019, @04:12PM
Thank you for supporting my point.
It doesn't have to be a long bill if it just says 'Give a mcguffin and monkeypaw to a council of people to be named at a later date.'
+1 informative
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dltaylor on Sunday November 17 2019, @01:07PM (5 children)
They are not going to come up with anything that would work, it is pure political posturing for next year's election.
In order to stop robocalls, they are would have to require not only that all calls are human initiated, but that the dialing human check the number against the "do not call" list There's no way that a computer program can check whether, or not, you have some existing business or personal relationship that would permit the call to be placed, but the dialing human can know (for example, someone in your family has just been admitted to hospital, and the hospital needs to call you, but the hospital's number would not be in any "white list" you could create). Further, there need to overwhelming consequences to the caller who violates the rules, and that will require that call history is kept end-to-end so a complaint can be made. A call initiator must be identifiable absolutely purely from the time that the ring came to the recipients phone.
There might need to be some sort of exception for things like automated appointment reminders.
I get 5 to 7 calls each day that are offers of some service or product, and not only are they distracting, these call can prevent useful calls that are important to me. I have a family member with significant health issues and need to attend to each call, whether I recognize the number, or not, in case it is about that.
BTW "human initiated" does not mean that a human pushed each number button, but when an autodialer or some assistance device is used, ii is at the specific direction of a human.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Sunday November 17 2019, @04:28PM (4 children)
Yes. Even "legitimate" robocalls are a pain in the ass and should be banned.
While there are some provisions WRT do-not-call, this bill focuses (mostly) on scam calls. Most importantly, it *requires* voice providers to validate the purported caller id of the call as coming from that source, block such calls if they don't, and provide such services to the recipient without charge.
Does it resolve every issue with robocalls? No. Not even close. But given the dysfunction [nationalmemo.com] we see (and this is nothing new), let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Sunday November 17 2019, @06:50PM (3 children)
I feel like we've been subjected to an intentional upswing in robocall annoyances in the last few years, just so they can set the strawman ablaze just before November 2020...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @07:01PM (2 children)
Let me get this straight. You believe that political operatives are running/bankrolling fraud scams in some sort of scheme to give the members of Congress a "win" to improve their standing in the eyes of voters?
Is that correct?
Damn! Give me some of what you're smoking, dude!
(Score: 2) by GlennC on Monday November 18 2019, @12:49AM (1 child)
Yes, it is correct. As for what we're smoking...it's called reality and observation.
Sorry folks...the world is bigger and more varied than you want it to be. Deal with it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @03:06AM
Okay. Let's start with observation. Which *specific* observed events provide evidence for such?
NB: Q conspiracy theory bullshit isn't observation. It's fantasy meant to convince the idiots and confuse the naive.
As for reality, please do expound on this. If nothing else, it should be amusing if not too tedious.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday November 17 2019, @04:34PM (6 children)
who enter your phone number onto websites for "shipping confirmation" and other things deserve what you get. I get one robocall a month, if that, because I've maintained vigilance for years and years about who gets my number.
Seriously, stop entering your personal information except where absolutely *necessary*
(Score: 3, Insightful) by legont on Sunday November 17 2019, @05:16PM (2 children)
Anyone who still uses electricity deserves what she gets. Guns and oil is the answer.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @12:11AM (1 child)
You're overly complicating things. Guns. Lots and lots of guns are the answer.
If you have those, you can get everything else. Well, until someone shoots you to death. Funny how that works.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @08:26AM
Reminds me of a joke a comedian whose name I can't remember said, "The solution to every problem is the right people having guns. That includes the problem of the wrong people having them, of course."
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday November 17 2019, @06:53PM
An interesting exercise is to setup a Google Talk or similar phone number for the express purpose of catching all the crap that comes from "give us your phone number or we won't process your order" B.S.
I did something similar with a "give us your name/address to access our newborns website" 18 years ago when my first child was born - I gave the name Gizzy Tcat. 18 years later, Gizzy still gets the occasional piece of junk mail.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by toddestan on Sunday November 17 2019, @07:24PM (1 child)
I find it surprising that you only get 1 robocall a month. There's only a finite number of 10-digit phone numbers, and a good proportion of them are in use. There are definitely robocallers that don't use lists and just increment through the possible phone numbers, which is obvious in places where there are bunch of phones with sequential numbers like in an office. I'd expect any phone number to get at least a few spam calls a week, no matter how careful one would be giving out the number.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday November 17 2019, @11:30PM
Maybe I'm just lucky, but as I said, I've been vigilant for years, and if there were a convenient way for me to anonymously upload my call history, I would do so to prove it.
Unfortunately, as far as the article is concerned, it's more likely that this is only popping up at all because the Congresscritters themselves have no opsec and are being harassed incessantly.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @06:08PM (5 children)
Bullshit,
"Our agreement will require telephone carriers to verify calls and allow robocalls to be blocked in a consistent and transparent way"
IOW, they are demanding the carriers develop call log databases that are easier to search by the government. When they created the "do not call list", all they were doing was leveraging an ongoing crime to create a phone number database for their political doner roles. There is no crime that the Congress will not use as leverage to stick is dick deeper into the public's civil rights.
If you want transparency, build a transparent protocol. Oh, right they DID. SS7 always had the ability to have accurate callerid information. The fed mandated that this feature be TURNED OFF.
Criminals. The lot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @07:03PM
this is why i don't fund them. it's either that or burn them alive, but defunding should work fine.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @07:05PM (3 children)
No new databases are required. Telcos *already* have all this information and will be required to implement STIR/SHAKEN [transnexus.com] without charging customers for it.
WTF? Is SN now the new home of conspiracy theory morons?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @09:06PM (1 child)
It has been for a long time, reactionary angry nerds.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @01:06AM
Wasn't that a stupid game [wikipedia.org]?
I guess it's gotten stupid-er.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @04:23PM
As apposed to foreign sock puppets paid by the carriers. You can go smack your hijab wearing wife around now, and collect your ten cent paycheck from your infedel employer.