I was thinking this morning about government and industry-level technical solutions to the scourge that is robocalls.
In internet, one solution proposed was a required "response p[acket" of some kind that is no burden for normal users but for someone who is spamming millions of accounts it amounts to a self inflicted denial of service attack. I think that's kind of an elegant solution. It hasn't been implemented as far as I know, so it obviously has some flaws, but I think many of the complaints are from the very people we're trying to stop.
But at any rate - why not on phones,too? Any number which initiates more than a certain threshhold of user-request blocks, or just a certain threshhold of initiated calls, must produce a live person to explain the business model or be shut off. Or, a certain number of calls triggers an automatic filter through the Do Not Call registry.
Or something.
Thoughts?
In internet, one solution proposed was a required "response p[acket" of some kind that is no burden for normal users but for someone who is spamming millions of accounts it amounts to a self inflicted denial of service attack. I think that's kind of an elegant solution. It hasn't been implemented as far as I know, so it obviously has some flaws, but I think many of the complaints are from the very people we're trying to stop.
But at any rate - why not on phones,too? Any number which initiates more than a certain threshhold of user-request blocks, or just a certain threshhold of initiated calls, must produce a live person to explain the business model or be shut off. Or, a certain number of calls triggers an automatic filter through the Do Not Call registry.
Or something.
Thoughts?