Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Cellphones Communications United States Your Rights Online

Congress May Permit Robot Calls To Cell Phones 619

TCPALaw writes "While many hoaxes have circulated in the past about cell phone numbers being opened up to telemarketers, it now may actually happen. A bill, HR 3035 (PDF), has been introduced in Congress, that would create numerous exceptions to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which banned autodialed and prerecorded robot calls to cell phone numbers. If passed, HR 3035 would permit a wide range of autodialed and prerecorded calls to cell phones that are currently prohibited, and would preempt practically all state laws providing similar protections. This is being applauded by debt collectors and banks (PDF) ... as if the bailouts weren't enough, now they get to make you pay for their calls to you."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Congress May Permit Robot Calls To Cell Phones

Comments Filter:
  • by networkBoy ( 774728 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:23PM (#37555190) Journal

    I will send them a bill if they get through, and only pre-approved (i.e. in my phonebook) calls will ring my phone.
    I ignore voicemail from everyone.

    • Re:Simple. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kheldan ( 1460303 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:28PM (#37555258) Journal
      I'm not quite that paranoid, but I don't answer my phone for numbers I don't recognize, and robocalls usually don't leave voicemail, so if I see an unrecognized number and there's no voicemail, I don't bother over who (or what) it was.

      Am I the only person here thinking that at least part of the reason behind this is so that the GOP and/or the DNC can legally get away with robocalling voters?
      • Am I the only person here thinking that at least part of the reason behind this is so that the GOP and/or the DNC can legally get away with robocalling voters?

        No, you are not. In fact, I think that's the biggest reason behind this bill. The new generation doesn't have land lines, so in order to annoy the piss out of potential votes, they need to be able to call cell phones.

      • Re:Simple. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:51PM (#37555606)

        Am I the only person here thinking that at least part of the reason behind this is so that the GOP and/or the DNC can legally get away with robocalling voters?

        You're one of the few people who won't make it a partisan issue.

        I don't answer numbers I don't know - since most of us don't get unlimited calling, I think any cold-calling absolutely sucks and ought to be banned, or callers ought to be made to pay credit to your phone account (whether it's mobile or not). I don't know if it's still this way, but in Brazil the caller paid cellphone charges for calling a mobile number. Suddenly that seems like a great idea.

      • by way2trivial ( 601132 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:52PM (#37555640) Homepage Journal

        they are already exempt from the restriction []
        Robocalls are made by all political parties in the United States, including but not limited to both the Republican and Democratic parties as well as unaffiliated campaigns, 527 organizations, unions, and individual citizens. Political robocalls are exempt from the United States National Do Not Call Registry. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations prohibit telemarketers from using automated dialers to call cell phone numbers. However, political groups are excluded from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) definition of telemarketer, thus robocalls from or on behalf of political organizations are still permitted on the federal level.[1]

      • Am I the only person here thinking that at least part of the reason behind this is so that the GOP and/or the DNC can legally get away with robocalling voters?

        I'd expect that's only an added bonus. Really, they're probably thinking much more along the lines of "Direct marketing industry wants this, telecom wants this, banking and finance want this, no industry opposes it, easy yes, win $50,000 in 'campaign contributions'."

      • Re:Simple. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by kmankmankman2001 ( 567212 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:55PM (#37555696)

        Am I the only person here thinking that at least part of the reason behind this is so that the GOP and/or the DNC can legally get away with robocalling voters?

        Perhaps - as many of us are aware that existing law already exempts political calls anyway. The proposed bill wouldn't grant them any more access than they already have. There are MANY reasons to oppose this bill and I suggest that people should contact their congressman/woman to voice their concerns - but not for the reason you raise here.

      • Re:Simple. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Technician ( 215283 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @01:52PM (#37556434)

        I had a collection agency robocall my landline for about 3 months calling at all hours about 3 times a day. It left a message to call an 800 number and ask for Bob. I ignored it as a sales call. If I picked up the phone, there was NEVER a person on the line. It was a robo call to deliver a message.

        A Google search showed the 800 number was a collection agency. Bob was fictitious to cue the agency it was a delinquent caller. This collection agency was hammering an old number that became my new landline.

        I figured they pay the bill for calls to 800 numbers so I recorded a message and started calling the 800 number with the message "Your autodialer is running amook on my landline. Please call me to let me know when you have this fixed. Ask for Bob" When I got a call, I called back late at night (I work nights) and left them the message. I finally got a real person to call. A short exchange let them know the number was a new phone. I also gave them a real hard time as there was no way for anyone to stop the robo calls if they did not speak English.

        If it happens again, I have a Russian co worker I'll have call them and only speak Russian except for "Ask for Bob"

        Robo dialing is one thing. Robo calls with nobody on the line should be 100% outlawed, even for collections.

        • Re:Simple. (Score:5, Informative)

          by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @02:00PM (#37556584) Homepage

          Those collection agency calls where they call you and tell you to call a number and ask for $NAME are a scam. In my case, they'd call wanting to talk about a "check I had written". They were robocalling me for months, probably close to a year before I finally disconnected that land line (for other unrelated reasons, though it was nice to be free of those calls finally)

          Turns out this was a fraudster company that would bully people into thinking they had an unpaid debt and to pay the "debt" off. Once you started talking to them they'd even threaten you with legal action if you didn't pay; legal action that would never come, of course, since the whole thing was fraudulent.

          I'm not sure if it's still going on. Remember, real debt collectors call you directly (no robocalls), address you by name and can specify precisely what you owe and to whom.

      • Robocalls -do- leave voicemail. I get tons of it.
        Voicemail spam is actually THE major reason I am going to kill my land-line (hear that, FairPoint?).

        Sadly, you are right about the parties trying to "close the cell phone loophole". While the bill's primary sponsor is a house gop'er, it is co-sponsored by a NYC democrat.

  • Lobbyists (Score:5, Informative)

    by tmosley ( 996283 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:24PM (#37555198)
    Isn't it amazing what a few thousand dollars in campaign contributions will do?
    • by gearloos ( 816828 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:34PM (#37555356)
      Umm.. no. This was definitely a job for kneepads.
    • Re:Lobbyists (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:55PM (#37555680)

      Isn't it amazing that everyone knows that our government is for sale, but nobody wants to do anything about it?

      Campaign finance reform is a joke, since it has to be passed by the people who benefit from its absence.

      Open source governance [] is a lot harder to make happen, but considering that there are ZERO other options, what exactly do we have to lose? Our plutocracy? Our enslavement to the rich and powerful?

      • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) *

        Isn't it amazing that everyone knows that our government is for sale, but nobody wants to do anything about it?

        The rest of us don't "do anything about it" because we've long ago realized that nothing short of a revolution will change anything (since the people who would have to vote for this are the very people who benefit the most from the old system). And since the American people are way to fat and lazy to pick up rifles like the Libyans, we've decided it's not worth bothering. Besides, even if we did have a revolution, how would you get anyone to agree on a government afterwards? You would just end up with a bun

      • by s73v3r ( 963317 )

        Campaign finance reform is a joke, since it has to be passed by the people who benefit from its absence.

        You'd think all those Tea Party types would have been all over this. Guess they don't care either.

      • That's sort of the point, people complain about how they're being treated by corporations, and come next election the GOP has no trouble getting votes.

        The Democrats aren't saints, but at this point they're the only party that ever seems interested in stepping in to help the voters out against corporate interests.

  • I already get autodialed/prerecorded robot calls from debt collectors and banks on my cell (they drive me friggin' insane). That's illegal? Can I sue them for say, the amount of my debt?
  • When I got my cell phone a few years back, I had the misfortune of inheriting the number of a person who did not pay her bills. The debt collectors were calling my cell every hour or two, until I finally convinced them I did not know whom they were calling about.
    • by mark-t ( 151149 ) <markt@nerdflat.cCHICAGOom minus city> on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:47PM (#37555534) Journal
      I once worked for a debt collection agency when I was a lot younger, and there were some pretty rigid rules that had to be followed about calling people with regards to debt. These rules were set up by a central governing authority that determined accepted business rules and practices (I don't recall the name of the authority off hand). Among the rules that had to be followed, I remember that collectors were *NOT* allowed to call people multiple times in one day unless they had not reached anyone the first time, or if they had been advised to call back later. Also, hours of attempted telephone contact are restricted to between the hours of 7AM and 9PM local time for the person being called. Further, if the person that a collector reaches claims to be the owner of the phone number that the collector was trying to reach, and affirms that the person the collector is trying to reach cannot be reached at that phone number, then the collector *MUST NOT* call that number again to try to reach the debtor, and other methods of contact must be utilized. Finally, C&D notices, issued in writing, must be adhered to. If the collection agency does not heed these guidelines (the aforementioned ones are just a handful... there are actually about 10 or 12 or them), then the person answering the phone can report the collection company to the authorities, and the collection agency will face a very stiff fine.
    • I gert regular calls for deadbeats that just make up a number. I've had this number for 5 1/2 years, never assigned elsewhere.

      Feh. Loser deadbeats. Fortunately, I don't sound female, nor Hispanic, and the collectors figure it out quickly.

  • by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:26PM (#37555236) Journal

    This is why cell phones should be pay to call. Not pay to receive. You have no control over who calls you, therefore it makes no sense to agree to pay for incoming calls. Any plan without free incoming calls is a non-starter for me.

    • Is this just a US thing? The last time I had to pay to receive a call on my mobile was like... 1997 or something... I doubt you'd even find a plan like that over here anymore.
      • by heypete ( 60671 )


        The way the North American Numbering Plan is structured (which is shared between the US, Canada, and a few other countries), there's not really any way to have a separate prefix for mobile phones. Mobiles and landlines are mixed in the same area codes Thus, calling (000) 555-0111 might go to a landline, while (000) 555-0112 might go to a mobile.

        Since the caller has no idea whether or not the recipient is on a mobile with this numbering plan, it wasn't possible to introduce the European-style billing mod

        • Yes, Switzerland must be a bit more expensive then than e.g. Germany. My iphone contract costs about 40 euros a month, and I had the choice of either free calls to land lines or free calls to other mobile phones of the same provider (t-mobile), plus it has unlimited SMS and unlimited data transfer (well, with a transfer rate reduction after 200MB, but still, you can keep surfing forever without any extra cost).

          I really prefer the european model of "caller pays". I would not want any contract where I do not

  • by RogerWilco ( 99615 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:26PM (#37555238) Homepage Journal

    You have to pay to be called? Someone can rack up your phone bill by repeatedly calling you? That doesn't sound right.

    • by v1 ( 525388 )

      Not every calling plan has free incoming minutes.

      And I remember, "back in the day" (1992 or so) when incoming time counted on my cell phone where I had 20 minutes a month, at $0.50 per additional minute over that. (that was an improvement over my starting plan, which was 10 minutes a month, $1.00 each additional !) Wrong numbers got VERY annoying very fast. Apparently a drug dealer or something was giving out my number, got call after call asking for the same person, and every single one of them hung up o

    • by ewieling ( 90662 )
      In the United States, it is free to call cell phones (subject to toll charges just like any other number). It is not free to receive calls on your cell phone (unless you have a higher priced "unlimited" plan). This is different from how the rest of the world bills for cell calls.
    • by subreality ( 157447 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:52PM (#37555648)

      Yep. When we say the cell market is terrible in the US, we're not kidding. We also pay for incoming texts. You can nail people for $0.20 a pop by text bombing them. The major carriers use incompatible technologies, so it's a major hassle to take your business elsewhere... not that any of them offer a better deal anyway.

      • Re:You have to pay? (Score:5, Informative)

        by garcia ( 6573 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @01:08PM (#37555864)

        Call up your carrier and have them disable SMS. If they refuse or can't do it (they can) then call them up every time you receive a SMS and tell them to remove it from your bill.

        AT&T has effectively disabled my ability to receive SMS messages (I refuse to pay for GSM SMS when it's sent with every fucking packet anyway) and they have also set me up with free SMS anyway because one phone number which keeps sending me texts was getting through anyway (they don't know why).

        Is it an inconvenience? Sure. I had to call 8x to get them to fix it properly. But do they need to learn not to charge people for SMS when it's effectively free? Yes.

      • Re:You have to pay? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Ichijo ( 607641 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @01:40PM (#37556286) Journal

        Google Voice makes it easy to change carriers, and with a smartphone, incoming and outgoing text messages are fre, if you use their app. Also, they filter out junk calls.

        My only worry is, what happens if Google Voice goes away?

    • I am pay-as-you-go (not for lack of money, but since I hate contracts and I bought my own phone, so I need no 'favors' from the phone co.) and each minute DOES cost me, incoming or outgoing.

      I was lucky enough to be able to disable all incoming texts (I hate the very concept, don't get me started...) but had I not set that attrib up on my account, each spam sent to me would help my balance get closer and closer to zero ;(

      best that I just opt entirely out of texts. I'm not a teenager and too old for the text

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Do you know who, aside from bill collectors, banks and telemarketers, wants to robo-dial your phone?

    Those same congresspeople. For polling, GOTV and of course dirty tricks.

  • If it weren't, I'm guessing nobody would do it. But I used to get robocalls at my old business, and it was always very obvious, so I always hung up inside of 2 seconds. So someone must not mind being called, and in fact buy the stuff that's being marketed?

    • It usually old people, and the mentally handicapped. It's not PC to say, but older people are more likely to be easily swayed by robocalls, spam, and junk email. Unfortunately, they don't condone off those phone numbers, so the rest of us get called and bothered too.
  • Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by black soap ( 2201626 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:33PM (#37555340)

    Debt collectors and banks? They shouldn't be robocalling. Those situations are where they have a pre-existing relationship with the person being called, and aren't cold-calling anybody.

    Robocalls are the telephone equivalent of spam. Why is it I can put a "No solicitors" sign on my door, but my phone must be subject to cold-calling from telemarketers, solicitations for "charities" and political groups, and any scammer who can operate a telephone? And they want to make it easier to bother lots of people at a time by allowing robocalling?

    If anything, every telemarketing call should have to be hand-dialed, etc., no computer assistance. Think of the jobs that would be created.... Do it for the economy.

    I wonder how soon the phone companies will work out a deal to let telemarketers call the phone customers, for a fee - because we know how much they care about the customers.

    • I have a "No Soliciting" sign on my door (it was from a previous owner). Contrary to belief, the actual meaning of it is that a person may not use your property to sell their product to other people. It doesn't prevent them from selling items to you.

    • by h4rr4r ( 612664 )

      Bullshit, my bank likes to robocall me to get me to sign up for their visa card. Last time they did it I informed then any future calls would result in my moving my accounts. If I wanted their visa I would call them about it.

      • by tepples ( 727027 )
        Would you move your accounts to another bank even if you lived in an area where only one bank has branches? And if you did, how would you deposit cash and checks that you receive from other individuals?
    • by Grishnakh ( 216268 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @01:04PM (#37555818)

      If anything, every telemarketing call should have to be hand-dialed, etc., no computer assistance. Think of the jobs that would be created.... Do it for the economy.

      Not only that, they should have to be hand-dialed with a rotary phone.

  • Nip it in the bud. (Score:5, Informative)

    by gatkinso ( 15975 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:33PM (#37555348)
  • by hAckz0r ( 989977 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:34PM (#37555360)
    Just set up your phone to forward all unanswered calls to your Congressman's office. If you don't know who is calling its probably going to be spam anyway, and I just don't answer them anyway and just wait for a message.Though, I just wonder if forwarded calls count against your minutes? Maybe Google Voice can set this up for people without a decent smartphone?
  • With more people using their cell phones primarily and people cutting the landline, you know this was coming.

    It was nice while it lasted. At least now, everyone can screen their calls.

    A part of the law should be the ability for customers to block unknown numbers automatically.

    • CORRECTION: You know this was coming in the US.

    • Actually I think it should be illegal to hide or obfuscate any phone number when making a call. If you want to call me, your phone had better show me an accurate number,
    • by Thud457 ( 234763 )
      I see a lot of people saying they don't answer unknown/unidentified numbers.
      You don't want anything bad to happen.

      Just be sure to add all the local hospitals to your contacts.
      And the city jail. And county. And any local police department numbers.
      And all your cow-orkers if you're unfortunate enough to be on-call at work.
      And your bank(s).
      And any numbers your credit card companies might be calling from.

      Might be better to have a blacklist app.
      fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, won't get fooled ag
      • by sohmc ( 595388 )

        I've found that if it's *REALLY* important (e.g. life or death), they will call several times before giving up.

        For example, when my sister was in the hospital, her boyfriend called my phone several times. I didn't have his number so I didn't answer it. He left a message the first time and told me that he'd keep trying to call.

        By his third call, I realized the same number just tried to call and it must be an emergency.

        Creditors usually don't do this since they get paid only if you pi

  • Businesses increasingly rely on advanced communications technologies to convey timely and important information to consumers. These calls notify consumers about threats such as data breaches and fraud alerts, provide timely notice of flight and service appointment cancellations and drug recalls, and protect consumers against the adverse consequences of failure to make timely payments on an account.

    If this is true, and this is the intended purpose of this law, and if it still keeps the telemarketers out, the

  • are either trying to reach someone who had my number, pulled it out of thin air when getting credit, or because of my sister, this is the last thing that I want. I use a prepay cell phone (I am a stickler for costs) and unless we adopt a callers pays method of billing with cell phones all I can see is a world of hurt coming out of this.

  • by Dr_Ish ( 639005 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:42PM (#37555476) Homepage
    Although the idea behind the *Telephone Consumer Protection Act*, as it is currently, is reasonable, in practice, it does little good. I started to get robo-calls some time ago on my land line from 'Tax Resolution Services'. The number has been on the national do not call register for ages. J. K. Harris and Company [] were particularly aggressive. Although I told them to put me on their do not call list, asked for a written copy of their do not call policy and did all the right things, they did not stop. Fortunately, I documented it all. Eventually, I took them to Small Claims Court, under the right to private action provision of the *Telephone Consumer Protection Act*. I won the case, along with $1,000 damages, court costs and legal interest. That was several months ago. To date, I have not received a penny. They do not respond to e-mails, certified letters, or telephone calls. I cannot go after their assets, as they seem to rent everything and own nothing. It turns out their head of legal services is only a paralegal, not a lawyer, so I cannot even pursue her for failing to live up to the professional standards of South Carolina Bar Association. So, scumbag telemarketers already have ways of getting around the law. Making life even easier for them would thus be a very bad idea.
    • Motherfuckers.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      You should set up a robodialer to call them until they respond.
    • by dex22 ( 239643 )

      They must have a corporate bank account you can seize the funds from it. Always think of your judgment as a long term investment that attracts typically 12% APR depending on State, and which you can pursue for as long as you wish.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        You have to remember to keep it alive. Judgments that are not acted on for a period of time can become dormant and eventually die (thereby becoming noncollectable).

        Interestingly enough, you may be able to file with the IRS to levy against JK's tax returns

        As an aside, my favorite collections story involves my former boss, who had a client who won a huge claim against Walmart. Walmart refused to cooperate with the collection efforts and basically ignored everything. So he levied against all the property th

    • Have you tried getting their accounts frozen. If you have a legal judgment against them they have a certain time to pay (usually something like 30 to 90 days) and if they don't then you can get them found in contempt of court. Once that is done it is pretty easy to have their accounts frozen. I had to threaten this with and insurance company that owed me money and didn't want to pay even thought I had a legal judgment.
  • by JustAnotherIdiot ( 1980292 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:45PM (#37555508)
    Since I don't get enough spam calls as it is. Thanks Congress.
  • Thank you Mr. Terry for being the acme of your fine party and branch of legislature.

    Seriously, have the orbital cannons come online yet?

  • Google Voice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Captain_Loser ( 601474 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:48PM (#37555564)
    I have found the the "beta" spam feature of google voice does a good job of filtering out crap calls. Also, every cell phone that I have used for the past 10 years has had caller ID. I just don't answer calls that I don't recognize. If it's important, they'll leave a voicemail.
    • I have found the the "beta" spam feature of google voice does a good job of filtering out crap calls. Also, every cell phone that I have used for the past 10 years has had caller ID. I just don't answer calls that I don't recognize. If it's important, they'll leave a voicemail.

      Another lesser known use for Google is to type in the number in question and getting some type of listing for them. That way...if they leave a can call them back if you like or just let them hang in the wind. Even if the number isn't specific to a listing...for instance a telemarketer or bill collector...others have been harassed as well and will complain online about it.

      Had my roommate see me do this with a number which wasn't in my phone book. He was amazed you could use Google to find a p

  • by b4dc0d3r ( 1268512 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @12:52PM (#37555628)

    I don't see anything in the bill to object to. Telephone soliciting is still prohibited, and if a debt collector is after you I think you have other things to worry about.

    In fact, the only scenario I can see as a real problem is when debt collectors rack up charges robo-calling you. Just take every charge off the amount you owe until it's a wash. Or actually pick up the phone and figure out how to deal with your debt, and inform them that you are being charged, and you do not have a prior business relationship as defined in the Communications Act and this is a mobile phone.

    Anyone have a better summary?

  • Personally, I find robocalls to be the most obnoxious thing someone can do. Whenever I get a robocall that gives me the opportunity to actually talk to an individual, I will always give whatever response will get that person to talk to me. My favorite are the one's that ask you to leave your name and number if you would like someone to call you. I always give a fictitious name and my real number (not cellphone). Then when they call back, I tell them that that person just stepped out and should be back in 15
  • This is exactly why I've kept my landline despite the fact I almost never use it. I keep it around to give to banks and others who need a phone number from me so I don't have to give them my cell number. No way I want telemarketers calling my cell.

  • I just looked at the bill. It says

    ‘‘(iv) to any telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service, specialized mobile radio service, or other radio
    common carrier service, or any service for which the called party is charged for the call, unless the call is made for a commer
    cial purpose that does not constitute a telephone solicitation;’’.

    The problem is that the current law is not enforced. Just in the past few days I got multiple machine dialed calls from someone tryi

    • File a complaint []. It takes a while, but they do actually process these. I filed several of them years back and recently received E-mails notifying me that they had taken action. You don't get any money out of it, but it's my understanding that the companies in violation are fined, so filing enough complaints will (hopefully) provide a disincentive to harass people.

      • by PRMan ( 959735 )
        I worked at a company that got 8 $11,000 fines for a total of $88,000. They do follow up at and they do fine.
  • This was introduced by the Republican Congressman from Nebraska. Are people in that state not caring if they get autodialers hitting their cell phones all day?

  • If I don't recognize the caller ID, I don't answer. It really is that simple. Most of these things won't go to voicemail. If they start doing that, there will be more countermeasures.

    Hey, how about providing services that we want or need? How about providing them in a friendly and courteous manor, like the local coffee shop? They get more of my money than I want to count. A certain major telecom that telemarketed me back in the 90s? I'm *still* reluctant to ever use their service.

  • Sponsor Lee Terry (R) and co-sponsor Edolphus Towns (D).

    Well, fuck me. Finally something both parties can agree on: screwing the US public.

  • "now they get to make you pay for their calls to you"

    Well, even in the days of landlines, we always paid. Yes, we PAID for our service.

    But it was flat-rate for incoming calls.

    I've got an unlimited voice plan now, so I can take time to waste these calls and eventually get dropped from the list. But not everyone does I know.

    Just remember, landlines always were paying for incoming calls, just not by the minute. Apparently towers are more precious than cables.

  • If you're late on your cell phone bill can the cell phone company robo-call you repeatedly and rack up a higher bill. Now that's a smart business plan!!
  • by ShavedOrangutan ( 1930630 ) on Thursday September 29, 2011 @01:02PM (#37555788)
    The easy solution is an Android or iPhone app to automatically hang up on unlisted calls and/or calls not in your phone book. Perhaps even a central phone number black list for known robocall sources. Phone doesn't even need to ring.
  • capitalist class may vote to allow itself to encroach evermore into your personal life with the harmless premise of offering additional goods and services that you, the consumer, have been questionlessly determined to purchase regardless of what you think.

I've finally learned what "upward compatible" means. It means we get to keep all our old mistakes. -- Dennie van Tassel