Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cell Phone Directory Coming Soon

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the baby-i-got-your-number dept.

Communications 219

applemasker writes "According to this story on Yahoo News via the L.A. Times, an upcoming cell phone directory which supposedly includes 75% of all cell users is in the works. Some people are already receiving cell phone spam and telemarketing calls. Worse yet, unless you opt-out at the beginning of your contract, some carriers such as T-Mobile can gladly hand over your info (though the article says that T-Mobile is changing the contract now). Some good news though, Verizon Wireless has said that it will not share its customer lists. Still, maybe it's time to submit your cell number to the Do Not Call List if you haven't done so already." We had a related story last year.

cancel ×

219 comments

BSD launches directory of hot babes! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9208970)

Is it any wonder people think Linux [debian.org] users are a bunch of flaming homosexuals [lemonparty.org] when its fronted by obviously gay losers [nylug.org] like these?! BSD [dragonflybsd.org] has a mascot [freebsd.org] who leaves us in no doubt that this is the OS for real men! If Linux had more hot chicks [hope-2000.org] and gorgeous babes [hope-2000.org] then maybe it would be able to compete with BSD [openbsd.org] ! Hell this girl [electricrain.com] should be a model!

Linux [gentoo.org] is a joke as long as it continues to lack sexy girls like her [dis.org] ! I mean just look at this girl [dis.org] ! Doesn't she [dis.org] excite you? I know this little hottie [dis.org] puts me in need of a cold shower! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox [spilth.org] . As you can see, no man can resist this sexy [spilth.org] little minx [dis.org] . Don't you wish the guy in this [wigen.net] pic was you? Are you telling me you wouldn't like to get your hands on this ass [dis.org] ?! Wouldn't this [electricrain.com] just make your Christmas?! Yes doctor, this uber babe [electricrain.com] definitely gets my pulse racing! Oh how I envy the lucky girl in this [electricrain.com] shot! Linux [suse.com] has nothing that can possibly compete. Come on, you must admit she [imagewhore.com] is better than an overweight penguin [tamu.edu] or a gay looking goat [gnu.org] ! Wouldn't this [electricrain.com] be more liklely to influence your choice of OS?

With sexy chicks [minions.com] like the lovely Ceren [dis.org] you could have people queuing up to buy open source products. Could you really refuse to buy a copy of BSD [netbsd.org] if she [dis.org] told you to? Personally I know I would give my right arm to get this close [dis.org] to such a divine beauty [czarina.org] !

Don't be a fag [gay-sex-access.com] ! Join the campaign [slashdot.org] for more cute [wigen.net] open source babes [wigen.net] today!

$Id: ceren.html,v 7.0 2004/01/01 11:32:04 ceren_rocks Exp $

Do Not Call List (4, Interesting)

davidmcn (606752) | more than 10 years ago | (#9208979)

I just assumed the Do Not Call list was to apply to cell phones too, so when it came time to enroll, every number in my household, cell and not, became a "Do Not Call" number.

Re:Do Not Call List (5, Interesting)

baudilus (665036) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209100)

The Do Not Call list could not have applied to cell phones because previously, telemarketers were barred from calling any phone where the receiver of the call could be charged for it (i.e. cell phone minutes). I guess that law has changed since inception, or otherwise, the cell phone companies have found a way to make incoming telemarketer calls "free."

Conversely (and perhaps slightly O/T), I've always been suspicious of the Do Not Call list, because if you consider it, on one hand it's like a free list that unscrupulous telemarketers can get and spam, and on the other hand, the "gub-mint" can link you email address to your phone number. (We can't call but we can sure spam that email account!) Of course you can get around it by using a quick free e-mail (like yahoo or hotmail) but who do you know outside of us savvy /.'ers, who probably have "junk" accounts anyway, would go through the trouble of setting one up just for this?

Re:Do Not Call List (2, Informative)

strictnein (318940) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209200)

one hand it's like a free list that unscrupulous telemarketers can get and spam

I believe there is a charge for the list, and they have to get the list quarterly.

Strangely enough, the Direct Marketing Association feels that it is necessary to charge people $5 to help get them off the list [dmaconsumers.org] if they do it online! What a scam. They don't link to the official site [donotcall.gov] at all.

Re:Do Not Call List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209280)

I like how the phone companies have gotten around the do not call list. They start the call with, "We would like to thank you for paying your bill on time" then launch into the same old advertising.

completely off-topic (0, Offtopic)

chimpo13 (471212) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209320)

http://www.vintagepork.com/ isn't working, damn it. What's it about?

Re:Do Not Call List (1)

T-Ranger (10520) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209356)

Security is like an onion. Layers and layers.

Get on the national DNC list(s). Get on any local ones. If/When you get calls anyway, get on their company specific list. Put your dog on the list.

Re:Do Not Call List (4, Insightful)

ericspinder (146776) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209309)

I still get sales calls on phone sometimes, they say that they are "surveys" and once an extermination service called just "because someone in the area needed their service". Those kind of calls are allowed by the DNC list. Trust me you will see more and more of them and with cell phone number avaiable, they might be hitting them hard. Right now telemarketers have a good list of people who will take the time to listen, but cell phones are a fresh market. Heck there are many teenagers and young adult who only use cell phones, they will want to tap that market. If the value of this fresh market is judged by the telemarketers to be greater than the costs (fines), we'll be seeing bunches of calls on our once private numbers, at least until it levels out.

I still use the same old line that I used before the DNC list "I do not ever, ever respond in any way to unsolisited telephone calls of any type. Please take me off your list and I hope that you have a nice day ".

Verizon (-1, Offtopic)

DaLiNKz (557579) | more than 10 years ago | (#9208992)

Well, i just got a contract for Verizon recently and I must say, even if they gave out their numbers I'm not really sure if the spammers could ever get a call to me without it getting dropped... The phones they have just don't do it for me, I wish Verizon had some of the sprint phones.. specifically picture phones. They don't have great quality but i'm not trying to document a exploration, i'm trying to take a quick snap of something or someone.

Re:Verizon (-1, Offtopic)

davidmcn (606752) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209025)

I've had verizon for 2 years now and have been happy with the service...but I do agree that the phone selection leaves something to be desired. Then again, I don't know where you are, whereas I'm in a large metropolitan area.

Re:Verizon (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209278)

...and that's why you never, ever sign up for a contract for cellular service.

Of course another great reason is that at the rate technology is improving, in a year or two the contract will become a noose. How about when the new plans include unlimited data transfer for less than you're paying for voice only now?

Try one of the prepaid plans. At AT&T for example it's 25 cents/minute (which is high if you use it a lot so it's not suitable for everyone), but there is no contract, no hidden fees like the fake taxes that were dicussed here recently, and unused minutes roll forward. For very light use, you can have a cell phone for $3.50/month including extras and taxes with AT&T. That $3.50 doesn't force you to use 14 minutes either; if you use less than 14 they still roll forward.

Re:Verizon (2, Insightful)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209299)

apparently your the minority since verizon was rated the best in customer service and support recently (with at&t as the worst, no surprise there)

As for picture phones, there are a ton of them for verizon, infact i know of one that is great and by LG.... but it begs the question.... who really needs their phone to take pictures... PDA replacement i can see, ability to be used as a modem yes... but PICTURES?

Expensive (5, Interesting)

thgreatoz (623808) | more than 10 years ago | (#9208997)

I thought telemarketing to a cell phone was illegal, due to the fact that you are charged for both incoming and outgoing calls on a cell phone. As I understood it, it's similar to the anti-junk fax laws, which were put in place because you pay for the ink and paper that is wasted.

Re:Expensive (0, Troll)

cavemanf16 (303184) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209023)

You're right, but this is Slashdot where FUD is decried when it relates to Linux, but reigns supreme when posted to the front page by an "editor."

Re:Expensive (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209057)

Oh, one last thing...

If michael is the one posting the story, you can almost guarantee he didn't read the story, made up some lame-ass bullshit to really sell the "story," and then posted it to the frontpage.

michael is such a loser.

Re:Expensive (1)

MrBlackBand (715820) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209072)

...FUD is decried when it relates to Linux, but reigns supreme when posted to the front page by an "editor."

What FUD are you talking about? People do get telemarketing calls on their cell phones. So what's your problem?

Re:Expensive (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209140)

michael is my problem. He always makes this kind of thing sound like the end of the freakin world. Yes, I realize people get telemarketing calls once in a while on their cell phones, and yes, I know that's just wrong.

But michael is constantly painting a picture of doom and gloom about everything EXCEPT Linux. Hey, I love Linux and OSS and Free Software as much as the next /.'er, but I simply can't stand michael's version of "journalism." Not to mention the fact that he's reported the facts entirely WRONG many times in the past just to make the headline news story on slashdot sound more interesting.

michael just pisses me off. Slashdot is almost a cesspool now because of him.

Re:Expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209202)

At least Simoniker and CowboyNeal do a pretty good job.

Re:Expensive (1)

MrBlackBand (715820) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209264)

Okay, I understand now. Sorry if I seemed to over react a bit. Still, I gotta do some commenting.

...but I simply can't stand michael's version of "journalism."

Who says that it's journalism? It's not journalism to post news stories by other people on a popular website. Slashdot is not a place for "journalism". It's a place were you can go and see headlines that appeal to nerds, and then comment on them as you see fit. There's nothing that says the "editors" have to be unbiased or not insert snarky comments. To me, that's all a part of the fun.

Re:Expensive (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209119)

The problem is, the "editors" at /. are too busy sucking eachother's cocks and licking the spooge off of eachother's balls.

Re:Expensive (5, Informative)

TheBeardIsRed (695409) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209033)

it is, read more here: How To Make A Telemarketer Cry (or, Suing Bozos for Fun & Profit) - http://www.panix.com/~eck/telemarket.html

Re:Expensive (5, Informative)

rwiedower (572254) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209332)

And here's the official FCC link [fcc.gov] to the TCPA which details that it is illegal to call not only a cell phone, but also hospitals or any service where someone is charged for the call. Read. Learn. Fight back.

Re:Expensive (2, Insightful)

periol (767926) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209048)

Right, and I'm sure you know just how well the "anti-junk fax laws" work. Or maybe you don't have one of them fax machines.

Re:Expensive (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Custard (587661) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209096)

What if they call you on nights or weekends when you happen to have free minutes? I bet the law doesn't consider that, but a telemarketer could make a good argument in court with that defense...

Re:Expensive (1)

Zed2K (313037) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209256)

But you are still paying for the priviledge of having unlimited nights/weekends. And not everyone gets that kind of plan either.

Re:Expensive (1)

ForestGrump (644805) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209259)

what if im on the 10 dollar/mo prepaid plan and don't get "free mins"?

Re:Expensive (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209260)

Yes, but there's really no way for them to know if you have a plan that has free nights and weekends.

Unless, of course, the phone company gives them your number AND what kind of plan you have, which would be really, really scummy.

Re:Expensive (1)

JuggleGeek (665620) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209300)

The law says that unsolicited telemarketing to cell phones is illegal. The law doesn't say it's illegal only if you are paying for minutes, it just says it's illegal. The telemarketer can argue 'till he's blue in the face, and that won't change the law.

At the same time, like spammers, many telemarketers don't care about the law.

I never put my cell phone on the national (or state) Do Not Call list, because I'm not receiving telemarketing calls to it anyway. I've had 2-3 since I've had it, and I've had it for 4-5 years, I think. If I started receiving telespam, I'd add it to the DNC list.

Re:Expensive (1)

thedillybar (677116) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209135)

The fact that it costs my company money hasn't stopped people from spamming the hell out of me. Why should it stop people from telemarketing to our cell phones?

Re:Expensive (2, Interesting)

pavon (30274) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209272)

The fact that it costs my company money hasn't stopped people from spamming the hell out of me. Why should it stop people from telemarketing to our cell phones?

1) Telemarketing cell phones is definately illegal while the spam laws are worthless.
2) Telemarketers can be easily traced and caught while spammers cannot.

I have gotten two telemarketing calls on my cell phone (both of which were quasi-legitimate purchase "follow-up" calls) and both times when I told them I was on a cell phone they immediately appologized, voluntarily put me on their DNC list and hung up. That is what accountability gets you, and it doesn't exist for email.

Re:Expensive (0, Offtopic)

hinterwaeldler (752524) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209168)

What? You actually have to pay for incoming calls on cell phones in the US? Poor bastards :-(

Re:Expensive (1)

lucabrasi999 (585141) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209279)

In the US, you usally pay for all minutes your phone is active. Incoming and Outgoing.

Re:Expensive (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209173)

it's similar to the anti-junk fax laws, which were put in place because you pay for the ink and paper that is wasted.

Its a damn good thing(tm) that bandwidth, disk storage, and my time are not wasted on other unwanted marketing ploys.

Re:Expensive (1)

thgreatoz (623808) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209190)

Good point.

Pay for incoming calls? (0, Redundant)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209281)

Crazy talk, who the fuck pays for incoming calls?

Re:Expensive (0, Redundant)

Spellbinder (615834) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209376)

what the fuck???? you pay for incoming calls???
here they stopped that many years ago
the only situation you pay for incoming calls is if you are abroad with your cell phone
i think you need better consumerism laws or something

Then how come i see MSCE CISCO BOOT CAMP faxes.. (1)

adamgeek (771380) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209377)

every day i see the fax machine out by the server room near my office, spitting out worthless faxes about vacations to tahiti and MCSE bootcamps.

not calling you a liar, just saying i wasnt aware that this practice (junk faxing) was illegal.. and if it really is, how come every business i've worked at that has a publically accessable fax machine, seems to get these faxes everyday (i.e. why isnt the law being enforced). i dont /expect/ you to necessarily know the answer haha.. but does someone? =D

existing customers (1)

commo1 (709770) | more than 10 years ago | (#9208999)

What happens to existing customers who have had the same number for 10 years and enjoyed 10 years of bliss? (or as much bliss as one can expect owning a device with which you be reached anywhere)

illegal??? (1, Redundant)

(54)T-Dub (642521) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209011)

I thought it was illegal for business to make unsolicited phone calls to cell phones because the customer gets charged for it. Am i wrong?

Re:illegal??? (0, Offtopic)

(54)T-Dub (642521) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209035)

Doh, now i'll be modded redundant because someone asked the same question on Thu May 20, '04 05:12 PM

Re:illegal??? (1)

SuperChuck69 (702300) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209060)

I believe it's on a state-by-state basis.

Re:illegal??? (4, Informative)

JuggleGeek (665620) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209348)

I believe it's on a state-by-state basis.

No, it's not. Telemarketing to cell phones is already illegal and has been for some time.

The FCC has information on their website [fcc.gov] .

legality? (-1, Redundant)

surreal-maitland (711954) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209012)

i thought telemarketer calls to cell phones were already illegal. is that incorrect?

Never get calls (5, Interesting)

lukewarmfusion (726141) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209014)

I almost never get telemarketing calls on my cell. I get a wrong number sometimes.

As soon as I get a telemarketer calling my cell phone, I demand their name, number, organization, address, etc. (as the DNC registry stipulates). Then I will inform them that I will be sending a bill to that address to recover the cost of the minutes that their company just used for me.

Once, I got a telemarketer and as soon as I realized who it was I informed them that it was a cell. She apologized profusely and voluntarily put me on their do-not-call list.

I'm in Indiana, so we have a stricter DNC anyway. :)

Wish that worked for spam (1)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209183)

Thank god the DNC doesn't work like the CAN-SPAM act... I couldn't handle getting so many calls for V1@g.RA.

Re:Never get calls (1)

cexshun (770970) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209195)

God, isn't it cool to be a Hoosier? I know I love it. I did the same thing you did to a telemarketer. Although the cost of the minutes was less then the postage I had to pay to send them a bill, it was well worth it to make my point!

Re:Never get calls (1)

transient (232842) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209201)

I've had similar experiences with my phone at work. Somehow a telemarketer got my work number, and as soon as I told them they'd called a business number, they split. Too bad it doesn't work with Oracle salespeople though. (I'm in Indiana too, incidentally.)

Re:Never get calls (2, Funny)

T-Ranger (10520) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209325)

Tell the Oracle salesdroids that it is a home number.

Re:Never get calls (1)

DJStealth (103231) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209357)

You ever get calls where the number on the display is FAKE?

I get those from telemarketers all the time; when I come home in the evening, I check my call display, and call back #'s I don't recognize.. At least once every week I get a call from a phone # that the number is not in service.

Huh? (-1, Redundant)

ewhac (5844) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209019)

Color me ignorant, but I was under the impression that telemarketing calls to cell phones was already illegal, primarily because the called party pays for all airtime. Was this ever true? Has this suddenly changed?

Schwab

Most cell phone plans have free nights and weekend (1)

voxel (70407) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209132)

So they just telemarket you on friday night, saturday and sunday :-).

Re:Most cell phone plans have free nights and week (2, Interesting)

baudilus (665036) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209155)

There is no guarantee that you have "Free Nights and/or Weekends."

The law still applies, as does the one that telemarketers cannot call you on Sunday.

Maybe I'm Naive but..... (4, Insightful)

MacGod (320762) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209028)

Maybe I'm naieve, but I personally think this would be a good idea. Telemarketers are irriting, no question, but worse still is losing a phone number and being unable to find it. I don't have to refer to the phone-book too often for landlines, but every time I do, it saves me mucho effort or results in me being able to contact someone I otherwise would not be able to.

Re:Maybe I'm Naive but..... (4, Interesting)

sixteenraisins (67316) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209106)

I understand that for many of us, a mobile phone is as fundamental as a land line phone at home. For many others, a mobile phone is the only phone they have.

However, I'm sure I'm not the only one who views a mobile phone as follows: The phone is for ME to call PEOPLE, not the other way around. The only people I want to receive mobile calls from (indeed, this applies to home line calls as well) are the people to whom I GIVE the number. That's why my home number is unlisted.

I can count on both hands the number of people who have my mobile number, and I like it that way. I would much rather see this directory be opt-in only.

Re:Maybe I'm Naive but..... (1)

Pantheraleo2k3 (673123) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209322)

Simple solution. We need a cell phone that suppors whitelisting. Maybe someone can implement a tool for Palm OS that restricts incoming calls to people in the address book. It's not perfect, but it would work for a lot of people

even if you don't register (3, Interesting)

atari2600 (545988) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209038)

It is like a firewall - take the call once.
*Phone rings*
Me: who's this? Them: We are calling to see how many children you have..
Me:I have registered this number in the Do not call registry
*click*
There you go :)


What can i say? I am a lonely guy :)

Re:even if you don't register (3, Funny)

baudilus (665036) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209130)

*Phone rings*
Me: who's this?

I love how you answer the phone. No business calls on your cell, eh?

Instant obsolescence? (5, Interesting)

darth_MALL (657218) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209042)

Admittedly, I know only a bit about cel-phones, but the many people I know and work with tend to change numbers frequently. What's practical about a list like this, if the information is consistantly out-of-date? I realise an electronic DB would be easy enough to keep current, but who's goign to use it (besides spammers?)

Re:Instant obsolescence? (1)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209138)

Well.. now that the cellular number portability laws are in effect nationwide (atleast it will be in a couple days), many will be able to keep thier numbers to switch to different carriers. However, there still might be those that do switch their numbers. However, it makes it tough say, for example, if that number was on the list and the new owner of the number doesn't want it posted. You might run into a few problems.

Already on the DNC list (2, Insightful)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209045)

funny- when I first signed up for the Federal DNC list, it asked me to provide up to 5 phone numbers. Didn't anybody else enter their cell numbers at that point?

Re:Already on the DNC list (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209105)

michael must not have since he is a royal moron asswipe.

Great! (5, Funny)

stinkyfingers (588428) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209054)

So the bastard next to me in the movie theater can ruin the experience by getting a call from a jackass he *doesn't* know?

Re:Great! (2, Funny)

MrBlackBand (715820) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209120)

It's Inconsiderate Cell Phone Telemarketing Guy!

ICPTG (Shouting at a funeral): I can save how much on my long distance? Sweeeeeeeet!

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209344)

No, he can ruin the experience by not turning the cell phone off.

Terrible!!!!! (5, Insightful)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209056)

With the abundance of web pages that allow users to simply type in a cell-phone number and a text message, I feel this might be a huge mistake publishing all of these numbers. How long would it take for a spam bot to cultivate through the database, pick-up all the numbers and spam them? My guess is that it shouldn't take more than a day to do.

"Wireless carriers say they doubt there will be widespread abuse. They point out that most mobile phones come equipped with caller ID, distinctive ring tones, call blocking and other tools to manage unwanted calls. And several carriers say they have made refunds to subscribers who have received unwanted calls. "

What they fail to understand is that, atleast with my carrier (Sprint), text messages pop up all the time. I have no options to block text messages from certain users, or only allow messages from those in my phone book. I think the biggest area won't be the unwanted calls, but rather the unwanted text messages that cost about as much as it does to send spam messages.

By far.. Worst idea EVER!

Re:Terrible!!!!! (2, Insightful)

euphonaesthesia (780368) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209265)

Not to mention, on most plans, one pays for text messages received [either deducted from a package of a number messages that one buys for a certain amount of money each month or charged a fee for using more messages than the number bought]. The inbox sizes are also quite small; even a small bit of spam would be even more annoying as it could quickly fill a relatively small quota.

Re:Terrible!!!!! (2, Insightful)

prshaw (712950) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209270)

>>How long would it take for a spam bot to cultivate through the database, pick-up all the numbers and spam them?

Why bother go through the database? Why not just spend a message to every number possible? It doesn't cost them anything to send the message, so they don't care if it is really in use or not.

Re:Terrible!!!!! (4, Informative)

The_K4 (627653) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209346)

I have sprint and have only gotten 1 spam sms message to my phone in 5 years i've had a cell. I reported it to SPRINT PCS and the tech said that with the exact time of the message and the number it was sent to they could get the IP address of the sender's computer. If you get spam on your phone report it!

The solution? (0, Troll)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209059)

Don't get a cell phone. Not only will you not get annoying calls but you also won't be one of the lucky recipents to get a brain tumor 20 years from now. Oh you know it's coming.......

Re:The solution? (4, Funny)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209083)

"Don't get a cell phone. Not only will you not get annoying calls but you also won't be one of the lucky recipents to get a brain tumor 20 years from now. Oh you know it's coming....... "

You should get rid of your computer. Not only will you not get those annoying spams, but you also won't be one of the lucky recipients to get skin cancer 20 years from now because you didn't switch to LCD soon enough. Oh, you know it's coming....

Re:The solution? (1)

Cooke (708777) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209177)

add to the list; RSI, bad posture and four eyes.

old news (4, Interesting)

arabagast (462679) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209061)

This has been avaiable here in Norway for several years now.. allthough I do imagine there is a certain difference in volume between Norway and the US. Had a funny experience with this btw, one day when I was bored, I looked up my number in one of the online catalogs - and behold, they had gotten hold of even more information about me than I ever gave my cell provider, it was kinda scary I can tell you :)

In Europe... (2, Informative)

Jott42 (702470) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209370)

You have to remeber that they are talking about the US. It is new there. And it is a problem, as they are paying for incoming calls. And they seem to not have a general, working do-not-call registry(?).
Strange, but true.

(Have Karma, flame away...)

may not be as bad as it sounds (5, Informative)

winsk (117756) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209067)

According to this article [sun-sentinel.com] , the CTIA claims that all the carriers who are going along with the plan are doing so on an opt-in basis for existing customers, and an opt-out basis for new customers, without any additional fees.

My contract... (1)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209085)

Opt out at the beginning of my contract?

That was over three years ago! I'm not under contract with T-Mobile now but I still am a customer, I wonder if they'll say I have to get back ON contract to get off the directory. My plan's so old I still get the first incoming minute free. Does that mean I can't sue for cost of minutes if I get telemarketer calls?

Costs (1)

elrick_the_brave (160509) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209091)

Hmm.. I think it would be prudent to document all the incoming calls/spam. Given that most companies charge per.. it now costs you money. It would be worthwhile to take up your cell provider's customer service time by requesting documentation on who is using up your paid resources. If you run into any roadblocks, IANAL, bring up your lawyer. You can use that effectively I think. Complain enough and you could be put on the do not call list.

can you hear me now? (1)

syschker (725565) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209111)

Not only is a business risking loss of clientel,I feel the cell companys involved are at risk too. Besides that you know somewhere down the line there will be a law suit (or two). ----- "you are unique, just like everybody else"

Before banning a directory... (1)

djeaux (620938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209134)

... outlaw the use of the "star codes" that block caller ID (*67).

Re:Before banning a directory... (4, Informative)

pknoll (215959) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209275)

This is already illegal for telemarketers. In 2004, the government's amended telemarketing sales regulations proscribed the sending of their phone number when calling and, if possible, their name.

Re:Before banning a directory... (2, Informative)

baudilus (665036) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209283)

There are already facilities to block calls block their caller ID information. Not only for cell phones, but for land lines as well.

From this site [sover.net] (which I believe is standard across land lines):

Anonymous Call Block--(Included with Caller ID and Caller ID on Call Waiting, and available as a stand alone feature.) This option has some notable caveats, so please understand what it will and will not do before ordering or activating. Basically, this features allows you to reject calls coming from parties who have enabled Caller ID block on their line, thus preventing the display on your ID display unit of their name and/or number (you see "Private Caller"). Such callers are redirected to a message telling them you are not accepting ID-blocked calls and that they need to remove the block and call back if they wish to each you.


Note: This means that some cellular calls and calls from business's PBX phone systems may not get through to you. Callers on those systems may not be able to remove the ID block in order to have their call ring through.

This feature will not screen out most telemarketers' calls, nor any other calls where the caller's telco does not transmit ID info or the info is not available (these display as "Unavailable," or "Unknown Caller," or similar). Again, it works only on calls where the caller has enabled their own Caller ID block ("Private Caller").

* To activate: press *77
* To deactivate: press *87

Re:Before banning a directory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209349)

If you have caller ID in most markets, you can use another * code to block calls with blocked caller ID. This only applies to POTS, since a PRI or T1/channelized system will provide the support for blocking the "private" caller ID calls. Translation: your office phone may require the phone administrator to block these calls, if the software/hardware allows it.

Jerks (3, Insightful)

thebra (707939) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209143)

Until recently, when customers switched carriers, their numbers changed as well, so marketers were reluctant to invest much in compiling databases.

For once I thought that something good was being done for the consumer...my mistake.

OK and? (0, Troll)

isa-kuruption (317695) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209156)

It's about time there was a cell phone directory. I can't remember how many times I've lost someone's cell phone number when I need it. It exists for landlines, why not cell phones?

I think the underlying excuse from the parent is the "right to privacy" which doesn't exist in the first place. This is just an example of privacy activism gone awry.

Verizon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209165)

Good! For the premium they charge, they'd better offer all of the "default protections" they can come up with.

i have the opposite problem (4, Interesting)

claykarmel (78187) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209170)

I run my business from my PCS phone.

Did you know that you CANNOT get a white pages listing for your cell phone unless you get your cell phone service from your local RBOC?

Try getting a D&B on a number they can't verify with the RBOC!

Call Me Paranoid... (1)

rinkjustice (24156) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209182)

but I wouldn't trust any "do not call" registry. You're handing out your cell number in blind trust that the list won't be adulterated in the future. It's just like those opt-out links at the bottom of spam - it will likely only alert spammers that it's a "live" and important contact.

Trust no one.

Can't they make money from a telephone service!? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209186)

Really! What is it with these companies, and screwing over their customers for an extra few dollars? No spammer is going to pay as much per number as the user is going to pay making and receiving calls.

This shows a total disregard for their customers. This is a stupid attitude, towards the people who actually pay the bulk of their income. They need to stop courting the extras, and make sure those who supply their primary income are as happy as possible with the service.

bluetooth as well? (2, Interesting)

Cooke (708777) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209221)

Will the Do Not Call list include a do not bluetooth spam? Im more worried about shops and like offering me things on a more personal level direct to my phone whenever I enter a mall or go to the bar.

Re:bluetooth as well? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9209303)

You like to hear yourself speak, don't ya? I hope so because your posting has no value to the world if you didn't get anything out of it.

SprintPCS (4, Interesting)

wytcld (179112) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209222)

With SprintPCS I was getting occassional spam text messages, so I when to their Website and turned that feature off - except then I kept getting spam text messages from ... SprintPCS. I had to call and have them "unprovision" text messaging entirely in order to get any assurance that they could stop themselves from spamming me!

Cell phone spam (4, Interesting)

maeltor (679257) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209226)

Some people are already receiving cell phone spam and telemarketing calls.
I've gotten cell phone spam on every carrier i've been with for the past 2 years (3 carriers). TMobile was the worst....i got 25 spam messages in one day. I also got billed for it (SMS overuse). They claimed that since I never logged in to change my "cell phone number email address" on TMobile's site, I was getting the messages and didn't try to prevent them. Man did that customer retention supervisor get her ass chewed. After I got done with her, I ended up with a new phone, a changed "email address" and 4 months free :)

FCC and Rulemaking! (3, Interesting)

enforcer999 (733591) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209288)

The FCC [fcc.gov] is in the process of making rules to protect consumers regarding cell phones and spam. On another related note: The American Teleservices Association [ataconnect.org] filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the National Do Not Call Registry. If the Court takes the case, I do not believe that they will over turn the 10th Circuit's decision.

Verizon sucks (4, Insightful)

-tji (139690) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209306)

Verizon already phone spams their own customers.

About a month ago, I got one of those annoying automated calls offering me "great new services" through Verizon. The recording said "Push 1 for more information".

So, I pushed '1' and waded went through several levels of systems until I could talk to a human. I asked him to set all my privacy preferences to prohibit any further calls or sharing of my personal information, and he was totally lost at how to proceed. He acted as if this was an unprecedented request.. "I don't have any idea how I could do that. We don't have any settings for that in the user accounts."

After spending 30 minutes on the phone with this guy, I was pissed to have wasted so much time and just wanted to hang up. But he agreed to submit some paper form that was supposed to ensure this did not happen again.. He did not inspire a lot of confidence, but I haven't gotten another call.. yet.

I love telemarketers (1)

CatPieMan (460995) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209307)

I can never remember my home phone number and they are always kind enough to inform me what my number is, right before I call hang up on them.

They are so much fun. As soon as I realize it is them, I put the phone down and walk away for a few minutes. Political callers are the best, as, I usually spout some anti-Capitalist, anti-Democratic stuff their way.

Hm, maybe I should un-register my home phone, I do so love messing with the telemarketers.

Now, my cell is another story. I have an international cell, as in, I can take it to other countries and it still rings with my USA-based number. I would not be happy to recieve a call from a telemarketer while in Australia, 11 hours ahead, and at a cost of US$1/min.

Oh, I use T-Mobile, so, this does not make me too happy.

-CPM

Spam-Filter for Cell phones (1)

rennen (664746) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209327)

I will start writing a spam filter for cell phones.
Make sure you set your rules wizard on your phone to only accept calls from your address book. =>

What a coincidence.... (2, Informative)

NIN1385 (760712) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209335)

I have wireless service through iwireless(formerly Iowa Wireless) who is an affiliate of tmobile. They recently sent me a notice that they were raising their prices by like 3 dollars. The reason they said they were raising the price is because of the bill that passed allowing a customer to take their cell phone number with them anywhere they go.

I have many friends with cell phones through different companies, and none of the other companies seem to be raising their prices at all because of this bill. T-mobile is a horrible company that doesn't give a shit about the customer, everytime I had a problem with them they simply told me that is the way it is and they wont make any effort to change it. I don't know where they got their business practices but where I come from the customer is ALWAYS right!

I am now switching to Verizon for reasons such as them not giving out the personal information of customer THAT PAY FOR THEIR SERVICE! Until companies start caring about the customers and not their profits...their profits will continue to go down.

I highly reccomend to anyone that is considering moving to T-Mobile or any of their affiliates to think twice and look at Verizon or Nextel instead. Peace...

Callers pay! (1)

Codeala (235477) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209355)

I think except in US, calls to cellphones are usually only charge to the callers. That makes sense...

In Soviet....err (0)

martingunnarsson (590268) | more than 10 years ago | (#9209373)

In Sweden, where I live, anybody can look up any cell phone number. That is, unless it's an unregistered pre-paid card (then there's no way to tell who's using it) or the subscriber chose not to be listed. I don't think it's a big deal.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...