> This, plus the monetary incentives are the root reason it's still a problem.
I'm skeptical. I think "our network eliminated spam calls" would be a major, major selling point for a mobile network. Like I would definitely consider switching carriers if one of them genuinely solved the problem. Given the amount of mobile network advertising I see, there's gotta be way more money in actually fixing this and gaining new users, than there is in getting a couple fractions of a cent per completed call.
It's not even a hard problem to fix. Just have calls sourced internationally set to default-deny for every account. If a user actually wants to receive internationally-sourced calls, they can turn it on. The number of people turning it on would be so small, spammers wouldn't bother at all anymore. Then, prosecute anyone sending spam calls from within the US (I assume we are already doing this). Boom, you've solved the phone spam problem.
Now someone go implement it so I can start paying you for your superior product.
> I think "our network eliminated spam calls" would be a major, major selling point for a mobile network.
If you genuinely had free choice of multiple otherwise similar quality options, which is not the case in all markets/areas.
Also, I wouldn't put it past the networks to promise to try to eliminate cold calls (to make it look like they are on your side), make a perfunctory amount of effort (the minimum to be able to say they are making an attempt), and still make the money they can from the other side.
Make the "report as spam" button or notification cause the spammer or their sponsor to incur a $0.01 charge payable to the mobile provider. The money would be a rounding error for false accusations, but would decimate anyone sending massive spam calls.
$0.10 - but you have to actually pick up the call before the "report as spam" button is available. Add a button which is "Hang up and report as spam", and put that button away from the regular hang up button, so it doesn't often get hit accidentally.
Also, if the monthly bill is less than $1 in spam charges, then the charges should be dropped. Spam charges aren't intended for one-off annoying calls.
I want to work on a micro payment system like this but for email. The email is encrypted but not for privacy, for "proof of readability", the key is somehow decrypted off the blockchain only after, say, $0.05 is sent to the recipient. That starts a time delay that auto refunds the micro payment UNLESS spam button is pressed on the client. Then the nickel is claimed. People mailing back and forth will do so for free, because clicking reply will refund the nickel. In theory recipients could set their own price to talk to them. Coins would be real and absolutely redeemable for USD or other coin. To be clear, email content is NOT on the blockchain.
Few problems:
- have to pay upfront to send messages.
- might have problems with liquidity finding traders to redeem with
- Major mail providers such as Gmail may block forwarded encrypted content "for security"
- would require add-on client to decrypt
- people are sick of hearing about shit coins
- need very low gas fee shitcoin
- if shitcoin server goes down, email goes down
I suppose you could do this in a cashless way and just request tokens from a miner. And if you ask for too many, too fast, you get denied or have to pay the miner. The idea would be to distribute them sparsely among people who don't send many messages. Maybe the shitcoin could somehow enforce not holding too many send tokens.
I like this and would pay for such a system. It doesn’t need to use blockchain though, a normal escrow system would work. Everyone who signs up puts a dollar in escrow. If you send an email to your contact it’s free. If you send outside your contacts it costs a penny, but the recipient can return the penny to you if they want.
This makes it prohibitively expensive to send low value email, free to send high value email, and slightly expensive to send “probably valuable” email.
I am a cynic, and I believe the real reason that nothing is being done, is because telecom companies love robocallers (they make a lot of money, and don't get bothered too much for customer service -I saw the same thing with spam emailers and fraudsters. Hosting providers love them, because they buy a lot of product, and don't ask for much customer service).
I also think that politicians don't want to address it, because they use them, and people really don't like political robocalls, because they can be downright noxious.
I'm skeptical. I think "our network eliminated spam calls" would be a major, major selling point for a mobile network. Like I would definitely consider switching carriers if one of them genuinely solved the problem. Given the amount of mobile network advertising I see, there's gotta be way more money in actually fixing this and gaining new users, than there is in getting a couple fractions of a cent per completed call.
It's not even a hard problem to fix. Just have calls sourced internationally set to default-deny for every account. If a user actually wants to receive internationally-sourced calls, they can turn it on. The number of people turning it on would be so small, spammers wouldn't bother at all anymore. Then, prosecute anyone sending spam calls from within the US (I assume we are already doing this). Boom, you've solved the phone spam problem.
Now someone go implement it so I can start paying you for your superior product.