Hacker News Reader

Comment by cameronbrown | Hacker News Reader

This isn't really feasible right now. Your bank, your doctor or a potential employer may all have different numbers each time they call you. Some critical calls may be unexpected and need the immediate attention a phone call gives (example: friend on somebody else's mobile)

View on HN

I let them leave a message, then skim the transcript. So far it's 100% spam, but I only lose 5 seconds checking and if it's important, I'll see it. I never pick up unrecognized numbers.

You are not alone.

If you are receiving transcripts it means your private voicemail data is being harvested. Even if you may not care, this is a violation of privacy for your friends and family.

Is that fundamentally different to the calls running over someone else's network in the first place? But, good point.

Yes, I long for encrypted voicemail built into Signal et al. One can only hope.

I (and many other people, I suspect) don’t pick up unknown numbers, so whether it’s critical or not is besides the point.

Even better, just get an app that puts everybody who is not a contact right in voicemail. I don't know why this is not a built-in open on iOS and Android. If you're expecting a call from a non-contact just turn it off for 15 minutes or call them back.

Do Not Disturb mode on more recent Androids (and I believe iOS too) effectively does this. I configured my phone to just not even ring for non-contacts, so I only see it if I have my phone open already. Otherwise I only find out when I see a voicemail later. It's been on for 3 months and I think 1 has been legitimate.

The iOS implementation of DND is lacking. It kills notifications for text messages from everyone, for example.

As an implementation of Do Not Disturb, that sounds like the expected and correct behaviour. It is only lacking if you want to (ab)use DND as a technical solution to the social problem that there is no adequate legal protection against spam calls in your jurisdiction. In Europe, I get a spam call maybe once a month, slightly more if you see legitimate (according to the local interpretation of law) market research and opinion polling as spam.

I'm overusing it for the permanent spam-blocking use case, for sure, but it makes sense to me that often when I say "Do Not Disturb", I mean specific groups. My spouse and kids can interrupt me pretty much whenever they want (especially if they know why I don't want to be disturbed - then they can make an educated judgment about if it's worth it or if emailing me is better). Maybe I don't want to be annoyed but I'm on call, so work contacts can get through. If anything more granularity and "contact groups" would be nice.

I've been wondering the same, I recently made MyHumans for iPhone to do just this. I think this works for a lot of people, and it has completely solved my spam problem.

Kinda ironic, since letting your bank/doctor/employer call from the same outbound number is literally the purpose of spoofing.

But they should be limited to only allow them to spoof numbers they own.

This. We view this as a problem for IP addresses, how is this not viewed as a problem for phone numbers?

So those businesses can redo how they handle their outbound calls. When a business emails me, they don’t use a different domain each time.

> Your bank, your doctor or a potential employer may all have different numbers each time they call you.

Then maybe they ought not to do that?

The whole definition of identity is ill-defined in this kind of context. Should your doctor have the same number on their work phone as on their desk phone as at the front desk as...? What about another doctor at the same clinic? What about your doctor's secretary? What about their personal mobile?

But that is not my choice

This doesn’t matter - voicemail works fine.

Services that cared could change behavior to call from a single number.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com