• nmarus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    In this day and age, people should learn how to text. That guy almost had to have an awkward voice conversation. 😳

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Real talk the lack of caller id for all businesses or government lines is insane.

    If you are not making a private call, on a private line, the I’d should be populated

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The bigger issue here is spam calls.

      If that shit was stopped, people wouldn’t ignore unknown callers.

      While your solution is good it only solves part of the problem.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        No, if a company was calling me and I didn’t want to talk to them, I’d still be better informed with caller id.

        A spam call would be ignored because I wouldn’t recognize the business name

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Many countries have this. It’s just just shitty American carriers that hold us back by gating anything and everything behind a fee.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Actually, in this case, it’s partially the opposite.

        The Madison River Telephone Company (later CenturyLink and now Lumen) started blocked calls and services from Vonage (VOIP) in 2005 because VOIP was a threat. The FCC stepped in and ruled against Madison River in what was really the beginning of Net Neutrality legislation.

        Their ruling established that phone carriers couldn’t discriminate against other services accessing their network and its features. Among those features is Caller ID. Since any. VOIP phone system doesn’t actually originate from a telephone exchange, so they all essentially have to “spoof” their Caller ID.

        The phone companies can’t block CallerID spoofing from spamme4s and scammers without violating a 20yo ruling from the FCC.

        • bountygiver [any]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          17 hours ago

          which is extremely outdated, with proper called ID these spoofed numbers should be presented as such on the caller ID

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            The problem is there is legitimate reason to spoof CID.

            VOIP is one. I also have the ability to do it when I make a call from my work cell to have it display the city switchboard so people both aren’t calling me when I’m off duty, but also so that the people receiving calls see a call from the City, not from some random dude.

            • JordanZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              12 hours ago

              This is already being worked on with STIR/SHAKEN. Very similar to certificates with websites. You want to place a call as a certain number? Where is your proof you own that number? Now we’ll place your call. Your cell’s recent call list should already be showing little check marks on certain callers. Those are authenticated.

    • person420@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The issue is with cell phones and mobile networks. They don’t all support passing CNAM (caller name delivery) between them. I worked in telecom for over 15 years, dealt with only businesses, I never met a company that didn’t have CNAM set up.

  • CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Why didn’t they text? Cultural norms aside, texts usually go through more easily than calls in spotty areas. But yeah, I’ll take hypothermia and exposure over answering an unknown number any day.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    96
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I’m totally with the hiker on this one, and this illustrates why spam calls are more than just a nuisance.

  • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I wouldn’t expect rescuers to be calling me (assuming this is legit), so yeah, I probably wouldn’t answer either

    • srecko@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Cmon, of course they would. They use every tool available and the phone is right there.

      • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Well then since they presumably got the missing person’s number from someone that knows them and knows they were missing, maybe they should’ve called from that person’s phone

  • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Weird story. If they needed rescuing and had cell coverage why would they need to wait for an incoming call?