Hacker News Reader

Comment by jimvdv | Hacker News Reader

I think this is antithetical to most people’s view of privacy on this platform :)

Make it an option. I should be able to block my number from the receiver of the call if I choose. The receiver should be notified the number is blocked and can choose accordingly. The fact that numbers can be spoofed is what should be illegal. Any company making calls should have to identify themselves to the person receiving the call.

I think if you want to make an anonymous call, you need to find a party that will be liable for your call.

Do most people actually care about being able to place phone calls and be anonymous in 2024? If I call someone it's either someone who has my number already or someone who is going to ask who it is (like a business) and I'm going to tell them who I am.

There are many valid reasons for making anonymous calls in 2024, including but not limited to being able to suss out information without exposing ones on identity.

Me and most people I know have stopped answering the phone completely if we don't recognize the number, because the ratio of spam to useful calls is so huge. Since this screening renders your use case for anonymous calls completely moot, the benefit of allowing them (very small, in my opinion) has to be weighed against the costs of the current system. Just to pick a random one, political polling is completely fucked at the moment, because so many people don't pick up pollster calls.

Edit: actually the more I think about your comment, the less sense it makes. What information could be gained by an anonymous phone call? Please walk me through this scenario, because I don't see it at all. Who is giving away sensitive information to an anonymous caller that they wouldn't give if there was caller ID?

Doctor's offices and schools are notorious for using the caller ID "blocked." I let them hit voicemail.

> Doctor's offices and schools are notorious for using the caller ID "blocked." I let them hit voicemail.

My doctor's office won't leave messages, and appears to have about 20 minutes a day where they pick up the phone, so, if I don't pick up when they call, then I can't talk to them. (I know, I know, get a new doctor. But this is my third try to find a specialist who's willing to go beyond "here are some easy suggestions that you've already told me don't apply to you," and there are only so many battles that I can pick before I just run out of specialists entirely.)

You can thank HIPAA for that. Under the Privacy Rule medical information has to be guarded. While I have seen some practices let you indicate on the patient forms that you allow brief or full voicemail, many won't do it as there's no one to confirm their name and DOB. Even the fact that you are a patient at a clinic can be protected health information (for example getting a call from a women's health clinic or drug rehab center that doesn't block caller ID can be compromising).

It's because they don't want callbacks.

To reiterate, calls need to say who's calling. They don't need to come from a number that will be answered.

It's about liability, and making sure there are consequences for spamming.

Crazy to think phonebooks published your name, number, and even address. Much smaller world.

Yes. What happened to that? It's interesting that we became more private in that regard while gushing personal information from sensors worn on our bodies 24/7.

They stopping printing phone books because everything is online.

Google your name and you’ll likely find much more information than the white pages ever had. I found an old email address of mine from the 90s that is long gone, every place I’ve ever lived, relationships to various family members, my parent’s address dating back decades, even my grandfathers last couple addresses and he’s been dead for over 20 years.

About 10 years ago someone on eBay tried to pull something on me and I was trying to figure out what I was dealing with. Within 45 minutes I had his name, parent’s names, phone number, and their address. I didn’t do anything with it, but it wasn’t that hard to find, with nothing more than a username or email address.

Scale I guess. No one but people nearby will have your local phonebook. And there would be no way to go through all the information even if someone had all phonebooks. The world used to be far more disconnected.

They still do. If you’ve made any public transaction (like buying a home), Whitepages will publish your info. That’s not the only reason for it, either. My 90 year-old relative was listed, and she doesn’t own anything.

When I visited the FCC many years ago, one fo the reasons they give for allowing anonymous calls is the the protection of domestic violence victims. Eg they may need to call their abuser to talk about child support payments. They shouldn't need to reveal too much information away, particularly if it could be used to find their address (eg a phone number)

I’ve never personally been involved in this type of situation, but it seems like if the relationship is such that there is a safety issue from information potentially slipping during a phone call, maybe the court should be dealing with that communication if there is an issue with child support payments not getting made.

Wonder why my husband is 20 minutes late to drop my kid off for the weekend. Let me call up my lawyer and he'll get a date on the judge's docket next month to find out what's up.

If he is dropping the kid off, he already knows where you live, so having him figure it out via a phone number is kind of a moot point.

The example given was child support, which is financial, not visitation. I’m assuming this person would be an ex-husband, and that abuse, leading to assurance that he can’t track you down, means visitation with the kid is off the table.

Anonymity and privacy are different things.

And anonymity against your interlocutor is usually a very bad thing. Even though there are a few exceptions.

I think what I would is a level playing field. If I get a call like that I cannot trace, I would expect that I should be able to do the same. If I am held to a standard that is not conducive to privacy, so should the person on the other side of that call.

But.. there is money on the line. Clearly, money from telemarketers/scammers/whoever is using this tech is enough to make telecoms hesitate from actually doing something about it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com