I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that
they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - >unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471 service can
see an erroneous number.
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang her landline earlier
this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has been sitting on the windowsill (being
the only place it can get a signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's recall facility to
ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that they chose
unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - unless all you here can
think of another way that the 1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that
they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471 service can
see an erroneous number.
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer
true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471
service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer to
let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to
this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone
has been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it. The lady used 1471 to find
out who had rung her number, and used it's recall facility to ring
me; so she didn't make any transcription error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no
longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the
1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in
a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to
this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone
has been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it. The lady used 1471 to find
out who had rung her number, and used it's recall facility to ring
me; so she didn't make any transcription error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no
longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the
1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in
a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
It doesn't yet cover spoofed mobile numbers in caller-id.
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that
they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471 service can
see an erroneous number.
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that
they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471 service can
see an erroneous number.
I get calls on my phone/land line both. Now and then I'll get 2-3
calls one after the other, 10 seconds apart. My theory is that it's a
robo caller redialing me a few times to see if I'll pick up maybe if I
see a diff number.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
It doesn't yet cover spoofed mobile numbers in caller-id.
On 20.03.25 16:21, Richmond wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
It doesn't yet cover spoofed mobile numbers in caller-id.
Sure it does: Usually you do not know the spoofed numbers so you do not
take up the call. That is what we do too.
If it is important people can leave a message on the voicemail box.
Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that
they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471 service can
see an erroneous number.
--
Graham J
On 20/03/2025 14:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to
this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone
has been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription
error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no
longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the
1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I had the same a while ago. Got lots of angry calls on my mobile. For a
while I changed my voice mail to tell callers my number was being
spoofed. Seems to have stopped being used now.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in
a call.
I think using a mobile by-passes the regulation, because otherwise it
would prevent mobile roaming. Expect more use of mobiles by scammers.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know theI wish others would do that, but of course with a mobile "it might be a friend with a new number" so its tempting to return the call
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer
true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471
service can see an erroneous number.
Not quite the same in the US, but similar. Here spoofed calls
are possible. I've had calls from myself. :) But it could also
be a scam, where someone gets you off balance and defensive,
then pulls some kind of trick.
Scammers/spammers have become so common that I just
don't even answer the phone anymore unless I recognize the
number. If it's a legit call they can leave a message.
On 3/20/25 08:10 AM, Graham J wrote:...
I've had the strongest desire to try calling them back but I feel I'd probably just be
bugging some poor old lady or worse, some son of a bitch guy with a gun and a chip on his
shoulder and a death wish.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in a >call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer to
let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Newyana2 wrote:
Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer
true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471
service can see an erroneous number.
Not quite the same in the US, but similar. Here spoofed calls
are possible. I've had calls from myself. :) But it could also
be a scam, where someone gets you off balance and defensive,
then pulls some kind of trick.
Scammers/spammers have become so common that I just
don't even answer the phone anymore unless I recognize the
number. If it's a legit call they can leave a message.
I add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped reduce
spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I won't answer a
call from a number I don't recognize.
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate
their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not
really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
On 3/21/2025 8:51 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate
their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not
really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
The chance that a number from Columbus, Ohio is a
real person trying to reach me personally is pretty much
zero. Even with the local numbers, a legit caller is very
unlikely.
This approach is not like what you're describing, blocking
a large list of blacklisted numbers. I just get the call and
wait if I don't recognize the number. If they leave no
message, then I block it. If they leave a message, I pick
up and apologize for screening. They invariably chuckle and
say they understand.
I haven't found that scammers are rotating through real
numbers. they seem to use thesame ones repeatedly.
Sometimes they spoof, but often it's things like salespeople
using an actual phone. The same number might call several
times per day. So blocking just a few numbers works well
in my experience. I also set my phone for a silent first
ring, so if someone is blocked I don't even have to know it.
(This is on my landline phone/answering machine. I don't
know about cellphones. I don't turn on my Android phone
often enough to care about scam calls. And I don't give out
that number, so I don't check messages.)
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate
their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not
really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:23:42 -0400, Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
On 3/21/2025 8:51 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate
their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not
really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
The chance that a number from Columbus, Ohio is a
real person trying to reach me personally is pretty much
zero. Even with the local numbers, a legit caller is very
unlikely.
This approach is not like what you're describing, blocking
a large list of blacklisted numbers. I just get the call and
wait if I don't recognize the number. If they leave no
message, then I block it. If they leave a message, I pick
up and apologize for screening. They invariably chuckle and
say they understand.
I haven't found that scammers are rotating through real
numbers. they seem to use thesame ones repeatedly.
Sometimes they spoof, but often it's things like salespeople
using an actual phone. The same number might call several
times per day. So blocking just a few numbers works well
in my experience. I also set my phone for a silent first
ring, so if someone is blocked I don't even have to know it.
(This is on my landline phone/answering machine. I don't
know about cellphones. I don't turn on my Android phone
often enough to care about scam calls. And I don't give out
that number, so I don't check messages.)
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then. Only 4 pople have
my cellphone number and 3 of them have probably lost it. (When I was
visiting my brother, a friend of his, his wife, and his son, all called
me, but they called me on my home phone, not my cell! And didn't get
the messages until I got home. )
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then. Only 4 pople have
my cellphone number and 3 of them have probably lost it. (When I was
visiting my brother, a friend of his, his wife, and his son, all called
me, but they called me on my home phone, not my cell! And didn't get
the messages until I got home. )
Over here, people use the landline less and less. Young people don't
even have one. Nobody I know phones me on the land line, except my very
old neighbours who are unable to manage a mobile.
Of the people that do have a landline, many keep it because the internet supplier is a phone company and forces them to have a landline. Some
then unplug it.
I actually redirect my landline to a mobile, which then runs an antispam
app.
It's similar here. Cellphones are increasingly required for
some transactions. When we got COVID shots during the pandemic, I had to stand in the old losers' line and show my drivers license to an
impatient college student because I didn't have the data on a cellphone.
It wasn't too bad,
though. My hair is gray enough that they just assume I'm a dimwitted old
man and most of them put up with me.
I currently have a landline that's VOIP. I think it costs
$16/month. Why? Because it's convenient. The sound is good. It has a
handy answering machine. I don't have to charge it. People call me from
their cellphones and want to pretend that it works well. It doesn't. The sound is often poor.
My $40 TracFone costs me $20 every 3 months. I keep
it in my glove compartment, turned off. If I need to make a call when
away from home, I use it. Why do I do that?
Because I don't want people to be able to text me. I don't want people interrupting when I'm doing errands or taking a walk. I'm not a surgeon
or a drug dealer. Anyone trying to reach me can wait until I get home. I
also don't shop online via cellphone. I don't use Ubers. I don't call DoorDash. I don't use apps. I know how to read a map. I don't like the
way that cellphones collapse space/time. If I'm out walking in the
woods, enjoying spring sunlight, I have no interest in someone
interrupting me to ask if I want to bid on a job or meet next Tuesday
for coffee. That can wait until I get home.
I got my first shots in Mar 2021. I had to make a reservation on a website (there were limited ones available) and show the email acknowledgment (printout) to get in.
I always considered SMS to be for things that don't require immediate response.
On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 12:10:58 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:
[snip]
It's similar here. Cellphones are increasingly required for
some transactions. When we got COVID shots during the pandemic, I had to
stand in the old losers' line and show my drivers license to an
impatient college student because I didn't have the data on a cellphone.
It wasn't too bad,
though. My hair is gray enough that they just assume I'm a dimwitted old
man and most of them put up with me.
I got my first shots in Mar 2021. I had to make a reservation on a website (there were limited ones available) and show the email acknowledgment (printout) to get in.
I currently have a landline that's VOIP. I think it costs
$16/month. Why? Because it's convenient. The sound is good. It has a
handy answering machine. I don't have to charge it. People call me from
their cellphones and want to pretend that it works well. It doesn't. The
sound is often poor.
Yes, that's what I have too (over fiber). I changed from the old copper
lines in about 2006 because of the poor call quality.
My $40 TracFone costs me $20 every 3 months. I keep
it in my glove compartment, turned off. If I need to make a call when
away from home, I use it. Why do I do that?
Because I don't want people to be able to text me. I don't want people
interrupting when I'm doing errands or taking a walk. I'm not a surgeon
or a drug dealer. Anyone trying to reach me can wait until I get home. I
also don't shop online via cellphone.
DoorDash. I don't use apps. I know how to read a map. I don't like the
way that cellphones collapse space/time. If I'm out walking in the
woods, enjoying spring sunlight, I have no interest in someone
interrupting me to ask if I want to bid on a job or meet next Tuesday
for coffee. That can wait until I get home.
I always considered SMS to be for things that don't require immediate response.
My assumption these days is that it's like an open line.
An ongoing conversation. I have a Millennial niece who usually
doesn't answer email. One day I texted her as a joke. She
was right there!
Note ... When I set up the Mobile Phone account, I explicitly DISABLED PhoneBank so people can't leave me messages. I'm on a PAYG Account, and
I figured if I had to then ring-in to somewhere to get my messages, that would be costing *ME* money!!
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
and turning on ('booting') a
smartphone takes quite some time and effort.
And if it's really turned off, do you never use other (non call/SMS
related) features while at home?
Puzzled!
FWIW, my smartphone is always *on*, but not *used* all that much and
in do-not-disturb mode during the night.
[...]
[1] Yes, 'off' could mean in airplane mode with Wi-Fi switched on, but
why would one bother to do that?
On 2025-03-21 17:32, micky wrote:
In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:23:42 -0400, Newyana2
<newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
On 3/21/2025 8:51 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate >>>> their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not >>>> really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
The chance that a number from Columbus, Ohio is a
real person trying to reach me personally is pretty much
zero. Even with the local numbers, a legit caller is very
unlikely.
This approach is not like what you're describing, blocking
a large list of blacklisted numbers. I just get the call and
wait if I don't recognize the number. If they leave no
message, then I block it. If they leave a message, I pick
up and apologize for screening. They invariably chuckle and
say they understand.
I haven't found that scammers are rotating through real
numbers. they seem to use thesame ones repeatedly.
Sometimes they spoof, but often it's things like salespeople
using an actual phone. The same number might call several
times per day. So blocking just a few numbers works well
in my experience. I also set my phone for a silent first
ring, so if someone is blocked I don't even have to know it.
(This is on my landline phone/answering machine. I don't
know about cellphones. I don't turn on my Android phone
often enough to care about scam calls. And I don't give out
that number, so I don't check messages.)
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then. Only 4 pople have
my cellphone number and 3 of them have probably lost it. (When I was
visiting my brother, a friend of his, his wife, and his son, all called
me, but they called me on my home phone, not my cell! And didn't get
the messages until I got home. )
Over here, people use the landline less and less. Young people don't
even have one. Nobody I know phones me on the land line, except my very
old neighbours who are unable to manage a mobile.
Of the people that do have a landline, many keep it because the internet >supplier is a phone company and forces them to have a landline. Some
then unplug it.
I actually redirect my landline to a mobile, which then runs an antispam
app.
Sorry it's taken so long to reply.
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a
smartphone takes quite some time and effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's
not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
And if it's really turned off, do you never use other (non call/SMS
related) features while at home?
Lots of people/businesses insist on texting me. When I was in charge
of approving the snow plowing, I had to leave the phone on if snow was expected, and sometimes I turn it on once a day to see if anyone texted,
like a doctor's office that wants confirmation that I'm coming, but most
of my doctors also send emails for the same purpose.
[...]Puzzled!
FWIW, my smartphone is always *on*, but not *used* all that much and
in do-not-disturb mode during the night.
[1] Yes, 'off' could mean in airplane mode with Wi-Fi switched on, but
why would one bother to do that?
When I said Off, I meant off. That way I don't have to keep it plugged
into the charger.
It's similar here. Cellphones are increasingly required for
some transactions. When we got COVID shots during the
pandemic, I had to stand in the old losers' line and show
my drivers license to an impatient college student because
I didn't have the data on a cellphone.
It wasn't too bad,
though. My hair is gray enough that they just assume I'm
a dimwitted old man and most of them put up with me.
I currently have a landline that's VOIP. I think it costs
$16/month. Why? Because it's convenient. The sound is
good. It has a handy answering machine. I don't have
to charge it. People call me from their cellphones and want
to pretend that it works well. It doesn't. The sound is
often poor.
My $40 TracFone costs me $20 every 3 months. I keep
it in my glove compartment, turned off. If I need to make
a call when away from home, I use it. Why do I do that?
Because I don't want people to be able to text me. I don't
want people interrupting when I'm doing errands or taking
a walk. I'm not a surgeon or a drug dealer. Anyone trying to
reach me can wait until I get home. I also don't shop online
via cellphone. I don't use Ubers. I don't call DoorDash. I
don't use apps. I know how to read a map. I don't like the
way that cellphones collapse space/time. If I'm out walking
in the woods, enjoying spring sunlight, I have no interest
in someone interrupting me to ask if I want to bid on a job
or meet next Tuesday for coffee. That can wait until I get
home.
I think it's gradually become a lifestyle thing. People are
living through their cellphones, like a kind of cockpit. That's
their home. For young people it's constant connection. It's
become normal to see people walking down the street fixated
on their cellphone.
Awhile back I said something to my girlfriend's 50 year old son
about how he seems very busy at night on his cellphone. I
though he was texting friends. Or maybe Facebooking? No.
He said he spends hours on dating sites, swiping, chatting
and occasionally getting laid. It's interesting to me how different
people use their cellphones. Some are just constantly scrolling
Instagram and begin to get anxious if they put their cellphone
in their pocket. The online theater has become more real for
them than their actual life.
So I don't think it has much to do with telephoning anymore.
Most people don't really need to get phone calls when away
from home. They just like the mobile lifestyle. And increasingly
it's an inclusive lifestyle. It's a different way of living.
Some time
ago I stopped a young woman in another city. I was slightly
lost. "Do you happen to know if this cross street is Powers St?"
She was very nice. She'd been walking, holding her cellphone,
earphones in. After a moment she told me, yes, it's Powers St.
It wasn't until sometime later that I realized she had looked
it up! By asking a simple, common question I had told her that
I didn't have a cellphone. She would never imagine asking anyone.
I would never imagine being able to look it up while out walking.
She was walking in Apple's music app. I was walking on a maple-
lined street during summer, looking at a variety of architecture
styles. Neither of us regarded the other's world as relevant.
I would like to redirect my mobile to my landline, but then I'd have to
undo each time I left the house with the phone.
Sorry it's taken so long to reply.
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a
smartphone takes quite some time and effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's
not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply.
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn >>>> on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a
smartphone takes quite some time and effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's
not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all your stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
No but I want to take pictures for me and the family. See how long it
took me, remember last time I went. I use the Waze in the car. It shows
me the traffic, roadworks. The phone has an answerphone. Its usually on >silent. I don't use UBER but I do use the local Taxi firm. using their
app shows me where the nearest cab is.
I've tried blocking numbers. If helps with some things (like charities
that seem to think I'm an ATM) but doesn't help with spammers (too many >numbers).
I seldom answer spam calls on my home phone because of caller ID NAME (the >current usual pattern for spammers is the name is a copy of the number). I >really wish cell phones would provide that. I probably miss some real
calls by ignoring unknown numbers.
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:11:24 GMT, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:
I've tried blocking numbers. If helps with some things (like charities
that seem to think I'm an ATM) but doesn't help with spammers (too many
numbers).
Oh yeah, another advantage to not turning the cell phone on. I don't
get many spam calls even when it's on, but I get none when it's off.
I seldom answer spam calls on my home phone because of caller ID NAME (the >> current usual pattern for spammers is the name is a copy of the number). I >> really wish cell phones would provide that. I probably miss some real
calls by ignoring unknown numbers.
On 2025-04-03 14:07, micky wrote:
I would like to redirect my mobile to my landline, but then I'd have to
undo each time I left the house with the phone.
There is a redirect if no answer
In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:19:19 +0200, "Carlos
E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-04-03 14:07, micky wrote:
I would like to redirect my mobile to my landline, but then I'd have to
undo each time I left the house with the phone.
There is a redirect if no answer
Oh, of course. That would be good. Except if it forwarded spam calls
that now leave no trace.
My current cellphhone outgoing messsage says, "I can go days or weeks
without turning on my cellphone so don't leave a message until you know
I'm expecting you to call." Unfortuantely, when I was in Dallas, and
it was my only phone, someone I wanted to hear from didn't leave a
message because of what my message said.
On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:
I add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped reduce
spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I won't answer a
call from a number I don't recognize.
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate
their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not
really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to block, Truecaller.
On 20/03/2025 12:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed that
they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer true - >> unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471 service can
see an erroneous number.
She was perhaps a lonely woman who wanted to talk to somebody. There are women like that in London area who wants to meet a nice, caring but rich young man who can look after her. They make up stories just to talk to strangers.
About 6 months ago a woman stopped me at a London Tube station and asked
me to help her to get food because she hasn't eaten for two days because
her land lord has taken her rent money and now she hasn't got anything.
I just gave her a tenner and left her because I knew what she was up to. £10 is nothing for me because I live and work in London but time is
quite precious for me. I don't have time for drug addicts and alcoholics.
I know I shouldn't be giving money to them but I just didn't want to
argue with her just in case she has a pimp looking after her watching me.
Scotland has many alcoholics and women are really lonely there.
On 21/03/2025 11:51 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:We do a similar thing. Our phone/answering machine speaks the caller ID and/or number.
On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:
<Snip>
For some weird reason my Landline phone socket wasn't installed in the Lounge/Kitchen/I add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped reduce >>> spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I won't answer a
call from a number I don't recognize.
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they rotate their numbers,
you are probably blocking some innocent person, and not really blocking the spammers.
That said, I also block them.
I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to block, Truecaller.
Dinning-room but in the main bedroom instead!
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom when the phone
rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built-
in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer Machine starts up
and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine starts up, the calling person/machine/
whatever hangs up. ;-)
On 4/8/25 07:55 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 21/03/2025 11:51 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:
<Snip>
For some weird reason my Landline phone socket wasn't installed inI add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped
reduce spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I
won't answer a call from a number I don't recognize.
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they
rotate their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent
person, and not really blocking the spammers. That said, I also
block them.
I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to
block, Truecaller.
the Lounge/Kitchen/ Dinning-room but in the main bedroom instead!
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the
Bedroom when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller
calling, I brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built- in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until theWe do a similar thing. Our phone/answering machine speaks the caller
Answer Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer
Machine starts up, the calling person/machine/ whatever hangs up.
;-)
ID and/or number. If the person is in the built in phone book, the
phone will speak their name as we entered it, and not some cryptic
caller ID. Still, if the ID is some 4 digit number and no name, we
know it's a scammer.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
We do a similar thing. Our phone/answering machine speaks the caller ID and/or number. If the person is in the built in phone book, the phone
will speak their name as we entered it, and not some cryptic caller ID. Still, if the ID is some 4 digit number and no name, we know it's a
scammer.
Recently, I have noticed that spammer calls tend to have my local area
code preceding the rest of the spoofed number, but I also let the
answering machine part of the DECT system offer to record the caller's information, which indeed usually results in a cleared line. Serious
people leave a message.
On 4/8/25 07:55 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 21/03/2025 11:51 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:We do a similar thing. Our phone/answering machine speaks the caller ID and/or number. If the person is in the built in phone book, the phone
On 2025-03-21 12:41, John C. wrote:
<Snip>
For some weird reason my Landline phone socket wasn't installed in theI add all such calls to my blocked list. Over time, that's helped
reduce
spam calls tremendously. Also, I'm like you in that I won't answer a
call from a number I don't recognize.
Unfortunately, as they are faking the caller-id number, and they
rotate their numbers, you are probably blocking some innocent person,
and not really blocking the spammers. That said, I also block them.
I also use an application that has a huge list of numbers to block,
Truecaller.
Lounge/Kitchen/ Dinning-room but in the main bedroom instead!
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom
when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I
brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built- in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/ whatever hangs up. ;-)
will speak their name as we entered it, and not some cryptic caller ID. Still, if the ID is some 4 digit number and no name, we know it's a
scammer.
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom
when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I
brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built-in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:52:35 +0100, Davey wrote:
[snip]
Recently, I have noticed that spammer calls tend to have my local
area code preceding the rest of the spoofed number, but I also let
the answering machine part of the DECT system offer to record the
caller's information, which indeed usually results in a cleared
line. Serious people leave a message.
I get spoofed numbers with a wide variety of area codes, although
possibly more of my local area code. If the caller's name is given as
a number, I NEVER have a message from those.
I've had very few junk callers leave a message. One way to tell is if
the first couple of seconds are missing, since those robocallers seem
to be unable to wait for the beep. You get something like "...ficer.
You are being..." (The missing part was probably "This is of", and
there was no officer's name). This is from a scam that claimed I owed
the IRS, and need to pay with gift cards.
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer
true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471
service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in a call.
I'm surprised that almost nobody mentions CID NAME
Daniel70, 2025-04-08 13:55:
[...]
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom
when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built-in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
And legitimate people who want to reach you have to leave a message and
hope you gonna call back?
A wireless phone should also display the number of the caller, so you
can decide wether to answer it or not. When you add the people you know
to the phonebook, you may even see their names and when then there is no
name but just the number when the phone rings, this may also indicate a spammer call.
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Daniel70, 2025-04-08 13:55:
[...]
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom
when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I
brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built-in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
And legitimate people who want to reach you have to leave a message and
hope you gonna call back?
A wireless phone should also display the number of the caller, so you
can decide wether to answer it or not. When you add the people you know
to the phonebook, you may even see their names and when then there is no
name but just the number when the phone rings, this may also indicate a
spammer call.
And some of those caller IDs are fake. :(
And some of those caller IDs are fake. 🙁
The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims to be
from some charge card company, and tells me that there are two charges
on the card, from businesses that I do not use.
On 09/04/2025 11:45, Davey wrote:
The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims
to be from some charge card company, and tells me that there are
two charges on the card, from businesses that I do not use.
But never say which card!
Well, no, that would be too much information! It is always the same
message, with the same charges.
I have recently had a spate of: "Your package is ready for
pickup..." e-mail messages, and a couple of the "Thank you for renewing
your Norton 360 subscription." ones. Since I have been exclusively a
Linux user since 2010, that is well out of date!
On 2025-03-21 17:32, micky wrote:
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn >> on the cell when I go out, and not even always then. Only 4 pople have >> my cellphone number and 3 of them have probably lost it. (When I was
visiting my brother, a friend of his, his wife, and his son, all called
me, but they called me on my home phone, not my cell! And didn't get
the messages until I got home. )
Over here, people use the landline less and less. Young people don't
even have one. Nobody I know phones me on the land line, except my very
old neighbours who are unable to manage a mobile.
Of the people that do have a landline, many keep it because the internet supplier is a phone company and forces them to have a landline. Some
then unplug it.
I actually redirect my landline to a mobile, which then runs an antispam
app.
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:16:48 +0100
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 09/04/2025 11:45, Davey wrote:
The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims
to be from some charge card company, and tells me that there are
two charges on the card, from businesses that I do not use.
But never say which card!
Well, no, that would be too much information! It is always the same
message, with the same charges.
I have recently had a spate of: "Your package is ready for
pickup..." e-mail messages, and a couple of the "Thank you for
renewing your Norton 360 subscription." ones. Since I have been
exclusively a Linux user since 2010, that is well out of date!
On 09/04/2025 20:54, Ant wrote:
And some of those caller IDs are fake. 🙁
A friend at one time used put the numbers of various TKs on the
caller ID when calling me!
(He had legitimate access to changing the caller ID).
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID NAME is a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
When I moved into this house, just about all the phone calls I got on
the landline were from Spammers so I installed an "Answerphone" on the Landline. That way, when that phone rang, I could wait to see if it is a "Real" call or just Spammers.
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give
it a call. ;-P
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100snip
Yup, the Norton one I receive also. I am on Linux as well, and have
also been since 2010.
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100
Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:16:48 +0100
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 09/04/2025 11:45, Davey wrote:
The one calling site that leaves a message is the one that claims
to be from some charge card company, and tells me that there are
two charges on the card, from businesses that I do not use.
But never say which card!
Well, no, that would be too much information! It is always the same
message, with the same charges.
I have recently had a spate of: "Your package is ready for
pickup..." e-mail messages, and a couple of the "Thank you for
renewing your Norton 360 subscription." ones. Since I have been
exclusively a Linux user since 2010, that is well out of date!
Yup, the Norton one I receive also. I am on Linux as well, and have
also been since 2010.
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give
it a call. 😜
On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give it a call. 😜
I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
[snip]
When I moved into this house, just about all the phone calls I got on
the landline were from Spammers so I installed an "Answerphone" on the
Landline. That way, when that phone rang, I could wait to see if it is a
"Real" call or just Spammers.
If I'm close enough I look at the caller ID to see if its something reasonable.
Now most of the junk calls have the caller ID name set equal
to the number.
BTW, they almost never leave a message. I consider that as indicating a
lack of confidence in what they're selling, as if they know that anybody who's had time to think about it would say no.
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID NAME is a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
--Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give
it a call. ;-P
Yes, I do use it that way.
On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give it a call. 😜
I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
On 29/04/2025 7:57 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:Well, with Power out, I guess you weren't doing anything else .... so,
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give it a call. 😜
I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
maybe, your spammer was wanting to give you something to do. '-P
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give it a call. 😜
I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
At least the phone system works when there's a power failure! Useful to know ...
On 04/28/2025 2:13 PM, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100snip
Yup, the Norton one I receive also. I am on Linux as well, and haveThis is how you handle spam phone calls
also been since 2010.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/536662662814345
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
On 2025-04-29 12:09, Graham J wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:At least the phone system works when there's a power failure!
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give it a call. 😜
I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
Useful to know ...
Mine did, but not everybody's.
Just heard from someone that people had to physically go to the office
of one known brand of elevators to go and rescue some trapped people
in this or that lift. Phone at that office was off.
On most places, the land line failed instantly, because the network is
fibre and needs power at sites. Mine failed instantly, and it is on
UPS. Mobile worked while towers had battery. It is possible that my
tower was on the main exchange, so they had a big battery and a
generator.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
On 2025-04-29 12:09, Graham J wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-04-28 15:01, Daniel70 wrote:At least the phone system works when there's a power failure!
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give it a call. 😜
I got one spam call yesterday. You know, I live in Spain, the entire
country was suffering a power failure, yet I got one spam call!
Useful to know ...
Mine did, but not everybody's.
Just heard from someone that people had to physically go to the office
of one known brand of elevators to go and rescue some trapped people
in this or that lift. Phone at that office was off.
On most places, the land line failed instantly, because the network is
fibre and needs power at sites. Mine failed instantly, and it is on
UPS. Mobile worked while towers had battery. It is possible that my
tower was on the main exchange, so they had a big battery and a
generator.
Did analog and digital landlines fail equally? or maybe there are no
analog lines left in Spain.
On 10/04/2025 09:33, Davey wrote:
Well, no, that would be too much information! It is always the same
message, with the same charges.
I have recently had a spate of: "Your package is ready for
pickup..." e-mail messages, and a couple of the "Thank you for renewing
your Norton 360 subscription." ones. Since I have been exclusively a
Linux user since 2010, that is well out of date!
I have had some genuine ones, usually when there has been a foreign transaction.
On 2025-04-28 22:51, knuttle wrote:
On 04/28/2025 2:13 PM, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100snip
Yup, the Norton one I receive also. I am on Linux as well, and haveThis is how you handle spam phone calls
also been since 2010.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/536662662814345
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
That might backfire; you might be sued for impersonating the police.
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
That might backfire; you might be sued for impersonating the police.
On 29/04/2025 5:42 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]
When I moved into this house, just about all the phone calls I got on
the landline were from Spammers so I installed an "Answerphone" on the
Landline. That way, when that phone rang, I could wait to see if it is a >>> "Real" call or just Spammers.
If I'm close enough I look at the caller ID to see if its something
reasonable.
Hey, like I typed my Landline phone is in the Bedroom. Just about the
only time I'm in the Bedroom, my mind is on totally different things to "Answer the Phone"! ;-)
Now most of the junk calls have the caller ID name set equal
to the number.
Hmm! Not sure WHAT would be displayed on my LL phone.
BTW, they almost never leave a message. I consider that as indicating a
lack of confidence in what they're selling, as if they know that anybody
who's had time to think about it would say no.
I figure it's probably an auto-dialer at the distant end, setting up
'active' calls so when the 'Spammer/Operator' finishes the current call
they are on, there is someone on the line waiting to be spammed (ME).
I've often wondered if, when my answer machine answers the call, does
it, possibly, put some signal on the line which the distant auto-dialer
can detect and know it's being connected to an Answer machine .... so IT breaks the connection.
I doubt it .... but it's an interesting thought!! ;-P
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID NAME is a
serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
On my mobile, if they are not in my 'phonebook' AND I'm not expecting a
call from somewhere unusual, I don't bother answering it either. The way
I figure it, if it is someone I NEED to talk to, they'll probably/
hopefully SMS me instead.
P.S. I have deliberately disable my Mobile's MessageBank-thingee cause,
as I figure it, if I have to phone in to get my Messages, I'd be charged
for that call as I'm on PAYG!!
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give >>> it a call. ;-P
Yes, I do use it that way.
Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> writes:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-04-28 22:51, knuttle wrote:
On 04/28/2025 2:13 PM, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100 snip > Yup, the Norton one Ireceive also. I am on Linux as well, and have > also been since
2010.
This is how you handle spam phone calls
https://www.facebook.com/reel/536662662814345
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
That might backfire; you might be sued for impersonating the police.
Sued by whom?
There’s only two parties to the call, and neither wants to involve the
police.
How do you know there are only two parties to the call?
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-04-28 22:51, knuttle wrote:
On 04/28/2025 2:13 PM, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100 snip > Yup, the Norton one Ireceive also. I am on Linux as well, and have > also been since
2010.
This is how you handle spam phone calls
https://www.facebook.com/reel/536662662814345
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
That might backfire; you might be sued for impersonating the police.
Sued by whom?
There’s only two parties to the call, and neither wants to involve the police.
On Tue 29/04/2025 11:27, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/04/2025 5:42 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]
When I moved into this house, just about all the phone calls I
got on the landline were from Spammers so I installed an
"Answerphone" on the Landline. That way, when that phone rang, I
could wait to see if it is a "Real" call or just Spammers.
If I'm close enough I look at the caller ID to see if its something
reasonable.
Hey, like I typed my Landline phone is in the Bedroom. Just about
the only time I'm in the Bedroom, my mind is on totally different
things to "Answer the Phone"! ;-)
Now most of the junk calls have the caller ID name set equal
to the number.
Hmm! Not sure WHAT would be displayed on my LL phone.
BTW, they almost never leave a message. I consider that as
indicating a lack of confidence in what they're selling, as if
they know that anybody who's had time to think about it would say
no.
I figure it's probably an auto-dialer at the distant end, setting
up 'active' calls so when the 'Spammer/Operator' finishes the
current call they are on, there is someone on the line waiting to
be spammed (ME).
I've often wondered if, when my answer machine answers the call,
does it, possibly, put some signal on the line which the distant auto-dialer can detect and know it's being connected to an Answer
machine .... so IT breaks the connection.
I doubt it .... but it's an interesting thought!! ;-P
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID
NAME is a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
On my mobile, if they are not in my 'phonebook' AND I'm not
expecting a call from somewhere unusual, I don't bother answering
it either. The way I figure it, if it is someone I NEED to talk to,
they'll probably/ hopefully SMS me instead.
P.S. I have deliberately disable my Mobile's MessageBank-thingee
cause, as I figure it, if I have to phone in to get my Messages,
I'd be charged for that call as I'm on PAYG!!
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time
I actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I
can give it a call. ;-P
Yes, I do use it that way.
The secret if you think it may be a spam call is to pick up the
handset and keep quiet. If it is a spam test call it will be dropped
after about 3-4 seconds. If you speak it will either play you a
recorded message or put you through to 'Kevin from Microsoft' usually
in a very heavy Asian accent.
I figure it's probably an auto-dialer at the distant end, setting up
'active' calls so when the 'Spammer/Operator' finishes the current call
they are on, there is someone on the line waiting to be spammed (ME).
I've often wondered if, when my answer machine answers the call, does
it, possibly, put some signal on the line which the distant auto-dialer
can detect and know it's being connected to an Answer machine .... so IT breaks the connection.
On 28/04/2025 20:42, Mark Lloyd wrote:
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID NAME is
a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
Where do 'home phones' put out the caller's name on the CLID?
I think most people would not want their name disclosed to strangers.
I figure it's probably an auto-dialer at the distant end, setting up
'active' calls so when the 'Spammer/Operator' finishes the current call
they are on, there is someone on the line waiting to be spammed (ME).
I've often wondered if, when my answer machine answers the call, does
it, possibly, put some signal on the line which the distant auto-dialer
can detect and know it's being connected to an Answer machine .... so IT breaks the connection.
I doubt it .... but it's an interesting thought!! ;-P
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID NAME is
a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
On my mobile, if they are not in my 'phonebook' AND I'm not expecting a
call from somewhere unusual, I don't bother answering it either. The way
I figure it, if it is someone I NEED to talk to, they'll
probably/hopefully SMS me instead.
P.S. I have deliberately disable my Mobile's MessageBank-thingee cause,
as I figure it, if I have to phone in to get my Messages, I'd be charged
for that call as I'm on PAYG!!
The secret if you think it may be a spam call is to pick up the handset
and keep quiet. If it is a spam test call it will be dropped after about
3-4 seconds. If you speak it will either play you a recorded message or
put you through to 'Kevin from Microsoft' usually in a very heavy Asian accent.
On Tue 29/04/2025 11:27, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/04/2025 5:42 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can
give
it a call. ;-P
Yes, I do use it that way.
The secret if you think it may be a spam call is to pick up the handset
and keep quiet. If it is a spam test call it will be dropped after about
3-4 seconds. If you speak it will either play you a recorded message or
put you through to 'Kevin from Microsoft' usually in a very heavy Asian accent.
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> writes:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-04-28 22:51, knuttle wrote:
On 04/28/2025 2:13 PM, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100 snip > Yup, the Norton one Ireceive also. I am on Linux as well, and have > also been since
2010.
This is how you handle spam phone calls
https://www.facebook.com/reel/536662662814345
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
That might backfire; you might be sued for impersonating the police.
Sued by whom?
There’s only two parties to the call, and neither wants to involve the >>> police.
How do you know there are only two parties to the call?
No-one mentioned a conference call?
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-04-28 22:51, knuttle wrote:
On 04/28/2025 2:13 PM, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:33:17 +0100snip
Yup, the Norton one I receive also. I am on Linux as well, and haveThis is how you handle spam phone calls
also been since 2010.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/536662662814345
If the link does not work Earl answers the phone "Hello Sheriff's
department, Fraud division. Who is calling."
That might backfire; you might be sued for impersonating the police.
Sued by whom?
There’s only two parties to the call, and neither wants to involve the police.
If you want to be private, there's a way to disable it (I don't remember
how right now, other than you dial '*' plus a 2-digit code). The
recipient's CID display will show something like "anonymous" or "private.
On 29.04.25 19:37, Mark Lloyd wrote:
If you want to be private, there's a way to disable it (I don't remember
how right now, other than you dial '*' plus a 2-digit code). The
recipient's CID display will show something like "anonymous" or "private.
I never accepted such calls in the past. In the webinterface of our
provider we can set this function to drop such calls automatically. They never reach the called person.
On 2025-04-29 20:18, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 29.04.25 19:37, Mark Lloyd wrote:
If you want to be private, there's a way to disable it (I don't remember >>> how right now, other than you dial '*' plus a 2-digit code). TheI never accepted such calls in the past. In the webinterface of our
recipient's CID display will show something like "anonymous" or "private. >>
provider we can set this function to drop such calls automatically. They
never reach the called person.
The problem is that at the other side of the pond, phones do not just
send their number, they also send the name of the owner. And some people obviously do not like this.
On Europe phones just send the number. Certainly, many people restrict anonymous calls.
On Europe phones just send the number. Certainly, many people restrict anonymous calls.
On 29.04.25 20:54, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On Europe phones just send the number. Certainly, many people restrict
anonymous calls.
Probably you are right with the numbers. In our system I have saved over
300 numbers by synchronising it with my computers. So I got the
impression the name is sent along because the system does ad the name if
it recognises the number. In case of a LL this would be misleading anyway.
At least we do hardly receive any spam-calls anymore on the LL and most
calls are done with the mobiles anyway.
If you say "hello" and there is an abnormally long delay before you hear anything back. I've found that one indication you're talking to a machine. This isn't perfect, since some people do that. It's ALMOST always a
machine.
On Tue 29/04/2025 11:27, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/04/2025 5:42 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]
When I moved into this house, just about all the phone calls I
got on the landline were from Spammers so I installed an
"Answerphone" on the Landline. That way, when that phone rang,
I could wait to see if it is a "Real" call or just Spammers.
If I'm close enough I look at the caller ID to see if its
something reasonable.
Hey, like I typed my Landline phone is in the Bedroom. Just about
the only time I'm in the Bedroom, my mind is on totally different
things to "Answer the Phone"! ;-)
Now most of the junk calls have the caller ID name set equal to
the number.
Hmm! Not sure WHAT would be displayed on my LL phone.
BTW, they almost never leave a message. I consider that as
indicating a lack of confidence in what they're selling, as if
they know that anybody who's had time to think about it would say
no.
I figure it's probably an auto-dialer at the distant end, setting
up 'active' calls so when the 'Spammer/Operator' finishes the
current call they are on, there is someone on the line waiting to
be spammed (ME).
I've often wondered if, when my answer machine answers the call,
does it, possibly, put some signal on the line which the distant
auto-dialer can detect and know it's being connected to an Answer
machine .... so IT breaks the connection.
I doubt it .... but it's an interesting thought!! ;-P
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID
NAME is a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
On my mobile, if they are not in my 'phonebook' AND I'm not
expecting a call from somewhere unusual, I don't bother answering
it either. The way I figure it, if it is someone I NEED to talk to,
they'll probably/ hopefully SMS me instead.
P.S. I have deliberately disable my Mobile's MessageBank-thingee
cause, as I figure it, if I have to phone in to get my Messages,
I'd be charged for that call as I'm on PAYG!!
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only
time I actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my
mobile so I can give it a call. ;-P
Yes, I do use it that way.
The secret if you think it may be a spam call is to pick up the
handset and keep quiet.
If it is a spam test call it will be dropped after about 3-4 seconds.--
If you speak it will either play you a recorded message or put you
through to 'Kevin from Microsoft' usually in a very heavy Asian
accent.
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give
it a call. ;-P
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:03:33 +0100, Woody wrote:
[snip]
The secret if you think it may be a spam call is to pick up the handset
and keep quiet. If it is a spam test call it will be dropped after about
3-4 seconds. If you speak it will either play you a recorded message or
put you through to 'Kevin from Microsoft' usually in a very heavy Asian
accent.
who ignores 90% of what you say (it probably wasn't on the script).
If you say "hello" and there is an abnormally long delay before you hear anything back. I've found that one indication you're talking to a machine. This isn't perfect, since some people do that. It's ALMOST always a
machine.
As to "tech support scams", I almost never give someone control of my computer, and NEVER an unknown person.
I've seen a Youtube video of where someone got a one of those calls,
asking what OS he had (expecting some version of Windows, and expecting nothing else). He answered "Haiku" (that's a real OS, https://www.haiku- os.org/).
On 30/04/2025 3:58 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:03:33 +0100, Woody wrote:Similarily, I've been rung up on my landline phone by "Microsoft Service Department" (or similar) telling me I had a problem with my
[snip]
The secret if you think it may be a spam call is to pick up the handset
and keep quiet. If it is a spam test call it will be dropped after about >>> 3-4 seconds. If you speak it will either play you a recorded message or
put you through to 'Kevin from Microsoft' usually in a very heavy Asian
accent.
who ignores 90% of what you say (it probably wasn't on the script).
If you say "hello" and there is an abnormally long delay before you hear
anything back. I've found that one indication you're talking to a
machine.
This isn't perfect, since some people do that. It's ALMOST always a
machine.
As to "tech support scams", I almost never give someone control of my
computer, and NEVER an unknown person.
I've seen a Youtube video of where someone got a one of those calls,
asking what OS he had (expecting some version of Windows, and expecting
nothing else). He answered "Haiku" (that's a real OS, https://www.haiku-
os.org/).
computer .... which they could fix if I handed over control.
Sure, Microsoft would have thought I was experiencing a problem ..... as
I usually ran Linux!! ;-P
On 29.04.25 19:37, Mark Lloyd wrote:
If you want to be private, there's a way to disable it (I don't
remember how right now, other than you dial '*' plus a 2-digit code).
The recipient's CID display will show something like "anonymous" or
"private.
I never accepted such calls in the past. In the webinterface of our
provider we can set this function to drop such calls automatically. They never reach the called person.
On 29.04.25 20:54, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On Europe phones just send the number. Certainly, many people restrict
anonymous calls.
Probably you are right with the numbers. In our system I have saved over
300 numbers by synchronising it with my computers. So I got the
impression the name is sent along because the system does ad the name if
it recognises the number. In case of a LL this would be misleading
anyway.
At least we do hardly receive any spam-calls anymore on the LL and most
calls are done with the mobiles anyway.
I had one of those a while back. Being a bit bored I decided to play
along. He wanted me to find the Windows key and I kept leading him along showing I didn't have one. Eventually he said lets do it another way.
'Open up the Google' he said. I acted daft saying what did he mean. He
asked if I knew what Google is to which I replied a browser. He said yes
so open it. I said I can't, I'm using Safari on an Apple.
Click, call gone.
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks
all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:19:48 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
[spam]
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from
certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks
all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
Here, I find number-based blocking to be nearly useless. The junk callers keep changing the number too much. NAME-based blocking that allows regular expressions could block most of the junk calls I get. If it blocked calls with the name field containing ten digits, that would get a lot of them.
Number blocking works very well here. The reason being to be able to white-list as well.
Fact is that our private calls are done with our mobiles most of the
time.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:04:27 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
Fact is that our private calls are done with our mobiles most of the
time.
Most of mine are too. However, a majority of junk callers use the home
phone.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:04:27 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
[snip]
Number blocking works very well here. The reason being to be able to
white-list as well.
A white list is what I had to do, considering no access to name
blocking. The device would respond to unknown numbers with a message to "press 0 and call back", and some people would actually do that. Most
(if not all) robocallers don't.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:19:48 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
[spam]
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from
certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks
all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
Here, I find number-based blocking to be nearly useless. The junk callers keep changing the number too much. NAME-based blocking that allows regular expressions could block most of the junk calls I get. If it blocked calls with the name field containing ten digits, that would get a lot of them.
The only numbers I have in the block-list on my phone are some charities, since I don't like to be treated like an ATM.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 15:36:36 +0100, Woody wrote:
[snip]
I had one of those a while back. Being a bit bored I decided to play
along. He wanted me to find the Windows key and I kept leading him along
showing I didn't have one. Eventually he said lets do it another way.
'Open up the Google' he said. I acted daft saying what did he mean. He
asked if I knew what Google is to which I replied a browser. He said yes
so open it. I said I can't, I'm using Safari on an Apple.
Click, call gone.
I've been watching some scam-call videos on Youtube. These scammers often
ask for Steam or Apple gift cards. One man would ask him "Why do you want steamed apples?".
On 01.05.25 18:54, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:04:27 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
Fact is that our private calls are done with our mobiles most of the
time.
Most of mine are too. However, a majority of junk callers use the home
phone.
Same is true here.
So far zero spam-calls on mobiles even with default settings. Knock on wood!
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
[...]
Now-a-days, apart from the Spammers .... just about the only time I
actually use the Landline is when I've misplaced my mobile so I can give
it a call. ;-P
That' SO (before-)last decade! :-) That's what my watch is for.
Watch has 'Find Phone'. Laptop has 'Find Phone'. Google TV Streamer
has 'Find Remote'.
Google TV Streamer is cable connected to the TV, so can not get lost. Laptop can get lost, but not so easily.
Mother's Day is coming up, but she will *not* get a 'Find Hubby'
gadget!
For example, the old network of the cable company ONO, which now belongs
to Vodafone, is fibre to the block, then coax to the home. On apartment buildings, they see a copper pair getting to their phone from the
basement. But there is a fibre coming to the building, so service is
down if there is no electricity. I do not know if they have their own
power supply coming from their main exchange.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 20:27:57 +1000, Daniel70 wrote:
[snip]
I figure it's probably an auto-dialer at the distant end, setting up
'active' calls so when the 'Spammer/Operator' finishes the current call
they are on, there is someone on the line waiting to be spammed (ME).
I've often wondered if, when my answer machine answers the call, does
it, possibly, put some signal on the line which the distant auto-dialer
can detect and know it's being connected to an Answer machine .... so IT
breaks the connection.
I often hear 5 beeps (like a busy signal) after scam calls (NEVER
legitimate calls). There seems to be some interaction problem between the auto-dialer and my phone. Good thing, the built-in answering machine
doesn't think that's a message.
I doubt it .... but it's an interesting thought!! ;-P
The few I get where they actually do leave a message, they are often front-end truncated. That is, the first 2-3 seconds of the message don't
get recorded, as if the auto-dialer is too stupid (more likely, doesn't
care) to wait for the beep.
I do that on the cell phone too, although the lack of caller ID NAME is
a serious disadvantage compared to the home phone.
On my mobile, if they are not in my 'phonebook' AND I'm not expecting a
call from somewhere unusual, I don't bother answering it either. The way
I figure it, if it is someone I NEED to talk to, they'll
probably/hopefully SMS me instead.
That's what I've been doing, considering the lack of help from caller ID showing the NAME.
P.S. I have deliberately disable my Mobile's MessageBank-thingee cause,
as I figure it, if I have to phone in to get my Messages, I'd be charged
for that call as I'm on PAYG!!
I used to know someone who did that, for the same reason. Now most cell service around here is "unlimited talk and text".
[snip]
On 1/05/2025 5:06 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:19:48 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:But, here in Australia, our normal, everyday, phone numbers DO have 10
[spam]
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from
certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks
all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
Here, I find number-based blocking to be nearly useless. The junk callers
keep changing the number too much. NAME-based blocking that allows
regular
expressions could block most of the junk calls I get. If it blocked calls
with the name field containing ten digits, that would get a lot of them.
digits .... two for the area code and eight for the specific phone with-
in that Area.
I was going to suggest all the Telcos should get together and Ban/Block/ Whatever ANY organisation that wants to swap large blocks of number too
often .... but, I guess, Telcos are supposedly Profit Making Enterprises
so why would they want to thwart an organisation that is contributing to their Profits. ;-)
On 1/05/2025 5:06 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:19:48 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:But, here in Australia, our normal, everyday, phone numbers DO have 10
[spam]
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from
certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks
all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
Here, I find number-based blocking to be nearly useless. The junk callers
keep changing the number too much. NAME-based blocking that allows
regular
expressions could block most of the junk calls I get. If it blocked calls
with the name field containing ten digits, that would get a lot of them.
digits .... two for the area code and eight for the specific phone with-
in that Area.
I was going to suggest all the Telcos should get together and Ban/Block/ Whatever ANY organisation that wants to swap large blocks of number too
often .... but, I guess, Telcos are supposedly Profit Making Enterprises
so why would they want to thwart an organisation that is contributing to their Profits. ;-)
On Sat 03/05/2025 12:26, Daniel70 wrote:an organisation that is contributing to their Profits. ;-)
On 1/05/2025 5:06 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:19:48 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:But, here in Australia, our normal, everyday, phone numbers DO have 10 digits .... two for the area code and eight for the specific phone with- in that Area.
[spam]
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from >>>> certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks
all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
Here, I find number-based blocking to be nearly useless. The junk callers >>> keep changing the number too much. NAME-based blocking that allows regular >>> expressions could block most of the junk calls I get. If it blocked calls >>> with the name field containing ten digits, that would get a lot of them. >>>
I was going to suggest all the Telcos should get together and Ban/Block/ Whatever ANY organisation that wants to swap large blocks of number too often .... but, I guess, Telcos are supposedly Profit Making Enterprises so why would they want to thwart
The difference in the UK is that it seems most of these scum are using numbers that are the use/property of other Telco customers - they don't 'buy' numbers of their own.
On 1/05/2025 4:50 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 15:36:36 +0100, Woody wrote:Stewed Apples .... Yumm ..... but Steamed Apples"?? ;-P
[snip]
I had one of those a while back. Being a bit bored I decided to play
along. He wanted me to find the Windows key and I kept leading him
along showing I didn't have one. Eventually he said lets do it another
way. 'Open up the Google' he said. I acted daft saying what did he
mean. He asked if I knew what Google is to which I replied a browser.
He said yes so open it. I said I can't, I'm using Safari on an Apple.
Click, call gone.
I've been watching some scam-call videos on Youtube. These scammers
often ask for Steam or Apple gift cards. One man would ask him "Why do
you want steamed apples?".
But, here in Australia, our normal, everyday, phone numbers DO have 10
digits .... two for the area code and eight for the specific phone
with-in that Area.
I was going to suggest all the Telcos should get together and Ban/Block/Whatever ANY organisation that wants to swap large blocks of
number too often .... but, I guess, Telcos are supposedly Profit Making Enterprises so why would they want to thwart an organisation that is contributing to their Profits. ;-)
On Sat, 5/3/2025 10:08 AM, Woody wrote:an organisation that is contributing to their Profits. ;-)
On Sat 03/05/2025 12:26, Daniel70 wrote:
On 1/05/2025 5:06 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 21:19:48 +0200, Jörg Lorenz wrote:But, here in Australia, our normal, everyday, phone numbers DO have 10 digits .... two for the area code and eight for the specific phone with- in that Area.
[spam]
In CH numbers and names are shown on landline calls,
BTW: Providers are forced by law to offer filters to eliminate spam
calls especially of call centers and the like. This is an opt
in-function.
The interface even allows to define specific filter to block calls from >>>>> certain numbers or number blocks. For example the filter "+2*" blocks >>>>> all calls from Africa (=Zone 2). That is just an example.
Here, I find number-based blocking to be nearly useless. The junk callers >>>> keep changing the number too much. NAME-based blocking that allows regular >>>> expressions could block most of the junk calls I get. If it blocked calls >>>> with the name field containing ten digits, that would get a lot of them. >>>>
I was going to suggest all the Telcos should get together and Ban/Block/ Whatever ANY organisation that wants to swap large blocks of number too often .... but, I guess, Telcos are supposedly Profit Making Enterprises so why would they want to thwart
The difference in the UK is that it seems most of these scum are using numbers that are the use/property of other Telco customers - they don't 'buy' numbers of their own.
The CallerID packet, has nothing to do with billing or call setup. Consequently, the message content is irrelevant. You can buy equipment
to stuff random digits in there if you want (pretending you are a VOIP
phone company, should work well for you and your equipment purchase.)
The most unsophisticated call centers are that stupid.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to
this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone
has been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it. The lady used 1471 to find
out who had rung her number, and used it's recall facility to ring
me; so she didn't make any transcription error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no
longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the
1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in
a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
It doesn't yet cover spoofed mobile numbers in caller-id.
And not easy to enforce. I don't think there's anything in place (software/infrastructure) to spot a fake number from real. It's the
bleeding obvious plague that no one saw coming -\O/-.
On 3/20/25 15:21, Richmond wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to
this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone
has been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it. The lady used 1471 to find >>>> out who had rung her number, and used it's recall facility to ring
me; so she didn't make any transcription error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no
longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the
1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in
a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
It doesn't yet cover spoofed mobile numbers in caller-id.
And not easy to enforce. I don't think there's anything in place (software/infrastructure) to spot a fake number from real. It's the
bleeding obvious plague that no one saw coming -\O/-.
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 21:55:50 +1000, Daniel70 wrote:
[snip]
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the
Answer Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer
Machine starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up.
;-)
Currently, I find that most (not all) junk calls have the caller ID
NAME the same as the number.
I still get a few calls that identify themselves with "CITY ST", like
"DALLAS TX".
I'm surprised that almost nobody mentions CID NAME.
On 07/05/2025 15:20, Jason H wrote:
And not easy to enforce. I don't think there's anything in place
(software/infrastructure) to spot a fake number from real. It's the
bleeding obvious plague that no one saw coming -\O/-.
Yes there is, although it does have a third category for, basically,
number from abroad, whose status is unknown. It has been introduced fro
all VoIP in the USA.
Providers have to sign information that indicates whether caller ID is
the true caller ID, or another caller ID from someone they have
positively identified. (A and B attestations; C is the third case
above.) I haven't gone into the details of how the true identity is tracked, but, if it isn't included in the VoIP headers, I assume that
the provider must log it and provide it to the authorities.
Search STIR/SHAKEN for more information.
Unfortunately this has been cross-posted to world as well as UK groups,
and I suspect you are in the UK. Also the real problem is associated
with VoIP, and it hasn't been posted to a VoIP group.
I believe that the UK didn't want to use the extension to the
traditional PSTN, and is awaiting analogue switch off, before fully implementing the same, or similar.
I believe many US legacy network users see a "V" in the caller ID, if it
is a true caller ID of the caller.
I believe there are mechanisms for passing on authentication when an--
call is forwarded, but it's something I've researched in depth, only
noting that complying has tripped up many US VoIP using organisations,
who used to like forwarding original caller ID to outworkers.
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone has
been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription error
in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no longer
true - unless all you here can think of another way that the 1471
service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer to
let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Daniel70, 2025-04-08 13:55:
[...]
After a couple of weeks of mad-dashes from the Lounge into the Bedroom
when the phone rang, only to find it was a Spammer caller calling, I
brought a Wireless Phone WITH Built-in Answer machine.
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
And legitimate people who want to reach you have to leave a message and
hope you gonna call back?
A wireless phone should also display the number of the caller, so you
can decide wether to answer it or not. When you add the people you know
to the phonebook, you may even see their names and when then there is no
name but just the number when the phone rings, this may also indicate a spammer call.
On 2025-03-20 15:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer to
let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Spain has announced a new regulation this summer (it still has to be processed in Parliament). Commercial entities issuing phone calls will prepend a number to their phone number, identifying the company. There
will be a registry of such prefixes. Telcos will block phone calls
without the prefix.
On 9/04/2025 4:55 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 21:55:50 +1000, Daniel70 wrote:
[snip]
Now, when the Landline rings, I just let it ring ... until the Answer
Machine starts up and, more often than not, when my Answer Machine
starts up, the calling person/machine/whatever hangs up. ;-)
Currently, I find that most (not all) junk calls have the caller ID
NAME the same as the number.
WHAT?? So it looks like the Caller is phoning the Caller?? Really??
That'd be a bit of a Give-away, wouldn't it?? ;-)
I still get a few calls that identify themselves with "CITY ST", like
"DALLAS TX".
I'm surprised that almost nobody mentions CID NAME.
On 13.05.25 15:09, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-03-20 15:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer to
let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Spain has announced a new regulation this summer (it still has to be
processed in Parliament). Commercial entities issuing phone calls will
prepend a number to their phone number, identifying the company. There
will be a registry of such prefixes. Telcos will block phone calls
without the prefix.
How long will it take until spammers prepend these numbers?
Come on! This is quite primitive!
The Spaniards should ask Swisscom how these things really work and how spamblocking is professionally executed in a VOIP-network.
On 2025-05-13 16:08, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 13.05.25 15:09, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-03-20 15:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer to >>>> let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Spain has announced a new regulation this summer (it still has to be
processed in Parliament). Commercial entities issuing phone calls will
prepend a number to their phone number, identifying the company. There
will be a registry of such prefixes. Telcos will block phone calls
without the prefix.
How long will it take until spammers prepend these numbers?
Come on! This is quite primitive!
Maybe by Telcos non routing these calls. Unexpected prefixes.
The Spaniards should ask Swisscom how these things really work and how
spamblocking is professionally executed in a VOIP-network.
I am sure they have several professionals advising what and how to do
things.
On 2025-03-20 15:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-03-20 13:10, Graham J wrote:
I know you're all very knowledgeable here, so:
There are groups more appropriate to phone trouble, like
comp.mobile.android or uk.telecom.mobile. I have added them both to
this post, so they will see your post below.
Received a call on my mobile, from a lady in Scotland who says I rang
her landline earlier this morning. I did not, and my mobile phone
has been sitting on the windowsill (being the only place it can get a
signal) all morning, with nobody near it.
The lady used 1471 to find out who had rung her number, and used it's
recall facility to ring me; so she didn't make any transcription
error in dialling my number.
I'm aware that spammers spoof mobile numbers but had always assumed
that they chose unallocated numbers. That is now apparently no
longer true - unless all you here can think of another way that the
1471 service can see an erroneous number.
I thought Britain had some new regulation about faking the A number in
a call.
I never return phone calls from unknown numbers. Only when I know the
number is from some friend or family I return the call, but I prefer
to let them try again, maybe they got interrupted.
Spain has announced a new regulation this summer (it still has to be processed in Parliament). Commercial entities issuing phone calls will prepend a number to their phone number, identifying the company. There
will be a registry of such prefixes. Telcos will block phone calls
without the prefix.
+++··················· <https://cadenaser.com/nacional/2025/05/12/bustinduy-explica-las-tres-medidas-de-consumo-para-acabar-con-las-llamadas-comerciales-masivas-a-los-moviles-cadena-ser/>
...
What is the Ministry going to do to put an end to calls from companies
to sell us supposed offers?
We have done our homework and we are going to introduce a regulatory
change through two amendments to the Customer Services Act to block
so-called spam calls. We will do this in three ways:
* Companies will be obliged to identify all numbers from which they make business telephone calls with a specific numerical code (a
telephone prefix). They will also have to identify customer service
calls with a different code. On the basis of these codes,
telecommunications operators will be obliged to block all calls from companies that do not use these codes.
* To declare null and void contracts that are concluded in non-consensual telephone calls. In this way, companies will be
discouraged from making unwanted calls, since the contracts obtained in
this type of communication will be null and void.
* All companies will be obliged to renew their consent to receive commercial calls with the user every two years, thus ensuring that
companies do not rely on indefinite or ambiguous authorisations to
continue contacting consumers.
How will the code numbers work?
There is a register of number codes so that when that prefix calls us,
it will come up and we will know that it is commercial, it will be
traceable. If there is a call without a code, companies will have to
block it immediately.
And how is consent renewed every two years?
We will have to renew our consent every two years. It will also happen
with the automatic renewal of subscriptions. We are going to introduce
that 15 days before the renewal takes place, companies will have to send
an obligatory email to give notice. It is a question of ensuring what we contract and how much we spend.
...
···················++-
But I don't understand how Telcos will detect that a phone call without prefix is commercial. We still have the problem of faked numbers.
On 13/05/2025 11:09 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-03-20 15:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
But I don't understand how Telcos will detect that a phone call
without prefix is commercial. We still have the problem of faked numbers.
Hmm! I was going to ask "How would the Telcos determine that YOU are
ringing, e.g., your MUM so the call should go through?? .... but,
a.t.t., I hadn't read this last paragraph of yours .... which indicates
you don't know, either!! ;-P
Odd one this morning, phone rings with number withheld.
On 2025-04-03 14:14, Frank Slootweg wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply.
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn >>>>> on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a
smartphone takes quite some time and effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's >>> not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all your
stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
Even if you do not have important apps in your phone, the bad guys might
add services to the phone and convince the providers to activate them.
Bank payments with confirmation code by SMS, for instance.
Might. I would not run the risk of not having protection on the phone.
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply:
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn >>>> on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a smartphone takes quite some time and effort. >>Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's
not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all your stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
On 3/04/2025 11:14 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply:
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only >>>>> turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides >>>> your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a smartphone takes quite some time and
effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's >>> not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all your
stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
I volunteer a few hours a week at the local Salvation Army Thrift
Shop .... and the number of times I see people flash their mobile phones
at the Credit Card machine staggers me.
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes all
their Banking information .... and you could just about guarantee that
they haven't got all their precious Family Photos saved somewhere else either!!
Crazy!!
On 2025-07-02 11:53, Daniel70 wrote:
On 3/04/2025 11:14 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply:
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only >>>>>> turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides >>>>> your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out? >>>>> Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a smartphone takes quite some time and
effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but
that's
not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is >>>> calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all your >>> stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
I volunteer a few hours a week at the local Salvation Army Thrift Shop
.... and the number of times I see people flash their mobile phones at
the Credit Card machine staggers me.
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes all
their Banking information .... and you could just about guarantee that
they haven't got all their precious Family Photos saved somewhere else
either!!
Crazy!!
It is actually safer than flashing a real credit card, if you follow the recommended procedures.
On 3/04/2025 11:14 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply:
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I only turn >>>> on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides
your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out?
Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a smartphone takes quite some time and effort. >>Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but that's >> not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is
calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all your stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
I volunteer a few hours a week at the local Salvation Army Thrift Shop
.... and the number of times I see people flash their mobile phones at
the Credit Card machine staggers me.
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes all
their Banking information .... and you could just about guarantee that
they haven't got all their precious Family Photos saved somewhere else either!!
On 2/07/2025 8:35 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-02 11:53, Daniel70 wrote:Oh!!
On 3/04/2025 11:14 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
Sorry it's taken so long to reply:
In comp.mobile.android, on 21 Mar 2025 18:52:57 GMT, Frank Slootweg
<this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]
You're a lot like me. I use my landline 95% of the time. I >>>>>>> only turn
on the cell when I go out, and not even always then.
Hmmm!? Do you have another ('dumb'/'feature') mobile phone, besides >>>>>> your smartphone?
No, just one smartphone.
If not, then how do you 'turn on' the smartphone when you go out? >>>>>> Turning it on, implies it's turned off [1]
Yes.
and turning on ('booting') a smartphone takes quite some time and
effort.
Not much effort, just push the power button and hold it for 3 or 4
seconds. I used to hold it until it vibrated, 5 or 6 seconds but
that's
not required. By the time I get to the car it's fully on. No one is >>>>> calling me anyhow so it if I have no phone for a minute or two, it
doesnt' matter.
So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your phone,
because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the finder/thief has all
your
stuff, access to your account(s), etc..
I volunteer a few hours a week at the local Salvation Army Thrift
Shop .... and the number of times I see people flash their mobile
phones at the Credit Card machine staggers me.
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes all
their Banking information .... and you could just about guarantee
that they haven't got all their precious Family Photos saved
somewhere else either!!
Crazy!!
It is actually safer than flashing a real credit card, if you follow
the recommended procedures.
On 2025-07-02 14:09, Daniel70 wrote:
On 2/07/2025 8:35 pm, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-02 11:53, Daniel70 wrote:
On 3/04/2025 11:14 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Oh!!So you don't have a SIM-lock PIN, nor a screen-lock PIN (or
biometrics)?
If so, I hope you don't have any important stuff on your
phone, because if you lose it or it gets stoelen, the
finder/thief has all your stuff, access to your account(s),
etc..
I volunteer a few hours a week at the local Salvation Army
Thrift Shop .... and the number of times I see people flash
their mobile phones at the Credit Card machine staggers me.
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there
goes all their Banking information .... and you could just
about guarantee that they haven't got all their precious Family
Photos saved somewhere else either!!
Crazy!!
It is actually safer than flashing a real credit card, if you
follow the recommended procedures.
Think about it. If they steal your card, they have all the data,
except the pin. They can use to pay with NFC as long as the amount is
relatively "small". However, with a phone they need a pin or pattern
or fingerprint or face to access and use the cards stored there.
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes all
their Banking information .... and you could just about guarantee that
they haven't got all their precious Family Photos saved somewhere else either!!
On 02/07/2025 10:53, Daniel70 wrote:
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes all
their Banking information .... and you could just about guarantee that
they haven't got all their precious Family Photos saved somewhere else
either!!
There was someone on one of the 'consumer' programmes complaining that
they lost ALL their photographs when their phone was stolen - going back
many years.
I despair quite often in the supermarket when the person in front of me spends ages trying to pay using their phone.
Never seen the advantage in doing so.
On 02/07/2025 10:53, Daniel70 wrote:
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes
all their Banking information .... and you could just about
guarantee that they haven't got all their precious Family Photos
saved somewhere else either!!
There was someone on one of the 'consumer' programmes complaining
that they lost ALL their photographs when their phone was stolen -
going back many years.
I despair quite often in the supermarket when the person in front of
me spends ages trying to pay using their phone.
Never seen the advantage in doing so.
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 09:05:08 +0100
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:53, Daniel70 wrote:
How many times have people lost their 'phones .... so there goes
all their Banking information .... and you could just about
guarantee that they haven't got all their precious Family Photos
saved somewhere else either!!
There was someone on one of the 'consumer' programmes complaining
that they lost ALL their photographs when their phone was stolen -
going back many years.
I despair quite often in the supermarket when the person in front of
me spends ages trying to pay using their phone.
Never seen the advantage in doing so.
I had to wait behind somebody at the checkout the other day who worked
on his 'phone, removed several items one at a time from his purchases,
then had to do mobile banking while still at the checkout to move enough
cash into his account to be able to use the 'phone to pay.
A lot of people were ready to kill him.
I had to wait behind somebody at the checkout the other day who worked
on his 'phone, removed several items one at a time from his purchases,
then had to do mobile banking while still at the checkout to move enough
cash into his account to be able to use the 'phone to pay.
A lot of people were ready to kill him.
It is actually faster than fetching the card from the wallet.
On 03/07/2025 10:33, Carlos E.R. wrote:
It is actually faster than fetching the card from the wallet.
I presume you are one of those who walks around with phone in hand all
the time?
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
Some of us don't! ;-(
On 2025-07-03 12:20, Davey wrote:
I had to wait behind somebody at the checkout the other day who worked
on his 'phone, removed several items one at a time from his purchases,
then had to do mobile banking while still at the checkout to move enough
cash into his account to be able to use the 'phone to pay.
A lot of people were ready to kill him.
If he had used his card, he still would have needed to enter the bank
account on his phone to move enough cash into his account and wasted the
same time.
On 03/07/2025 10:33, Carlos E.R. wrote:
It is actually faster than fetching the card from the wallet.
I presume you are one of those who walks around with phone in hand all
the time?
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
On 03/07/2025 12:18, JMB99 wrote:
On 03/07/2025 10:33, Carlos E.R. wrote:Not significantly if its a finger press. Point the locked phone at the
It is actually faster than fetching the card from the wallet.
I presume you are one of those who walks around with phone in hand all
the time?
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
NfC reader, it asks to be unlocked, touch the fingerprint reader, to
unlock and tap again...
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet
where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several cards
in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 09:05:08 +0100 JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
I had to wait behind somebody at the checkout the other day who worked
on his 'phone, removed several items one at a time from his purchases,
then had to do mobile banking while still at the checkout to move enough
cash into his account to be able to use the 'phone to pay.
A lot of people were ready to kill him.
When I notice someone ahead of me in line take out a notebook, that's a
bad sign. One of those people who carries around hundreds of coupons.
Coupons are OK, but why can't they decide which ones they're going to use
and get them out in advance? These people often have to argue with the checker about EVERY item, searching the bags for it.
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 11:20:17 +0100, Davey wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 09:05:08 +0100 JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
[snip]
I had to wait behind somebody at the checkout the other day who worked
on his 'phone, removed several items one at a time from his purchases,
then had to do mobile banking while still at the checkout to move enough
cash into his account to be able to use the 'phone to pay.
A lot of people were ready to kill him.
When I notice someone ahead of me in line take out a notebook, that's a
bad sign. One of those people who carries around hundreds of coupons.
Coupons are OK, but why can't they decide which ones they're going to use
and get them out in advance? These people often have to argue with the checker about EVERY item, searching the bags for it.
On 2025-07-03 13:18, JMB99 wrote:
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
I had to wait behind somebody at the checkout the other day who worked
on his 'phone, removed several items one at a time from his purchases,
then had to do mobile banking while still at the checkout to move enough
cash into his account to be able to use the 'phone to pay.
A lot of people were ready to kill him.
On 03/07/2025 12:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-03 13:18, JMB99 wrote:
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
My phone, like my car/house keys, remains in my trouser pocket whenever
I'm not using it or charging it. If I took my phone or my keys out and
left them on a random table, I'd spend ages remembering where I'd left
them and I'd be too much at risk of going out without them.
On 4/07/2025 1:26 am, David Wade wrote:
<Snip>
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet.... and, in a related manner, in about 2000, to pay for my Chicken
where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several
cards in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because
it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
Dave
Dinner, I went to hand my Credit Card to the Staff Member .... and, in
doing so, passed the Card over the Card Reader machine and BEEB, Job
Done!! First I knew of THAT ability!!
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet
where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several cards
in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
Dave
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-07-04 11:35, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/07/2025 1:26 am, David Wade wrote:
<Snip>
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet.... and, in a related manner, in about 2000, to pay for my Chicken
where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several
cards in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because
it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
Dave
Dinner, I went to hand my Credit Card to the Staff Member .... and, in
doing so, passed the Card over the Card Reader machine and BEEB, Job
Done!! First I knew of THAT ability!!
Really?
NFC has existed for years.
The standard wasn’t even defined until 2003
https://www.thamestechnology.co.uk/inspiration/history-of-contactless-payments-a-timeline
On 2025-07-04 13:12, Tweed wrote:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-07-04 11:35, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/07/2025 1:26 am, David Wade wrote:
<Snip>
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet.... and, in a related manner, in about 2000, to pay for my Chicken
where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several
cards in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because >>>>> it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
Dave
Dinner, I went to hand my Credit Card to the Staff Member .... and, in >>>> doing so, passed the Card over the Card Reader machine and BEEB, Job
Done!! First I knew of THAT ability!!
Really?
NFC has existed for years.
The standard wasn’t even defined until 2003
https://www.thamestechnology.co.uk/inspiration/history-of-contactless-
payments-a-timeline
That's an enormous time in technology :-D
On 2025/7/4 12:24:58, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-04 13:12, Tweed wrote:Daniel said his story was "in about 2000", so saying the standard wasn't defined until 2003 is a valid thing to say!
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:That's an enormous time in technology :-D
On 2025-07-04 11:35, Daniel70 wrote:The standard wasn’t even defined until 2003
On 4/07/2025 1:26 am, David Wade wrote:
<Snip>
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet >>>>>> where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several.... and, in a related manner, in about 2000, to pay for my Chicken
cards in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because >>>>>> it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
Dave
Dinner, I went to hand my Credit Card to the Staff Member .... and, in >>>>> doing so, passed the Card over the Card Reader machine and BEEB, Job >>>>> Done!! First I knew of THAT ability!!
Really?
NFC has existed for years.
https://www.thamestechnology.co.uk/inspiration/history-of-contactless- payments-a-timeline
On 2025/7/4 12:24:58, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-04 13:12, Tweed wrote:Daniel said his story was "in about 2000", so saying the standard wasn't defined until 2003 is a valid thing to say!
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-07-04 11:35, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/07/2025 1:26 am, David Wade wrote:
<Snip>
.. for me much simpler than trying to ease a card out of the wallet >>>>>> where it invariably jams, which I have to do as there are several.... and, in a related manner, in about 2000, to pay for my Chicken
cards in there. In most cases I will have also used my phone because >>>>>> it has my loyalty card stored in it as well....
Dave
Dinner, I went to hand my Credit Card to the Staff Member .... and, in >>>>> doing so, passed the Card over the Card Reader machine and BEEB, Job >>>>> Done!! First I knew of THAT ability!!
Really?
NFC has existed for years.
The standard wasn’t even defined until 2003
https://www.thamestechnology.co.uk/inspiration/history-of-
contactless- payments-a-timeline
That's an enormous time in technology :-D
On 03/07/2025 12:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-03 13:18, JMB99 wrote:
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
My phone, like my car/house keys, remains in my trouser pocket whenever
I'm not using it or charging it. If I took my phone or my keys out and
left them on a random table, I'd spend ages remembering where I'd left
them and I'd be too much at risk of going out without them.
On 2025/7/3 20:29:10, Mark Lloyd wrote:
[]
When I notice someone ahead of me in line take out a notebook, that's a
(At first there I thought you meant something like what I'm typing this
on! Visions of waiting for Windows to boot ... then I remembered we call
them laptops these days.)
bad sign. One of those people who carries around hundreds of coupons.Indeed. On the (infrequent) occasions I use a coupon, I place it on the
Coupons are OK, but why can't they decide which ones they're going to
use and get them out in advance? These people often have to argue with
the checker about EVERY item, searching the bags for it.
belt near (on top of, if possible) the item to which it relates.
On my normal supermarket (Carrefour) they have an app, and the app
generates a QR code for the cashier with all the bargain coupons that
there are. Instantly.
If you mean coupons that you have to stick into a card, those are very
rare here.
My rule is that I can take them out of the pocket*, but NEVER set them
down in a place that isn't mine (house or car).
* - when I first started carrying these things, I put them in the
obvious place, a FRONT pocket. I have never put anything other than a
few papers in a back pocket.
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 22:07:21 +0100, NY wrote:
On 03/07/2025 12:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-03 13:18, JMB99 wrote:
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so
takes longer to get into use.
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
My phone, like my car/house keys, remains in my trouser pocket whenever
I'm not using it or charging it. If I took my phone or my keys out and
left them on a random table, I'd spend ages remembering where I'd left
them and I'd be too much at risk of going out without them.
My rule is that I can take them out of the pocket*, but NEVER set them
down in a place that isn't mine (house or car).
On 6/07/2025 5:03 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 22:07:21 +0100, NY wrote:
On 03/07/2025 12:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-03 13:18, JMB99 wrote:
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so >>>>> takes longer to get into use.
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
My phone, like my car/house keys, remains in my trouser pocket whenever
I'm not using it or charging it. If I took my phone or my keys out and
left them on a random table, I'd spend ages remembering where I'd left
them and I'd be too much at risk of going out without them.
My rule is that I can take them out of the pocket*, but NEVER set them
down in a place that isn't mine (house or car).
When he was visiting people and if there was something that he HAD to
take home with him, he would put his car keys next to the object so he couldn't leave without being reminded about the object! ;-P
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
My rule is that I can take them out of the pocket*, but NEVER set them
down in a place that isn't mine (house or car).
On 05/07/2025 22:14, Bob Eager wrote:
My rule is that I can take them out of the pocket*, but NEVER set them
down in a place that isn't mine (house or car).
Many items have a secure anchor point like the ones on laptops.
Never understood why one could not be designed into mobile phones?
On 05/07/2025 20:03, Mark Lloyd wrote:
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
I EMailed Rohan recently complaining about their shirt pockets. There
used to be two on most shirts and they were deep enough to take a modern mobile phone completely - it could be then made more secure with a zip fastener on the pocket on a flap that was held by a button.
Their more recent shirts are like most other ones on sale with a small
pocket which will not take a mobile phone completely so danger of it
falling out if you bend over.
On 6/07/2025 5:03 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 22:07:21 +0100, NY wrote:
On 03/07/2025 12:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-07-03 13:18, JMB99 wrote:
My phone remains in a zipped pocket and need unlocking to be used so >>>>> takes longer to get into use.
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
My phone, like my car/house keys, remains in my trouser pocket whenever
I'm not using it or charging it. If I took my phone or my keys out and
left them on a random table, I'd spend ages remembering where I'd left
them and I'd be too much at risk of going out without them.
My rule is that I can take them out of the pocket*, but NEVER set them
down in a place that isn't mine (house or car).
When he was visiting people and if there was something that he HAD to
take home with him, he would put his car keys next to the object so he >couldn't leave without being reminded about the object! ;-P
On 05/07/2025 20:03, Mark Lloyd wrote:
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
I EMailed Rohan recently complaining about their shirt pockets.
On 2025/7/7 10:3:5, Daniel70 wrote:
On 6/07/2025 10:18 pm, JMB99 wrote:
On 05/07/2025 20:03, Mark Lloyd wrote:
Certainly, I keep it locked, in a shoulder bag when I am out, or in a
table when I am in. It is summer, so can't be in a jacket pocket.
I EMailed Rohan recently complaining about their shirt pockets.
"shirt pockets" .... supposedly responsible for 3.5inch 'Floppies'
being the size they are/were!!
Hmm. There was also a slightly different size/format; 3" I think it was.
My Oric Atmos used those, but it wasn't the only one - some other maker
(I think it might have been Amstrad (for their word-processor, not the
664 games machine) did too.
On 2025-07-07 16:38, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2025/7/7 10:3:5, Daniel70 wrote:
"shirt pockets" .... supposedly responsible for 3.5inch 'Floppies'
being the size they are/were!!
Hmm. There was also a slightly different size/format; 3" I think it
was. My Oric Atmos used those, but it wasn't the only one - some other
maker (I think it might have been Amstrad (for their word-processor,
not the 664 games machine) did too.
For their CPC664/6128 computers *AND* their word-processors - IMS, the latter's electronic design was developed from that of the former, so
they were very similar underneath the casing.
However, this gave a problem when upgrading to a PC: "How do I transfer
my Amstrad data to my PC?", the answer being: "With great difficulty!"
You could buy software to drive a parallel cable connection, but from
memory it wasn't cheap, so I devised a special dual format for an
external 5" floppy drive - the format appeared as a (slightly modified from default, but perfectly valid) CP/M format to the CPC6128, and the
entire CP/M disk contents appeared as one large file to the PC. Then I wrote a C-program to read the large file as a virtual CP/M format and
save the disk contents as the original individual files to my PC's HD.
Thank f*k we don't have to p*ss around like that any more!
"shirt pockets" .... supposedly responsible for 3.5inch 'Floppies' being
the size they are/were!!
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 508 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 235:27:42 |
| Calls: | 9,984 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,835 |
| Messages: | 6,358,134 |