[inigyou]

I don't think we want telcos to block scam calls themselves. We want them to be forced to give the subscriber's actual address to the police.

[dredmorbius]

Why not?

And why would you impose a highly-intrusive personal-tracking system across billions of subscribers?

[inigyou]

Because I don't want some stupid AI system to randomly decide I'm a spam caller.

And you know every other country has full KYC for phone connections, right?

[dredmorbius]

What would be a sufficient appeals process or remedy action that might address your concern?

What activities are you engaged in which make you think you'd likely be considered a spammer? What specific harms do you see occurring? Might these be related to your present line of business / profession / employment?

[inigyou]

Sure, if someone gave me a false phone number to call them on, I could be declared a spammer. If I had to call more than 3 people a day ordinarily, I could be declared a spammer. I'm basing these on what already happens in the banking sector as a direct result of the regulation you want.

[dredmorbius]

What would be a sufficient appeals process or remedy action that might address your concern?

What activities are you engaged in which make you think you'd likely be considered a spammer? What specific harms do you see occurring? Might these be related to your present line of business / profession / employment?

[inigyou]

You have just copy-pasted your previous comment. That is a form of spam, and I'm flagging it as such.

[etchalon]

They don't to block scam calls. They can easily limit who gets access to make them, making the resource itself precious enough no one would risk wasting it on a dial scam.