| ▲ | mrheosuper 3 days ago |
| I used to have a machine that look like this(A bit smaller tho). My machine was for...spamming text sms. We would put it on our vehicle and drive around the city to spam sms message. We stop doing that now since it's not really effective anymore. But our machine having same form factor does not mean they have same functionality. |
|
| ▲ | Shank 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| > We would put it on our vehicle and drive around the city to spam sms message. Why would you drive around? You can just put it in one place and spam. It doesn't change the network connectivity or the numbers or anything to drive, except perhaps running from law enforcement? |
| |
| ▲ | rcarmo 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | To avoid showing up on 2G/3G networks as a static congestion factor. SMS in 2G a can easily block calls if done intensively enough, since it’s part of the actual call signaling. We could tell when high-school classes ended by the sudden increase in SMS and decrease in call volumes in certain cells. | |
| ▲ | mrheosuper 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | i don't recall exactly reason, quite a long time since then, but it has something to do with fake number detection and the amount of phone number we can reach. | | |
| ▲ | monerozcash 2 days ago | parent [-] | | You were probably driving around with a "SMS Blaster" that didn't use sim cards, no? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | peterldowns 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| How did that work economically? Who paid for you to do that and how was it worth it for them to do so? |
| |
| ▲ | mrheosuper 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Apparently, it worked for them. We don't care about message (as long as it's not too "uncomfortable"). Anyone can use our service. They decide how long to broadcast, we take care the rest. Mind you, we are not in US. |
|
