There's are reasons AT&T are on my permablacklist, and this article (along with a slew of others at the Dallas Morning News) is several of them. AT&T, and other major telcos, are fatally conflicted over telephone solicitations, in all their forms: unsolicited phone calls, robocalls, spam, and scams. They've dragged their feet for decades whilst their subscribers lose billions of dollars to at best useless and unecessary goods and services, and at worst, fraud and scams.

Dave Lieber of DMN ran a series of articles on this as well, I recommend:

"Watchdog Memo to AT&T's CEO: Didn't mean to get you in trouble" <https://www.dallasnews.com/news/watchdog/2016/07/08/watchdog...>

And:

"Watchdog: AT&T's CEO gets new job, Frontier employees dance during disaster" <https://www.dallasnews.com/news/watchdog/2016/08/04/watchdog...>

At Techdirt: "AT&T Falsely Blames The FCC For Company's Failure To Block Annoying Robocalls " <https://www.techdirt.com/2016/06/02/att-falsely-blames-fcc-c...>

The FCC announcement, voted on June 18, 2015: "Fact Sheet: Wheeler Proposal to Protect and Empower Consumers Against Unwanted Robocalls, Texts to Wireless Phones" <https://web.archive.org/web/20150910081851/https://apps.fcc....> (PDF)

▲

anon7000 a day ago | parent | next [-]

It’s an abject market failure that no carrier out there has solved this problem. I have whatever Verizon provides, and it’s basically useless.

I would switch to a provider that solved this solution, but none do. Clearly they’re making more money offering a bad experience to the consumer.

	▲	dredmorbius a day ago \| parent [-]
		Comcast/Xfinity, of all companies, actually has a reasonably good, network-based capability, "Spam Blocker": <https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/spam-blocker-overvi...> I discussed it yesterday in another thread: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49126133> I suspect that the relevant factor is that Comcast doesn't provide significant outbound business telephony relative to its household business, though that is one of their business offerings, see: <https://business.comcast.com/>. (I may be entirely wrong on this, I'm just learning much of this in the past few days/weeks.)

▲

bediger4000 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My theory has been that scammers have two things: (1) "pink contracts" with phone companies, the scammers pay extra money so that telcos won't throw them overboard and (2) scammers have bribed US lawmakers to keep the situation paralyzed.

I really hope that the money the 10 or 20 people who are in on this got is worth the price of ruining a global utility communication system.

	▲	FireBeyond 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No doubt. Before they went bust (and this is aging myself), I worked for a web design company - we had a guy who brought us a bunch of business, and never met a get-rich-quick scheme too problematic. He had the "bright idea" of what was basically pyramid scheme spam - people got paid to import their address book or manually add all their friends and so on. We did not work on this project. He regaled us with the woes of finding hosting, as no-one wanted to touch it as soon as they translated his bullshit trying to legitimize it - except GlobalCrossing, who was happy to host it for a "surcharge" atop their usual rates.