I amso IR
"Well Yea, Duh"!
- Jul 11, 2015
- 1,189
- 166
- 140
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #41
Since the communications industry developed and adapted the system, they it stands to reason, should be responsible for altering the system where found unreliable.
The way I see it, the telecom industry delivers exactly what they promise to deliver: a means by which distant parties can, for a fee, communicate reliably. Your issue is with the content being communicated, not the service that enables the communication, which is what the telecom industry provides.
Since the communications industry developed and adapted the system, they it stands to reason, should be responsible for altering the system where found unreliable.
The way I see it, the telecom industry delivers exactly what they promise to deliver: a means by which distant parties can, for a fee, communicate reliably. Your issue is with the content being communicated, not the service that enables the communication, which is what the telecom industry provides.
In you're original post you did state that my issue is "best taken up" with the " message and message originator". That seemed to me that you felt I should confront "the message originator". I must have been in error....]You, my fine feathered friend, you [suggested I take up the matter with the maker of the calls].
You're right. I'd forgotten I wrote that. Sorry for not remembering.
I see, looking back at your OP, that you have no way to initiate contact with the originator of the calls, so that's a dead route for seeking a solution.
As there have been numerous complaints by numerous people to the numerous authorities and communications industry, another attempt would prove fruitless as all previous have.
Insofar as there (per you, you remarks on the matter are the first I'm hearing of this specific thing occurring) "have been numerous complaints by numerous people to the numerous authorities," what is the official response of those authorities? If indeed numerous folks have reached out to the appropriate agencies, bureaus and departments, there's no way "radio silence" is all they've responded with...keeping in mind that what's "numerous" to you and me may not constitute "numerous" for the organization in question. They do, after all, have to respond to literally hundreds of millions of citizens and constituents.
If executive branch officials/administrators in fact have been completely silent in response to specific requests of them for action of some sort, reaching out to your elected representatives is the next step you should pursue.
In you're original post you did state that my issue is "best taken up" with the " message and message originator". That seemed to me that you felt I should confront "the message originator". I must have been in error....]You, my fine feathered friend, you [suggested I take up the matter with the maker of the calls].
You're right. I'd forgotten I wrote that. Sorry for not remembering.
I see, looking back at your OP, that you have no way to initiate contact with the originator of the calls, so that's a dead route for seeking a solution.
As there have been numerous complaints by numerous people to the numerous authorities and communications industry, another attempt would prove fruitless as all previous have.
Insofar as there (per you, you remarks on the matter are the first I'm hearing of this specific thing occurring) "have been numerous complaints by numerous people to the numerous authorities," what is the official response of those authorities? If indeed numerous folks have reached out to the appropriate agencies, bureaus and departments, there's no way "radio silence" is all they've responded with...keeping in mind that what's "numerous" to you and me may not constitute "numerous" for the organization in question. They do, after all, have to respond to literally hundreds of millions of citizens and constituents.
If executive branch officials/administrators in fact have been completely silent in response to specific requests of them for action of some sort, reaching out to your elected representatives is the next step you should pursue.Since the communications industry developed and adapted the system, they it stands to reason, should be responsible for altering the system where found unreliable.
The way I see it, the telecom industry delivers exactly what they promise to deliver: a means by which distant parties can, for a fee, communicate reliably. Your issue is with the content being communicated, not the service that enables the communication, which is what the telecom industry provides.
In you're original post you did state that my issue is "best taken up" with the " message and message originator". That seemed to me that you felt I should confront "the message originator". I must have been in error....]You, my fine feathered friend, you [suggested I take up the matter with the maker of the calls].
You're right. I'd forgotten I wrote that. Sorry for not remembering.
I see, looking back at your OP, that you have no way to initiate contact with the originator of the calls, so that's a dead route for seeking a solution.
As there have been numerous complaints by numerous people to the numerous authorities and communications industry, another attempt would prove fruitless as all previous have.
Insofar as there (per you, you remarks on the matter are the first I'm hearing of this specific thing occurring) "have been numerous complaints by numerous people to the numerous authorities," what is the official response of those authorities? If indeed numerous folks have reached out to the appropriate agencies, bureaus and departments, there's no way "radio silence" is all they've responded with...keeping in mind that what's "numerous" to you and me may not constitute "numerous" for the organization in question. They do, after all, have to respond to literally hundreds of millions of citizens and constituents.
If executive branch officials/administrators in fact have been completely silent in response to specific requests of them for action of some sort, reaching out to your elected representatives is the next step you should pursue.
Good Day 320. I would have to think, the communications folks never imagined that fraud abuses, outright theft, would become a staple of the devices they offer. However, as that has been the case I would also think they would have an interest in securing the system. Personally, were my firm or name associated with theft, I would want it to be cleansed. I have to feel that Apple is going to spend time and money to overcome the fact that the FBI has broken it's security in it's product. Again, the very fact that their phones are being used to commit fraud against unsuspecting persons should take on a like meaning. I admit, people should be far more discerning when the phone is involved, rather than believing what they hear and responding without thinking. However, some times some folks simply trust but do not verify, older folks in particular. I am surprised you are not aware of the situation I mention. At least in my State, Colorado, it has been of interest for months now. TV news mentions it often and offer assistance to those who have been affected by giving interviews and the address of parties, the affected folks can contact. True, is the fact you mention, "They do, after all, have to respond to literally hundreds of millions of citizens and constituents". From my point of view, that is all the more reason for communications to be more proactive. With reference to reaching out to my elected representatives. I did that on an unrelated matter two weeks ago. I received a response yesterday, in the mail. The subject of my representatives response was health issues and my query to him referred to airplanes. That is fact 320! Based upon that fact alone, perhaps big business should take a little more interest in the product line they offer. Or perhaps they rely on that state of affairs!
It has been good speaking with Sir. I appreciate your approach, line of thought, although may question your faith, if that is the proper term, in Government and large corporations. I wish you a palatable day and look forward to reading future posts you may offer. Thank you for your time.
I amso IR
P.S. I dropped a line to Mr. Bill O'Reilley of FOX fame. In summation I asked him, "What say you" Bill? After sending the email, much later, I realized I had forgotten the "town" portion of "name and town' after trying so hard to not bloviate. Perhaps he will be forgiving, yuk yuk.