CameronDev comments on Australian Government gets a taste of what everyday people have to deal with in terms of data breaches as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's mobile phone number released online

[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 17 points 1 year ago (7 children)

QR would be convenient enough

My friend, that is not convenient. Phone numbers need to be memorable, and need to be transmittable offline without relying on technology. Old people use phones...

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Phone numbers need to be memorable. A disposable unique contact does not. You can print a QR code, easily save it to a device, transmit it via nearly anything with a connectible screen. Of course you would want to launch it with alongside phone numbers, not in place of it, but this is what should be the next 'innovation' in cellular communication.
That said, it does pose the problem of contacting someone with a phone that isn't your own, perhaps from jail. I'm sure they would never suggest putting an emergency contact chip in your hand for your own health and safety. No government would ever suggest something so silly. /s

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

If I want to contact a business though I know I need to dial 555-123-4568, and I know that because there was a little jingle at the end of the advert. But if they just flash up a QR code then do I just have to wait until the ad is on TV again? There's a reason they don't really put QR codes on TV but they do on YouTube where you can pause it, and queue up the video whenever you wanted.

It's not an awful idea but it needs a bit of refinement. That needs to be some kind of way to associate a human readable identifier to the contact.

We use QR codes all of the time for websites but eventually that still boils down to a URL in plain text.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago*

usernames, like in signal. opt-in, customizable. maybe also add something automatically for the locality

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Businesses are a separate use case. Phone companies already handle separate use cases, where they use very short memorable numbers for specific purposes. They just need something similar, whether it's keeping phone numbers, or using something slightly different. Probably some sort of simple alias.

It's the phone companies that need to innovate, and the solution isn't very hard.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

You say the solution isn't very hard but what you are suggesting is basically just obfuscating phone numbers. Surely the actual solution is to just make spam calling illegal.

Oh and just cut Indias data connection, because those guys are never going to fix their scam call centre problem because the government and police are corrupt.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You could argue that cryptography is nothing but a type of obfuscation. I was trying to explain things so that the very average person could understand it.

People don't stop doing things just because you make it illegal. You even know this because you mentioned India. However people actually do stop when you make it nearly impossible.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago

The solution is simple then. Allow businesses to maintain a phone number for people who watch ads on TV. Not like businesses getting spam calls is that big an issue. Though I'm certain they'd be very enthusiastic to have the unique contact QR feature available for tracking in web ads.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent