New premium and machine related numbers announced

The 14-digit limit breaks many services who use tagged numbers; the standard tagging length is 5 digits. WASPA members have appealed and this is likely to hold these regs up for a long time.
 
The 14-digit limit breaks many services who use tagged numbers; the standard tagging length is 5 digits. WASPA members have appealed and this is likely to hold these regs up for a long time.

Better for unsubs, to unsub now you have to sms 932423523235 and not 31223
 
This makes sense if they can make it happen..

I will instantly block all 090 and 096-098 numbers.... no more of those fekking irritating machine recorded advertising calls hopefully.
 
This makes sense if they can make it happen..

I will instantly block all 090 and 096-098 numbers.... no more of those fekking irritating machine recorded advertising calls hopefully.

+1

Next the they must abolish the "Private" numbers, force everyone to reveal their identity. Even if they musk it, it will still do. I want to block all these nonsensical pursuers.
 
Better for unsubs, to unsub now you have to sms 932423523235 and not 31223

The tagged numbers are almost always used for replies, so you don't type them in. Us and our enterprise customers use them for things like support and interactive systems so a reply can be routed to the right customer/service. SMSes are still very useful when not used for spam. They're the only easy to integrate service with 100% accountability and traceability.
 
Can someone translate this gobeldygook into english please:confused::confused::confused:

ICASA thought they were doing something useful, but it's really a useless thing that will benefit nobody, and they've done it wrong anyway.

Most people can't just go and block all numbers originating from automated systems, because of things like bank OTPs, alarm company notifications, etc.
 
Last edited:
ICASA though they were doing something useful, but it's really a useless thing that will benefit nobody, and they've done it wrong anyway.

Most people can't just go and block all numbers originating from automated systems, because of things like bank OTPs, alarm company notifications, etc.

I wish more banks would go the USSD route like Nedbank...
 
Next the they must abolish the "Private" numbers, force everyone to reveal their identity. Even if they musk it, it will still do. I want to block all these nonsensical pursuers.

100%. The most annoying is when a security company uses Private numbers - mine does - when you're out and you get a Private call you HAVE to answer it in case it happens to be them. Idiots.
 
I wish more banks would go the USSD route like Nedbank...

Yeah, nice when it works - but there are lots of issues on many handsets with USSD push. Also, USSD push doesn't work on CellC or Telkom Mobile yet. They don't support LBS (location lookup) either. I think they're running their backoffice systems on Commodore 64's.

SMS is the only tech you can use to send a message to someone, and be 100% sure it'll get there, and if not, you'll know exactly why (out of range, SMS store full, etc). It's obviously annoying when used for spam, but that's the other edge of the sword I guess.

There are a few enterprise IM's out there with APIs comparable in functionality to SMS - that's where these guys should be going; offer that as an option with R5 off your bank fees.
 
I wish more banks would go the USSD route like Nedbank...

Push USSD ties up a session on the SS7 network, especially if you need to reply to it. And too easy to dismiss by accident IMO. I have had way too many "touch the screen while picking my phone up" incidents, and unlike an SMS you can't just retrieve the USSD message.

When my debit orders go off I get a flood of SMS's (by choice). I can go through them at my leisure and determine which ones are legit and which ones are not (if any) and dispute them. For that I need time to read it. With SMS's I can choose the time I do this at.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X