Here's the link to submit a comment to the FCC:<p><a href="https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express" rel="nofollow">https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express</a><p>Ran a quick search and found a whole bunch of news articles, but nobody includes info that makes it easy to route your comment. Feels like the beginning of Hitchhiker's Guide:<p>> It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying Beware of the Leopard.
This is the specific proposed rule to reference: <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-seeks-comment-enhanced-know-your-customer-requirements" rel="nofollow">https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-seeks-comment-enhanced-know...</a>
Open to the possibility that I’m just cynical but my faith is very low that these comment processes are anything more than a regulatory requirement for the illusion of due diligence which legitimizes the actual corporate lobbying and security state actually making the policy.
They require your name and address, so they will have a nice database of anyone who dares voice an objection.
I'm nearly certain commenting, at least from my monitoring of commenting on ATF rulemaking, achieves the opposite of what the commenters hope.<p>While there is ~zero chance that commenting can help you, it absolutely is used against you as their lawyers sharpen their claws by crowdsourcing possible sources of challenge and use your comments to predict them and determine how to undermine such positions.
Thank you
Great. As if telecoms can be trusted with customers' id. AT&T left my name, address, social security etc in an improperly secured database for others to have, and they tried to open accounts with it; they had retained the information after I closed my account, and they denied the information was coming from them for <i>years</i> before they finally admitted it and gave us all a quarter to call someone who cares and a year of credit monitoring.
We should allow privateers to go after spammers, and get the seized assets. And spammer is then tortured appropriately. Satan could run a successful single issue campaign on this in the most religious state in the US.
This is probably part of the larger scope of the system wanting to require ID to even boot a computer let alone connect to the internet.
This is how it works in Australia, which means it's a pain for tourists as you need to provide a passport for ID and get it activated, as opposed to just grabbing one at an airport kiosk and being ready to go on your way to the taxi or train like most other places.
Has this changed recently? I thought I heard about this several years ago, but the last 2-3 times I've visited (in the last couple of years) I've been able to pick up a prepaid SIM from Colesworth without any ID check.
> like most other places<p>Much of EU requires ID for some time now. France is a bit strange, requires registration after 23 days or something. Germany, Italy, Spain it's basically impossible.<p>The US is rather unique in that it does not require registration.
Argentina doesn't also, you can just buy a SIM card off the newsstand.
Huh? At least in Germany, Spain and France all of the smaller shops fill in fake info without even asking.<p>EU countries have had these requirements for years and years and never moved to actually enforce them.
I mean. It’s the same, you just have to show your passport and fill a form. It takes 1minute to get it done, you can do it on your way to the taxi if you want. Though e-sim are more practical now
I wonder what exactly are they hoping to achieve then? Anything that can be filled out in 1 minute in a taxi can be spoofed with an extra 30 seconds on the dark net buying dark IDs. So this does less than zero for crime, actually encourages more of it, while doing what exactly? It's madness.
Don’t eSIMs solve this problem for tourists?
Apple — and now Google — have "solved" this problem for the government by removing physical SIM slots in US iPhones.
Doesn't an eSIM link the SIM to the phone's IMEI which is usually logged somewhere?
Only if you do not require voice service.
What problem were they hoping to solve with that legislation?
Most of time it's billed as law enforcement fighting tool. If people can't have anonymous cell phones, once you capture one criminal phone number, you can quickly look at who they call and since they can't be burners, you figure out the criminal network.<p>Also, if you have restrictions of speech in the country, it's great way to de anonymize any speech government says is illegal.
The problem of citizens having anonymous internet connectivity.
That's an illusion. Two days of location data and you can pin down the owner pretty well.<p>I thought about getting a SIM when Germany was about to introduce ID requirements. I quickly realized this being a moot point.
The free anonymous internet was only ever a ruse to get people to use it so the CIA could spy on them. DARPA, folks, created a “free as in beer” global surveillance network and we all bought it.<p>Not that we didn’t get anything in return but the idea that the worlds foremost military industrial complex just gave this to the world because they loved us is laughable.
[dead]
I'm always surprised how bad ideas spread faster than good ideas among our rulers. Here is a map of countries where an ID is required (or not) <a href="https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/sim-card-registration-laws/" rel="nofollow">https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/sim-card-regist...</a>
Had to buy one of these SMS activation services from a guy in Nigeria using a memecoin because claude decided to ban my account because they didn’t like my credit card brand and Claude requires sms activation for new accounts.<p>Guess these guys are going to make more money in the near future.
I wish they would kill spam calling and texting instead.
After the implementation of SIM card real-name registration in China, scam calls can accurately state your personal information.
No more anonymous driving, thanks to Flock. Soon, no more anonymous calls, thanks to the FCC.<p>Your bank already knows everything about you; why not your operating system, too?<p>Soon your ISP will only let you online if your OS sends them the "right" information: your government ID.<p>We should also abolish cash while we're at it. The government needs to know every purchase you've ever made, no exceptions.<p>Of course, then we should tear down used bookstores. They're the biggest risk of all. Anyone can walk in and pick up pieces of paper that teach them dangerous ideas. Other religions. Philosophies. Poetry. How to make things.<p>What we really need is a nation of drones walking to and fro in the image of our rulers, thinking their thoughts, practicing their religions, and parroting their words. It's the only way to be truly safe.
Worse, we are becoming a burden.<p>The Thiels of the world are already past wanting an obedient consumer.<p>They don't need us for the utopia they imagine for themselves.
Can even go to the bodega on foot anonymously, too many of my neighbors have ring cameras pointed at the street.
Let's not neglect the connected cameras appearing everywhere, increasingly backed with AI face recognition.
Flock is being rejected in a number of cities, thanks to citizens.
I am quite confident that there will eventually in any of those cities be some kind of major mass casualty type event that will be attributed to that rejection. I don’t hope for it and am sorry for all of humanity for what we are allowing to seemingly inevitably come about, but here we are; like cattle being herded to the feed lot. “But they’re saying they’ll feed you”, you will hear, “they don’t mean you ill. You should stop being a conspiracy theorists. This food is good.”
We’ll see how it goes, but we also have suits like this that push back on that narrative as if you’re going to say your tech protects against a certain kind of tragedy, and that tragedy actually happens and you didn’t protect against it, maybe you bear some liability.<p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/06/school-shooting-survivor-sues-ai-gun-detection-firm-after-system-failed-to-spot-weapon/" rel="nofollow">https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/06/school-shooting-...</a>
> We should also abolish cash while we're at it.<p>Why do you think all the rich people (and by extension the oligarchy running this country) are pushing Crypto?
I don’t think pointing that out will get very far. People didn’t notice when “democracy” was pushed by the same people, in direct contradiction to the Constitution. “Democracy” was the lynchpin to neutralize the Constitution and usher in oligarchic control again, just like digital/programmable currency will complete the pivot of slavery into a total and global system. Why only enslave a few people when you can enslave all people with smoke and mirrors that will make them cheer on their own deception with amusement.
Every step of the way enabled by useful idiots who think that because each incremental step applies more/cheaper government violence to some class of petty deviants they don't like that it is worth doing even if the overall trajectory created by the sum total of the steps is bad. Selfish jerks.
Fundamentally un-American.<p>That being said, many countries across the world already do this to eliminate burner phones. And many messaging apps require a phone number anyways so this basically locks down anonymous messaging through a phone.
Well - it's not exactly a surprise that all these non-American countries engage in un-American practices.<p>It's much more concerning when said practices are undertaken by the U.S.<p>Just because other countries do something isn't a justification to bring the practice into the U.S. despite that being a justification used with increasing prevalence these days.
American exceptionalism was always a lie; name an “un-American” practice, and I'll show you a piece of American foreign policy.
Violations of the US Bill of Rights.<p>Yes they occur. Yes the US does it. Every violation of it should have lost in court already but courts have a way of interpreting things based on their beliefs rather than original intent.
A lie, or an ideal to try and live up to, depending on the context. In the context of discussing liberty-destroying privacy invasions it's an <i>ideal</i>, and we should not be so quick to dismiss it.
>Just because other countries do something isn't a justification to bring the practice into the U.S.<p>I need to know whether these other countries are rich western europe before I know whether to agree with you or to cook up some snide rebuttal.<p>Joking, obviously. And by "joking" I mean mocking a specific type of person and set of beliefs that is who is a) bad b) too common around here.
Free, anonymous political speech is the bedrock of American freedom. Also, guns
there still are a bunch of viable messaging apps/services that work without a phone number:<p>matrix, wire, deltachat, threema, maybe jabber/xmpp (depends on their support of encryption). any others?
> many messaging apps require a phone number<p>But not all, so what's the actual point?
I expect the FCC to adopt this rule, and I also expect it to be challenged in court, on the basis that there are many other approaches to fighting spam calls that the FCC has not tried, but are much less intrusive.
Maybe a way around this is for intermediary companies to own the phone that happens to have service and then lease the phone.
does nothing to fight spam; only polices lawful users<p>they call that "anarcho-tyranny"
Isn’t this already a requirement? Can you really buy a burner phone/sim without providing identifying information?
not at all, it’s easy to buy cash only tracphone, mint, boost, etc. and there are plenty of explicit anonymous providers such as phreeli.<p>That said, I don’t think its a problem whatsoever and we shouldn’t have laws restricting it.
I used to buy test phones for software testing at a bodega where they had a laundry basket full of phones, and they would sell prepaid SIMs no questions asked.
T-Mobile prepaid accounts for example
In the US you can buy a SIM card and activate without providing any information at the airport. At least in NYC. I was really surprised the first time
Back in the late 2000s-early 2010s you could grab some Verizon bubble pack flip phones and just dial an activation string on the handset itself and it'd set up a new phone number for you and you'd just have to go add airtime with a prepaid card or credit card without having to provide <i>anything</i>.<p>Some of the LTE tablets even powered up and put you into a walled garden with data (heh, DNS tunneling worked out of it) to let you sign up for a mobile plan out of the box.<p>When I did some activations with PagePlus with an actual dealer-level account, it cost me nothing to activate a 'customer' handset and the only info I had to provide on the activation screens was the phone's serial number and the requested ZIP/area code for activation.<p>And fine, okay, the FCC will force American telecoms to require IDs, but nothing's stoping Redtea Mobile's foreign eSIMs from roaming into the US for data connections. You're just one eSIM global roaming provider away from bypassing all of it!
This is the pathway Iran is using to provide tiered internet btw.<p>Just putting it out there on how quickly this tech turned against the population.
This sounds like a great thing for people that beat their domestic partners. Make it harder for their victims to escape.
They’ll get around to guns eventually …
It was only a matter of time.<p>The real issue is whether government's should have the right to metadata or the content of remote communications.<p>Government's don't claim the right to monitor face to face communications so why should they have the right to do so for remote communications.
Regardless of this, I see phone network as a legacy thing that in perfect world should already be replaced with lightweight upgradeable calling protocol over IPv6.
Good luck with this.<p>You can't make the desk clerk in a ghetto cell phone store care.<p>I say this speaking as someone who has a T-Mobile account under the name George Washington with a Valley Forge, Pennsylvania address.
We're already forced into the credit bureaus. Into traffic cameras. Into using credit cards and banks. The idea the state would let us actually say things online anonymously (or to each other) is completely unrealistic: we must be tagged and tracked through our lifecycle.
[dead]
[flagged]
The Trump administration has been working overtime trying to build databases of people in this country. Leaving no stone unturned, legal or otherwise. I vaguely remember a time when American conservatives were against precisely this, often as a first principle. Maybe that's just an idealized memory on my part.
Spoiler: They were never against it, just biding their time.
The American conservatives who can afford to be are effectively exempted. When they're not flying around on private jets, the ownership and metadata created by their cars, phones, etc. are obfuscated by layers of shell corporations.<p>The other ones are simple and/or deluded and think these sorts of policies won't ever come for _them_. (To their credit, under the current regime they're actually correct about that to a certain extent.)
Seems like classic regulatory overreach.
US of A’s Chinafication letsgooooooo
Good. Telecoms should have a duty to know who uses their networks.
Let’s have your name and address then, citizen. Posters have a right to know who is commenting.
The person using the network is the one who put a quarter in the payphone.
It makes sense. If you are member of state supported terroeist group (antiva, mosab, alwuaide) just ask your sponsors for sims directly. Non state groups should not have access!