• dugmeup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    This isn’t regulatory. It’s Optus deciding that if they didn’t sell the handset or its foreign bought it is will be blocked. Because of reasons…

    And don’t ask questions because software is hard, and telecom is too technical for the plebs.

    It’s nothing but a blatant cash grab hidden in a thin veneer of technical babble because it’s tough for modern journalists to question engineering.

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Just days ahead of the shutdown, Australia’s media regulator ACMA finalised a new “direction” (basically a rule) that meant telecom companies had to refuse service to all phones that relied on 3G for making emergency calls.

      The idea was to prevent people from mistakenly believing that phones were fully working, only to realise they were unable to make emergency calls when the crucial moment came.

      Australians with older 4G phones may also be caught out because of the way the phones are configured.

      It is up to the telcos to work out which phones are affected, notify the owners, block their phones, and help make other arrangements such as low- or no-cost replacement phones.

      However, as Telstra and Optus noted during a Senate inquiry into the shutdown, telecom companies are unable to tell which individual devices suffer from this problem unless have they sold them.

      I’m not saying it’s not partly on the providers, but validating that a bunch of obscure phones that aren’t sold in your country meet new regulatory requirements is not as easy as you’re making it out to be.

      • LorIps@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s the reason why every other fucking country still has either 3G or 2G activated. 4G is just a shitshow for making calls.

        • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well, 2G and 3G are being shut off in the United States as well. I believe AT&T shut down their 2G network in 2017 and shut down their 3G network here recently. And T-Mobile in the United States shut down their 3G network in 2022. And while their 2G network is still currently running, it won’t be forever. I believe Verizon is also in the process of shutting down or has already shut down 2G and 3G as well.

        • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          Where I live, 3G is going to be phased out, but 2G is staying seemingly indefinitely. Not only for the old phones, not only for all the dying villages that are not getting any upgraded equipment, but also for all the automation dependent on it. Apparently quite a few places did it like this.

      • MicrowavedTea@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So to let people know that they won’t have emergency service during an emergency, they prevent them from having ANY service now (24-hour notice). Even if telecom companies behaved perfectly (which they wouldn’t) the initial idea was already a problem.

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 months ago

          You’d think they’b be able to… I dunno… SMS them about the problem, instead of cutting the service they pay for?

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes, the phones are non compliant and need to be barred. This is good. Everyone must be able to access emergency services in times of crisis. The fact some manufacturers make phones that don’t use 4g for this means their phones rely on outdated tech and standards and will be excluded.

          Railing against this is just weird.

          • MicrowavedTea@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Except they weren’t non-compliant before and this is punishing the users, not the manufacturers. I don’t even know what tech my phone uses for emergency services.

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              2 months ago

              So? Technology moves forward. So of you have a phone no longer compliant you need to get a replacement.

              • quafeinum@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                That’s not how telecommunications work at all. You always have backwards compatibility and you don’t need perfect latency or beam forming to make an emergency call. Don’t kid yourself it is solely to fuck with consumers and to make more money somehow.

                Telcos in Australia have so far been the worst money grabbing vultures that I’ve ever seen. Like these motherfuckers would lock a PoE line to the MAC address of an networkadapter, so that you could use one machine and nothing more.

              • Darth_Mew@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                gooddamn your tongue must be raw from licking those corpo assholes all day. take a breather my man good lord!

      • dugmeup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s not a bunch of a large number. It is a set number of phones from well known providers from a few countries.

        Basically no one wanted to pay for one Business Analyst to read documentation and make phone calls to providers. For a program that has years and millions in it.

        Or worse, cause it is out of scope

        Or the worst, so they could sell the “buy from the provider” bullshit

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Regulatory compliance of hardware is not, and should not be, the responsibility of the service provider. It’s the responsibility of the manufacturer to have their hardware certified basically everywhere.

          Frankly, the rules shouldn’t even allow providers to make that determination. They should either be certified to meet the requirements by an independent agency, or have providers be prohibited from allowing them.

          • Zanz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            They’re actively blocking North American and international iPhones from connecting to their Network. Apple has updates for each region that automatically download when you get there, but they’re claiming it’s a trade secret so only the phones they sell can get that update that’s made by Apple for them. It isn’t even a firmware update it’s a little app that downloads in the background. Google does the same thing with Android, the pixel line, and anything running the stock with Google services or pixel experience.

          • dugmeup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Read the article. Optus is not bothering checking. Just closing stuff off.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              I did read the article. Checking is not and should not be their responsibility.

              The only legitimate way to check is to do actual, intensive, independent testing of every device in question, specific to your country’s regulations. Spec sheets are not a valid approach to verifying that a device will work.

              • dugmeup@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                How do you think spec sheets work? Engineers rely on data a d there are industry standards. That is the whole point of documentation. Even little motors and resistors have documentation that is relied on. You really think this is not documented accurately?

                You really think that Optus is intensely checking and verify every device they sell? They rely on the documentation! They are a retailer of phones.

                The way that Aussies think is always interesting. I find a lot of people bend over backwards to justify the reasons for companies. Instead of standing up for customers these arguments seem to look like a shining example of “out of scope” decisions. I have seen in too many corporate meetings and decision makers.

                • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Everywhere else on the planet, in order for a device to be cleared for sale, that specific model undergoes heavy testing for regulatory compliance by a government agency.

                  “The specs said it was fine” is literally never going to be a valid legal defense, and making that argument will get you laughed out of court. Either it’s actually certified to be used as you’re allowing it to be used, or you get the hammer dropped on you, as you should.

      • Zanz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        They also refused to use the standard voice over LTE and refuse to let any thing that they didn’t sell try to connect to their voice over LTE even if it’s compatible. Leaving restricted Apple from enabling voice over LTE for iPhones not from Australia even though it’s just a software update that you need that doesn’t run on the firmware level.

        • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          that shouldn’t matter, what about those that are using phones as remote servers and the ability to call is irrelevant? What about the phones that are glorified ipods? What of the ring doorbell phones?

          not all phones need to call.

      • RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If by radio you mean the music device, no. My jap import cannot pick up aus stations. If you mean radio frequencies for phones and others, hopefully someone else has the answer haha.

        • Elvith Ma'for@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s not only the frequencies, but also the modulation and the protocol (“how devices talk to each other”). Your phone may support all needed frequencies and might still not be able to “talk” to the network.