In 2003 a friend and I were brainstorming what the next big disruptive tech would be and how we might get investment to start a company based on it. My conclusion at the time: cheap digital cameras. 22 years ago they were already cheap and high resolution enough to kill the film camera industry, and they've only continued on through today with color night vision, etc.
He did finally get investment and start his own company: automating regulatory paperwork for small companies that would be swamped in it without help.
Meanwhile, networked cameras are approaching "smartdust" levels of ubiquity. It's like living around the time of Gutenberg and seeing the world relatively smothered in printed text leaflets, hundreds of times as many pages of text in less time and for lower cost than scribes. The changes have only just begun, and people aren't really aware of how fundamentally life has changed as a result.
Or, they'll just develop downstream garbage filters and effectively ignore the little flags. Sure, some energy will be wasted, but it won't be occupying too many analyst brain cells.
Source: I have such a setup at home. My camera goes crazy detecting motion in the dark, CPU usage goes up. Main thing I notice? CPU temp rises from 50C to 55C. That's it.
So, all you have to do to "out" anyone who ever talks to you on the phone is mis-inform Google that the number is a business and "boom" they're out there.
Makes one want to start using callerID spoofing as a regular practice. I am calling from 212-555-1212.
With social media, e-mail, and the rest of it "out there" people have started assuming that "unlisted" is the default for voice phones now. Also, in those "good old days" of the ubiquitous phone books, the listings were mostly land-lines, and mobile phones were unlisted by default. Because of the rates charged for mobile calls in the dying days of the white pages, there were even special laws regarding unsolicited calls to your mobile phone.
It used to be difficult AND expensive to get an unlisted domain name as well, but that has been evolving and now it's a no-cost checkbox option when registering whether you want your contact info to be listed with the domain ownership or not.
Times do change, and while we are generally more exposed than ever, I believe the shifts to more "private by default" configurations of our contact info are a good thing.
In the 90s it was "selling it for parts" where the market value of the whole company was lower than the component parts, so buy it on the open market for a bargain, then slice and dice and profit.
These days, they're squeezing the lemons for all they can get.
Compared to crappy voice menus we have today, there’s a lot of potential
It's easy to get above rock bottom. Today's voice menus are already openly abusive of the customers.
Oh, demoralizing thought, when the AI call center agent becomes intentionally abusive... and don't think that companies, and especially government agencies, won't do that on purpose.
I have actually had semi-positive experiences with AI chat bot front ends, they're less afraid to refer to an actual human being who might know something as opposed to the call center front line humans who seem to be afraid they might lose their job if they admit the truth: that they have absolutely no clue how to help you.
Shifting the balance, drop the number of virtually untrained humans in the system by half, train the remaining ones twice as much, and let AI fill in for routing you to a hopefully appropriate "specialist."
A lot of people "have trouble getting started" - in all kinds of endeavors. Once you get them rolling, they can see the pattern and do it for themselves next time. If the AI glop gets lucky and copied decent argument from beginning to end (something I've seen it fail spectacularly at many times), then that can help jumpstart people who are stuck, but only if they can recognize when it's just a bunch of glop.
Really, if would be better for them to read a bunch of samples for themselves (which is what the AI does) and hopefully they can get the pattern. What I think is a horrible approach is to sit in a lecture hall and listen to a little guy down front drone in a monotone about the theory of what you are supposed to do, then try to synthesize from the fragments of what you understood from that what is expected. Samples to work from are much more efficient.
In the 1980s that wasn't really a thing. Besides, it taught me a valuable skill: I partnered with someone who was good at taking notes and I was good at paying attention without taking any notes - she, too, had a problem understanding what she was writing down while writing it down, but took beautiful copies of the lecture. So, afterwards we'd get together and I'd explain her notes to her - which helped me to cement the concepts in my head, at least long enough to get through the exam, and she got her notes explained.
Speaking from a life of dyspraxia - no, not everyone with sucky handwriting is lazy, many of us would spend 95% of our capacity on making the writing legible and be challenged to learn the actual topic as a result.
I have a friend who has taught Online university writing for the past 10 years. Her students are now just about 100% using AI - her goal isn't to get them to stop, it's to get them to recognize what garbage writing is and how to fix it so it isn't garbage anymore.
One proposed Florida law I actually agree with is: phones off during school - all of school, including between classes and recess. Possible exception for lunchtime. Definite exception for when the teacher is specifically using the phones as a fully engaged teaching tool, which should be no more than 20% of overall classroom time, but definitely could be used as a way to "grab attention."
I get wanting to be able to track little Ginny and make sure she got to school O.K. and know when to go meet the bus to pick her up.
There should definitely be "Cybersafety" education in our schools, and the phone as a teaching tool definitely makes sense there.
Having AI write the first draft of your assignment can be a good lesson too, but the remaining 28 minutes should be spent understanding and refining what the AI has given you.
It is a hard problem. Any "human" based filtering will inevitably introduce bias, and some bias (fact vs fiction masquerading as fact) is desirable. The problem is: human determination of what is fact vs what is opinion is... flawed.
Get their phone number published on the open internet.