My guess is some kind of spoofer shenanigans
[deleted]
Submitted 3 weeks ago by help123@sh.itjust.works to nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
Comments
Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
slazer2au@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Likely a fake one.
You don’t have to have a valid caller id when calling someone. Telcos track call data with other fields.
guy_threepwood@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
If you still have a land line you can dial locally without even an area code. This worked in most countries. Some mobile phone networks kept this tradition although in a weirder way: you could dial locally when physically located in those areas, and your phone would display the area code you were in on the its standby screen. Which worked as long as you weren’t on a border between cells and it picked the wrong one.
Over time this went away.
I don’t think this is what you have experienced, but it was a nice thing that blurred the lines between land line and mobile phones for a little while, and I think it’s interesting.
Quill7513@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
where has 9 digit locals?
argh_another_username@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Brazil has a stupid numbering system for phones, now. Instead of having three digits area codes and several area codes for highly populated areas, they have two digits area codes and nine digits phone numbers. (But it’s not the case here, here is a scam caller)
Asidonhopo@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I mean I’ve been getting spam sms texts from email addresses lately so I assume it’s complete phone anarchy now in these late days
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
OP, if you’re not in a country with 9 digit phone numbers, then it’s almost certainly a spoofed typo.
Libra@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
A spoofed one.
lath@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
My guess would be a (spam) call center landline.
Cuberoot@lemmynsfw.com 3 weeks ago
Probably spoofed, but that doesn’t necessarily make it meaningless. If you convert numbers to letters per the telephone code, and treat 1 as a space or similar punctuation. It might resolve to KISH NORM. Is that phrase meaningful to you? Do you know anyone who would spoof a callerid to send you that message?
pineapplelover@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
How do I spoof phone numbers. Always wondered this
Ahrotahntee@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Caller ID is notoriously unauthenticated. It’s getting better but I can still set my caller ID to be anything I want on my softphone.
pineapplelover@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
Cool, I’ll have to check it out myself
kaeurennetwo@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Honestly, I don’t know what kind of number that is either. I usually get calls with country codes that make it easier to guess. How about searching for the number in an identification service to give you a clue as to who that is exactly?
AstralPath@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
In Peru (and some islands in the Pacific as well IIRC), some regions have nine digit numbering plans. This may have been a call from one of those areas. More likely its spam.
tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
If you add up all the digits, it sums up to 46, which sums up to 10, which sums up 1, and that’s exactly how many shits you should give about this
whaleross@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
While applying this technique, the caller may well hang up, so the quandary is solved regardless.
tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
See, this is a type of proof that many mathematicians overlook preferring to opt instead for Proof by Contradiction or Proof by Induction. If they just sit and applied Proof by Waiting, they could solve their theorems with 100x less the effort.
This morning I proved Pythagoras’s Theorem by employing Proof by Waiting. I waited exactly 5 seconds, and in that time found that it had been proved by a simple online search. Mathemeticians are idiots.
thermal_shock@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Multiply the 1x0 to get the REAL number of fucks also.
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Who are you, so wise in the ways of maths?
tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
a duck!