2,400 telephone providers fail to stop robocalls, may be shut down by the FCC.

I'm not sure if being removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database is tantamount to being shut down, but it sounds like it to me.

Thanks! I've used that, reordered just a bit.

"2k4 VSPs face removal re: compliance fail re: robocall mitigation DB filing reqs" is 80 but I'd say it was probably a bit on the cheating side.

> 2k4 VSPs

As an English speaker, I'd interpret 2k4 as 2004, not 2400.

In Chinese that structure would mean 2400, though I don't know how widely understood the K would be.

Where are you from?

> As an English speaker, I'd interpret 2k4 as 2004, not 2400.

Whereas as an English speaker, I'd interpret 2k4 as 2400 because, well, that's just how it's always been in my orbits (cf resistor labelling, for example.)

Compare https://unreal.fandom.com/wiki/Unreal_Tournament_2004

> Unreal Tournament 2004, also known as UT2K4 and UT2004

or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_2K#Games

Both, I would contend, come under the "American English" banner and thus can be rightly shunned as abhorrent misuses.

Lots of users of engineering notation do this.. 1M5 = 1,500,000, 22k1 = 22,100, etc. The unit takes the place of the decimal point. A missing dot doesn't change the meaning.

Exactly, putting (meaningful) characters instead of dots got really going when copy machines made some dots disappear after more than one "copy of a copy" was made.

Then when fax machines came along sometimes dots would disappear or be unclear on a single transmission.

Either way, occasionally sometimes the page would also be scattered with random dots too because of degraded photosensitive operation, or audio-frequency noise on the telephone line at the time.

And it got even more uncertain when text that is not fixed-width got within mainstream reach :\

Yeah, it should be 2.4k in English. Can probably trade the 's' in "reqs" for the decimal point.

> Can probably trade the 's' in "reqs" for the decimal point.

I was iffy about dropping the 's' from 'reqs' to get it to 79 (makes it sound like they've only violated one requirement, not multiple) but then I suppose the whole thing is that truncated/abbreviated by that point, it doesn't matter...

2.4k has the exact same number of characters as 2400.

On the other hand, "2.4k" is inherently imprecise, whereas you'd need "2400+" to be similarly imprecise.

You also save on the comma in "2,400".

Occurs to me that I could have done ">2k VSPs" and avoided the "2k4" controversy but I expect it'd just cause more arguments about whether ">2k" is valid for ">2400"...