I have seen the reverse problem, where the spammer who called is trying to get off the phone. Many years ago, I had a job as a manager in an outbound telemarketing center. We had a policy that we could not hang up once the call started -- the person we called had to hang up. Supervisors took escalated calls where someone whose dinner we had interrupted was upset that we called. Very rarely, those calls would then be escalated to me.
One time a lawyer in Philadelphia (not even kidding) refused to hang up, and instead continually berated the rep on the phone with cursing. He refused to hang up. The supervisor couldn't calm him down, and had repeated all the stock responses we had apologizing for upsetting them and promising not to call them back. He just kept cursing and said he was going to stay on the phone all night since we couldn't hang up. After about ten minutes of this, the call was escalated to me.
I went through the same items with him when he paused to take a breath. He chuckled and said he was going to keep me on the phone all night. I told him that was fine, since I was paid hourly and had gone into overtime five minutes earlier. (It was five after the hour.) I said, I'm now making $22.50 an hour listening to you. I'm happy to stay on all night. How much are you getting paid? That made him hang up.
These days, though, most call centers have a policy where the rep on the phone can hang up if the customer continues to curse after being asked to stop. Requiring the rep to stay on the phone beyond that can get an employer in trouble for creating a hostile work environment.
Then I tell they are breaking the law as I am registered with The Telephone Preference Service  and they are on breach of the Privacy and Electronic (EC Directive) Regulations 2003.
I have had one successful prosecution so far.
As well it should be.
I don't want to know about your new product or what it can do for me. I've been living quite well without it so far, thank you, and now please FO.
I'm invisioning a marketplace of chatbots trying to pass the turing test (ideally armed with cancelled credit card numbers, fake postal addresses and bogus identities -- and willing to do absolutely anything to waste the callers time).
The beauty of it is that normal spam calls have assymetric economics in favor of the spammer.
A team of chatbots turns the economics around.
You can pick a specific chatbot: http://www.jollyrogertelco.com/pick-a-robot
But with fake clicks, I often read on HN that it is the wrong way to respond. Can someone explain the difference?
Here you are getting hit by an unwanted ad over hardware you pay for.
Adbockers are an attack on hardware and IP you are using that someone else owns and pays for.
CNN content and servers are 'free' on the condition you view their ads. You are going to them, they aren't pushing on to you.
For example, imagine an older person who easily loses track of the conversation picking up the phone to talk to a telemarketer. The telemarketer mistakes this person for a bot, and yells at them in frustration.
This might be mitigated by adding some actual AI, so that the bot can convincingly imitate a person without mental health problems.
It's actually a sequence of recordings played in the same order every time in a loop from the 5th. Telemarketers usually realize it a few recordings into the second loop.
Now imagine combining machine learning with conversation analysis to create the ultimate Lenny.
one of them keeps trying for over 50 minutes
"Lenny simply plays a set of audio recordings one after another to interact with the caller. The same set of prompts is always used in the same order."