Database Users

Just to let everyone something to think about...

Read this link. Read it carefully. It's not just about Google being able to run whatever code they like on your devices, it's about Google DOING it, remotely, without any user intervention/confirmation.
What's next ? Let me throw some wild and far fetched guesses...
* Applanet like apps being killed off on the devices to fight piracy...
* Anything not from the market being wiped out from time to time, for the same reason...
* Users are hunted down and being prosecuted for piracy based on their devices content...
* The system is rigged/updated to block inappropriate content, such as pedophile sites...
* Users are being prosecuted for possessing and/or visiting inappropriate content/providers...
* The "inappropriate" extends to warez sites and regular porn sites, "bad" users are still prosecuted...
* The "inappropriate" extend to the "wrong" political sites, "bad" users are still prosecuted...
* .......
I bet you get the idea. And yea, i know i am taking it too far, but still
PS: Let me add something... the builds we are running on our HD2 are often partially illegal (gaps) etc... hint hint

maybe a little paranoid, ok, well maybe a lot
InfX said:
* The system is rigged/updated to block inappropriate content, such as pedophile sites...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not sure why you mentioned this, anyone in their right mind would welcome this particular point.

kam333 said:
maybe a little paranoid, ok, well maybe a lot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot, exaggerated to the max, of course. But that doesn't turn what Google does right.
kam333 said:
not sure why you mentioned this, anyone in their right mind would welcome this particular point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats EXACTLY why i mentioned it.

InfX said:
A lot, exaggerated to the max, of course. But that doesn't turn what Google does right.
Thats EXACTLY why i mentioned it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
personally, i think google already knows tooooo much about its users, but in the case of malware, google is definitely the lesser of the 2 evils
let me ask you this, would you rather the big G have some remote access to your device or hackers collecting your personal info. Its the connected world, there's no turning back!!!
only real solution for anyone worried about companies interfering with their device... remove the sim card... for ever.
gnight & dont have nightmares

kam333 said:
would you rather the big G have some remote access to your device or hackers collecting your personal info.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess what... neither of those

Also, there are terrorists under the bed,chemtrails in the sky, bromine in the water,drug dealers at the school gates, drunks on fones in cars, bondage freaks at work,human traffickers, religious zealots bent coppers paedo nursery workers racists fanatics and plain clothes Google operatives spreading FUD in forums cos its cheaper and gets more results than million pound lawsuits. Oh and bloody clowns.
Just a random outpouring,please continue.

Infx may sound paranoid, and no person of any kind of moral decency would condone anbody using pedophelia porn or any other form of content that causes any kind of harm to anyone. But those are matters for the authorities to deal with, not google. If the internet's morality policies were enforced by a huge internet based company, wouldn't that be considered some kind of a conflict of interests somehow? I mean imagine if Disney were the biggest internet company, we'd never see so much as a single cuss-word or titty. Big companies shouldn't be able to impose their own commercialized morals upon users, the internet will inevitably grow more and more watered down. I don't consider myself a paranoid person, but this type of issue stinks of denial of 1st amendment rights, one step closer to completely government/corporate filtered news-tainment, and corporate control of the masses.

Huggs, i totally agree, thata why i posted this, not because i am actualluly that paranoid (would i still use Internet if i was ?). What i tried to do in my post is to demonstrate a worst case scenario, how would google start with somethimg that should be totally accepted by everyone (fighting pedophily) yet slowly move to fighting things we no longer want it to fight (political opinions).
PS: This little remote control thing is the first step for a corporate giant to become a corporate government, a corporate dictator. And the onlu things corporations care for is money, not their users.
PPS: Just my personal opinion, feel free to disagree.

I like that idea: http://code.google.com/p/open-android-alliance/

InfX said:
Guess what... neither of those
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you really dont have a great deal of options
android, rim, ios & wp7 all have the ability to "spy" on their users to some degree,
mostly its just basic info such as: gps location, installed apps & how often they're used, crash logs, etc
some apps on ios have been caught out sending even more personal data. The point is, whilst i dont disagree fully with your concerns, i do see your post as somewhat hysterical.
There was no suggestion in the article you linked (or any other that ive read) that google is planning any of things you mentioned, so why mention them, as doing so only makes you a part of the current media trend of FUD as samsamuel put it.
this isnt about deny that all companies are in it 1st for the £$€, then customer welfare further down the list, im talking about being realistic. at this moment in time i cannot see google taking the path that you suggested, i also have far more immediate and real life things to focus on.
im all for a good conspiracy theory, fema detention camps springing up all over the usa (REX 84), the western so called "powers" planting the seeds of unrest in africa & the middle east so they can insert more puppets to secure natural resources (be it oil, gold, diamonds...), i could go on, but this isnt the place.
so let bring it back to google, you are in denial if you think cyber crime isnt going on, and with the rise of the smartphones we will see a rise of cyber crims trying to gain access. so i ask again who would you rather have access to your device?
if you still think or say neither, il know for sure you have lost the plot or you have taken my advice & binned your sim card cause thats the only other option you have.
@huggs, normally your post are quite informative & rational, that last post wasnt imho
no one was talking about censorship, the 1 point about google blocking access to child porn is something i would vote for, this has nothing to do with internet policing, you say thats down to the authorities, but they are not all seeing (no yet anyway) hence the use of informants by law enforcement the world wide, n thats all i would support. yes its possible that you give them a small mandate they will take it further but il worry about that IF the signs arise.
ppl who get there kick this way should have no rights, & should be actively hunted by whatever methods are available & taken out of the general population.
P.S.
Man i would love to have such a care free life that i need to start imagining then stressing about what may or may not happen, but i dont, my concerns are here & now, What you are talking about ISNT.
sorry for the lengthy post but your suggestions/posts are a subtle form of propaganda and a 1 line response really wouldn't cut it.
all the best
Kam

I say if we are doing something wrong and get caught that's our own fault.

How is it illegal? Isn't android open license ie freeware?
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App

@kam333, i may be way less paranoid than you may think, mind the fact i've posted this as a VERY far-fetched and unrealistic speculation that only got slim to nil chance of actually happening, but it does demonstrate a possibility of undoubtedly good things becoming a base to slowly advance into nasty control-it-all direction. And, yea, your suggestion about binning the SIM card won't work. I still got WiFi
@dung8604, search the net about why Cyanogen mod no longer includes Google apps.

Well, I'm running a cooked rom without a Google account set up. So I can cross that off of the paranoid list.

I can't say I'm surprised by anything written in the article.

Did a quick search and from what i can tell, only Google apps are proprietary. Nothing about the OS itself though
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App

[Q] Un-Authorised Tracking of Downloads in XDA

Recently, whenever I am clicking on the Download link for Mediafire, Rapidshare or any download site from XDA, the links are going via viglink.com which tracks the User Clicks and Which page you are going in.....
PLease check for your computers and report....
Note: This does not happen, when you select Open in new Tab or Open in New Window.....

why does it matter?...

pongscript said:
why does it matter?...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed.
I'll be fine just like that. Also as an android user, or cyanogen user or whatever,
statistics are given to google every hour or so.
u should kinda know, iphone users are worse.

Stunned
I'm stunned by the laizzez-faire attitude that common people take to privacy and user-control. The usefulness of Google etc. leaves people uninterested in 'the details'. By people not taking an interest (or making poor comparisons to existing behavior) as an excuse to do nothing, puts us all at the mercy of these companies who then do as they please with our information (our lives). This kind of crap makes me love government - it's rare that the people know what to do with this kind of information.
Maybe this gentleman setting up this thread is for those of us who take this kind of thing seriously, so I too would like to know more.

phoneyericsson said:
I'm stunned by the laizzez-faire attitude that common people take to privacy and user-control. The usefulness of Google etc. leaves people uninterested in 'the details'. By people not taking an interest (or making poor comparisons to existing behavior) as an excuse to do nothing, puts us all at the mercy of these companies who then do as they please with our information (our lives). This kind of crap makes me love government - it's rare that the people know what to do with this kind of information.
Maybe this gentleman setting up this thread is for those of us who take this kind of thing seriously, so I too would like to know more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do see your overall point about privacy, but I also see it as being a little paranoid.

I am not paranoid because I want to know the reason for same. Once you are aware of how the trackers work, you will understand.
agentJBM said:
I do see your overall point about privacy, but I also see it as being a little paranoid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my X10i using XDA App

I don't got that crap you've stated. But those track things SUCK!

Samsung has NO customer forums? Really?

I just went to the Samsung site looking for their Customer Forums where could report some bugs in their latest OTA and suggest some improvements.
THERE ARE NONE.
Seriously, a multi-billion dollar company with NO way for their customers to interact, get problems solved or make suggestions. Nothing. It is inconceivable to me that in the year 2012 a company the size of Samsung would be in the stone ages of customer interaction.
Want to know how they get customer feedback? You log on and post a review of the product. That's it! No interaction, no feedback, no idea if anyone even saw what you wrote - you just post a review and pray.
Yeah you can go to Samsung's Facebook page and post something on their wall but that's not a proper forum.
http://www.facebook.com/samsungsupport
I am honestly dumbfounded at this revelation.

They do it on social media. In a pretty big way too.

Surely, in your research of the GN 10.1, you found that out - I did. They do have a question and answer area.
A "rant" is neither productive nor helpful. They don't have forums. Period.

BarryH_GEG said:
They do it on social media. In a pretty big way too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Social media is a pathetic replacement for an actual Forum. Lol, can you imagine xda-developers as a Facebook page?
Massive fail Samsung. It's clear from some of the changes they made in the last OTA that they aren't listening to the users.
toenail_flicker said:
A "rant" is neither productive nor helpful. They don't have forums. Period.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's probably why they don't have forums. Not enough people ranting. You'll have to forgive me. I didn't research whether Samsung had customer forums. I just assumed they weren't living in 1960.

I am endeavoring to report some bugs on their Facebook page. I have no idea if anyone else has already reported these or if there is follow-up as their "forum" has no apparent structure. Will report back if I get any feedback.

unfortunately yes.
I've been looking for its own forums few years back, and find NONE. :cyclops:
They rather use a facebook page, which we don't know the page is being maintained by who.
But, if you need a fast response, you can try their website, there's a LIVECHAT down there.
Facebook is really a pathetic idea to make it as the main forum of such a big company (in my opinion).
If facebook is being used as an additional media, then yes, it's a good idea.

Time for Mr. Peabody's WABAC Machine
For support: Not a forum and not Facebook.
Samsung needs a Web and Android App accessible Support database.
From 1979 to 2002 I was an IBM Mainframe Systems Programmer at UF in Gainesville Florida, then at the School Board of Alachua County Florida.
I watched large companies like IBM and CA move into the web era with their Support. I moved with them from phone calls and mailing fix tapes to Customer Searchable Databases with user entry for new issues, and with Downloadable Fixes for resolved issues.
Of course, way back then issues for my organization affected 10s of thousands of people where resolving an issue meant dealing with only one person in our organization.
Moving forward to today, we've got 10s of thousands of people and many, many more who all need their individual fixes. Very time consuming compared to dealing with one person.
This is one reason why more and more OTA forced SW updating is happening and why the big companies are pushing cloud computing. Such as Google evolving the Chrome platform; Adobe offering Creative Cloud; and VMWare and IBM competing for hosting Enterprise virtual computers.
Aloha.. Al :highfive:

Is it just me or do 80% of their Facebook Support moderators look like complete burnouts?
If a Forum is too hard for them how about a simple Suggestion Box where users can report bugs directly to the Design Team?
My faith in their meeting future needs with OTA's is greatly diminished. Hopefully they will surprise me.
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk 2

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=31024209&postcount=24
You might get more feed back by directing your rants here. :cyclops:

tonyz3 said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=31024209&postcount=24
You might get more feed back by directing your rants here. :cyclops:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tonyz3,
I think you should put in an application to work for the Samsung Design Team, you seem like their kind of guy. :cyclops:

They used to have customer Forum. I was a member. They were so heavily censored, that you could say virtually nothing negative.
When the Galaxy S was having GPS issues, a class action suit was initiated about the GPS problem. I posted this fact and my post was edited to eliminate the sentence stating that. My post appeared but the words "Class Action Lawsuit" magically disappeared!
Moderators would actually cut pieces out of your posts before they would appear.
I then tried to send a private message to another forum member about the censorship and they censored and blocked the private messages as well and then sent me a message saying any more communications of that type would get me banned.
I then posted a second time to the main forum complaining that they were censoring negative posts and was in fact banned from the forum. So there isn't much of a point to a Forum where you aren't alowed to communicate.
So perhaps they just decided to institute the ultimate form of censorship and eliminate the forum altogether.

Digital Man said:
They used to have customer Forum. I was a member. They were so heavily censored, that you could say virtually nothing negative.
When the Galaxy S was having GPS issues, a class action suit was initiated about the GPS problem. I posted this fact and my post was edited to eliminate the sentence stating that. My post appeared but the words "Class Action Lawsuit" magically disappeared!
Moderators would actually cut pieces out of your posts before they would appear.
I then tried to send a private message to another forum member about the censorship and they censored and blocked the private messages as well and then sent me a message saying any more communications of that type would get me banned.
I then posted a second time to the main forum complaining that they were censoring negative posts and was in fact banned from the forum. So there isn't much of a point to a Forum where you aren't alowed to communicate.
So perhaps they just decided to institute the ultimate form of censorship and eliminate the forum altogether.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh well, they make nice tablets and if we get the same software as the Note II we will all be happy campers.

mitchellvii said:
Oh well, they make nice tablets and if we get the same software as the Note II we will all be happy campers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
:highfive:

Petition: AT&T stop discriminating!

Hello community,
I have started a petition against AT&T regarding their practices against the deaf community and could really use your help and support. I have already obtained just over 2000 signatures but need a lot more. Please take a moment to read and help out, it is greatly appreciated. Don't forget to pass it along... Thanks! :thumbup:
http://www.change.org/petitions/at-...ium=email&utm_campaign=signature_goal_reached
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

Signed and shared.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium

Signed. HTH

ATT fails with their shenanigans almost as much as apple. So it does not really surprise me. I signed it because we are all equal.

papabear said:
ATT fails with their shenanigans almost as much as apple. So it does not really surprise me. I signed it because we are all equal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could not agree more.. Big thanks to all who have taken the time to sign.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

Sounds like this needs some publicity...
Have you contacted the Aclu?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium

waiters said:
Sounds like this needs some publicity...
Have you contacted the Aclu?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have not... I am working with a campaigner at change.org trying to get this thing to take off. Aclu is a good idea, I'll give it a shot today. Thanks for the input. :thumbup:
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

Just an update.. I have almost 2500 signatures, also advocacy groups are threatening to file a complaint with the FCC and the FCC has responded saying they would take action if necessary. Thanks to all who have viewed this and signed the petition.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

Where it says "In emergency situations where texting isn't an option or there's no Wifi available, mobile FaceTime could be a lifesaver." In what situation can you not text but you can use your data connection to facetime? and you're deaf so you have to use hand signals right? So you may encounter a situation where you cannot text, but you can sign over facetime? That doesn't even make sense.
You basically want to legally force a company to alter their pricing because you feel that with a physical disadvantage you cannot utilize every aspect of their service?
I don't know about that one, unless I am missing something here. They are not discriminating against anyone per this, because you could just as easily say that every cable company is discriminating against blind people by not offering audio only TV shows...
What am I missing? How is AT&T discriminating?

orangekid said:
Where it says "In emergency situations where texting isn't an option or there's no Wifi available, mobile FaceTime could be a lifesaver." In what situation can you not text but you can use your data connection to facetime? and you're deaf so you have to use hand signals right? So you may encounter a situation where you cannot text, but you can sign over facetime? That doesn't even make sense.
You basically want to legally force a company to alter their pricing because you feel that with a physical disadvantage you cannot utilize every aspect of their service?
I don't know about that one, unless I am missing something here. They are not discriminating against anyone per this, because you could just as easily say that every cable company is discriminating against blind people by not offering audio only TV shows...
What am I missing? How is AT&T discriminating?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Grouchy.
I signed it because I have friends who are deaf and anything I can do to help them is good and also I hate AT&T.

MrObvious said:
Grouchy.
I signed it because I have friends who are deaf and anything I can do to help them is good and also I hate AT&T.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol what's up Mr O!
I personally don't care one way or the other, I think maybe I am just missing something.
I don't like ATT at all either, which is why I use T-Mobile. Maybe someone can explain where the discrimination is here so we're all clear. I just don't like the idea of forcing companies to adjust their pricing, like if I had a company I should be able to charge what I want and if it's too much people just won't buy from me...
Eespecially when there are many other phone choices and many other carrier choices (you could use an Android device with an FFC on T-Mobile for instance)

orangekid said:
Where it says "In emergency situations where texting isn't an option or there's no Wifi available, mobile FaceTime could be a lifesaver." In what situation can you not text but you can use your data connection to facetime? and you're deaf so you have to use hand signals right? So you may encounter a situation where you cannot text, but you can sign over facetime? That doesn't even make sense.
You basically want to legally force a company to alter their pricing because you feel that with a physical disadvantage you cannot utilize every aspect of their service?
I don't know about that one, unless I am missing something here. They are not discriminating against anyone per this, because you could just as easily say that every cable company is discriminating against blind people by not offering audio only TV shows...
What am I missing? How is AT&T discriminating?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello orangekid,
To put it simply, yes they should alter pricing. Are you okay with paying for things you can't use?
By AT&T not allowing a deaf user face time access through their TAP plan (text accessibility program) but forcing them to buy a voice plan, wouldn't you agree this is a form of discrimination? Your comparison regarding blind people is a moot point... no one is forcing blind people to buy tv service they would most likely not use. AT&T however, tells their customers in order to use a service of ours (which deaf people can fully utilize) they have to pay for something they can never use, voice minutes. I take it you did not take the time to read the comments in the petition? At this point I have 2404 people who feel AT&T is discriminating, a lot of them are members of the deaf community. If your sole purpose was to just come here and try to ruffle some feathers, please refrain from doing so. If you don't agree or don't want to sign the petition, don't post. I'm not trying to be a jerk I just posted here for people who would like to support this cause. Thank you.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

Signed good luck !

Signed.

HarlanPepper0010 said:
Hello orangekid,
To put it simply, yes they should alter pricing. Are you okay with paying for things you can't use?
By AT&T not allowing a deaf user face time access through their TAP plan (text accessibility program) but forcing them to buy a voice plan, wouldn't you agree this is a form of discrimination? Your comparison regarding blind people is a moot point... no one is forcing blind people to buy tv service they would most likely not use. AT&T however, tells their customers in order to use a service of ours (which deaf people can fully utilize) they have to pay for something they can never use, voice minutes. I take it you did not take the time to read the comments in the petition? At this point I have 2404 people who feel AT&T is discriminating, a lot of them are members of the deaf community. If your sole purpose was to just come here and try to ruffle some feathers, please refrain from doing so. If you don't agree or don't want to sign the petition, don't post. I'm not trying to be a jerk I just posted here for people who would like to support this cause. Thank you.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am just trying to understand what you are actually against. I did read some of the comments, and it's not really that hard to get 2,000 signatures for ANY cause. Like I stated already, I may just have something confused here. You can choose to buy AT&T or not right? I mean why not get Sprint or Verizon or T-Mobile with an Android phone, why is FaceTime such a requirement?
Besides, isn't there a data only plan you can get on AT&T, like for people with iPads?
I'm being 100% honest when I say I'm not trying to "ruffle some feathers" I just don't see specifically what the discrimination is.
If your take is "if you can't see what the obvious discrimination is then I won't waste my time explaining it to you" or "I still think you're just trying to get under my skin and really do see discrimination but are only pretending not to" then it is what it is, but that's not my intention.
Maybe I just don't fully understand what your service is and why it can only be used on an iPhone or on AT&T.

orangekid said:
I am just trying to understand what you are actually against. I did read some of the comments, and it's not really that hard to get 2,000 signatures for ANY cause. Like I stated already, I may just have something confused here. You can choose to buy AT&T or not right? I mean why not get Sprint or Verizon or T-Mobile with an Android phone, why is FaceTime such a requirement?
Besides, isn't there a data only plan you can get on AT&T, like for people with iPads?
I'm being 100% honest when I say I'm not trying to "ruffle some feathers" I just don't see specifically what the discrimination is.
If your take is "if you can't see what the obvious discrimination is then I won't waste my time explaining it to you" or "I still think you're just trying to get under my skin and really do see discrimination but are only pretending not to" then it is what it is, but that's not my intention.
Maybe I just don't fully understand what your service is and why it can only be used on an iPhone or on AT&T.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello again Orangekid,
All you are doing is answering your own questions. You know why I am doing this, but continue to press the issue. I am petitioning AT&T to stop discriminating deaf people by charging them for something they can't use. (Voice minutes)
It's nice to have choices right? If AT&T works the best for some users, they should be able to use it without restrictions or additional charges for something unusable. If you can't seem to understand this cause, I encourage you to Google it so you can find the answer you are looking for. There are plenty of articles you may read regarding this topic. I have read many.
You obviously are not finding your answer here since you did not read my last post which states; if you don't support this or don't want to sign, simply don't post... by posting what you did.. "If your take is "if you can't see what the obvious discrimination is then I won't waste my time explaining it to you" or "I still think you're just trying to get under my skin and really do see discrimination but are only pretending not to" then it is what it is, but that's not my intention." It is your intention, otherwise you would not have posted. Thank you.
Also thanks again to all who have signed so far.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

HarlanPepper0010 said:
Hello again Orangekid,
All you are doing is answering your own questions. You know why I am doing this, but continue to press the issue. I am petitioning AT&T to stop discriminating deaf people by charging them for something they can't use. (Voice minutes)
It's nice to have choices right? If AT&T works the best for some users, they should be able to use it without restrictions or additional charges for something unusable. If you can't seem to understand this cause, I encourage you to Google it so you can find the answer you are looking for. There are plenty of articles you may read regarding this topic. I have read many.
You obviously are not finding your answer here since you did not read my last post which states; if you don't support this or don't want to sign, simply don't post... by posting what you did.. "If your take is "if you can't see what the obvious discrimination is then I won't waste my time explaining it to you" or "I still think you're just trying to get under my skin and really do see discrimination but are only pretending not to" then it is what it is, but that's not my intention." It is your intention, otherwise you would not have posted. Thank you.
Also thanks again to all who have signed so far.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're obviously not understanding what I am saying, that's fine I guess I can't expect everyone to. I haven't answered any of my questions, nor have you; repeating the same mission statement over and over does not an answer make. You factually utterly ignored my question on how you could possibly find yourself in an emergency situation where you cannot text, but you can use your hands to activate FaceTime and use that instead (an example showing how it is indeed discrimination).
If this petition doesn't work out I suggest you switch to Android or another carrier, you might also have better luck avoiding an ETF by bringing up this topic as opposed trying to change their entire pricing system, which seems to be making them money.
I will stop posting in this thread since I won't be getting any of my questions answered here anyways.
Good luck with your endeavors

orangekid said:
You're obviously not understanding what I am saying, that's fine I guess I can't expect everyone to. I haven't answered any of my questions, nor have you; repeating the same mission statement over and over does not an answer make. You factually utterly ignored my question on how you could possibly find yourself in an emergency situation where you cannot text, but you can use your hands to activate FaceTime and use that instead (an example showing how it is indeed discrimination).
If this petition doesn't work out I suggest you switch to Android or another carrier, you might also have better luck avoiding an ETF by bringing up this topic as opposed trying to change their entire pricing system, which seems to be making them money.
I will stop posting in this thread since I won't be getting any of my questions answered here anyways.
Good luck with your endeavors
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To satisfy your insatiable thirst to find an answer you can't find here... Texting uses cellular minutes. FaceTime uses data. In an emergency, take an earthquake for example (there was a decent one not to long ago here in California) cellular lines were so jammed with people making calls to friends and family I was unable to make any calls nor send any texts. Data however was unaffected.
Now a hearing person could easily open the app and contact through FaceTime since most likely they have a voice plan. Why would or should a deaf person pay for voice minutes just to use this service? When they are the ones who would benefit the most from it. I have made this point in my last few posts which you have obviously ignored. Are there other options? of course there are but as I stated in my last post, which again you ignored. If AT&T and FaceTime work the best for some they should have access to all services without paying for something unusable..
I have answered your questions in the best capacity I can. You however do not want an answer You obviously just want to make a point. You are right and I am wrong. How's that working out for you? Just remember you started this, I kindly asked if you don't agree or don't want to sign please don't post. Something you have ignored again. I see a trend here.
My suggestion to you is to imagine yourself as a deaf person. Take away the ability to just pick-up a phone and call your family or friends. Take away the ability to just turn on the TV, walk away from it and still know what is going on. Try going to see a movie in the theater. Try turning on the radio, or listening to music. How bout a concert? Simple things us hearing individuals take for granted. You think it's hard finding work for a hearing person in this country, try finding one as a deaf individual. I understand this because I have seen and lived with it for 32 years, people do not choose to be deaf; why should they be charged for a service they can not use? If you really think that by coming in here and playing dumb; looking for an answer but not wanting to hear my response will sway my decision or make me rethink my stance, you sir (or ma'am) are wrong. I stand by this petition. Have a nice day.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2

HarlanPepper0010 said:
To satisfy your insatiable thirst to find an answer you can't find here... Texting uses cellular minutes. FaceTime uses data. In an emergency, take an earthquake for example (there was a decent one not to long ago here in California) cellular lines were so jammed with people making calls to friends and family I was unable to make any calls nor send any texts. Data however was unaffected.
Now a hearing person could easily open the app and contact through FaceTime since most likely they have a voice plan. Why would or should a deaf person pay for voice minutes just to use this service? When they are the ones who would benefit the most from it. I have made this point in my last few posts which you have obviously ignored. Are there other options? of course there are but as I stated in my last post, which again you ignored. If AT&T and FaceTime work the best for some they should have access to all services without paying for something unusable..
I have answered your questions in the best capacity I can. You however do not want an answer You obviously just want to make a point. You are right and I am wrong. How's that working out for you? Just remember you started this, I kindly asked if you don't agree or don't want to sign please don't post. Something you have ignored again. I see a trend here.
My suggestion to you is to imagine yourself as a deaf person. Take away the ability to just pick-up a phone and call your family or friends. Take away the ability to just turn on the TV, walk away from it and still know what is going on. Try going to see a movie in the theater. Try turning on the radio, or listening to music. How bout a concert? Simple things us hearing individuals take for granted. You think it's hard finding work for a hearing person in this country, try finding one as a deaf individual. I understand this because I have seen and lived with it for 32 years, people do not choose to be deaf; why should they be charged for a service they can not use? If you really think that by coming in here and playing dumb; looking for an answer but not wanting to hear my response will sway my decision or make me rethink my stance, you sir (or ma'am) are wrong. I stand by this petition. Have a nice day.
Sent from my PC36100 using Xparent ICS Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not so much a matter of convenience as sign language is another language and their native language. If you asked someone from Mexico who just got done taking English classes if they would rather speak to everyone in English or Spanish they would say Spanish because they are fluent in it. Basically the point about deaf people is some don't do English very well to begin with but sign fluently. They can get confused by English grammar and it's very hard to understand when they do something like a text message, but they understand a video of a sign language sentence much better. Also, when they make bibles for deaf people, it is a video of a person signing the scriptures, not a written text. Why? Some deaf people do as well with English as I do with Spanish.
That's one reason. I hope I didn't offend anyone with this post but I was just making a point for Orangekid. If I did I do apologize as it was not intentional.

HarlanPepper0010 said:
You are right and I am wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HarlanPepper0010 said:
you sir (or ma'am) are wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry that's a little confusing.
I wasn't trying to make a point, I really was curious. Your explanation on the data/texting thing was a good one, was that so hard? I'm sorry you're taking this so personally. Despite our exchanges I have tried to stay polite, and assert that I wasn't trying to argue or just be difficult but really was trying to grasp what the issue truly was.
The fact that you blatantly refuse to believe this and have hard bent on attempting to create a scare-crow argument and attacking that as if this were a debate and not a mere request for clarification on the matter, as if repeatedly stating your arbitrary opinion of my purposes makes it true, shows me that you are indeed taking my efforts to merely truly understand the position as a personal attack on said position. I'm sorry but you seem to be arguing with someone else and putting their face on my words. Let me be as clear as I possibly can so we can settle the matter once and for all.
1) I did no understand if the petition was to change AT&T's normal pricing policy or if there was a special pricing plan that included features you didn't want that you wanted changed.
2) I did not understand why a deaf person would HAVE to use an iPhone and HAVE to use FaceTime and HAVE to use AT&T, and I wondered if a similar petition existed for the other "big 3" with their pricing and packages. This led me to believe that I must misunderstand the entire petition.
3) I am not implying that your purposes are malevolent, communistic, naive, or anything other than what you state, I am merely seek to fully understand them.
Keep in mind you posted a thread in a public forum urging people to share your views and sign your petition. When you do such, you open yourself to queries about the thread and you cannot "kick out" anyone who merely asks a question about it. if I were offering a counter-position, which I stopped after the first post because I began to doubt exactly what that position was, I would still have a right to post it here. I can see how my first post here can be taken that way, but as I said I then wondered if I completely mistook the entire position.
I don't have a problem with you, this thread, this petition, deaf people, or any other demographic. I'm sorry this blew up out of proportion and I'm sorry you mistook me and that you are taking things so personally.
No matter how many times and in what ways you state that my motives are to "prove a point" or stir trouble as it were, it is untrue. I wished only to give further stage to this matter and to clarify it.

Move along, derailed thread.

--

Not really, at least, not very practically. You *might* be able to set the flag that the RT jailbreak un-sets (assuming it isn't "protected" by PatchGuard the way it is in RT 8.1) but that could break a lot more things than you'd realize; desktop Windows isn't intended to be locked down that way. The best bet that I'm aware of is AppLocker (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd723678(v=WS.10).aspx). That link is for Win7 but I'm sure you can find resources for Win8 as well.
Practically speaking, the simple and obvious approach is to restrict those people to low-rights accounts. That won't stop them from running software that they download to their user profile, but it will prevent many installers and most malware from working, and it will make it easy to clean up any mess they happen to create.

http://google.com/search?q=windows+kiosk+mode

e.mote said:
http://google.com/search?q=windows+kiosk+mode
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you're trying to be a smartass, at least make sure you are referring to the right thing.

Thanks for reminding me why I rarely bothered with helping online peeps. Some have enough manners to actually acknowledge the help. Most will just get what free help they can and never reply. A few special cases turn out to be a-holes who think they deserve the red carpet VIP treatment, and start lipping off if they don't get it. Guess which category you fall into?
If you had actually expend the two seconds to click on the provided link before flapping your lips, then the kiosk mode fits what you're describing, which is to lock down Windows to a few assigned functions. MS did put out a freeware called Steady State, but that's limited to Vista or older.
Then again, reading comprehension is getting to be a rarity in these parts. Damn twits...(get off my lawn...hahah)

Except, apparently, it's you who misread the request... or perhaps misread what Kiosk Mode in Win8.x does. It would be much *too* restrictive for the OP's needs, because it would prohibit using the desktop (or any of its software, such as Explorer or Word), or downloading Store apps (much less running them; it's limited to a preselected app). So, while perhaps the "smartass" reply was unwarranted (I remind you again that your avatar - showing a creature typically believed to be of sub-human intelligence rolling its eyes - will cause many people to automatically *assume* you're being a smartass even when you don't intend such) - you weren't actually being very helpful either.
With that said, OP, you really should search before posting; this exact question has been asked, discussed, and rejected as impractical before.

I read the request just fine. OP wants a way to restrict peeps from doing "bad stuff" on a Win8 box. Then, kiosk mode is a good key word to search on. There are others, of course, but noobs are only interested in being spoonfed, so I threw him a freebie to start out.
You should expand your knowledge. Kiosk mode (to lock down the PC) is a generic term that pertains to a variety of solutions, and not just the particular built-in Win8 solution you referred to. Locking down (public) PCs is a common need, and solutions abound. While Win8 has had very little new desktop software for it, Win7 does have a wide range of 3rd-party software, some of which undoubtedly have been upgraded to work with Win8. Shocker, there are actually more than one page of search hits.
BTW, I'm sick and tired of people (all two of them) casting aspersions on my avatar. It's a damn pic. I happen to like orangutans and think they're cool cats. Works for me, and if you don't like it, tough. So, do spare me the Dr Phil routine, before I start writing a dissertation on the irrelevant ramblings of someone who calls himself "GoodDaytoDie". When I want your 2 cents, I'll ask for it.

e.mote said:
Thanks for reminding me why I rarely bothered with helping online peeps. Some have enough manners to actually acknowledge the help. Most will just get what free help they can and never reply. A few special cases turn out to be a-holes who think they deserve the red carpet VIP treatment, and start lipping off if they don't get it. Guess which category you fall into?
If you had actually expend the two seconds to click on the provided link before flapping your lips, then the kiosk mode fits what you're describing, which is to lock down Windows to a few assigned functions. MS did put out a freeware called Steady State, but that's limited to Vista or older.
Then again, reading comprehension is getting to be a rarity in these parts. Damn twits...(get off my lawn...hahah)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh you are soooo helpful, providing me a link to a Google search that's not even the right thing. I think I said that I need them to use more than one app.

GoodDayToDie said:
Except, apparently, it's you who misread the request... or perhaps misread what Kiosk Mode in Win8.x does. It would be much *too* restrictive for the OP's needs, because it would prohibit using the desktop (or any of its software, such as Explorer or Word), or downloading Store apps (much less running them; it's limited to a preselected app). So, while perhaps the "smartass" reply was unwarranted (I remind you again that your avatar - showing a creature typically believed to be of sub-human intelligence rolling its eyes - will cause many people to automatically *assume* you're being a smartass even when you don't intend such) - you weren't actually being very helpful either.
With that said, OP, you really should search before posting; this exact question has been asked, discussed, and rejected as impractical before.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well then our resident Google expert should tell me the search string to Google, as whenever I search anything related to RT and exe, I just get RT jailbreak stuff.

e.mote said:
I read the request just fine. OP wants a way to restrict peeps from doing "bad stuff" on a Win8 box. Then, kiosk mode is a good key word to search on. There are others, of course, but noobs are only interested in being spoonfed, so I threw him a freebie to start out.
You should expand your knowledge. Kiosk mode (to lock down the PC) is a generic term that pertains to a variety of solutions, and not just the particular built-in Win8 solution you referred to. Locking down (public) PCs is a common need, and solutions abound. While Win8 has had very little new desktop software for it, Win7 does have a wide range of 3rd-party software, some of which undoubtedly have been upgraded to work with Win8. Shocker, there are actually more than one page of search hits.
BTW, I'm sick and tired of people (all two of them) casting aspersions on my avatar. It's a damn pic. I happen to like orangutans and think they're cool cats. Works for me, and if you don't like it, tough. So, do spare me the Dr Phil routine, before I start writing a dissertation on the irrelevant ramblings of someone who calls himself "GoodDaytoDie". When I want your 2 cents, I'll ask for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh yes, go ahead, call me a noob.
I know about various kiosk software, and I also know that there's always a way to get around it - some people literally turn off their antivirus software because the malware tells them to. Which is why I wondered about having an RT-style lock, without any visible toggles and switches to disable it.
And by the way I didn't look at your avatar at all, I just really don't think that pointing somebody to Google, or even worse, LMGTFY, is just rude.
Considering that this is a website where I got banned twice and flamed out of a thread because I mentioned ways to improve things in it, I expect other people to be nicer.

>Oh yes, go ahead, call me a noob.
OK, noob. Here's the thing. It's rude to expect people to be mindreaders, and start lipping off if they don't give you the exact answers you wanted. Did you say you already tried kiosk software? Hmm, no. Do you know that "kiosk mode" has a general meaning of locking down PCs, and kiosk software allows a variety of possible configurations? Hmm, not likely, considering your penchant of lip first and read later.
>I just really don't think that pointing somebody to Google, or even worse, LMGTFY, is just rude.
Wow, you DO expect manners, even though you have none to offer. Well, noob, reality check. Lots of questions are answered by simple search queries. If you think that's rude, then you should stop asking questions, because with your flipping people off when you don't like their answers, this thread will inevitably be the result.
>this is a website where I got banned twice and flamed out of a thread
Why am I not surprised. Going for a third?
>I expect other people to be nicer.
Right, it's always other people who need to be nicer, but you can be an a-hole because God has given you a lifetime license. Good luck with that.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+link+to+google+and+expect+to+be+called+a+saint
I think "RT-style" is specific enough to not require any mind reading. What YOU linked me to was not specific at all. But hey, it's the XDA tradition to call people noobs if they refuse to suck your ****, right?