# How Facebook tracks you on Android



## hukadan (Mar 25, 2019)

This videos reminds me why I don't have a smartphone. I really like the part where the app, when opting-out, actually send more data to Facebook.


----------



## Crivens (Mar 25, 2019)

The problem is not facebook.
The problem is that your firewall does not blackhole all of these 'social networks' analytics and that ilk.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Mar 25, 2019)

You do that at the browser.


----------



## PMc (Mar 25, 2019)

The main benefit of the Internet was that we would get rid of predefined communication channels (aka mass-media) and their ability to steer and control public opinion. Instead of the traditional one-to-many relation of television and newspapers (which was upheld by the sheer amount of investment needed to run a tv-station or newspaper), on the Internet every participant can publish, and so there is the possibility for arbitrary any-to-any relations, which was considered a big advantage and gain in freedom and self-determination.

Now it seems, we have replaced the traditional means of mass-influencing by a much more intrusive and effective way of individualized mass-influencing, which is no longer under control of the governments but under the control of international corporate structures which are controlled by - whom?


----------



## linux->bsd (Mar 26, 2019)

PMc said:


> which is no longer under control of the governments but under the control of international corporate structures which are controlled by - whom?



The new enemy, same as the old. Google and powerful international corporations now dictate the limits to freedom of speech (which limits freedom of thought). I'll never forget the answer Eric Schmidt gave to the question of privacy: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, then maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Was gobsmacked when I heard him say that. Like, who the fuck are you to decide what people should and shouldn't do, or what people should and shouldn't want to keep private. You can apply that destructive reprimand to anything: politics, faith, family, etc.


----------



## tedbell (Mar 26, 2019)

The heads of these companies were losers all their lives no matter how much money they had. This is their attempt at revenge.


----------



## ProphetOfDoom (Mar 26, 2019)

I must confess I use an Android device - mainly because it's enjoyable and convenient. It's a Huawei P Smart so it's entirely possible that not just one but two nations are spying on me.
I'm massively into tech and prefer not to be left behind I don't see there's much other choice than to accept the privacy/convenience trade-off.
I tried I really did. When the Ubuntu phones from BQ arrived a few years back I enthusiastically bought one of the world's first Linux phones. It might have respected my fundamental rights but it was unusable. The predictive/corrective text function outputted the most _insane _suggestions continually so you would soon want to throw the phone across the room. The app store was empty. The web browser was slow. It was a miserable user experience.
I know some people are so idealistic that they won't own an Android device and I deeply respect them for it - I just don't have such willpower.
As a geek I *need* these things! I wouldn't be surprised if Richard Stallman is crying over his monochrome GNewSense Chinese ARM netbook... or whatever he's using nowadays... Wishing he'd never started all that freedom rhetoric cos the poor guy just... wants... to tap on an iPad...


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Mar 26, 2019)

linux->bsd Please watch your language. This isn't reddit.


----------



## sidetone (Mar 26, 2019)

tedbell said:


> The heads of these companies were losers all their lives no matter how much money they had. This is their attempt at revenge.


It looks like sarcasm. But, it's something like as you wrote. For Facebook, it's about the false religions of power & money with apathy. Facebook doesn't respect anything.

Zuckerberg is really off.



linux->bsd said:


> "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, then maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."


It's true, but it's pathetic when it is used as an excuse or justification to spy, which they also "shouldn't be doing it [spy] in the first place". The profane language is warranted IMO.


----------



## linux->bsd (Mar 26, 2019)

drhowarddrfine said:


> linux->bsd Please watch your language. This isn't reddit.



I've never used reddit, but now I'm envisioning pages of posts of nothing but curse words just for the hell of it.



AlexanderProphet said:


> ...


Oh man, you are my worst nightmare. It's people like you that convince app developers and their parent companies that's it's okay to violate their users' privacy and continuously cross the line of decency, because you'll just take it and shrug. I'd say "your life, your choice," but you and the people like you negatively and drastically affect the products that are created, and therefore what's available to me. It's why my phone is essentially broken (all apps are blocked by a rooted firewall, so they constantly crash because they can't phone home with my personal details). And yet, there is a massive organization of tech-literate people that are constantly fighting to undo your effect. Such a trip to watch this play out.


----------



## sidetone (Mar 26, 2019)

There's limited choice, because many companies are no longer. Either use a phone without Internet, or have spyware. There's only Android, Apple or some rare OS that's  supposed to be opensource, but worse.


----------



## linux->bsd (Mar 26, 2019)

sidetone said:


> There's limited choice, because many companies are no longer. Either use a phone without Internet, or have spyware. There's only Android, Apple or some rare OS that's  supposed to be opensource, but worse.



I recently looked into a handful of AOSP-based custom ROMs that look very enticing. It's a shame CyanogenMod imploded the way it did. That wiped out a mainstream alternative to Android, Apple, and Windows Mobile.


----------



## sidetone (Mar 26, 2019)

New thread: Installing FreeBSD on my Samsung. j/k.


----------



## ProphetOfDoom (Mar 26, 2019)

Lol. I am tech literate, I just have different priorities. This kinda reminds me of when vegans get wound up about others not being vegan. It's great that you'd rather suffer than be involved with wrongdoing but have respect for those who choose not to suffer.


----------



## Crivens (Mar 26, 2019)

sidetone said:


> It's true, but it's pathetic when it is used as an excuse or justification to spy, which they also "shouldn't be doing it in the first place". The profane language is warranted IMO.


Yes, it's the "why did that sl*t had to dress like that?" defense.
But you simply put your tinfoil hat on and check who gave google the startup venture capital.


----------



## tedbell (Mar 26, 2019)

linux->bsd said:


> I recently looked into a handful of AOSP-based custom ROMs that look very enticing. It's a shame CyanogenMod imploded the way it did. That wiped out a mainstream alternative to Android, Apple, and Windows Mobile.



CM is now LineageOS and I'm running version 15.1 (Android 8.1) on my S5. CM is not AOSP. It's its own version taken from Android sources. Most custom ROMS are based on either CM or AOSP. Neither are compatible. There are also a handful of custom ROMS taken from Touchwiz that were debloated.


----------



## sidetone (Mar 26, 2019)

Crivens said:


> Yes, it's the "why did that sl*t had to dress like that?" defense.
> But you simply put your tinfoil hat on and check who gave google the startup venture capital.


Not really. There are things on the Internet we shouldn't do, but that doesn't mean we should have our data sold for profit or manipulation. Google is at least honest, but it requires one to trust a corporation, where there is no trust. Twitter is straight-forward, saying, you are who you say you are, it's all logged. Facebook just plays games, moves goalposts with little to no warning and sells data in the most disrespectful ways.

A girl dressing however she wants is no excuse for someone to do what they're not supposed to. That's an excuse, she dresses a way, and for something small, some thinks he has the right to ruin her life? A girl should be able to dress how she wants with no major consequences, unfortunately, we live in a world with lowlives who feel entitled and make lame excuses, so it's not wise to dress like that. Internet surfing is not an equal comparison to that.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Mar 26, 2019)

AlexanderProphet said:


> I know some people are so idealistic that they won't own an Android device and I deeply respect them for it - I just don't have such willpower.
> As a geek I *need* these things!



Never having owned a smartphone I must not know what I'm missing out on.

Ignorance is bliss.


----------



## Crivens (Mar 26, 2019)

sidetone 
Maybe I did not make that clear enough. The excuse "You should not do stuff in the first place when you don't want us to spy on you" is on the same level as the one I cited. 

Sure, everybody should be able to dress how one wants (this includes guys) without provoking violence. But there is always a line. Going to church in a bikini may be considered that line crossed, but where is that line _exactly_? Same for going shopping in a SS uniform. Do that and expect _not_ to get your behind into hard contact with heavy footwear? Not where I live. Why do we defend the one choice and not the other? Why is google not sued into kingdom come?
Thinking all of that trough can get you to some unpleasant things about yourself and reality.


----------



## PMc (Mar 26, 2019)

linux->bsd said:


> I'll never forget the answer Eric Schmidt gave to the question of privacy: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, then maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."



This indeed does unravel a bit of the background and the "greater picture": we have a new definition of the word "_clean_" (with the bias into "_transparent_"). Then, if You're a bit into Freudian psychology, this can trigger a mind-blowing meditation... (it is the same scheme according to which people in former times tended to suppress "dirty" sexuality due to seemingly-christian doctrines. But this time the "priests" have no values at all, and are unconscious themselves.)

The Agile fancy tried to set the programmers free from their cubicles, but now we all shall live in nicely _clean_, tidy and uniform cubicles in our mind. And there is currently no proper way to stand up against this, because the privacy argument is weak, and the true and valid argument against it is considered "evil" (just like "_dirty_" language is considered "evil").


----------



## sidetone (Mar 26, 2019)

The level of severity is different.

A girl should be able to walk outside in a bikini without consequence. If anyone goes to work or to an event in the wrong attire, the minor consequence is just, "go home." Even if she's dressed conservatively, some womanizer will try to hit on her in an attempt to use her. Human traffickers excuses are, well someone was born.

I should be able to take home a huge tv, without someone making up the excuse, "he should have covered it." Suppose I didn't have a big enough towel to cover a big screen tv, that I would of had to make another trip. Suppose someone stole an expensive tool, because I left it in the car, because I couldn't park close enough behind an opaque fence to hide it from prying eyes to take it inside. If I leave a bike out for 2 minutes, someone thinks, well, he shouldn't have left it out. Well, you shouldn't trespass to steal it, and you shouldn't steal it. People make lame excuses. Facebook shouldn't be doing that kind of stuff.

Pearls before swine.

For someone like Zuckerberg who makes excuses, if he can live by his rules for others, why does he pay security to guard his trash can? He's doing what he shouldn't be doing. By his own standards, he's not playing by his rules, because he can't.

Different corporate heads are playing by different rules, some possibly at least they could play by themselves.

But, there are things that are legal that we shouldn't be doing on the Internet depending on various or our own opinions. It doesn't mean it should be exploited. It also doesn't mean the consequences should be disproportionate. For things we should be doing, without a doubt, companies shouldn't be prying on us, because innocent stuff gets used against us, individually or up to the whole society. Information being used against them is also the case for those who say they have nothing to hide.


----------



## aragats (Mar 26, 2019)

Crivens said:


> The problem is not facebook.
> The problem is that your firewall does not blackhole all of these 'social networks' analytics and that ilk.


It's not easy to setup a firewall in a mobile device, most people won't be able to do it.


----------



## alexseitsinger (Mar 26, 2019)

From what I have seen and heard there just aren't enough people that are tech-privacy-literate to support any movement away from current practices. This, in my opinion, is why nothing changes. The majority of people are so hopelessly dependent on their computers and smartphones that they cannot be bothered with things like arguing for thier privacy. They think that since their bank accounts are not currently being robbed, that there is nothing to worry about. Sadly, it could not be further from the truth. It is a smart move by the big corporations to get them hooked before(if) they know better. Even if there is an argument, if the majority of (tech-privacy-illiterate) people do not want a change, it will not happen because they will continue to consume and purchase the related products and services without question. Those of us who are concerned will continue to go unnoticed.


----------



## johnblue (Mar 26, 2019)

linux->bsd said:
			
		

> I recently looked into a handful of AOSP-based custom ROMs that look very enticing.


The only good AOSP ROM is the one that you compile yourself for yourself on Nexus phones.



And one of the many good things about doing that is that it will specifically *not* have gapps.


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

hukadan said:


> This videos reminds me why I don't have a smartphone. I really like the part where the app, when opting-out, actually send more data to Facebook.



Not having a smartphone means not to work for a large company.
Large corporate / companies oblige employees to use smartphones very often in Europe.


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

sidetone said:


> The level of severity is different.
> 
> A girl should be able to walk outside in a bikini without consequence. If anyone goes to work or to an event in the wrong attire, the minor consequence is just, "go home." Even if she's dressed conservatively, some womanizer will try to hit on her in an attempt to use her. Human traffickers excuses are, well someone was born.
> 
> ...


The US laws are made by money makers. The rules are made by large companies, money will always bypass the US laws, just services, which destroy our planet for entertaining, confidential data spying software plots : facebook, youtube, google, android,...


----------



## sidetone (Mar 27, 2019)

The laws haven't caught up to social media and the Internet, AFAIK, but that's often the next step.


----------



## hukadan (Mar 27, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> Not having a smartphone means not to work for a large company.
> Large corporate / companies oblige employees to use smartphones very often in Europe.


Citation needed  Probably it is true for some jobs. But then you can still use a dumb phone for personal related stuff.  I have yet to see a company that obliges all his employees to have a smartphone though.


----------



## D-FENS (Mar 27, 2019)

Crivens said:


> The problem is not facebook.
> The problem is that your firewall does not blackhole all of these 'social networks' analytics and that ilk.



That's what I do 

```
pkg install dnsmasq

cat <<EOF >  /usr/local/etc/dnsmasq.d/dns-cache.conf
listen-address=127.0.0.1
cache-size=1000
EOF

cat <<EOF >  /usr/local/etc/dnsmasq.d/spam-list.conf
address=/facebook.com/127.0.0.66
address=/google-analytics.com/127.0.0.66
EOF

cat <<EOF >  /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 127.0.0.1
EOF

sysrc dnsmasq_enable=YES
service dnsmasq start
```

If you are in good mood, add some IP blocking in your IPFW tables to the mix.


----------



## scottro (Mar 27, 2019)

As I understand it (but I don't understand it that well) there are still some Android phones that don't do this if you don't have Facebook. The last I'd read, some of the manufacturers, especially Samsung, were doing it, but isn't it still possible (and not even that difficult) to find one without including Facebook as a program installed with the base system?


----------



## aragats (Mar 27, 2019)

scottro said:


> there are still some Android phones that don't do this if you don't have Facebook.


By my understanding it's not the base software in phones which tracks, but third-party applications installed: their devs use FB SDK to add some features, and that SDK's functions get embedded in those apps and do the tracking.


> isn't it still possible ... to find one without including Facebook as a program installed with the base system?


Even when it's preinstalled, it's still possible to disable it by official means.


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

hukadan said:


> Citation needed  Probably it is true for some jobs. But then you can still use a dumb phone for personal related stuff.  I have yet to see a company that obliges all his employees to have a smartphone though.



Many jobs are like this today, decades ago, it was not a big deal.

VPN,... for security reasons, they have to give smartphones or expensive blackberries to employees.
Too bad, last generation iPhone, wow, ok thanks. Finally, employees have to or feel to have to.


----------



## ralphbsz (Mar 27, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> Not having a smartphone means not to work for a large company.
> Large corporate / companies oblige employees to use smartphones very often in Europe.


Well, for the last 25 years I've worked for those large computer/IT companies, although not in Europe, but in California.  No single one has required the use of the personal cellphone for the job.  Rather on the contrary, the use of personal devices (laptops, cellphones, tablets) is usually highly restricted, for security reasons.  All my employers in the last 15 years (since wide-spread smart phone usage became a thing) actually offer to pay for a corporate-owned and corporate-controlled second phone that you can use for all work-related functions; I refuse (already one too many devices in my pocket), and simply don't use my personal cellphone for work-related stuff.

By California law, if you use your personal device for work, the employer has to pay you for any extra costs that causes (extra data charges, more SMS).  Similar for the use of home internet connections for work.  For this reason, most big employers simply pay 100% or a large fraction of the home internet connection for their workers, that's easier than trying to calculate the actual work-related usage byte-by-byte.


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

ralphbsz said:


> Well, for the last 25 years I've worked for those large computer/IT companies, although not in Europe, but in California.  No single one has required the use of the personal cellphone for the job.  Rather on the contrary, the use of personal devices (laptops, cellphones, tablets) is usually highly restricted, for security reasons.  All my employers in the last 15 years (since wide-spread smart phone usage became a thing) actually offer to pay for a corporate-owned and corporate-controlled second phone that you can use for all work-related functions; I refuse (already one too many devices in my pocket), and simply don't use my personal cellphone for work-related stuff.
> 
> By California law, if you use your personal device for work, the employer has to pay you for any extra costs that causes (extra data charges, more SMS).  Similar for the use of home internet connections for work.  For this reason, most big employers simply pay 100% or a large fraction of the home internet connection for their workers, that's easier than trying to calculate the actual work-related usage byte-by-byte.



It depends the type of jobs maybe. Companies pay for private phone calls. Man, working for a company that does do so much money saving?

US are definitely not EU.

If you have a really good job, companies support lot of cost.


----------



## aragats (Mar 27, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> they have to give smartphones or expensive blackberries to employees


You're behind the times: Blackberry is already dead for 3 years.
I wish I could use it instead of Android: it's much better and more reliable. I have one, but it's almost impossible to use any third-party applications anymore since phone's OS and software is outdated and not supported anymore. So, I stopped using it several months ago...


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

aragats said:


> You're behind the times: Blackberry is already dead for 3 years.
> I wish I could use it instead of Android: it's much better and more reliable. I have one, but it's almost impossible to use any third-party applications anymore since phone's OS and software is outdated and not supported anymore. So, I stopped using it several months ago...



where you live?


----------



## aragats (Mar 27, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> where you live?


I thought my profile info is correct and publicly available (-;
But how does it matter?


----------



## Crivens (Mar 27, 2019)

Someone wants to pick  up a BB  phone for the cheap? SCNR


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

aragats said:


> I thought my profile info is correct and publicly available (-;
> But how does it matter?


Bit lazy today, nice place to live  In EU it is sold. About 1000 euros for a good one BB.


----------



## aragats (Mar 27, 2019)

Those "new BBs" are not BBs, they're Android phones. RIM licensed their production to a Chinese company...


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

aragats said:


> Those "new BBs" are not BBs, they're Android phones. RIM licensed their production to a Chinese company...


Android rules, difficult to avoid it.


----------



## scottro (Mar 27, 2019)

There are laws for lots of things.  There are also often many applicants for jobs, either at big or small companies. Someone just out of school, for example, competing against other people willing to work for lower salaries (assuming the person just out of school will) may ask, Does the company supply a phone and be told no, and try to sue.  Maybe this is only with the smaller companies, I don't know, but I would say, at least in the northeastern US, many companies do expect you to use your own (smart)phone for things, and while you can probably demand a phone, or refuse to use your phone, it will hurt your chances. And my impression is that this is growing--companies are more likely, not less, to make you use your own phone. 
Take 'em to court if you like and have time to hire a lawyer, take time off from work or jobhunting to be in court, and so on.


----------



## alexseitsinger (Mar 27, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> Not having a smartphone means not to work for a large company.
> Large corporate / companies oblige employees to use smartphones very often in Europe.



I think it is pretty common for most employers to expect this even if it is not explicitly requested. It is concernng that one is forced to relinquish control of their privacy in order to survive. Especially when those who have control over your survival are usually less interested in their privacy let alone another individual's. There are some benefits to having a device with you, for things like 2FA. But, I think sometimes its outweighed by the ways they can, will, and do get used to invade your life.


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 27, 2019)

alexseitsinger said:


> I think it is pretty common for most employers to expect this even if it is not explicitly requested. It is concernng that one is forced to relinquish control of their privacy in order to survive. Especially when those who have control over your survival are usually less interested in their privacy let alone another individual's. There are some benefits to having a device with you, for things like 2FA. But, I think sometimes its outweighed by the ways they can, will, and do get used to invade your life.



I think that it is just in Europe mostly the case. Because there aren't much jobs at highest paid level, companies ask for more, but they also give more. You can get car, phone, even flat. US is a much different story, and mentalities are different. What is accepted in Europe would not in US.
Asia is actually most efficient and foremost interesting. Companies (or countries) are efficiently supported what interest them the most.
North... actually there won't be, won't be ice or anything. Planet is polluted, damaged,...


----------



## linux->bsd (Mar 28, 2019)

AlexanderProphet said:


> Lol. I am tech literate, I just have different priorities. This kinda reminds me of when vegans get wound up about others not being vegan. It's great that you'd rather suffer than be involved with wrongdoing but have respect for those who choose not to suffer.



You misunderstood: I wasn't saying you're tech-illiterate. I'm saying there are tech-literate people that recognize the folly of your approach to technology and are fighting to undo your effect. Unfortunately, I cannot have respect for your choice because of how negatively it affects me and the people around me. Otherwise, my rule of thumb is let people do whatever the hell they want as long as it doesn't negatively affect me -- that reads a lot more selfish than it sounds in my head.


----------



## PMc (Mar 28, 2019)

AlexanderProphet said:


> Lol. I am tech literate, I just have different priorities. This kinda reminds me of when vegans get wound up about others not being vegan. It's great that you'd rather suffer than be involved with wrongdoing but have respect for those who choose not to suffer.



I would say, rightfully so. Because it makes no difference. It makes no difference if You or I or anybody decides to [not] use whatever gadget or app. Even if millions and millions of people would decide to not use facebook, that would make a difference only in the reported figures, not in the applied practices.
But then ...



linux->bsd said:


> Oh man, you are my worst nightmare. It's people like you that convince app developers and their parent companies that's it's okay to violate their users' privacy



... if we start to put the blame on each other ("it is just you, because you do not behave in a way I want you to behave"), then we got exactly to the place where the powers-that-be want us to be: quarreling against each other for their behaviour - identifying scapegoats instead of responsibles.


----------



## linux->bsd (Mar 28, 2019)

PMc said:


> ... if we start to put the blame on each other ("it is just you, because you do not behave in a way I want you to behave"), then we got exactly to the place where the powers-that-be want us to be: quarreling against each other for their behaviour - identifying scapegoats instead of responsibles.



But I can't reach Google or Facebook or the rest of them. I can't even reach my government representatives -- they're sold out to the multination corporations. So I have to start with the people I can reach, namely, fellow technophiles around me. Maybe my approach was wrong though.


----------



## PMc (Mar 28, 2019)

linux->bsd said:


> But I can't reach Google or Facebook or the rest of them. I can't even reach my government representatives -- they're sold out to the multination corporations.


I know.



> So I have to start with the people I can reach, namely, fellow technophiles around me. Maybe my approach was wrong though.



It is certainly important to talk about the matter and create awareness. But for one person you might convince to change behaviour, there will be ten others who do not even understand the issue. 
And worse: for one you convince there may be another who gets angry because You appear to want to take away their play-thing - and that's not good at all, because it creates bad mood, and: divided we fall.


----------



## sidetone (Mar 28, 2019)

I don't know why 1 person gets blamed, when even those of us who are aware don't have much more choice for mobile Internet use.


linux->bsd said:


> But I can't reach Google or Facebook or the rest of them. I can't even reach my government representatives -- they're sold out to the multination corporations. So I have to start with the people I can reach, namely, fellow technophiles around me. Maybe my approach was wrong though.


Facebook doesn't care what anyone thinks, until their funds are threatened they'll pretend. Their purpose is to abuse, not listen. Asking Facebook to do something is futile, except they'll just use that to identify you further. 

Facebook:
Messages without a phone number, email, DOB and name will be rejected. 
"Facebook, stop stealing people's information." << ignore message 🗑, useful data  🗃 : email, name, phone number,  DOB, tone of letter, passive assertive, or aggressive voice, IP >>
--> Sell data to pharmaceutical company for blood pressure medications, then sell data to telemarketer spammers.  
--> Further processing: Did user volunteer additional information? How can can Facebook exploit user data? Is data amusing to Mark "" Zuckerberg? Yes? No? 
--> 

Google isn't as bad, but there are other options. Duckduckgo, Startpage and Qwant.

Flashplayer didn't care that their product was unsatisfactory and inaccessible.

Facebook had to answer to Congress. Your Senator takes a tally (in my basic perception and an inaccurate tally), because they answer to too many people (interests and PACs) to give customized responses. Your Representative is meant to represent a smaller population.


----------



## Datapanic (Mar 28, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> Bit lazy today, nice place to live  In EU it is sold. About 1000 euros for a good one BB.


1000 euros for a BB?  How much for a Palm5?


----------



## Spartrekus (Mar 28, 2019)

linux->bsd said:


> Otherwise, my rule of thumb is let people do whatever the hell they want as long as it doesn't negatively affect me.


Exactly.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Mar 28, 2019)

linux->bsd said:


> I can't even reach my government representatives


This is far easier than many people think and I've done it a few times myself so you should try it sometime.


----------



## Crivens (Mar 28, 2019)

drhowarddrfine said:


> This is far easier than many people think and I've done it a few times myself so you should try it sometime.


Same here. But talking to someone does not mean you reach them, let alone convince them of something.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Mar 28, 2019)

Crivens True but many people also think politicians should change their mind just because they contacted them and forget there are a lot of constituents--tens to hundreds of thousands--with opposing views or there just isn't enough time on the agenda or it's not important enough compared to other issues. For example,

I live across the street from a city park. The speed limit is 40MPH and you I'm sure you know many people don't go anywhere near 40MPH and I often claim they use that area as a launch ramp, gunning their engines to speed up. Worse is there a grade school next to the park and two crosswalks. The street is maintained by the state street department so I called my representative and was put in touch with one of her office people. He told me he comes this way home and doesn't feel there is an issue but did recognize that three connecting streets have a speed limit of 35MPH which, to him, doesn't make sense. However, two years later, nothing has come of this.

My favorite example of contacting representatives is when my son applied for admission to the state police academy. He is homeschooled and doesn't have a high school diploma but he graduated, summa cum laude, from the state university with a degree in Criminal Justice. The admissions department rejected him for not having a high school diploma. I contacted my state representative's office and the lady who answered the phone said she would get back to me. I never think that's a good thing to hear but, 15 minutes later, I'm on conference call with that lady and someone from admissions for the police academy.

Sounding quite flustered, the admissions officer said, "I never though I'd ever be contacted by a state representative about such things!". The state representative asked, "Doesn't a degree from the university trump any high school diploma?" To which the admissions officer agreed and my son was immediately accepted to the academy.

So one may not get directly through to the representative themselves but it's not difficult to get things accomplished through their office, or at least attempts made, even if they don't go your way.


----------



## sidetone (Apr 3, 2019)

What a creep.

Facebook now requires new users to give up their email password. So the data he collected wasn't enough for him, that he needs to read your personal emails? Then I expect him to release that publicly, as he's done with data before without consent.

At the same time, this creep says he wants to change the Internet.

In the past he wanted phone numbers for sign in, then he uses that information to sell.

Zuckerberg is beginning to sound like a Scientologist or a religious run oppressive government. He belongs in jail sooner or later. What's next, the perverted nerd will verify that facebook users are wearing a gray shirt with a timestamped photo to log in?

If it wasn't bad enough before, who would give up their email password for inconvenience or to let this little creep sift through even more of their privacy to sell to advertisers? This is what people without principle who abuse power do, push the boundary of what they can get away with and the pervert nerd is really pushing it. He's not only pushing it with current and potential users, he's pushing it with lawmakers.

I never used facebook, and I never saw its utility. What's sad is that for webpage ranking, facebook shares is a metric for traffic.


----------



## tedbell (Apr 3, 2019)

Zuckerberg is just a common loser. Probably mad that he never became cool when he got rich. Once a loser always a loser. Thankfully the FB exodus continues.


----------



## sidetone (Apr 3, 2019)

Loser doesn't describe his viciousness. Popular or not, that's a bad person that should never be given authority, nor trusted. They say power corrupts, but maybe it just exposes who a person really is.

Maybe his lack of personality has to do with his lack of likability. I wonder if his stupid parents drank too much Heineken during his pregnancy and he had mental development problems. It's not the general public's fault he's like that.


----------



## Crivens (Apr 3, 2019)

It's not so much power that corrupts people but the lack of accountability. The lack of consequences. Or why do you think false accusations are more than 80% in some places? That's a police number, so officials do know the accusation is false in most of the cases, but there is no actual consequence for the accuser.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Apr 4, 2019)

sidetone said:


> This is what people without principle who abuse power do, push the boundary of what they can get away with and the pervert nerd is really pushing it. He's not only pushing it with current and potential users, he's pushing it with lawmakers.



People with power usually want more power.



> In one of the Berkeley studies, drivers of high-status cars like Mercedes and BMWs cut off other drivers 30% of the time, compared to only 7% for the lowest-status cars. They also failed to yield to pedestrians almost half the time.
> 
> Another study proved powerful people are indeed more likely to take candy from a baby. When given permission to take sweets intended for children down the hall, college students who saw themselves as having high socioeconomic status took about twice as much candy as the poorer participants.
> *The researchers believe power has a somewhat dehumanizing effect on people, and the powerful are more self-focused and less empathetic.*
> ...



I could cite an example of that happening but won't.


----------



## youngunix (Apr 4, 2019)

While you are on the ether, try to be more like a rootkit and blend in looking like...


----------



## sidetone (Apr 4, 2019)

I read that there are some with power who used it for good, because they had principle, knew the difference between right and wrong, or were sympathetic. For example Lincoln.

The ones with no principles are the ones who abuse power. They are conformists. When they don't have power, they are restrained, quiet and go with the flock. The more power they get, the more social norms they break. They are quiet as not to alarm people who can check them before they gain power.

It's the ones who seek power, and someone else who had power didn't abuse it, or didn't take it to that level, but messed up and didn't notice the other person was not right. People like Noriega, Kim Sung, and Stalin, they serve someone else or a cause, but they are serving themselves, until they can just do that, then they dispose of that cause or person. Arguably, some who abuse power are worse in nature, but then one becomes as bad as the other.

Perhaps everyone is corrupted by power, but some actively seek it who were always cruel inside, and some are not solid enough to begin with. Others may be susceptible to being corrupted, but they did not follow the characteristics of those consolidating power. The person who messed up and delegated power to someone rotten wasn't seeking it, and they didn't abuse it for selfishness.









						Why Power Corrupts
					

New research digs deeper into the social science behind why power brings out the best in some people and the worst in others




					www.smithsonianmag.com
				





> “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power. - Abraham Lincoln


Actually, don't!


----------



## Birdy (Apr 4, 2019)

_



			We have, I fear, confused power with greatness. - Stewart Udall
		
Click to expand...

_To which I'd add "_...and authority_".


----------



## sidetone (Apr 4, 2019)

__





						540 Million Facebook User Records Exposed Online, Plus Passwords, Comments, and More
					

Researchers at the cybersecurity firm UpGuard on Wednesday said they had discovered the existence of two datasets together containing the personal data of hundreds of millions of Facebook users. Both were left publicly accessible.




					gizmodo.com
				




Too soon.

Trust them with your email passwords?


----------



## youngunix (Apr 4, 2019)

I keep warning everyone I know about those specific types of social media and they ask me "what do you use?". I sincerely reply, Reddit, IRC & Forum boards, they laugh in confusion followed by immediate silence. Most people want to be sheep, which gives the illusion to those that lust over power and control that everyone is "OKAY" with being controlled and manipulated. You see, the problem is really not those that crave control but the masses that want to be controlled.


----------



## Deleted member 48958 (Apr 4, 2019)

youngunix said:


> the problem is really not those that crave control but the masses that want to be controlled.


And while those masses will exist, theу will need a shepherd,
and while such need is exist, "friendly" corporations will help those naive animals,
to store and to save information about them, their photos, some erotic content... phone numbers,
gps locations, etc. And of course, they will help to store and to spend their money, meanwhile creating
their ideology and demonic, material cult. While most of people are divine by its nature, but while you're
in the darkness, you'll see nothing, only shiny popular things and other meaningless crap.
Destroy the darkness with the light from your heart.


----------



## rufwoof (Apr 4, 2019)

youngunix said:


> I keep warning everyone I know about those specific types of social media and they ask me "what do you use?". I sincerely reply, Reddit, IRC & Forum boards, they laugh in confusion followed by immediate silence. Most people want to be sheep, which gives the illusion to those that lust over power and control that everyone is "OKAY" with being controlled and manipulated. You see, the problem is really not those that crave control but the masses that want to be controlled.


ssh reddibox.us ... nice for if you just want to browse (not post). hashbang.sh ... for email and irc (and textual type browsers such as lynx). www1 rather than the advertisement paid for www2 that in return accepts/targets profiling each individual in order that they can better target advertisements (brainwash/mind control). When your phone in your pocket, or facial recognition technology enables a specific advert to be displayed on the electronic billboard you're approaching then www2 is clearly working (for the media). Individuals are reduced to nothing more than numbers and vacuums to be behaviour programmed. Me ... seemingly like you, still prefer www1 for the culture, friendliness and available expertise - without the barrage of advertisments. More Unix philosophy (simple/text/file). Only using www2 when I have to or convienient to do so.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Apr 4, 2019)

youngunix said:


> Most people want to be sheep, which gives the illusion to those that lust over power and control that everyone is "OKAY" with being controlled and manipulated. You see, the problem is really not those that crave control but the masses that want to be controlled.



A good Shepard cares about their flock.

I'm trying to be nice and it's hard when you're tempting me like that...


----------



## youngunix (Apr 4, 2019)

Trihexagonal said:


> A good Shepard cares about their flock.
> 
> I'm trying to be nice and it's hard when you're tempting me like that...


Keyword "good".


----------



## youngunix (Apr 4, 2019)

ILUXA said:


> And while those masses will exist, theу will need a shepherd,
> and while such need is exist, "friendly" corporations will help those naive animals,
> to store and to save information about them, their photos, some erotic content... phone numbers,
> gps locations, etc. And of course, they will help to store and to spend their money, meanwhile creating
> ...


well said lad, god bless you.


----------



## youngunix (Apr 4, 2019)

rufwoof said:


> ssh reddibox.us ... nice for if you just want to browse (not post). hashbang.sh ... for email and irc (and textual type browsers such as lynx). www1 rather than the advertisement paid for www2 that in return accepts/targets profiling each individual in order that they can better target advertisements (brainwash/mind control). When your phone in your pocket, or facial recognition technology enables a specific advert to be displayed on the electronic billboard you're approaching then www2 is clearly working (for the media). Individuals are reduced to nothing more than numbers and vacuums to be behaviour programmed. Me ... seemingly like you, still prefer www1 for the culture, friendliness and available expertise - without the barrage of advertisments. More Unix philosophy (simple/text/file). Only using www2 when I have to or convienient to do so.


As you can see, there are a variety of tools to avoid being mined like a metal. But the weak can only see the green grass.


----------



## Spartrekus (Apr 10, 2019)

sidetone said:


> What a creep.
> 
> Facebook now requires new users to give up their email password. So the data he collected wasn't enough for him, that he needs to read your personal emails? Then I expect him to release that publicly, as he's done with data before without consent.
> 
> ...



Informatics is like a religion.
The crusades for using Facebook, google, and microsoft products, like old templar preaching the good. 

It is better to stay opensource and keep freedom.


----------



## sidetone (Apr 10, 2019)

Spartrekus said:


> Informatics is like a religion.
> The crusades for using Facebook, google, and microsoft products, like old templar preaching the good.
> 
> It is better to stay opensource and keep freedom.


Google promoted opensource (Summer of Code, contributions to XMPP, Go). It's difficult to tell if their agenda is good, neutral, bad or some combination of those based on their opinion. Still, its not good to trust a company with everything, even one that's not bad, whether they get hacked, or for unforseen consequences.

Facebook has a bad agenda, and Bill Gates of Microsoft had a big ego.


----------



## malavon (Apr 10, 2019)

sidetone said:


> Google promoted opensource (Summer of Code, contributions to XMPP, Go). It's difficult to tell if their agenda is good, neutral, bad or some combination of those based on their opinion. Still, its not good to trust a company with everything, even one that's not bad, whether they get hacked, or for unforseen consequences.


Actually, I can help you there. I'd say Google is by far the most evil corporation I've ever heard of. More evil than tobacco companies, weapons manufacturers or anything.
They aren't in it for the money. Google is in it to force their political views upon the world. That's a real 1984 for you. Their utopia is literally the "Lego Movie". (must watch  )
The sad thing is that people still aren't convinced of that because of their marketing department. The "Do no Evil" slogan and other marketing has apparently worked very
well on the masses.
I have one thing for you to view and dissect: "The Selfish Ledger", a leaked internal video. Google's PR department did a lot of work to convince people that it was just a
mind exercise to see if it was feasible. That's why they left it online for all to see. If they had tried to cover it up, they risked this from going mainstream. Now, newspaper
coverage was almost non-existent. Of course, journalists aren't really tech-savvy enough to understand what this actually meant. They'd probably praise it into heaven if
it were actually released as a "product".

Remember the Cambridge Analytica Facebook scandal? There, personal data was used to manipulate people voting for a certain candidate. Imagine what a company with
access to your e-mails (inner thoughts, business contacts, possibly medical history ...) , phone records (texts, calls, even your voice and the way you speak, emotional state...),
gps locations (friends' and families' houses, stores you shop & restaurants you eat, doctor/hospital visits, basically everywhere you go...) could do to manipulate you into
a certain thinking pattern. They have everything they need to do this. Why do you think they're constantly trying to get information from inside people's home by buying
smart device companies etc? Why did they invent Google Now, a service which simply consists of sending everything you and anyone near you say to Google's servers?
The more they know about you, the easier it is for them to manipulate you.

If they were in it for the money, I'd be awed. But they're not, they've proven that in the past and will prove again in the (Orwellian?) future.


----------



## sidetone (Apr 10, 2019)

I didn't know if Google is evil, but it is something that has to be considered. There is definitely no reason to trust them, as you are right about marketing departments. They will always try to convince you of what they want you to think about them. It couldn't be assumed Google is using it for intentionally bad purposes, but in the end, even if good is intended, there will be a lot of ethical dilemas, where Google is not qualified to make every distinction. As someone said above, they're not God, and people including CEOs have potential to abuse power. Anyone who desires power, especially in this way, can't be trusted. Look at the hold some kept on people in their country, to creating religion based on themselves, watching people, encouraging spying. They use charisma, or convince others they are innocent. Look at Scientology, which is worse than a confession booth, it uses secrets to subjugate and manipulate. It appeared as if the representative from Google was saying, if you do something bad in their opinion, it will be exposed, and as if they were keeping tabs on that. Whatever Google's purpose, there's unacceptable potential for abuse.


malavon said:


> Remember the Cambridge Analytica Facebook scandal? There, personal data was used to manipulate people voting for a certain candidate.


That particular incident was about Facebook, but it can be applied to any company for potential of abuse.


> Imagine what a company with
> access to your e-mails (inner thoughts, business contacts, possibly medical history ...) , phone records (texts, calls, even your voice and the way you speak, emotional state...),
> gps locations (friends' and families' houses, stores you shop & restaurants you eat, doctor/hospital visits, basically everywhere you go...) could do to manipulate you into
> a certain thinking pattern. They have everything they need to do this.


I've always gotten that. John Henry could only temporarily go up against a machine, and AI will always beat us in board games, and can do that all day long, while we sleep or rest for a big part of the day. Some have beaten AI, but very few, they need sleep, and they can't do it regularly, and they probably can't beat it anymore.

Maybe you stumbled on something. When I can't make definite conclusions on assumptions whether something is true, there's no valid reason for Google or any other company to do that. If they weren't using it for intentionally evil purposes (which is now kind of doubtful), they are going to use it for maintaining elitism or for preserving themselves, while good or not inherently bad people don't get protections from harsh realities or evil actors, which would still be evil.

What does anyone make of Google's promotion of opensource? I don't know what to make of that. Kind of like, get its foot in the door, or software freedom?


----------



## malavon (Apr 10, 2019)

sidetone said:


> Maybe you stumbled on something. When I can't make definite conclusions on assumptions, there's no valid reason for Google or any other company to do that.


You didn't watch the video did you? :-D I put a link inside my original post for the people who don't want to google it (yes, pun intended).


----------



## sidetone (Apr 10, 2019)

malavon said:


> You didn't watch the video did you?


I was getting there. Also, Youtube is owned by Google.
Edit: _A stretch of the word pun.









						Google’s Selfish Ledger is an unsettling vision of Silicon Valley social engineering
					

How total data collection could reshape society.




					www.theverge.com
				



_


----------



## malavon (Apr 10, 2019)

sidetone said:


> I was getting there. Also, Youtube is owned by Google.


Addressed that as well with "That's why they left it online for all to see"


----------



## Spartrekus (Apr 10, 2019)

sidetone said:


> Google promoted opensource (Summer of Code, contributions to XMPP, Go). It's difficult to tell if their agenda is good, neutral, bad or some combination of those based on their opinion. Still, its not good to trust a company with everything, even one that's not bad, whether they get hacked, or for unforseen consequences.
> 
> Facebook has a bad agenda, and Bill Gates of Microsoft had a big ego.





sidetone said:


> I didn't know if Google is evil, but it is something that has to be considered. There is definitely no reason to trust them, as you are right about marketing departments. They will always try to convince you of what they want you to think about them. It couldn't be assumed Google is using it for intentionally bad purposes, but in the end, even if good is intended, there will be a lot of ethical dilemas, where Google is not qualified to make every distinction. As someone said above, they're not God, and people including CEOs have potential to abuse power. Anyone who desires power, especially in this way, can't be trusted. Look at the hold some kept on people in their country, to creating religion based on themselves, watching people, encouraging spying. They use charisma, or convince others they are innocent. Look at Scientology, which is worse than a confession booth, it uses secrets to subjugate and manipulate. It appeared as if the representative from Google was saying, if you do something bad in their opinion, it will be exposed, and as if they were keeping tabs on that. Whatever Google's purpose, there's unacceptable potential for abuse.
> 
> That particular incident was about Facebook, but it can be applied to any company for potential of abuse.
> 
> ...



You can trust them, definitely that it is for big business. As soon as there is business from informatic's mongers, you can expect spying and removing freedom. However, services for services does harm the economy.

The best would be that you must have a Google smartphone or nano embedded devices always with you, to allow most livings, to deal with bank, to pay in shops, ... to order a pizza, to simply turn on TV, to start the wash machine,... That makes your life easier, to have more entertainment, but then .... revolution to get back the most important:  freedom of living.


----------



## sidetone (May 5, 2019)

Facebook wants to start their own cryptocurrency.

What a sham.


----------



## hitest (May 12, 2019)

tedbell said:


> Thankfully the FB exodus continues.



I have no regrets about deleting my FB account.  It is good to be free of all social media platforms.  Corporate social media surveillance platforms are detrimental.


----------



## xtremae (May 12, 2019)

It would be interesting to provide an estimate of how many man hours are spent on these platforms on a daily basis.


----------



## sidetone (May 16, 2019)

Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal, according to recruiters who worked there









						Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal, according to recruiters who worked there
					

Former Facebook recruiters told CNBC that the tech company has experienced a significant decrease in its job offer acceptance rates.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## ralphbsz (May 17, 2019)

While this is definitely true, the reality is (as usual) more complex.  To begin with, some of Facebook's big competitors have also had their share of scandals.  And of the smaller ones (like Palantir and Uber), the scandals or problems have been worse: look at the customers of Palantir (not usually the kind of industry that young software engineers want to be associated with), and the sexual culture at Uber (where a few years ago one got the feeling that they hired women mostly to provide amusement to its founder and CEO).  At the same time, the big traditional IT companies (HP, IBM, Oracle=Sun) are struggling badly, and young successful people don't want to work there.  And as much as Facebook is seen from the outside as mostly a privacy violating machine, quite a few folks who work there still see themselves as a force for good: they are creating a machine that allows people to communicate effectively with other people.


----------



## olafz (May 21, 2019)

linux->bsd said:


> It's a shame CyanogenMod imploded the way it did.


Yes, but I think they had imploded themselves. And today we have Lineage OS as a successor.


----------



## Chea (May 22, 2019)

Here's a fun read about how google tracks you as well. 
Google Data Collection . 

I've always heard that if you want to use facebook on your phone to keep it in its own browser. I'm glad I no longer have a FB account.


----------



## Sevendogsbsd (May 22, 2019)

I use facebook and twitter. FB is used mainly to annoy and confuse my wife with tech posts. I do not have the FB app on my phone and only access it using my browser. Most FB posting is from this laptop. I am pretty observant about apps on my phone and also use netstat to check outgoing traffic. I also neuter app permissions if possible, and pull perms from apps when I don't see a logical reason for them to have a specific permission. I know we are tracked by various apps on our phones but there is some functionality that is just useful and I use it so I don't really care if google tracks me.


----------



## sidetone (May 26, 2019)

This headline is so hilarious.








						Facebook has a plan to stop revenge porn—by collecting your nudes
					

Australia is the latest country to partner with the social network to tackle image-based abuse.




					mashable.com


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (May 26, 2019)

sidetone said:


> This headline is so hilarious.
> Facebook asks users to upload nude photos to ensure they are not used for 'revenge porn': The site will catalogue images and then ban them from being shared on the site
> 
> 
> ...


Now there's a hack waiting to happen. lol


----------



## sidetone (May 26, 2019)

No hack necessary. Zuckerberg infringes private user data to public view for free, but more often than not, he also says show me the money. I don't know which is more important to Zuckerberg, humiliating his user base or making money. I'm a bit surprised that someone like him did not do both at every opportunity. Maybe he was advertising to buyers of data when he made private user data public without consent.


----------



## sidetone (Sep 5, 2019)

Senator: Mark Zuckerberg should face “the possibility of a prison term”
					

"He ought to be held personally accountable," Ron Wyden (D-OR) said.




					arstechnica.com


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Sep 5, 2019)

sidetone said:


> Senator: Mark Zuckerberg should face “the possibility of a prison term”
> 
> 
> "He ought to be held personally accountable," Ron Wyden (D-OR) said.
> ...



Should face the possibility of a prison term? "He ought to be held personally accountable?" Sounds about right. I could name several other prominent public figures who fall into the "should" and "ought to" category, none of which did a day for their heinous habitude.

Aside from our two-tier legal system, they'll never be able to put together a Judge, prosecution team and jury of his "peers" who don't use Facebook. Nobody else would return a guilty verdict for fear of not being able to post what they had for breakfast.


----------



## Birdy (Sep 5, 2019)

To set an example FB - and others - should be destroyed, their executives stripped of their assets and thrown in jail for the rest of their lives. Complicit politicians & judges as well.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Sep 5, 2019)

Birdy said:


> To set an example FB - and others - should be destroyed, their executives stripped of their assets and thrown in jail for the rest of their lives.



That's good enough for the Red Devil's Advocate. We have a conviction. Bailiff, escort the prisoner to his new quarters.









						Burglary ring used social media to track affluent Houston residents and steal art, jewelry and guns
					

A widespread burglary ring used social media to track affluent Houston-area residents to steal high-priced art, jewelry, computers, and guns.




					abcnews.go.com
				




Though the article did not state precisely which social media platforms they were using (the author a fearful Facebook user), odds are Inmate Zuckerburg helped facilitate the admission of their crimes so they "ought to" get along well and he "should" feel right at home.


----------



## ShelLuser (Sep 5, 2019)

For the record: I didn't read the whole thread but still wanted to respond   and yes: I know the thread is kinda old.



hukadan said:


> This videos reminds me why I don't have a smartphone. I really like the part where the app, when opting-out, actually send more data to Facebook.


This has nothing to do with a smartphone nor Android but "social" media in general. I mean... you _do_ realize that Facebook can also easily track you while browsing on a PC?  Just being logged into Facebook and visiting websites which have some of those "social" media widgets (you know: 'share on ....') will be enough for Big brother to know you that you visited that place. The kind of information they'll also happily store away for you.

The solution is simple: either don't use Facebook or make sure you're not always logged in.

I prefer #1...  I'm not on Facebook, Twitter or any other of that nonsense.


----------



## CraigHB (Sep 5, 2019)

Did the same, removed social media accounts.  Family talked me into creating them to stay in touch, otherwise would not have created them in the first place.  I came to the realization I just don't want myself posted on the internet like that.  Privacy is becoming harder to come by every day and it seems most people just give it up without a second thought.

I don't use a "smart phone" and it's getting harder all the time to find basic phones.  My service provider is going to obsolete 3G in a couple years which will push me into a smart phone and double my bill.  There will be no basic 4G phones based on what I've seen so far.  It's enough to start believing in conspiracy.

I fully agree the issue of privacy has moved from government to corporate business.  They want your personal information to trade as a commodity.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Sep 6, 2019)

CraigHB said:


> I came to the realization I just don't want myself posted on the internet like that.  Privacy is becoming harder to come by every day and it seems most people just give it up without a second thought.



Having all kinds of personal information and photos of yourself online is a Cardinal Mistake. Take my word for it.

If I have been given reason enough to take intense interest in someone the first thing I do is check for social media accounts and pictures to see who I'm dealing with. That might be as far as I take it and let it go. It would have to be pretty serious to start a folder on someone, but I have before and that's generally not a good thing. I never delete them.

I have a vivid imagination and a bag of tricks I cooked up for personal use I won't relate here. Mostly annoyances and none of them meant to bring a Happy Happy Joy Joy moment, some less joyful than others. It's better to give than to receive and you don't want to be on the bad end of the stick.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Sep 6, 2019)

Over the past 15 years, I've had two whack jobs from reddit track me down cause I irritated them. One called me on the phone when I used to have a landline. The other found my personal web site and posted that.

80% of everyone on reddit are kids under 20 and whack jobs so it's too be expected.


----------



## recluce (Sep 6, 2019)

tedbell said:


> CM is now LineageOS and I'm running version 15.1 (Android 8.1) on my S5. CM is not AOSP. It's its own version taken from Android sources. Most custom ROMS are based on either CM or AOSP. Neither are compatible. There are also a handful of custom ROMS taken from Touchwiz that were debloated.



Unfortunately, LineageOS kind of imploded itself. With the move to LineageOS 15, they cut support for a lot of devices and very few newer devices are supported (I assume because they do not allow unlocking the boot-loader).


----------

