LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   'Smart' phones: the new security blankets (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/smart-phones-the-new-security-blankets-4175665765/)

cynwulf 01-08-2020 04:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6075858)
No you didn't. You used a more extreme term according to Websters Dictionary

I've reread the pertinent parts of the thread and though you've used what I would loosely term some "bravado", I can't isolate any specific hyperbole/exaggeration - so I retract that. I also have to admit that the thread has gone off on multiple tangents (RF emissions as one example) and at this stage, for me it's all rather confused - and I will probably just call it a day after this post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6075858)
This was indeed a serious mistake on my part. The words are there but escaped the quote leader tag. It was an accident but I am responsible and I sincerely apologize for my error both in what I concluded and how I came to that conclusion. You did in fact state that it was opinion.

Fair enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6075858)
Incidentally I offered this apology because it is my responsibility to answer for my mistakes even though in this case that is a more difficult "pill to swallow" considering you refer to me as being both hyperbolic and pedantic, both substantial personal insults.

While I still assert that you've been rather pedantic in this thread - you've picked over wording and definitions - and it comes across a strategy to undermine the arguments of your perceived "opposition" - there was no desire to insult by using that particular term. I merely think you have a strong desire to be always perceived right, to correct what you perceive as misinformation and in many ways it comes across that you like to win arguments for the sake of winning them.

I on the other hand have no desire to win arguments, just to debate/discuss and would not go out of my way to rubbish and dismiss all opinions and make demands for scientific white papers every time something remotely vague or unverified is posted by someone on the WWW.
Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6075858)
I really don't understand your need to attack me or get heated at all. Until the insults I had no argument with you, just with ideas and about smartphones for crying out loud.... not exactly political or religious hotbed stuff.

It may come across as "heated" it isn't. We have different styles, but as I see it, you use some dismissive and condescending comments in your posts - and that can come across as "insulting" for some - bear in mind that this forum is accessible from around the world and perhaps cultural differences play a part. But when all is said and done, there was no intention on my part to insult, so I do apologise if that's how it came across.
Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6075858)
I make a distinction between being addicted to heroin and in the habit of regularly buying lottery tickets and apparently you do not.

This may be what I think of as hyperbole and misrepresentation - it's also somewhat condescending.

I do make a distinction (from an earlier post):

Quote:

Originally Posted by cynwulf (Post 6075170)
Last time I checked, addiction was a disorder of the brain. Which in effect means that not just psychoactive drugs can be addictive. So long as whatever it is leads to stimulation of the reward pathways - releasing dopamine and opioids, it is technically an addiction. So gambling, social networks, computer gaming, etc, can all be addictive. There is a huge difference between that and e.g. heroin addiction, but the seriousness of one, particularly withdrawal or what lengths people will go to to get their "fix", does not simply cancel out the other.

Once again, you have picked two extreme examples and bundled them into one statement seeking to misrepresent my opinion as so much poppycock. For someone who is supposedly very much about "precision" (as applied to others), you should try reading, quoting and responding with the same level of precision.

It's interesting that I largely agree with jsb's latest post, but jsb's end his post in stating that he agrees with you...

Again I think this another matter of semantics - I and others have used the term "smartphone addiction". I was never referring to the physical device (i.e. if you take out the battery and just carry it around, it cannot be addictive and raise your dopamine levels), but its functions, the software it hosts and its portability and the concept behind it are all geared towards addiction.

Opinion time again:

I also maintain that there is "gaming addiction", "online gambling addiction" and "social media" addiction, but the lines are blurred. The smartphone is the facilitator. My question is - is a laptop computer - the same kind of facilitator?

For me the smartphone adds "the convenience factor", it is designed around the apps and around social media and communications in general, it's not the other way around. For lack of any better expression, it's concealable - and it's mobile. An addict is severely limited in their addiction if they have have to hump a laptop around in a bag. They cannot walk around in the street or sit on public transport using a laptop for their social media "habit".

I agree in part that "social media addiction" and similar are being conflated with an admittedly theoretical dependence on the devices themselves. ondoho mentioned 50%, I would say the split is very different. The hardware plays a part - it's plays a psychological role mainly based on the aesthetics, "features" and UI of the OS, but software wise, the access to "social media" is a bigger pull than an OS most don't understand nor care about. But "social media" and the devices are a bit of a "horse and carriage" scenario for most - e.g. how many would buy a phone which has no access to social media sites by design? And how many would sign up to a "social media" site, which has no "app" for the popular phone OS? With "social media" it's all about numbers after all.

jsbjsb001 01-08-2020 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cynwulf (Post 6075952)
...
I also maintain that there is "gaming addiction", "online gambling addiction" and "social media" addiction, but the lines are blurred. The smartphone is the facilitator. My question is - is a laptop computer - the same kind of facilitator?

This was basically the very point I was making earlier on, in that; while I would use the "enabler" rather than the word "facilitator", whichever word we wish to use; the hardware itself (and I would also say the software too) simply "enables" someone to "fulfill" their "addiction" to social media or whatever else - therefore it's not the smartphone itself that's "addictive". I would agree with you cynwulf that a laptop, and for that matter any computing device that can be used for things like social media, gaming, etc would also be "enablers" or "facilitators" - whichever words we once again prefer. Therefore the smartphone itself isn't much, if any different in that particular regard.

I think if you say a smartphone itself is "addictive", then by extension, that would also mean a laptop or desktop PC, tablet, etc must also be "addictive" (not saying you were saying that BTW).

This is where the portability and the "convenience factor" come in that you talk about below:

Quote:

For me the smartphone adds "the convenience factor", it is designed around the apps and around social media and communications in general, it's not the other way around. For lack of any better expression, it's concealable - and it's mobile. An addict is severely limited in their addiction if they have have to hump a laptop around in a bag. They cannot walk around in the street or sit on public transport using a laptop for their social media "habit".
Quote:

I agree in part that "social media addiction" and similar are being conflated with an admittedly theoretical dependence on the devices themselves. ondoho mentioned 50%, I would say the split is very different. The hardware plays a part - it's plays a psychological role mainly based on the aesthetics, "features" and UI of the OS, but software wise, the access to "social media" is a bigger pull than an OS most don't understand nor care about.
...
I think this is where we are perhaps getting confused/conflating things. I'd also say that whether or not smartphone manufacturers design them to be "addictive" is probably another debate, versus whether or not one CAN actually make a smartphone itself "addictive" - which I'm not sure they could, even if they wanted to/are trying to...

enorbet 01-08-2020 09:58 AM

Hello again cynwulf. I do hope you haven't left the conversation because I think we are gaining some ground, narrowing down the initially perceived differences to actual differences. I actually think this is at the same time harder with plain text absent physical cues but also easier due to having a fixed record to refer back to and not relying on just memory.

In any case I will try to keep my reply to your last post shorter. First I think it might be instructive to note that you say you perceive that I "like to win arguments" right on the heels of my admitting a fairly serious mistake and overtly and sincerely apologizing for that mistake. Is that not a bit of a contradiction? FWIW I really can't help my "over wording". I talk this way. I started college as an Engineering major and ended as an English Literature major with engineering minor. It is both a blessing and a curse.

As for insults, I accept your explanation and step down from that perception but I would like to point out that at least in one case, that of my reference to heroin vs/ regular lottery ticket purchase, which you see as hyperbole, that regular lottery ticket purchase is a form of what I think you would call "gambling addiction" and I'm pretty close to that myself as gambling addiction at the very least is a habit which is cultivated and in some people can become extremely negative even while positives are ignored and lost. It is in that fuzzy in-between area for which I prefer to make a distinction since it does not create the same behavior in everyone, just very small percentages of us.

I'm hoping by explaining that I am by no means trying to simply ignore negative applications of habitual smartphone use and outright deny that some do become so habitualized that they cross that line into self-destructive choices, that people see I am not diametrically opposed to that concept. I also hope I've made it clear that I view the thread title as quite precise since I would imagine few of us consider "the blankie" as a certified addiction, but rather a mildly bad habit.

enorbet 01-20-2020 02:31 PM

OK guys, finally some overview evidence... a study of 40 previous studies by MIT

Here's the full link

https://www.technologyreview.com/f/6...aid.engagement

Here's a shortened one of the same page at MIT

https://tinyurl.com/usg4pof

ondoho 01-20-2020 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6080828)

What a feel-good article.
"But"s come to mind:
They speak about smartphones, then they speak about screen time in general. so which is it?
It still seems kindof obvious to me that kids that spend many hours at "a screen" daily, well into the night, every night, well past bedtime - well, that it's addictive and unhealthy.
What about social media and all that electronic communication. I think that's an important factor; but the article says that "the screen itself" is not to blame. Well duh.

enorbet 01-20-2020 03:26 PM

I still disagree with the use of "addiction" as opposed to "unhealthy habit" but it is something of a matter of degree. However, isn't that the point? The article obviously points out that extreme dependence on any device including "screen time" is unhealthy and should not become a substitute for actually going outside and engaging face-to-face. I'm pretty sure the use of "the screen" is meant to include all digital comm devices - phones, tablets, laptops, and PCs.

Tilly 01-21-2020 05:56 AM

It's a literature review. The original linky can leave a casual reader with the impression that they've done the primary research - they haven't. But the literature review itself (linked in that article) is worthy enough. Like many lit reviews it doesn't actually say anything you didn't suspect already but at least you can use them as 'proof'... It's a cheap way of getting a paper to your name as you don't have to round up a load of people to research on... The actual paper is here...
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...111/jcpp.13190

To really comment I'd have to read the 40 papers and as no one is going to pay me for that I'm not going to be doing it... If one of them had recently got their PhD I'd suspect it was chapter N of a thesis...

@enorbet - I agree. I think the bottom line is all things in moderation... Really, the acid test for me is how many people were texting on their phone under the table during Christmas dinner...and how many will do so on Chinese New Year... And yes, I'd *love* to do *that* research...

Tilly 01-21-2020 11:54 AM

Actually, I've been a bit unfair... they have used the material as secondary research; it is a bit more than a literature survey but I'm not sure how much notice I'd take of it. The other researchers all had their different methods. It feels like comparing cabbages and cars... I can't help feeling one could come to a lot of other 'conclusions' using that method. It really needs a proper study of a reasonable number of users... The trouble with some of these studies is that they are extremely small... And the trouble with humans is that when you study them they know and do all kinds of things you can't account or even allow for...

Crippled 01-21-2020 12:51 PM

The name Smartphone is mislabeled. They should be labeled as to what they really are. They are Spyware/MalwarePhones. There is nothing smart about them, but you could say it's Smarts that it's Spyware/Malware.

Tilly 01-21-2020 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crippled (Post 6081217)
The name Smartphone is mislabeled. They should be labeled as to what they really are. They are Spyware/MalwarePhones. There is nothing smart about them, but you could say it's Smarts that it's Spyware/Malware.

My phone isn't smart and I can't remember the last time I used it so I'm afraid that I don't know much about how they operate. But it is fascinating for me, I'm afraid. Is it a general thing or dependent on phone/provider etc etc?

enorbet 01-22-2020 03:54 AM

Well Crippled, I happen to agree in most cases but not only is that not all bad (web browsers being aware of our "history" has lead me to some founts of information I would never have found on my own) but the biggest problem as I see it with Smartphones is that most can't be turned off. I despise software switches on anything. Give me a damned hardware. old school toggle switch that goes Click! and I know it is dead Off! and I like it. There are a few smartphones with such switches, not exactly old school toggles, but as effective. Many phones are built so we can't even remove the battery to insure it is Off but some do. The more people prefer and buy those would drive the market to where that became common instead of more rare. This is why I mentioned the Pine64 phone after someone else here mentioned the Librem5, which is too expensive for my tastes.

That said, I don't know that will always be true. My Son's life as a businessman would be vastly more difficult and involve a LOT more hours as well as make him far less effective without his Smartphone. His is basically a laptop that fits in his shirt pocket. He can connect it to keyboard, mouse and monitor at home, to his car on the road and whatever he ants the few days he must actually drive into the office, and he is instantly in touch with people and information that makes his life incredibly more enjoyable and effective.

Smartphones are tools and the discipline of tools must be learned or they can cut you.

Crippled 01-22-2020 07:37 AM

enorbet, there are no software switches. They don't let you turn off their Spyware and Malware. The phone doesn't do what I want it to do. It does things on it's own even when I don't want it to. Pine64 phone looks promising if they are ever able to get everything to work and will work with all cell phone carriers. Librem5 is impracticable as it's for those with money to burn. As for web browsers you can lock some of them down like Firefox by going into about:config like is explained here https://restoreprivacy.com/firefox-privacy/ and here. https://gist.github.com/0XDE57/fbd302cef7693e62c769

enorbet 01-22-2020 04:13 PM

Hello again Crippled. :) What I mean by software switching is that the switch(es) don't connect directly to the thing being controlled such as in this case, the power supply. Instead software switches connect to a logic chip that controls any number of components, in this case, the power supply... one step removed from User. This means any kind of software trigger, even one delivered wirelessly, can do the same job(s). This is great on your TV remote but not so cool on things like smartphones and in cars.

I've read that there is some danger with some phones coming with compromising or surveillance software built in to the firmware but that is not universal and any device whose battery can be removed ends that threat until the battery is once again equipped. The Librem 5 and Pine 64 both have software switches but since they have a number of therm and one of those turns off WiFi, that pretty much rules out any external access or control when User doesn't allow it.

The Librem 5 is about 100 bux cheaper than a Pixel 4 and if you look at the features of both then I agree that by comparison the Librem 5 is over-priced but then it does have a different kind of added value than multiple high definition cameras in the form of an unlocked, AFAIK, FOSS Linux OpSys. That should be worth a lot to many here.

The Pine 64 is a bit cheaper and has even less features but sufficient to do most of the things (sans some apps, "some" being rather massive ATM) that most expect from a cellphone these days, and it does dock to double as a home PC as does the Librem 5. Both are more powerful in that role than many towers and laptops I see people ask questions about here on LQN.

These are the specs on the Pine64....

Quote:

Originally Posted by pine64.org
Allwinner A64 (quad core ARM Cortex-A53) SoC with Mali 400-MP2 GPU
2GB LPDDR3 RAM, 16GB eMMC 5.0 flash expandable with bootable microSD card
5.95″ 1440720 LCD touch screen, 18:9 aspect ratio, hardened glass
USB Type-C for power/charging, data and HD digital video output
4G LTE Cat 4 modem (Quectel EG-25G) with worldwide bands
802.11 /b/g/n Wi-Fi, single-band with AP mode
Bluetooth 4.0 + A2DP
GPS, GPS-A, GLONASS localization services
Back/main camera: 5MP, 1/4″ with LED Flash (OV6540)
Front/selfie camera: 2MP, f/2.8, 1/5″ (GC2035)
Accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer and ambient light sensors
Hardware switches for LTE/GNSS, WiFi, Microphone, Speaker and USB (via PCB microswitches); power and volume switches
3000mAh battery (Samsung Galaxy J7 compatible form factor)
Matte black plastic chassis
3.5mm headphone jack
Vibration motor and RGB status LED

LTE-FDD: B1/ B2/ B3/ B4/ B5/ B7/ B8/ B12/ B13/ B18/ B19/ B20/ B25/ B26/ B28
LTE-TDD: B38/ B39/ B40/ B41
WCDMA: B1/ B2/ B4/ B5/ B6/ B8/ B19
GSM: 850/900/1800/1900MHz


I separated and emboldened the connectivity section to demonstrate what I'm slowly learning determines how many different service providers it can function with. It is my understanding that covers the vast majority. It like most phones these days can also connect to the network at home via it's WiFi through your home modem/router, so it looks like to me it already has a lot of the bases covered.

Currently I use Vonage (VOIP) for home voice phone and a simple Tracfone for text, emergencies or anything away from home. I called Tracfone to see if they would handle and allow the Pine 64 and they said, "We don't yet offer those at our online store but it will work just fine". AFAIK major carriers like Verizon and AT&T work with the above listed LTEs. I don't see connectivity as much of a problem or obstacle even at this very early date for true Linux phones. On some darker days I might even enjoy Ballmer and Billy groaning everytime I power it up and make a call. I have almost a full year before I'm forced to change my hardware and I don't yet know what is my best option for provider but I am leaning pretty heavily toward Pine 64 right now.

Crippled 01-22-2020 09:09 PM

[QUOTE]
Quote:

Originally Posted by enorbet (Post 6081732)
Hello again Crippled. :) What I mean by software switching is that the switch(es) don't connect directly to the thing being controlled such as in this case, the power supply. Instead software switches connect to a logic chip that controls any number of components, in this case, the power supply... one step removed from User. This means any kind of software trigger, even one delivered wirelessly, can do the same job(s). This is great on your TV remote but not so cool on things like smartphones and in cars.

I know what you mean. But what I mean is when there are software switches in smartphones and these switches don't work at all.

Quote:

I've read that there is some danger with some phones coming with compromising or surveillance software built in to the firmware but that is not universal and any device whose battery can be removed ends that threat until the battery is once again equipped. The Librem 5 and Pine 64 both have software switches but since they have a number of therm and one of those turns off WiFi, that pretty much rules out any external access or control when User doesn't allow it.
The problem is more and more phones come with a battery that can't be removed like my Spyware/Malware LG phone.

Quote:

Currently I use Vonage (VOIP) for home voice phone and a simple Tracfone for text, emergencies or anything away from home. I called Tracfone to see if they would handle and allow the Pine 64 and they said, "We don't yet offer those at our online store but it will work just fine". AFAIK major carriers like Verizon and AT&T work with the above listed LTEs. I don't see connectivity as much of a problem or obstacle even at this very early date for true Linux phones. On some darker days I might even enjoy Ballmer and Billy groaning every time I power it up and make a call. I have almost a full year before I'm forced to change my hardware and I don't yet know what is my best option for provider but I am leaning pretty heavily toward Pine 64 right now.
That's great news to hear that the Pine 64 will work fine with Tracfone which is also called StraightTalk which is my cell phone carrier.

ondoho 01-23-2020 01:35 AM

Getting a bit off topic here...
We do have a Linux smartphones thread, folks.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56 AM.