LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Mobile
User Name
Password
Linux - Mobile This forum is for the discussion of all topics relating to Mobile Linux. This includes Android, Tizen, Sailfish OS, Replicant, Ubuntu Touch, webOS, and other similar projects and products.

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 06-17-2020, 02:55 AM   #1
bellacampen
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2018
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: 0
Ringtone and alarm sounds S9


I've recently upgraded my S9 to S10 note phone. Is there any way to get my Alarm & Ringtones from my old S9 to my new S10 note because in my opinion the current ones are far too silent.
I updated my phone through Samsung, so I no longer have access to a S9. Tap here to help. Thanks.

Last edited by bellacampen; 06-30-2020 at 02:57 AM.
 
Old 06-17-2020, 05:46 AM   #2
TenTenths
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2011
Location: Dublin
Distribution: Centos 5 / 6 / 7
Posts: 3,245

Rep: Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellacampen View Post
Is there any way to get my Alarm & Ringtones from my old S9 to my new S10
Yes, there's Alarms, Ringtones and Notifications folders that contain the relevant files. (Although I think Alarms can also be stored under Ringtones).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bellacampen View Post
I no longer have access to a S9
If you don't have access to the old phone you're not going to get very far.

Last edited by TenTenths; 06-17-2020 at 05:47 AM.
 
Old 12-02-2020, 07:21 AM   #3
BrownLuther007
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2020
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
If you have the link for it now, just download it on note 10 and select it. or you can search the old one on the internet and manually select it. Android seems too flexible enough to let you do that.
 
Old 12-02-2020, 03:31 PM   #4
TB0ne
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 24,307

Rep: Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownLuther007 View Post
If you have the link for it now, just download it on note 10 and select it. or you can search the old one on the internet and manually select it. Android seems too flexible enough to let you do that.
Really?? Why don't you post the link then? You've just joined, have had six posts that reopened old threads with no/duplicate content or answers.
 
Old 12-03-2020, 02:39 AM   #5
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 18,140
Blog Entries: 12

Rep: Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellacampen View Post
I've recently upgraded my S9 to S10 note phone. Is there any way to get my Alarm & Ringtones from my old S9 to my new S10 note because in my opinion the current ones are far too silent. My ringtone is: http://spam.com

I updated my phone through Samsung, so I no longer have access to a S9. Tap here to help. Thanks.
Spammer.
Apparently one of those that come back later and edit spam links into their posts.
I strongly suspect that BrownLuther007 is another of those.
 
Old 12-03-2020, 08:59 AM   #6
TB0ne
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 24,307

Rep: Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148
Agreed....posted just to see if there was a response.
 
Old 12-17-2020, 03:38 AM   #7
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 18,140
Blog Entries: 12

Rep: Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535Reputation: 5535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarlet Michelle View Post
It's great that it is guided and fixed here. My phone is having a bit of a spam problem.
And another spammer.
Couldn't we just nuke the whole thread?
Seems to be one of those keywords that attracts nothing but.
 
Old 12-17-2020, 09:09 AM   #8
TB0ne
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 24,307

Rep: Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
And another spammer.
Couldn't we just nuke the whole thread?
Seems to be one of those keywords that attracts nothing but.
I have suggested over the years to do first five (or ten) post moderation, to weed these folks out. I can point to (and I'm sure you can too) a bunch of accounts that I'm 99.9% certain are spammers, who haven't posted spam yet. Easy to spot, and having such folks go through moderation would probably deter them.
 
Old 12-17-2020, 09:19 AM   #9
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth, unfortunately...
Distribution: Currently: OpenMandriva. Previously: openSUSE, PCLinuxOS, CentOS, among others over the years.
Posts: 3,869

Rep: Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053
Quote:
Originally Posted by TB0ne View Post
I have suggested over the years to do first five (or ten) post moderation, to weed these folks out. I can point to (and I'm sure you can too) a bunch of accounts that I'm 99.9% certain are spammers, who haven't posted spam yet. Easy to spot, and having such folks go through moderation would probably deter them.
I reported something like 15 - 20 newly created accounts through the "Contact Us" form that hadn't posted yet just the other night, that where clearly spammer accounts. And they all had the same MO, so whoever/whatever created those accounts has been hitting this site for a long time. They typically have 4 or 5 digits at the end of the username (for example something like "aghawhhrrahher5433"), and if you look in their user profile it's fairly obvious they are nothing but spammers. I don't know why Jeremy can't include the same MO in the existing spam filter to block the accounts before they even have a chance to post any spam in the first place.
 
Old 12-17-2020, 09:22 AM   #10
boughtonp
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,795

Rep: Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466
Quote:
Originally Posted by TB0ne View Post
I have suggested over the years to do first five (or ten) post moderation, to weed these folks out. I can point to (and I'm sure you can too) a bunch of accounts that I'm 99.9% certain are spammers, who haven't posted spam yet. Easy to spot, and having such folks go through moderation would probably deter them.
Spambots don't bother to check if posts get moderated, and just keep sending them anyway, creating more works for the mods.

I'd simply have a check that blocked the post if (UserPostCount <= X and Content contains '[url=') with a suitable message.

Genuine new users normally post URLs directly (resulting in "[url]" instead), whilst spammers either want keywords attached or try hiding the link.

Having X as low as 3 would be enough to get the vast majority, without being too big an inconvenience.


Last edited by boughtonp; 12-17-2020 at 09:24 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 12-17-2020, 09:23 AM   #11
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth, unfortunately...
Distribution: Currently: OpenMandriva. Previously: openSUSE, PCLinuxOS, CentOS, among others over the years.
Posts: 3,869

Rep: Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053Reputation: 2053
Here's 4 more I just found and reported:

annetaeyndexta8589
ajenztop4560
aolguttsy9391
aolauyandext7222
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 12-17-2020, 10:25 AM   #12
TB0ne
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 24,307

Rep: Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148Reputation: 7148
Quote:
Originally Posted by boughtonp View Post
Spambots don't bother to check if posts get moderated, and just keep sending them anyway, creating more works for the mods.

I'd simply have a check that blocked the post if (UserPostCount <= X and Content contains '[url=') with a suitable message.

Genuine new users normally post URLs directly (resulting in "[url]" instead), whilst spammers either want keywords attached or try hiding the link.

Having X as low as 3 would be enough to get the vast majority, without being too big an inconvenience.
Good idea as well, but a large number of them post 'real' messages like:
  • "Very good information! I will follow this thread closely"
  • "Thanks for your solution"
  • "<repeats post/question from earlier in thread>"
  • etc.
All blatantly obvious, just to get past the first X posts, then they go back an edit things to include the links. A canned response saying "Yeah, you've posted nothing of value, so your post was removed." that a moderator could send with a single-click would do it.

One thing I have noticed is that 99% of them come from either Windows 7 or Mac users, based on the sidebar identification, but that can be spoofed of course.
 
Old 12-17-2020, 10:38 AM   #13
boughtonp
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,795

Rep: Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466

I'm not sure how many of the bots are specifically targetting LQ directly, so unsure whether they would adapt their behaviour in response to something other places don't do.

Giving mods anti-spam power is fine, but they can't be online all the time, so the less manual work involved the better. (So long as it doesn't deter real users.)

Things like rare user agents and zero-content posts should be detectable with a script - there must be a score-based anti-spam system out there (like SpamAsssasin, but forum-focused)?
(I'd normally go search but I'm hungry so I'm going to go eat instead.)

 
Old 12-17-2020, 11:25 AM   #14
TenTenths
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2011
Location: Dublin
Distribution: Centos 5 / 6 / 7
Posts: 3,245

Rep: Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420Reputation: 1420
Quote:
Originally Posted by boughtonp View Post
there must be a score-based anti-spam system out there
Yeah, I've a rather simplistic word score based one on my own forum.

I've also things like any posts where the user tries to post (or edit a post to include) a link gets marked for manual moderation until the user has X posts.

Proxy server detection, ISP identification.

Also require everyone to select the country they are registering from in a drop-down and if the GeoIP doesn't match the country they've selected then their registration goes in to a queue for a human decision. (Amazing how many "US" registrations come from "IN" IP addresses!)

I've also previously implemented things like "Disposable E-Mail" domain detection.

And of course making use of resources like Stop Forum Spam checklists.

HOWEVER given that there's a lot of new users who post things like "I followed the instructions at www/blah/blah and it's not working" or are asked to follow up with "Well what instructions did you follow" and they then post the above, I think the sledgehammer URL detection methodology would discourage legitimate users from posting here.

In general the moderators on here are quick to react when posts are reported and there are many of us who are quick enough to report, so the overall level of Spam that gets through is really pretty low.
 
Old 12-17-2020, 12:37 PM   #15
boughtonp
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,795

Rep: Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466Reputation: 1466
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenTenths View Post
HOWEVER given that there's a lot of new users who post things like "I followed the instructions at www/blah/blah and it's not working" or are asked to follow up with "Well what instructions did you follow" and they then post the above, I think the sledgehammer URL detection methodology would discourage legitimate users from posting here.
Yes, that's why I was specifically advocating a non-sledgehammer approach that didn't affect those new users posting URLs but did affect spammers posting links.


Quote:
In general the moderators on here are quick to react when posts are reported and there are many of us who are quick enough to report, so the overall level of Spam that gets through is really pretty low.
The spam link above was posted eleven hours ago and reported nine hours ago, but since the sole moderator listed for this forum was last active March 2019 it's not clear how long it will remain up for.

I don't know how many spam attempts are made, so it may well only be a tiny amount that actually get through, but given the amount I've been noticing I would have to disagree with "really pretty low".

And again, the ideal situation is to reduce the need to even report spam by blocking the unambiguous spammers automatically (without affecting genuine users). And more can definitely be done in that regard than is currently done.

 
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RTC Alarm wakes up, even while BIOS has RTC alarm disabled mastermind2501 Linux - Newbie 2 12-22-2008 04:32 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Mobile

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:52 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration