Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 134
  1. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell
    When's the last time someone splashed a picture onto your computer monitor without your consent? This is more like a virus situation where your computer does things you don't authorize. Not a flyer on your doorstep!
    People splash pics on my monitor w/o my consent all the time...there are called pop ups and they are not considered viruses. Why aren't people freaked out about that? After all, you normally have to download additional software to stop it. How about cookies, those seem even more intrusive, but people have learned to accept it as part of the web experience and deal with it in a fashion that makes sense to them. Again, remember I am not talking about offensive or malicious pop up or cookies.

    It would seem that when your BT phone is set to discoverable it is advertising its presence to other phones. To me that seems more like an invitation (going beyond any open door/window analogy).

    I don't think people should put offensive messages like "you have been bluejacked" or nasty pics. Just like I don't enjoy people cursing or wearing offensive t-shirts in public or family oriented places.

    I really think people are overreacting to this activity and perhaps if it wasn't called bluejacking and instead called blue-messaging people would have such a bad reaction.

    I think if someone sent me something funny or cleaver on Bluetooth I would enjoy it, especially if it was a surprise.
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    People splash pics on my monitor w/o my consent all the time...there are called pop ups and they are not considered viruses. Why aren't people freaked out about that? After all, you normally have to download additional software to stop it. How about cookies, those seem even more intrusive, but people have learned to accept it as part of the web experience and deal with it in a fashion that makes sense to them. Again, remember I am not talking about offensive or malicious pop up or cookies.
    Sorry this is not at all comparable to pop-up ads. With pop-up ads you CHOOSE TO VISIT a web site at which the owner presents you with advertising. That is no different than entering a store and someone trying to spray perfume on you. You made the CHOICE to visit the site and have your browser select data from that web server. With Bluejacking no request is ever made for anything on the part of the individual that is "jacked".

    As for your view of someone having a discoverable BT setting I think it was best addressed already by dstrauss:
    it is painfully obvious that you can't distinguish right from wrong. By your logic, anyone who does not do everything possible to protect themselves from YOUR MISBEHAVIOR deserves what they get:

    You leave your credit card at the restaurant table, so I'm free to use it.

    Leave your door unlocked and I'm breaking in.

    You should have used a locked mailbox.

    And worst of all, you just can't see the fallacy of your arguments, nor how wrong it is to encourage juveniles like this to keep TAGGING their universe.
    No matter the name this is an uninvited intrusion onto someone's device. It is very much like a virus. And yes it is wrong.
  3. #83  
    I don't understand all of the *****ing...if you don't want pics sent to you via BT, turn off your discovery! If you don't want to have to do that, only turn it off when you goto public places...geez
    1 | 2
  4. #84  
    I've read this in its entirety and I must add that the whole incident was childish. Its obvious that Clown did something that he thought the forum was going to get a big kick out of; apparently he was tickled senseless by what he did and couldnt wait to post about it.

    Which takes me to another thought. Did the guy he send this too actually see the PICTURE? If I'm not mistaken, anything sent via BT or IR has to be accepted by the receiver, in this case, The Stranger. So although Clown "discovered" him, did this stranger actually accept the pic? Or did he just see something strange/sinister happening to his phone and turn around with one of those WTH looks on his face?

    Some of you say he committed no harm while some of you feel the least he could have done was "educate" the stranger. The bottom line; he didnt; he just laughed.

    Its already been said that its one thing to do this to friends, its another to do it to someone you dont know.
    Dont ya'll release that at this point, you are NOT going to beat Clown into submission and have him confess that what he did wasnt right?

    This is one of those topics where agreeing to disagree comes in handy.
    Dont you think you've beat this issue to death?
    ~ ScandaLous ~
  5. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell
    With pop-up ads you CHOOSE TO VISIT a web site at which the owner presents you with advertising. That is no different than entering a store and someone trying to spray perfume on you. You made the CHOICE to visit the site and have your browser select data from that web server. With Bluejacking no request is ever made for anything on the part of the individual that is "jacked".
    I disagree with you, leaving BT discovery on and going into the public is the same type of choice you describe. The owner sets his/her BT discovery to ON and the phone gives "permission" to other devices to communicate. Both owners must CHOOSE to do this.

    You want to talk about faulty logic....how can you be so against BT messaging and at the same time say its ok it be sprayed with perfume when you walk into a store? Come on... there is less of a choice when being sprayed since there is no option to turn perfume discovery off

    It is completely unreasonable to use any sort of theft analogy with BT messaging. I will sooner buy your tagging/graffiti analogy. However, not all graffiti is juvenile. Some graffiti is beautiful, enjoyable and considered art. Do not close your eyes to something you donít understand just because you may be scared, you will miss much of the neat things in the world. Again, please remember this thread is not about stealing information or pushing offensive information/images on people.

    BT is a new medium and people are discovering its uses. I can see randomly messaging people being lots of fun at a club or bar, or other social scene where you do not already know people.
  6. #86  
    This isn't really that exciting. This is the coolest bluetooth trick yet.
    http://www.jasonbradbury.com/jason_b..._goe.html#more
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by juice
    This isn't really that exciting. This is the coolest bluetooth trick yet.
    http://www.jasonbradbury.com/jason_b..._goe.html#more
    Crazy...now we just need to figure out how to implant the mic and earpiece into our fingers, that would eliminate the need for the glove
    1 | 2
  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    I disagree with you, leaving BT discovery on and going into the public is the same type of choice you describe. The owner sets his/her BT discovery to ON and the phone gives "permission" to other devices to communicate. Both owners must CHOOSE to do this.
    This is pretty insane. I won't even spend time on this nonsense.

    You want to talk about faulty logic....how can you be so against BT messaging and at the same time say its ok it be sprayed with perfume when you walk into a store? Come on... there is less of a choice when being sprayed since there is no option to turn perfume discovery off
    They never spay you without asking first. With this you're sending stuff to people who you never even met. Taking full advantage of people in many cases not even knowing what the heck is happening to their phone!

    It is completely unreasonable to use any sort of theft analogy with BT messaging. I will sooner buy your tagging/graffiti analogy. However, not all graffiti is juvenile. Some graffiti is beautiful, enjoyable and considered art. Do not close your eyes to something you donít understand just because you may be scared, you will miss much of the neat things in the world. Again, please remember this thread is not about stealing information or pushing offensive information/images on people.
    OK lets run with your graffiti analogy then. With graffiti no matter how ugly or beautiful to the eye of the beholder there is the issue of PERMISSION TO SPAY AT ALL. If it is done without permission of the property owner it is very much a CRIME. With this BT jacking the phone owner never requested you send them anything. And no them having discovery on is not an open invite to you, no more than someone having a car window open is an invitation for someone to toss a picture or anything else inside a car!

    BT is a new medium and people are discovering its uses. I can see randomly messaging people being lots of fun at a club or bar, or other social scene where you do not already know people.
    Get the guts to go introduce yourself in person for crying out loud!
  9. #89  
    Sounds a lot like prank phone calling to me...
    "Is your refrigerator running?"
    "Yes"
    "Better catch it!" Click.
    The ones that Bart Simpson uses on the bartender are funnier. But in any case prank phone calls are an improper use of the phone and you can lose the right to have a phone for doing it.
    Just because I don't turn my phone off when I'm not using it does not mean that any prankster should be aloud to call me.
    But on the other hand the original post in this thread sure sounded fun, and mostly harmless. Could we turn this into a kind of BT game of tag? Send a BT message that says "Tag you're it!" and include a web address where the tagged can report where and when they got tagged. Or a message that could be BT'd and added too. Everyone who gets the message adds to it where and when they got it and then pass it on.

    This could go both ways, fun, prank, malicious, intrusion, game, harmless, a way to meet people, or just part of the high tech culture.

    Personally I think it won't be long now till some kid gets BT porn and a law gets passed.
  10. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dafydd
    Personally I think it won't be long now till some kid gets BT porn and a law gets passed.
    That has me concerned, also BT spam asking me if a want a larger wang

    But until then, tag sounds fun as well.
  11. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell
    And no them having discovery on is not an open invite to you
    From the palmone web:
    Discovery describes the process of your palmOne device searching out other Bluetooth wireless devices within range. It's like asking a classroom "Who wants to talk?" and seeing who raises their hands. Once your palmOne device discovers another Bluetooth wireless device, it can initiate a wireless transaction. If a Bluetooth wireless device is never discovered, there can be no communication.

    http://kb.palmone.com/SRVS/CGI-BIN/W...tem,CASE=15382

    Thus, discovery on = permission to talk as I see it.
  12. #92  
    P1's definition is not a legal opinion.

    Also many BT devices being "jacked" are not made by P1. So they are not at all under P1's definition of anything.

    So ink883, what do you make of Dafydd "crank calling" analogy? I think he's on point.

    Just having a phone number can be viewed as saying "who wants to talk". Does not make it right to make a prank call to my phone.

    Dafydd - I think you should call "CHECKMATE" .
  13. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell
    So ink883, what do you make of Dafydd "crank calling" analogy? I think he's on point.

    Just having a phone number can be viewed as saying "who wants to talk". Does not make it right to make a prank call to my phone.
    There is nothing wrong with palmone's definition, legal or not. Itís an analogy to help you understand how you are giving permission to communicate. If I put my phone number on a park bench and tell people to call, I shouldnít be upset when they do (even when there are harmless prank calls), and I certainly would not consider them thieves.

    Again, remember I am not now, nor have I ever said, sending spam, malicious or obscene messages are OK. However, sending someone a picture of a dog, or a message saying "tag your it" or "Smile and fortune will be yours" (what I send) is not bad, wrong, evil, stealing, nasty, obscene, or vandalism.

    Darnell, if you do not want random messages, why would you turn your phone Discovery ON? In addition, if you do not like Palms definition, show me a better more credible one.
  14. #94  
    ink883 your King has been taken. You've lost . Bluejacking is wrong and on par with crank calls, computer viruses, adware, spyware and the like.

    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    There is nothing wrong with palmone's definition, legal or not. Itís an analogy to help you understand how you are giving permission to communicate. If I put my phone number on a park bench and tell people to call, I shouldnít be upset when they do (even when there are harmless prank calls), and I certainly would not consider them thieves.
    Just having a number opens anyone up to calls. Just as having discovery on allows the sending of BT items. The difference here is "permission" and it is the one point you attempt to gloss over.

    Again, remember I am not now, nor have I ever said, sending spam, malicious or obscene messages are OK. However, sending someone a picture of a dog, or a message saying "tag your it" or "Smile and fortune will be yours" (what I send) is not bad, wrong, evil, stealing, nasty, obscene, or vandalism.
    As I've already told you with your own graffiti analogy. It does not matter how "pretty" or "ugly" the message sent is. The issue here is that you were not given permission by the owner and in many cases the Bluejacked person has no idea what is happening or why. Sending pictures like those of a dog does not tell the person what is going on. Just because someone has it on does not imply it is on FOR YOU. Just because I have a phone number does not mean I want you trying random numbers just to see if you reach me! Bluejacking is simply searching for random devices and sending a message, same as crank calling!

    Darnell, if you do not want random messages, why would you turn your phone Discovery ON?
    Mine has always been off. Just like I lock my front door. But it does not make it right for anyone to enter a front door that is unlocked or even open on someone else's home. Bluejacking people you don't know without informing them what is going on and how to prevent it is wrong.

    In addition, if you do not like Palms definition, show me a better more credible one.
    This is about the matter of Bluejacking. And it is still wrong. You and I both know that the vast majority of people getting bluejacked have no clue what is going on and many bluejackers will do nothing to help the person they "jacked". Just bug them with their pictures of their dog and other silly messages.
  15. #95  
    Do instructions or manuals come with bluetooth devices? Wouldn't the "discovery" feature be explained when setting up the device. How do people know there is a "discovery" setting?
  16. #96  
    Daffyd also says "But on the other hand the original post in this thread sure sounded fun, and mostly harmless."

    I agree. It's pretty much harmless. It's a _prank_.

    Yah, some people always got annoyed with pranks. Some people always will. Some will ignore them, some will play a prank in return.

    It takes all kinds.
  17. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell
    The difference here is "permission" and it is the one point you attempt to gloss over.
    Seems I am the only one who provided evidence that shows Discovery = Permission. Look at palm's definition, when you set your phone to BT discovery on you are giving permission for someone to send you messages and communicate with your phone. I don't think you understand how the tech works, and if you think I am wrong about how this works then provide a link to a better more credible explanation.
  18. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by Christinac130
    Do instructions or manuals come with bluetooth devices? Wouldn't the "discovery" feature be explained when setting up the device. How do people know there is a "discovery" setting?
    The manual talks a little bit about BT starting at page 70. Unfortunately it doesn't do into detail like the palmone web.
  19. #99  
    if you allow discovery on- you still need to pair with a device to transfer data- if the transfer happens without a pin- then you still need to accept the transfer when it completes (seems more logical to accept before it starts)
    problem is that some phones have a bad implementation and they dont require passkeys or authorization to send/receive files.

    oh and the BT glove- i'm making one right now but i'm using a shooting glove and a palm branded bt250. i wish i had jason bradbury's job- similar to george carlin- thinking up goofy [stuff] and then going around telling you about it.
    Treo 800w 8/08
    Nokia N800
    previously: Treo 700wx 12/06, Sprint 6700 3/06; Treo 650 11/04; Treo 600 1/04 (gone); Samsung i500 (gone); Hitachi G1000 11/03 (gone); Nokia 7110 5/00(best phone ever)
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    Seems I am the only one who provided evidence that shows Discovery = Permission. Look at palm's definition, when you set your phone to BT discovery on you are giving permission for someone to send you messages and communicate with your phone. I don't think you understand how the tech works, and if you think I am wrong about how this works then provide a link to a better more credible explanation.
    I don't need someone else to tell me what the difference between right and wrong is.

    Finding a P1 page with a paragraph you feel is sympathetic to your view does not make the activity at all right.

    Notice what you found was on the Bluetooth Discovery Troubleshooting page. The kind of thing someone might look at after having been jacked! And it is a warning IMHO like lock your door or somebody might walk in. While such warnings are helpful (unlike the blue jackers who are not) it does not legitimize the activity.
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions