You guys are killing me. So many of you keep pretending as if there is no text messaging plan. Like a person who would use SMS to say "see you at dinner" wouldn't at least have the $5 a month plan.
If you don't have any texts allotted and you get some, yes, it sucks and, yes, it's expensive but if you have a plan it works out to way less than $1 a text or even 20 cents a text, good grief.
And yes, I realize paying at all sucks but stop with the sensationalist crap of talking about 20 cents a text for people who actually text and confusing the non-Americans into thinking that everyone has to pay that. (personally I pay less than 1 cent a text w/ the unlimited plan)
The way I see it, AT&T gets $1.20 for a typical text message.
There's the message, a response, and then a closing back. RARELY is text exchange just one message--it's usually at least 3, even if nothing else is discussed.
- Dinner tonight at 8?
- OK.
- See you there.
Three messages, and each party pays 20 cents, both sender and receiver.
You guys are killing me. So many of you keep pretending as if there is no text messaging plan. Like a person who would use SMS to say "see you at dinner" wouldn't at least have the $5 a month plan.
If you don't have any texts allotted and you get some, yes, it sucks and, yes, it's expensive but if you have a plan it works out to way less than $1 a text or even 20 cents a text, good grief.
And yes, I realize paying at all sucks but stop with the sensationalist crap of talking about 20 cents a text for people who actually text and confusing the non-Americans into thinking that everyone has to pay that. (personally I pay less than 1 cent a text w/ the unlimited plan)
I think AT&T charges $15 a month for unlimited. That would mean that you send and receive more than 1500 a month. That is quite excessive for the average person, but if that is how you like to communicate, I certainly have no problem with it.
What I do have a problem with is the justification of $15 a month for such a small amount of data that is being sent over the carrier?s control channel when it?s not being used to connect with a cell phone tower. THe only real cost is the store and forward servers, but for the amount of data the cost is obscene, which is why i won?t pay for it.
At 160 characters you have 140Bytes using a 7 bit character (at least according to Wikipedia). While I doubt that the average of using all 160 characters is quite small, while using only a handful characters is most common, I?ll use the larger for the sake of your argument. At 1501 text messages (that means they are just under 1¢ each on AT&T) each at the max of 140Bytes you get a whooping 205.21KB of data for that entire month of SMS data for $15. That doesn?t seem very smart when I can send robust emails with images, audio, video and rich text with a maximum limit of 20MB per email on my device with plenty of other options to choose from.
I understand that most phones don?t have real email capabilities, but that isn?t the issue. The issue is the price gouging and the defense by people willing to pay so much for so little.
Yes, the world will come to an end one day. So what? Stop living? Hell, no!
What were these idiots doing when they discovered these softwares holes? Well, look at it this way; a house can burn down no matter what materials were used to build it. All you have to do is set fire to it.
These guys need to get a real job, and stop scaring people for every nonsense just to get publicity. May be they should stop holding their stupid Black Hat "insecurity" conference and have a White conference instead.
Yeah! What next? May be the nuclear war will be started with an iPhone! I hate you bastards!!
Meanwhile, AppleInsider has also learned that Apple has recently tasked security experts with evaluating its second security update to Mac OS X of the 2009 calendar year.
Appropriately labeled Security Update 2009-002, the release is known to be in testing for versions of the Mac maker's Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" operating system. A version for Leopard hasn't been reported.
Em. Security researcher is a real job. In fact, even Apple tasks them with finding security holes in their software. Maybe you would prefer to turn a blind eye to security concerns until they become widespread, but thankfully there are people, including Apple (albeit not always consistently), who are more proactive. If you truly feel that associating with security researchers is a waste of time, than you can certainly contact Apple and suggest that they stop getting third-party security researchers to verify their software.
What were these idiots doing when they discovered these softwares holes?
Doing a job Apple should have done themselves.
Quote:
These guys need to get a real job, and stop scaring people for every nonsense just to get publicity. May be they should stop holding their stupid Black Hat "insecurity" conference and have a White conference instead.
You should thank these people, rather than lash out at them in such an ill considered manner. It is infinitely preferable that security flaws be found by people who are not motivated by an intention to exploit their discoveries for illegal profit or to just use them to cause havoc and harm
Quote:
Yeah! What next? May be the nuclear war will be started with an iPhone! I hate you bastards!!
If you 'hate' these people for exposing a security flaw, what sort of feelings would you have for someone who actually used them against you for real?
Can't use my phone for 10 seconds!? OMG, the world is coming to an end. What's wrong with Apple that they didn't hold a worldwide press conference to discuss this peril? Attention must be paid to these geeks.
Problem with that is that you then need all of your contacts to have only your GV #, which is fine, but in my case, everyone has always had my current cell #, and having them all switch is a pain for everyone. Also, if someone SMSs your GV #, the default setup is to forward that to your cell #, again via SMS. If ATT allowed Apple to approve the GV app for the iPhone, things would be different for sure, but right now I can't be bothered to log into GV via safari and use the horrible site layout (it really is bad on the iPhone for those who don't yet know) to send and receive SMS messages.
I'm sure Apple will release an update as soon as they can, these guys are really just trying to be sensationalists. If this hack is so powerful and so open to abuse, then why are they publicizing it tomorrow for every hacker in the world to take advantage of?
I hope this isn't true. As it is, I already resent the fact that I have to accept SMS messages as part of the service (for $0.20 a pop) and have no control that I've seen to block or only accept messages from certain people. I can choose not to accept a phone call, not so with SMS that I've found. I get the message and I'm automatically charged for it.
I don't think it's the money that's a problem for me, it's just the total lack of control and it just seems like a potential way to rack up my bill without my permission and I can't do much of anything about it without spending even more time and money.
I agree that this sounds a wee bit hokey -- invisible texts or strange characters? I'm not sure that makes much of any sense, but I'm no expert -- I can only hope.
Most messages have invisible characters, for example when you hit the return key, your computer inserts an invisible \
, \
\
or \
character code. If you hit the tab key, it puts in \\t. You don't see these characters as they are formatting characters in much the same way you don't see HTML tags when you visit a web page but on a website if you view the source code, you can see the markup that makes the page look the way it does.
The article as noted earlier doesn't tell the whole story. 512 messages have to be sent at the hacker's expense and this sort of thing could be intercepted by the network carrier. It doesn't say if you have to open every one of the messages to trigger the buffer overflow either.
Also, given that other platforms have the flaw, it's not really an iphone thing but an SMS thing.
Eventually, I'd like to see companies moving away from calls and SMS to Skype and Twitter-like systems that use network connections. You already pay for data access via subscription. To charge users for both that and communication is profiteering. Those systems use profile-based communication, which is independent of the device too, I don't like contacting people based on numbers - it has privacy concerns for celebrities but they can use aliases.
I hope this isn't true. As it is, I already resent the fact that I have to accept SMS messages as part of the service (for $0.20 a pop) and have no control that I've seen to block or only accept messages from certain people. I can choose not to accept a phone call, not so with SMS that I've found. I get the message and I'm automatically charged for it.
I don't think it's the money that's a problem for me, it's just the total lack of control and it just seems like a potential way to rack up my bill without my permission and I can't do much of anything about it without spending even more time and money.
I signed up with ATT and the iPhone 3GS 2 days ago and started getting hit by spam. Yesterday, I went to the store and they turned off the SMS service. Bad enough that I got to receive junk mail... worse is having to pay for it. I am just getting used to it... but it does have a lot of features.
However, this versatility comes at a cost... that is why Blackberry is still around.
Comments
If you don't have any texts allotted and you get some, yes, it sucks and, yes, it's expensive but if you have a plan it works out to way less than $1 a text or even 20 cents a text, good grief.
And yes, I realize paying at all sucks but stop with the sensationalist crap of talking about 20 cents a text for people who actually text and confusing the non-Americans into thinking that everyone has to pay that. (personally I pay less than 1 cent a text w/ the unlimited plan)
"Dick Cheney? Is that you?"
The way I see it, AT&T gets $1.20 for a typical text message.
There's the message, a response, and then a closing back. RARELY is text exchange just one message--it's usually at least 3, even if nothing else is discussed.
- Dinner tonight at 8?
- OK.
- See you there.
Three messages, and each party pays 20 cents, both sender and receiver.
That's $1.20. Just pick up the phone and talk!
Get a Google Voice account instead. Free SMS.
SMS hack could leave "every" iPhone vulnerable
wood could leave "every" house vulnerable to fire.
You guys are killing me. So many of you keep pretending as if there is no text messaging plan. Like a person who would use SMS to say "see you at dinner" wouldn't at least have the $5 a month plan.
If you don't have any texts allotted and you get some, yes, it sucks and, yes, it's expensive but if you have a plan it works out to way less than $1 a text or even 20 cents a text, good grief.
And yes, I realize paying at all sucks but stop with the sensationalist crap of talking about 20 cents a text for people who actually text and confusing the non-Americans into thinking that everyone has to pay that. (personally I pay less than 1 cent a text w/ the unlimited plan)
I think AT&T charges $15 a month for unlimited. That would mean that you send and receive more than 1500 a month. That is quite excessive for the average person, but if that is how you like to communicate, I certainly have no problem with it.
What I do have a problem with is the justification of $15 a month for such a small amount of data that is being sent over the carrier?s control channel when it?s not being used to connect with a cell phone tower. THe only real cost is the store and forward servers, but for the amount of data the cost is obscene, which is why i won?t pay for it.
At 160 characters you have 140Bytes using a 7 bit character (at least according to Wikipedia). While I doubt that the average of using all 160 characters is quite small, while using only a handful characters is most common, I?ll use the larger for the sake of your argument. At 1501 text messages (that means they are just under 1¢ each on AT&T) each at the max of 140Bytes you get a whooping 205.21KB of data for that entire month of SMS data for $15. That doesn?t seem very smart when I can send robust emails with images, audio, video and rich text with a maximum limit of 20MB per email on my device with plenty of other options to choose from.
I understand that most phones don?t have real email capabilities, but that isn?t the issue. The issue is the price gouging and the defense by people willing to pay so much for so little.
the artist formerly known as prince will be texting us all
Yes, the world will come to an end one day. So what? Stop living? Hell, no!
What were these idiots doing when they discovered these softwares holes? Well, look at it this way; a house can burn down no matter what materials were used to build it. All you have to do is set fire to it.
These guys need to get a real job, and stop scaring people for every nonsense just to get publicity. May be they should stop holding their stupid Black Hat "insecurity" conference and have a White conference instead.
Yeah! What next? May be the nuclear war will be started with an iPhone! I hate you bastards!!
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...n_testing.html
Meanwhile, AppleInsider has also learned that Apple has recently tasked security experts with evaluating its second security update to Mac OS X of the 2009 calendar year.
Appropriately labeled Security Update 2009-002, the release is known to be in testing for versions of the Mac maker's Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" operating system. A version for Leopard hasn't been reported.
Em. Security researcher is a real job. In fact, even Apple tasks them with finding security holes in their software. Maybe you would prefer to turn a blind eye to security concerns until they become widespread, but thankfully there are people, including Apple (albeit not always consistently), who are more proactive. If you truly feel that associating with security researchers is a waste of time, than you can certainly contact Apple and suggest that they stop getting third-party security researchers to verify their software.
my first thought was..
"dick cheney? Is that you?"
rotflmao
What were these idiots doing when they discovered these softwares holes?
Doing a job Apple should have done themselves.
These guys need to get a real job, and stop scaring people for every nonsense just to get publicity. May be they should stop holding their stupid Black Hat "insecurity" conference and have a White conference instead.
You should thank these people, rather than lash out at them in such an ill considered manner. It is infinitely preferable that security flaws be found by people who are not motivated by an intention to exploit their discoveries for illegal profit or to just use them to cause havoc and harm
Yeah! What next? May be the nuclear war will be started with an iPhone! I hate you bastards!!
If you 'hate' these people for exposing a security flaw, what sort of feelings would you have for someone who actually used them against you for real?
Try thinking before posting.
Get a Google Voice account instead. Free SMS.
Problem with that is that you then need all of your contacts to have only your GV #, which is fine, but in my case, everyone has always had my current cell #, and having them all switch is a pain for everyone. Also, if someone SMSs your GV #, the default setup is to forward that to your cell #, again via SMS. If ATT allowed Apple to approve the GV app for the iPhone, things would be different for sure, but right now I can't be bothered to log into GV via safari and use the horrible site layout (it really is bad on the iPhone for those who don't yet know) to send and receive SMS messages.
I'm sure Apple will release an update as soon as they can, these guys are really just trying to be sensationalists. If this hack is so powerful and so open to abuse, then why are they publicizing it tomorrow for every hacker in the world to take advantage of?
My first thought was..
"Dick Cheney? Is that you?"
Sorry I can't lol with you, I don't get it?
Sorry I can't lol with you, I don't get it?
There's a surprise.
I hope this isn't true. As it is, I already resent the fact that I have to accept SMS messages as part of the service (for $0.20 a pop) and have no control that I've seen to block or only accept messages from certain people. I can choose not to accept a phone call, not so with SMS that I've found. I get the message and I'm automatically charged for it.
I don't think it's the money that's a problem for me, it's just the total lack of control and it just seems like a potential way to rack up my bill without my permission and I can't do much of anything about it without spending even more time and money.
You get charged 20c to RECEIVE a text message?
How crap is your plan?
We only get charged if we send a text message.
You get charged 20c to RECEIVE a text message?
How crap is your plan?
We only get charged if we send a text message.
Thus the reason why AT&T customers simply love their carrier's policies.
Why do you think that so many people jump on the AT&T bash-wagon all the time? It's not without justification.
(Actually, it's the same across all US carriers afaIct, unless you pay extra for an additional allowance of text messages.)
I agree that this sounds a wee bit hokey -- invisible texts or strange characters? I'm not sure that makes much of any sense, but I'm no expert -- I can only hope.
Most messages have invisible characters, for example when you hit the return key, your computer inserts an invisible \
, \
\
or \
character code. If you hit the tab key, it puts in \\t. You don't see these characters as they are formatting characters in much the same way you don't see HTML tags when you visit a web page but on a website if you view the source code, you can see the markup that makes the page look the way it does.
The article as noted earlier doesn't tell the whole story. 512 messages have to be sent at the hacker's expense and this sort of thing could be intercepted by the network carrier. It doesn't say if you have to open every one of the messages to trigger the buffer overflow either.
Also, given that other platforms have the flaw, it's not really an iphone thing but an SMS thing.
Eventually, I'd like to see companies moving away from calls and SMS to Skype and Twitter-like systems that use network connections. You already pay for data access via subscription. To charge users for both that and communication is profiteering. Those systems use profile-based communication, which is independent of the device too, I don't like contacting people based on numbers - it has privacy concerns for celebrities but they can use aliases.
I hope this isn't true. As it is, I already resent the fact that I have to accept SMS messages as part of the service (for $0.20 a pop) and have no control that I've seen to block or only accept messages from certain people. I can choose not to accept a phone call, not so with SMS that I've found. I get the message and I'm automatically charged for it.
I don't think it's the money that's a problem for me, it's just the total lack of control and it just seems like a potential way to rack up my bill without my permission and I can't do much of anything about it without spending even more time and money.
I signed up with ATT and the iPhone 3GS 2 days ago and started getting hit by spam. Yesterday, I went to the store and they turned off the SMS service. Bad enough that I got to receive junk mail... worse is having to pay for it. I am just getting used to it... but it does have a lot of features.
However, this versatility comes at a cost... that is why Blackberry is still around.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32210255...ence-security/
I wish I could delete the icon but it's a "core" feature. I don't understand why SMS exists at all.
Jailbreak, get Poof. You can delete the stocks icon too.