61–70 of 103 posts
This is really cool. Just set up a message to my wife when I leave work. "I'm heading home from work. Based on traffic data, it should take me XX minutes to travel XX miles". Took about 10 minutes to write thanks to some good examples in the documentation. Looking forward to watching this evolve. Should be extremely powerful with the right set of triggers and hardware integration.
I'd like an easy interface to events around the phone being at rest (no accelerometer input). For the rest state: I assume that most people have their phone by their beds at night. I have a locale rule that puts my phone into airplane mode during the hours I'm normally asleep. This is much more easily/accurately expressed as "phone at rest for 15m". Similarly, I'd like to sync news when I pick up the phone to leave i…
I use to be able to get weeks of use from a single charge of my old Motorola Razr.
Unfortunately, the app requires that you login with Facebook.
There is an already existing program that allows you to do pretty much the same thing, I have had it forever. The app is called Tasker ( https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.dinglisch.... ) works like a charm and can be programmed right on the phone.
onX claims to offer verbs like 'when i'm in the car' or 'when i'm walking'; Tasker/Locale offer verbs like 'is there a wifi network named X nearby' or 'is bluetooth on'. I spent money on Locale to try and solve these kinds of problems on my Android phone and regretted it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
_less strict_ does not mean insecure. iOS for example has very strict rules about when apps can run, how long they can run, and the resources they use. Everything is a tradeoff and in general Android leans in the direction of power and freedom.
How does a less strict security model not imply less security?
Rules restricting the range of passwords that may be used in an arbitrary fashion can markedly decrease the search space for an attacker.
A strict rule count by itself is neither good nor bad. Well, arguably, it's bad, as it increases system complexity, side effects, loopholes, and trains users to thwart restrictions. Ideally you want a small number of sane rules (mostly based on role and access), tightly implemented, with strong auditability.
Going back to passwords: the simple check of denying the use of any known password (there are collections of millions now from various site compromises) would be an audit check, not strictly a rule, though it might result in a rule of "known passwords will be denied".
I do wonder at the 'less strict security model' part though. I'd think more 'less strict process model' would be a bit more accurate as it's a processing issue, not so much security issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook was chosen for the beta. What other authentication schemes would you expect? (besides creating a dedicated account)
A dedicated account is the only option for me - I refuse to use apps or websites that require me to authenticate through a 3rd party.
isn't this like http://ifttt.com/