Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

nickvsnetworking.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 184 posts

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#61

Post by JoshTriplett »

zabumafu wrote: post #39

I implemented the same behavior in a different Google product. I remember the PM working on this feature showing us their research on how iPhones rendered bars across different versions. They had different spectrum ranges, one for each of maybe the last 3 iPhone versions at the time. And overlayed were lines that indicated the "breakpoints" where iPhones would show more bars. And you could clearly see that on every r…

> We tried to implement something that matched the most recent iPhone version.

So, game-theoretic evil?

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#62

Post by dataflow »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #52
dataflow wrote: post #42

Is there any reason to believe this mechanism is actually there to help carriers deceive users? To me this looks like it's intended to address some other issue, like perhaps "I have zero bars shown, what do you mean I'm still connected? That that clearly means I'm disconnected..." I feel like anything intended to lie to users would not be implemented in this manner.

Think about all the various policies, dishonesty, PR spin, marketing, price-gouging, hidden fees, elimination of lifetime programs, and yes, outright fraud you've become aware of over the years. Just sit quietly for a moment, let those ideas stew. And if after one minute of silence you still feel the need to bestow upon these companies the most generous interpretation of their conduct possible , well, I'll be slightl…

I think you missed important nuance in my comment. Note in my comment I was asking about this mechanism. I'm not suggesting the companies involved wouldn't deceive users. I merely question whether this is how they would do it. It feels way too simple, coarse, obvious/public, and inflexible if the goal is to trick users.

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#63

Post by JoshTriplett »

eqvinox wrote: post #5
metadat wrote: post #2

You know, I don't recall ever seeing 1 bar of signal strength on a smartphone. And once it's down to 2 bars, it barely works, if at all. Human brains: wow, what a bunch of suckers. Damn. By the way, is it legal to be deceptive in this way?

> You know, I don't recall ever seeing 1 bar of signal strength on a smartphone. I do. I'm from Germany, land of perpetual EDGEing. Highest total GDP in the EU but can't build a mobile network for the life of it. Then again we somehow forgot how to run trains and build cars without cheating, so I guess it fits. Want to see a single bar? Come visit, our carriers aren't on the list with that inflate flag enabled. I gue…

> Highest total GDP in the EU but can't build a mobile network for the life of it.

> Then again we somehow forgot how to run trains

The mobile networks don't have enough dB and the trains have too much DB?

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#64

Post by brewdad »

devmor wrote: post #54
hulitu wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have no clue how to explain it yet Android is quiet lazy searching for towers.

As I read this comment on my iPhone 15, I have 1 bar of 5G signal on one esim and 3 bars of signal on the other. This suggests that the issue is not related to Android.

When we visit downtown of our city, I get great data coverage. My wife, on a different model but same gen iPhone and same plan, gets nothing. Her phone shows three or four bars but her apps won't load anything.

No idea why, especially since I'm the one who installs ad blockers and such. Her phone is essentially stock.

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#65

Post by xfactorial »

hshdhdhehd wrote: post #55
zabumafu wrote: post #39

I implemented the same behavior in a different Google product. I remember the PM working on this feature showing us their research on how iPhones rendered bars across different versions. They had different spectrum ranges, one for each of maybe the last 3 iPhone versions at the time. And overlayed were lines that indicated the "breakpoints" where iPhones would show more bars. And you could clearly see that on every r…

Thats why I experienced 2 bars equals zero internet today?

That is literally what i am observing lately with my provider: i have 2 bars and yet i do not have internet, where as my gf, using the same iPhone model, with a different provider, having 2 bars, has perfect data connectivity.

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#66

Post by NotMelNoGuitars »

Poking around the config files, AT&T and two other carriers (both of which are subsidiaries, from a quick Google) seem to display 3G connections as if they were 4G:

    $ grep -r show_4g_for_3g_data_icon_bool assets/
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1187_AT&T.xml:    
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2119_FirstNet.xml:    
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1779_Cricket-Wireless.xml:
Android documents[0] this flag, which they don't appear to do for the `inflate_signal_strength_bool` field outside the source code from what I can tell. It seems like there a bunch of odd flags for controlling user-exposed visuals - another flag `show_4g_for_lte_data_icon_bool` is used by 96 carriers, for example.

I wonder if there's some odd telecom history behind these, or if these flags were intended for some kind of edge-case. It seems like carriers have the option to arbitrarily override the thresholds used for determining signal strength[1], but only four carriers actually do. All only elect to customize the `lte_rsrp_thresholds_int_array` field; and all opt to make things harder for themselves, reporting their network connection as lower strength than the default classification[2] would:

    $ grep -r _thresholds_int_array assets/ -A5
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2556_Xfinity_Mobile.xml:    
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2556_Xfinity_Mobile.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2556_Xfinity_Mobile.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2556_Xfinity_Mobile.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2556_Xfinity_Mobile.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2556_Xfinity_Mobile.xml-    
    --
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1345_Telstra.xml:    
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1345_Telstra.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1345_Telstra.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1345_Telstra.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1345_Telstra.xml-        
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1345_Telstra.xml-    
    --
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_1839_Verizon-Wireless.xml:  # omitted, same as Xfinity, above
    ...
    --
    assets/carrier_config_carrierid_2032_Xfinity-Mobile.xml:  # omitted, same as Xfinity, above
    ...
[0]: https://developer.android.com/reference/android/telephony/Ca...

[1]: https://source.android.com/docs/core/connect/signal-strength...

[2]: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+/...

        sDefaults.putIntArray(KEY_LTE_RSRP_THRESHOLDS_INT_ARRAY,
                // Boundaries: [-140 dBm, -44 dBm]
                new int[] {
                        -128, /* SIGNAL_STRENGTH_POOR */
                        -118, /* SIGNAL_STRENGTH_MODERATE */
                        -108, /* SIGNAL_STRENGTH_GOOD */
                        -98,  /* SIGNAL_STRENGTH_GREAT */
                });

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#67

Post by [deleted] »

zabumafu wrote: post #39

I implemented the same behavior in a different Google product. I remember the PM working on this feature showing us their research on how iPhones rendered bars across different versions. They had different spectrum ranges, one for each of maybe the last 3 iPhone versions at the time. And overlayed were lines that indicated the "breakpoints" where iPhones would show more bars. And you could clearly see that on every r…

[deleted]

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#69

Post by jayd16 »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #61
zabumafu wrote: post #39

I implemented the same behavior in a different Google product. I remember the PM working on this feature showing us their research on how iPhones rendered bars across different versions. They had different spectrum ranges, one for each of maybe the last 3 iPhone versions at the time. And overlayed were lines that indicated the "breakpoints" where iPhones would show more bars. And you could clearly see that on every r…

> We tried to implement something that matched the most recent iPhone version. So, game-theoretic evil?

Don't be evil but also morality is relative.

Re: Simple trick to increase coverage: Lying to users about signal strength

#70

Post by userbinator »

hulitu wrote: post #50
dataflow wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> taking mine to the same areas on the same carrier and doing a comparison Unfortunately I don't think it's that simple. I've seen one phone simultaneously show significantly different numbers of bars for two SIMs installed in it for the same exact network and operator . After a while they become similar... then differ again... etc. I have no clue how to explain it yet, but what I do know is that it literally makes n…

> I have no clue how to explain it yet Android is quiet lazy searching for towers.

I think it has more to do with the cellular modem itself, or precisely the firmware it's running; of which there is much more diversity on the Android side.
Post reply on HN