NexusHD2 Android Forum

MarkAtHome wrote:I, too, sent them an email which has not been replied to. I have quoted my original post to them, requesting a response, and it, too, has been ignored.

Methinks that resending our inquiries with CCs to their partners, corporate or otherwise, should be the next step. Bringing the issue to their attention (presuming that they do not already know), might apply sufficient pressure.

I doubt you can influence their views which are protected from the world by the Great Wall of China.

NYLimited wrote:
I doubt you can influence their views which are protected from the world by the Great Wall of China.

You mean the "Great Firewall of China" don't you? lol

Odysseus wrote:
You mean the "Great Firewall of China" don't you? lol

Could be either. Or both. No idea.

Don’t worry!

Sure, the National Security Agency has been getting some bad press lately. Sure, an internal audit by the NSA found that the agency broke privacy rules thousands of times a year, as The Post reported Thursday. But, hey, they’re only human.

Among the violations?

A notable example in 2008 was the interception of a “large number” of calls placed from Washington when a programming error confused the U.S. area code 202 for 20, the international dialing code for Egypt, according to a “quality assurance” review that was not distributed to the NSA’s oversight staff.

Cited in 21 violations in the first quarter of 2012 alone was “typographical errors or overly broad search terms.” Cited in 60 was “operator error.”

We all know operator error. This is why somehow the NSA wound up with every e-mail sent to or from the state of Georgia, after that same programming error mistook it for the former Soviet republic. The same programming error that swapped 20 and 202 also picked up every e-mail sent to or from President Obama, after mistaking him for Osama bin Laden in what the NSA probably described as a “really, really embarrassing mix-up after which the programming error had to undergo intense sensitivity training.” The NSA also picked up, in a combination of operator error and typographical error, every e-mail from Cincinnati after someone mistyped “al-Qaeda” as “Cincinnati,” all communications relating to NSA employee Dave Mittne’s ex-wife after someone mistyped “Yemeni al-Qaeda leader Saeed al-Shihri” as “Kim Mittne,” every e-mail from Kim Mittne’s new husband after an even more confusing typographical error, and all of George Lucas’s private communications, because someone described him as “destroying the integrity of Star Wars,” and the NSA thought that maybe it was aimed at Reagan’s missile defense program. Also every e-mail from Ke$ha “because that is clearly a made-up name.”

See, there’s a simple explanation for all this excessive data collection. Basically, somewhere, someone in the NSA meant to type ‘All Terrorist E-mails’ but he accidentally didn’t type the word “terrorist.”


You can read the complete article in the Washington Post.
Written by Alexandra Petri, published on August 16, 2013.

The National Security Agency — which possesses only limited legal authority to spy on U.S. citizens — has built a surveillance network that covers more Americans' Internet communications than officials have publicly disclosed, current and former officials say.

The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic in the hunt for foreign intelligence, including a wide array of communications by foreigners and Americans. In some cases, it retains the written content of emails sent between citizens within the U.S. and also filters domestic phone calls made with Internet technology, these people say.

The NSA's surveillance network covers more Americans' Internet communications than officials have publicly disclosed, reaching roughly 75 percent of all U.S. internet traffic. Siobhan Gorman reports on the News Hub. Photo: Getty Images.

The NSA's filtering, carried out with telecom companies, is designed to look for communications that either originate or end abroad, or are entirely foreign but happen to be passing through the U.S. But officials say the system's broad reach makes it more likely that purely domestic communications will be incidentally intercepted and collected in the hunt for foreign ones.


You can read the complete Wall Street Journal article here.
Written by SIOBHAN GORMAN and JENNIFER VALENTINO-DEVRIES, published on August 20, 2013.

BTW. Someone has asked about link tracking in Tapatalk on Tapatalk forum and... got some answer Tapatalk developers have stated, they don't track links Asked why Tapatalk adds hash to every link clicked within Tapatalk app - no answer...

donblazello wrote:BTW. Someone has asked about link tracking in Tapatalk on Tapatalk forum and... got some answer Tapatalk developers have stated, they don't track links Asked why Tapatalk adds hash to every link clicked within Tapatalk app - no answer...

Indeed! The truth is I don't know if they track the links or not. I do know that some links will go to link.tapatalk.com while others go to link2.tapatalk.com before redirected to the actual destination. What they do with the information is unknown. If I were to guess I would say it has something to do with advertising but that would only be a guess.

They do have privacy policy: http://www.tapatalk.com/privacy.php

And there is a statement:

I. INFORMATION COLLECTED
We collect non-personally identifiable information about you in a number of ways, including tracking your activities through your IP address and your mobile device ID. We do not collect any personally identifiable information about you unless you voluntarily submit such information to us, by, for example, filling out a survey or registration form. The types of information that may be requested include your name, and your e-mail address

Still, it's interesting why they track, if they don't...

donblazello wrote:They do have privacy policy: http://www.tapatalk.com/privacy.php

And there is a statement:


Still, it's interesting why they track, if they don't...

I would certainly find that policy understandable and even acceptable while I am connected to their forums. I do not find it acceptable while connected to any number of other forms via their software, especially since clicking on a url here which takes me to, say, Chainfire's blog is none of their business.


---
Any clod can have the facts, but having an opinion is an art.

NYLimited wrote:I would certainly find that policy understandable and even acceptable while I am connected to their forums. I do not find it acceptable while connected to any number of other forms via their software, especially since clicking on a url here which takes me to, say, Chainfire's blog is none of their business.

So you added LINK.TAPATALK.COM and LINK2.TAPATALK.COM to hosts? Any landmines?