You can watch out of area broadcasts from stations that have
live-streaming, on an Android phone or an Android tablet that has a GPS
(many Wi-Fi models and all LTE models).

Don't try just using a VPN set to the location of the station, that
doesn't work since they now look at the GPS location. This means that
you can't watch on a laptop with a VPN, the broadcasters are wise to that.

1. Turn on Developer Options
<https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/how-do-i-turn-on-the-developer-options-menu-on-my-samsung-galaxy-device/>

2. Install this app:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rosteam.gpsemulator>

3. Go to Mock Locations under Developer Options and choose the App you
just installed.

4. Launch the GPS emulator and, on the map, choose the place you want to
appear to be located.

5. Open the TV station's streaming link in a browser.

6. For PBS stations you can also use the PBS Android App at
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.pbs.video> once you
set the mock location.

7. This method also works with apps like DirecTV Stream, so you are able
to watch out-of-area stations, if you want to watch things like sporting
events that aren't being broadcast in the area where you are located.

8. If your phone can cast wirelessly to a TV, or supports HDMI-Out via
the USB port, you can watch on a larger screen.

Sadly, none of this works on iOS devices because Apple doesn't allow
mock GPS locations.

In article <tc9unn$15o6l$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Sadly, none of this works on iOS devices because Apple doesn't allow
> mock GPS locations.

sadly, you are again incorrect despite it having been explained to you
before. the method is different, that's all.

Am 02.08.22 um 03:30 schrieb sms:
> You can watch out of area broadcasts from stations that have
> live-streaming, on an Android phone or an Android tablet that has a GPS
> (many Wi-Fi models and all LTE models).
>
> Don't try just using a VPN set to the location of the station, that
> doesn't work since they now look at the GPS location. This means that
> you can't watch on a laptop with a VPN, the broadcasters are wise to that.
>
> 1. Turn on Developer Options
> <https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/how-do-i-turn-on-the-developer-options-menu-on-my-samsung-galaxy-device/>
>
> 2. Install this app:
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rosteam.gpsemulator>
>
> 3. Go to Mock Locations under Developer Options and choose the App you
> just installed.
>
> 4. Launch the GPS emulator and, on the map, choose the place you want to
> appear to be located.
>
> 5. Open the TV station's streaming link in a browser.
>
> 6. For PBS stations you can also use the PBS Android App at
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.pbs.video> once you
> set the mock location.
>
> 7. This method also works with apps like DirecTV Stream, so you are able
> to watch out-of-area stations, if you want to watch things like sporting
> events that aren't being broadcast in the area where you are located.
>
> 8. If your phone can cast wirelessly to a TV, or supports HDMI-Out via
> the USB port, you can watch on a larger screen.
>
> Sadly, none of this works on iOS devices because Apple doesn't allow
> mock GPS locations.

That is fraud should it work.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 8/1/22 9:22 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>Am 02.08.22 um 03:30 schrieb sms:
>> You can watch out of area broadcasts from stations that have
>> live-streaming, on an Android phone or an Android tablet that has a GPS
>> (many Wi-Fi models and all LTE models).
>>
>> Don't try just using a VPN set to the location of the station, that
>> doesn't work since they now look at the GPS location. This means that
>> you can't watch on a laptop with a VPN, the broadcasters are wise to that.
>>
>> 1. Turn on Developer Options
>> <https://www.samsung.com/uk/support/mobile-devices/how-do-i-turn-on-the-developer-options-menu-on-my-samsung-galaxy-device/>
>>
>> 2. Install this app:
>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rosteam.gpsemulator>
>>
>> 3. Go to Mock Locations under Developer Options and choose the App you
>> just installed.
>>
>> 4. Launch the GPS emulator and, on the map, choose the place you want to
>> appear to be located.
>>
>> 5. Open the TV station's streaming link in a browser.
>>
>> 6. For PBS stations you can also use the PBS Android App at
>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.pbs.video> once you
>> set the mock location.
>>
>> 7. This method also works with apps like DirecTV Stream, so you are able
>> to watch out-of-area stations, if you want to watch things like sporting
>> events that aren't being broadcast in the area where you are located.
>>
>> 8. If your phone can cast wirelessly to a TV, or supports HDMI-Out via
>> the USB port, you can watch on a larger screen.
>>
>> Sadly, none of this works on iOS devices because Apple doesn't allow
>> mock GPS locations.
>
>That is fraud should it work.

If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...

On 8/1/2022 9:59 PM, AJL wrote:

<snip>

> If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
> tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
> evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...

Jorge is wrong of course™. Watching a broadcast television station's
stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.

Tonight there was a documentary on the PBS affiliate in Miami. The show
was of little interest to people out of the area, unless you grew up
there and moved away. A lot of people that no longer lived in the area
were complaining that they could not watch it. The TV station streams
all their shows via the PBS app but it defaults to your local PBS station.

I recall that back in the 1970's and 1980's some NFL teams would have
the local station black out the games in order to spur ticket sales, but
I don't think they do that anymore because the lost revenue from the
black out did not make it worthwhile since few fans would buy tickets
when a game was blacked out. Sometimes fans would get in a car and drive
to outside the local area, and go to a bar to watch the game.

nospam wrote:

>> Sadly, none of this works on iOS devices because Apple doesn't allow
>> mock GPS locations.
>
> sadly, you are again incorrect despite it having been explained to you
> before. the method is different, that's all.'

I made these screenshots just now to show how wrong nospam always is:
<https://i.postimg.cc/ZKXjT326/mocklocation01.jpg> Android mock location
<https://i.postimg.cc/SRvdYzsF/mocklocation02.jpg> Best mock location apps
<https://i.postimg.cc/DySBk5j2/mocklocation03.jpg> Mock location setting
<https://i.postimg.cc/7L8BN7Nq/mocklocation04.jpg> Spoof wifi/gps provider
<https://i.postimg.cc/MZPdFgYP/mocklocation05.jpg> Randomize road speed

Regarding this purposefully helpful kind-hearted tutorial today...
*Using Android's Mock Location Setting to Watch TV Programming from Other Areas*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/TUxUT0GVog8>

1. Steve had kindly posted a tutorial thread for the benefit of everyone.
2. Then nospam denied every fact about Apple that nospam happens to hate.
3. And Joerg Lorenz claimed that using Android settings is "fraud"
(which is something nospam has also claimed in the past, where I doubt
either Joerg or nospam has any idea of the five tenets of fraud).

With respect to nospam's brazen fabrication of imaginary iOS functionality:
*Steve was correct that iOS is crippled in terms of mock GPS location.*

What's interesting is how _desperate_ the iKooks are to deny obvious facts.
iKooks are exactly like flat earthers... insisting the earth is flat.

Unlike nospam, both Steve and I own iOS devices and we _know_ that the mock
location capability of Android does not exist on any iOS device ever made.

At any price.

However, what nospam is _desperately_ trying to allude to is there does
exist an abominable *classic Apple clusterfuck* which allows you to spoof
an iOS location if you go to the trouble of always walking around with a
computer attached to the iPhone just so that you can spoof your location.

In summary, these iKooks _hate_ that iOS is crippled in that it can't do
even the simplest of the most basic of the most common things we do all day
on Android - such as spoof our GPS location.

My key improvement to Steve's tutorial is I wouldn't use the mock-location
app he suggested simply because it has ads, and you don't need those ads.
*GPS Emulator* by RosTeam
Free, +ads, +gsf, +$purchases, rated 4.6, 59.5K reviews, 1M+ Downloads
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rosteam.gpsemulator>
While I have plenty of fake-GPS mock-location apps, this has no ads:
*Fake GPS location* by Lexa
Free, no ads, +gsf, rated 4.6, 456K reviews, 10M+ Downloads
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.lexa.fakegps>

Note that these mock location apps are set inside the operating system,
such that EVERY app gets their information from them, and that these mock
location apps can randomly move along roadways by a given distance per
a given time period, and they can start at the last location, and they can
randomize the amount of movement per second, and they can spoof the
altitude, and some can set a specific exact location by the keyboard
instead of only graphically, etc. They can even send the location to
another phone or get the location from another phone if you want that.

Also note these fake-gps mock-location apps can spoof the wi-fi provider.
<https://i.postimg.cc/pdf8prL4/screenshot03.jpg> Spoof Wi-Fi Provider

I'm not sure the use, but others can spoof both the Wi-Fi & GPS provider.

Since every Usenet thread should educate the users, it would be nice if
someone who knows more than I do about this can explain how we might take
advantage of the fact that you can easily spoof the wifi & gps provider.
<https://i.postimg.cc/ZKXjT326/mocklocation01.jpg> Android mock location
<https://i.postimg.cc/SRvdYzsF/mocklocation02.jpg> Best mock location apps
<https://i.postimg.cc/DySBk5j2/mocklocation03.jpg> Mock location setting
<https://i.postimg.cc/7L8BN7Nq/mocklocation04.jpg> Spoof wifi/gps provider
<https://i.postimg.cc/MZPdFgYP/mocklocation05.jpg> Randomize road speed
--
Posted to add additional technical value to what Steve wrote for his
tutorial and to also show how the iKooks like nospam hate that Apple
products are crippled in terms of functionality when compared to Android.

sms wrote:

> On 8/1/2022 9:59 PM, AJL wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
>> tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
>> evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...
>
> Jorge is wrong of course™. Watching a broadcast television station's
> stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.
>
> Tonight there was a documentary on the PBS affiliate in Miami. The show
> was of little interest to people out of the area, unless you grew up
> there and moved away. A lot of people that no longer lived in the area
> were complaining that they could not watch it. The TV station streams
> all their shows via the PBS app but it defaults to your local PBS station.
>
> I recall that back in the 1970's and 1980's some NFL teams would have
> the local station black out the games in order to spur ticket sales, but
> I don't think they do that anymore because the lost revenue from the
> black out did not make it worthwhile since few fans would buy tickets
> when a game was blacked out. Sometimes fans would get in a car and drive
> to outside the local area, and go to a bar to watch the game.

It's not fraud.
It's not even close.

Stupid people with no education claim everything they can't do, is fraud.

Never forget people like Joerg Lorenz & nospam are so ill educated they
don't know "fraud" requires EVERY one of multiple tenets to exist.
*The Nine Elements of Common Law Fraud*
<https://www.robertdmitchell.com/common-law-fraud>

Note: None of these tenets exist, let alone _all_ of them, where I note
that every single one has to be proven for it to be considered fraud.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information,
which in this csae is to show a definition of the tenets of common fraud.

In article <tcacal$1a1q4$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> > If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
> > tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
> > evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...
>
> Jorge is wrong of course. Watching a broadcast television station's
> stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.

it is when you deliberately falsify your location to be able to see it.

nospam wrote:

>>> If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
>>> tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
>>> evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...
>>
>> Jorge is wrong of course�. Watching a broadcast television station's
>> stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.
>
> it is when you deliberately falsify your location to be able to see it.

Note that nospam, over the years... has called automatic call recording
fraud; he's called mock location fraud; he's called ad blocking fraud; he's
called youtube downloading fraud; he's called loading apps outside the app
store fraud; he's called torrenting operating systems fraud; he's called
using a different carrier on your iPhone than AT&T fraud; etc.

What's the common element in all of these?
*Everything that iOS can't do nospam calls "fraud" because he can't do it*

Every time nospam calls anything he can't figure out how to do on the
iPhone "fraud", it proves my assessment of these iKooks, that they...
a. Are of low IQ
b. Have nor education, and,
c. They _hate_ that iOS is crippled.

Further proof is this isn't the first time (nor will it be the last) that
nospam claims that anything that he can't figure out how to do, is "fraud".

For those who aren't of low IQ and who can comprehend facts, read this:
*What Are the Elements of Common Law Fraud?*
<https://www.robertdmitchell.com/common-law-fraud>

People with a low IQ & no education like nospam & Joerg are incapable of
comprehending that _every_ single one of those elements of fraud must exist
for it to be considered fraud.

On 8/2/2022 3:38 AM, nospam wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>> AJL wrote:

>>> If the reason for a blackout is just to sell more local sporting
>>> event tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using
>>> various methods to evade webpage ads while enjoying the
>>> content...

>> Watching a broadcast television station's stream, that the station
>> provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.

> it is when you deliberately falsify your location to be able to see
> it.

I can get can get rid of and/or stop annoying motion ads on most web
pages by either disabling JavaScript or using an add-on like Tranquility.

Is this a fraud or theft?

I can disable some newspaper's articles-per-month without a subscription
limit and read all I want just by just periodically erasing their cookies.

Is this a fraud or theft?

I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.

Is this a fraud or theft?

I can get lots of pirate stuff on Usenet.

Is this a fraud or theft?

IMO they likely all are in varying degrees...

(BTW I'm going by the dictionary, not legal definition.)

Am 02.08.22 um 07:22 schrieb sms:
> On 8/1/2022 9:59 PM, AJL wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
>> tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
>> evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...
>
> Jorge is wrong of course™. Watching a broadcast television station's
> stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.

It is fraud. But you do not understand the economic logic behind it.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Am 02.08.22 um 12:38 schrieb nospam:
> In article <tcacal$1a1q4$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>> If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
>>> tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
>>> evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...
>>
>> Jorge is wrong of course. Watching a broadcast television station's
>> stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.
>
> it is when you deliberately falsify your location to be able to see it.

Certainly.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

AJL wrote:

> (BTW I'm going by the dictionary, not legal definition.)

Using _that_ criteria, nospam & Joerg would claim that everythign they
can't figure out how to do is "theft"...

For example, nospam can't torrent on iOS so he calls _all_ torrents "theft,
as just one example.

Legally, it turns out that even torrenting movies hasn't been proven to be
illegal in the USA, and the proof is that there has NEVER been even a
SINGLE court case in the history of the United States' copyright law that
the defendant challenged that the court ruled on behalf of the plaintiff.

Note that most people are stupid and ill educated, so they simply _assume_
there are cases which the defendant was found guilty even in their almost
complete absence. There was _one_ example (Malibu Entertainment, as I
recall), where the lawyers were disbarred because what _they_ were doing
was seeding the movies themselves, and then prosecuting people by first
asking for money (which many people paid up without a fight) and then they
took a handful to court and in the end, they were all thrown out of court.

The point is that people who are inherently stupid & ill educated think
EVERYTHING that they can't figure out how to do, is "theft", when it's not.

Joerg Lorenz wrote:

>>> If the reason for the blackout is just to sell more local sporting event
>>> tickets then I perhaps commit the same fraud by using various methods to
>>> evade webpage ads while enjoying the content...
>>
>> Jorge is wrong of course™. Watching a broadcast television station's
>> stream, that the station provides at no cost, is hardly fraud.
>
> It is fraud. But you do not understand the economic logic behind it.

It is always the case that people who are inherently stupid & ill educated
think EVERYTHING that they can't figure out how to do, is "fraud".

If this Joerg claims it is "fraud", all we ask of him is to act like an
adult (which, is probably impossible for someone as ill educated as he).

Here's the adult question for this Joerg moron:
*Name just one US court case where this has been proven to be fraud*

Name just one.
--
People with very low IQ's don't bother with facts such as legal court cases
since they can't comprehend the technical details inherent in legal cases.

In article <tcbb48$j33$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

>
> Note that nospam, over the years... has called automatic call recording
> fraud;

note that you continue to lie.

i never said that. what i said was that recording calls can violate
wiretap laws, depending on jurisdiction.

> he's called mock location fraud;

nope. what i said was spoofing location for the purpose of accessing
content that is otherwise unavailable is fraud.

there are other reasons to spoof location, which might be perfectly
fine. one example is when software developers test a location-aware
app.

> he's called ad blocking fraud;

nope, nor does that even make any sense. it is, however, theft of
services, since ads are how the content providers make money. by
blocking ads you are consuming content and denying compensation for the
provider. because of that, some sites request that ad blockers be
disabled to view the content.

> he's
> called youtube downloading fraud;

nope. what i said was that downloading videos from youtube violates
their terms of service, which is why google removes any app that can do
it. obviously there are numerous ways around that, but that doesn't
change the legality of it.

> he's called loading apps outside the app
> store fraud;

nope, nor does that make any sense. what i said was that sideloading
brings additional risk.

> he's called torrenting operating systems fraud;

nope. what i said was the nearly all torrenting is for illicit content,
such as porn, warez, movies, music, etc.

> he's called
> using a different carrier on your iPhone than AT&T fraud; etc.

nope, nor does that make any sense. anyone can use any carrier they
want, assuming the phone is unlocked. if the phone is locked, then
they'll need to first unlock it to use a foreign carrier.

as usual, you are lying, and in this case, quite a bit. everything you
said was bullshit.

In article <tcbi45$1jbjk$1@dont-email.me>, AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

> I can get can get rid of and/or stop annoying motion ads on most web
> pages by either disabling JavaScript or using an add-on like Tranquility.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

technically, it's theft of services, since ads are how they make money.

realistically, nobody will care, although some sites will refuse to
display any content if they detect ad blocking of any sort.

> I can disable some newspaper's articles-per-month without a subscription
> limit and read all I want just by just periodically erasing their cookies.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

as above, it's technically theft of services and realistically, nobody
will care, although some sites make it a significant effort (more than
just tossing cookies).

> I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
> demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

if the popup to sign up is a requirement to continue and view content,
then it's a paywall, same as the newspaper subscription you just asked
about. if it's just a request but you can click away and continue, then
blocking it is probably fine.

> I can get lots of pirate stuff on Usenet.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

legally it's copyright infringement, which is informally and often
called theft, despite being incorrect.

> IMO they likely all are in varying degrees...
>
> (BTW I'm going by the dictionary, not legal definition.)

if you're not going by the legal definitions, then it's theft.

In article <tcbmcu$1r81$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

>
> For example, nospam can't torrent on iOS so he calls _all_ torrents "theft,
> as just one example.

that is false, and torrenting on a mobile device is dumb.

> Legally, it turns out that even torrenting movies hasn't been proven to be
> illegal in the USA,

yes it has and many people have been fined for it.

> and the proof is that there has NEVER been even a
> SINGLE court case in the history of the United States' copyright law that
> the defendant challenged that the court ruled on behalf of the plaintiff.

yes there has.

> Note that most people are stupid and ill educated,

you being the prime example of that.

nospam wrote:

>> Note that nospam, over the years... has called automatic call recording
>> fraud;
>
> note that you continue to lie.
>
> i never said that. what i said was that recording calls can violate
> wiretap laws, depending on jurisdiction

Everything you can't do on iOS, you call "illegal" nospam.
Why?

I don't know why.
I suspect you don't own the IQ or education to figure out how to do it.

It's not illegal in ANY jurisdiction under many cases, and in many
jurisdictions it's only illegal if both parties aren't advised, and in most
others only if one party (which can be you) doesn't give permission.

The fact is you've erroneously called automatic call recording illegal for
years, when it's not - simply because you _hate_ you can't do it.

>> he's called mock location fraud;
>
> nope. what i said was spoofing location for the purpose of accessing
> content that is otherwise unavailable is fraud.

The fact remains you call everything you _hate_ that you can't do on iOS
either "illegal" or "theft" or "fraud", where the fact remains that you
can't find even a _single_ court case in the USA backing up your claims.

Why?
I don't know why.

I suspect you don't own the IQ nor the education to understand case law.

> there are other reasons to spoof location, which might be perfectly
> fine. one example is when software developers test a location-aware
> app.

The reason I spoof my GPS location is for privacy.

Do you feel privacy should be against the law simply because you can't
figure out how to get location privacy on your beloved but crippled iPhone?

>> he's called ad blocking fraud;
>
> nope, nor does that even make any sense. it is, however, theft of
> services, since ads are how the content providers make money. by
> blocking ads you are consuming content and denying compensation for the
> provider. because of that, some sites request that ad blockers be
> disabled to view the content.

Again, what's common about you low IQ uneducated iKooks nospam is that
everything you can't do on iOS you consider illegal out of hand.

Why?
I don't know why.

I suspect you _hate_ your beloved but crippled iOS lacks functionality.

>> he's
>> called youtube downloading fraud;
>
> nope. what i said was that downloading videos from youtube violates
> their terms of service, which is why google removes any app that can do
> it. obviously there are numerous ways around that, but that doesn't
> change the legality of it.

We discussed this case (and every case above) for years, nospam, where you
don't have the IQ nor education to comprehend that there is no need to
agree to ANYTHING on the public Google YouTube pages just to view content.

You lack the IQ and education to comprehend that the source code, for
example, to YouTube Vanced, LibreTube, NewPipe, Invidious, et. al, is
published src which Google can't do a single thing about since it's legal.
<https://i.postimg.cc/2yYK4N0W/newpipe02.jpg>

Why don't you iKooks ever tell the truth for once, nospam?
*You simply _hate_ that iOS can't do _any_ of that basic functionality*

>> he's called loading apps outside the app
>> store fraud;
>
> nope, nor does that make any sense. what i said was that sideloading
> brings additional risk.

From your own posts, nospam, the best you can figure out for sideloading
IPAs on a non-jailbroken iPhone is a *classic Apple clusterfuck* that
allows a user to run an app for a day or two before the certificate expires
on them.

Meanwhile, with Android, you don't even need to sideload to use a FOSS
Google Play Store client that scrapes the EXACT same APKs that are on the
Google Play Store repository, along with plenty of other reputable open
source repositories (such as Auroa Droid scrapes, for example).
<http://auroraoss.com>

>> he's called torrenting operating systems fraud;
>
> nope. what i said was the nearly all torrenting is for illicit content,
> such as porn, warez, movies, music, etc.

What goes along with your low IQ and almost complete and total lack of
education nospam is we discussed at length the Malibu court cases in
particular, years ago, and you completely forgot what we found out.

Never in the history of the United States has a torrented movie been found
to be illegal when the defendant disputed the case.

Plenty have given up and paid a fee to the plaintiff, but not a single case
(other than the Malibu cases which were later thrown out of court and the
lawyers disbarred) has there ever been for applying US Copyright Law to
torrented movies.

I suspect you don't even understand why...
*Which is my point about you low-IQ uneducated iKooks, nospam.*

Case law is too complicated for your iKook brain to figure out, nospam.

Everything you are too stupid to do you don't understand why or how anyone
else can do it, which is why you claim everything you can't do is "theft".

>> he's called
>> using a different carrier on your iPhone than AT&T fraud; etc.
>
> nope, nor does that make any sense. anyone can use any carrier they
> want, assuming the phone is unlocked. if the phone is locked, then
> they'll need to first unlock it to use a foreign carrier.

You don't remember anything we discussed nospam years ago when I first
jailbroke an iPhone in order to get the AT&T iPhone to work on T-Mobile.

This is in keeping with my assessment that your IQ is low, nospam.

You can't remember your own conversations where you claimed jailbreaking a
phone in order to use it on another network was illegal.

> as usual, you are lying, and in this case, quite a bit. everything you
> said was bullshit.

The fact remains that everything you iKooks can't figure out how to do, you
claim is illegal or theft or fraud... even as you can't find even a single
US court case that backs up your claims.

What that means is either you don't own the IQ or education to understand
the complexities of the law, and, your entire belief system is imaginary.

Why?
I don't know why.

I suspect you _hate_ the crippled iPhone lacks the most basic of functionality.

On 2022-08-02 10:32, nospam wrote:
> In article <tcbi45$1jbjk$1@dont-email.me>, AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
>
>> I can get can get rid of and/or stop annoying motion ads on most web
>> pages by either disabling JavaScript or using an add-on like Tranquility.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> technically, it's theft of services, since ads are how they make money.
>
> realistically, nobody will care, although some sites will refuse to
> display any content if they detect ad blocking of any sort.
>
>> I can disable some newspaper's articles-per-month without a subscription
>> limit and read all I want just by just periodically erasing their cookies.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> as above, it's technically theft of services and realistically, nobody
> will care, although some sites make it a significant effort (more than
> just tossing cookies).

I would argue that neither is fraud.

A website that serves content is not entitled to leave data on my
computer without my permission, and I am certainly allowed to remove
that data whenever I chooose.

>
>> I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
>> demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> if the popup to sign up is a requirement to continue and view content,
> then it's a paywall, same as the newspaper subscription you just asked
> about. if it's just a request but you can click away and continue, then
> blocking it is probably fine.

So if you can click directly, it's fine, but if you have to use a piece
of software to choose which data you view, it's not.

The Atlantic has a pop-up that covers the page, but using the Reader
function of Safari allows me to read the article anyway.

Is that "theft of services?

In article <tcbobo$o1m$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Everything you can't do on iOS, you call "illegal" nospam.

false. why do you lie?

>
> I don't know why.

that much is clear.

> The reason I spoof my GPS location is for privacy.

what you fail to understand is that it doesn't accomplish that task,
and in fact, it does the *opposite*.

In article <tcboh0$1kr1t$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> >> I can get can get rid of and/or stop annoying motion ads on most web
> >> pages by either disabling JavaScript or using an add-on like Tranquility.
> >>
> >> Is this a fraud or theft?
> >
> > technically, it's theft of services, since ads are how they make money.
> >
> > realistically, nobody will care, although some sites will refuse to
> > display any content if they detect ad blocking of any sort.
> >
> >> I can disable some newspaper's articles-per-month without a subscription
> >> limit and read all I want just by just periodically erasing their cookies.
> >
> > as above, it's technically theft of services and realistically, nobody
> > will care, although some sites make it a significant effort (more than
> > just tossing cookies).
>
> I would argue that neither is fraud.

correct. neither is fraud.

> A website that serves content is not entitled to leave data on my
> computer without my permission, and I am certainly allowed to remove
> that data whenever I chooose.

you gave it permission to leave data on your computer by choosing to
not block cookies.

> >> I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
> >> demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.
> >>
> >> Is this a fraud or theft?
> >
> > if the popup to sign up is a requirement to continue and view content,
> > then it's a paywall, same as the newspaper subscription you just asked
> > about. if it's just a request but you can click away and continue, then
> > blocking it is probably fine.
>
> So if you can click directly, it's fine, but if you have to use a piece
> of software to choose which data you view, it's not.

not necessarily.

> The Atlantic has a pop-up that covers the page, but using the Reader
> function of Safari allows me to read the article anyway.
>
> Is that "theft of services?

what does the terms of service of the website say?

nospam wrote:

>> I can get can get rid of and/or stop annoying motion ads on most web
>> pages by either disabling JavaScript or using an add-on like Tranquility.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> technically, it's theft of services, since ads are how they make money.

For years, everything you state is "theft" has a common theme, nospam:
a. You don't own the IQ nor education to comprehend simple case law, and,
b. You don't own the IQ nor education to figure a way around it, nospam.

> realistically, nobody will care, although some sites will refuse to
> display any content if they detect ad blocking of any sort.

Pretty much what I use the web for is news and looking up functionality.
Any web site that puts hurdles to block that process, I simply skip.

However, what's _different_ about me is I'm not forced to use safari.
Nor am I forced to use the pointedly inferior stone age web kit browsers.

I can use the Tor Browser, for example.
You can't.

The strong anonymity of the Tor Browser is on all platforms _except_ iOS.

>> I can disable some newspaper's articles-per-month without a subscription
>> limit and read all I want just by just periodically erasing their cookies.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> as above, it's technically theft of services and realistically, nobody
> will care, although some sites make it a significant effort (more than
> just tossing cookies).

The reason you claim it's illegal is you can't figure out how to do it.
Worse...

You claim that it's "theft of services" because you don't own the IQ or
education to understand the basic tenets of United States common law.

>> I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
>> demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> if the popup to sign up is a requirement to continue and view content,
> then it's a paywall, same as the newspaper subscription you just asked
> about. if it's just a request but you can click away and continue, then
> blocking it is probably fine.

Find a single case in the history of the United States, nospam, where the
defendant has been found guilty for simply using a different viewing client
than whatever clients that the newspaper company wrote their code for.

Find just one.

>> I can get lots of pirate stuff on Usenet.
>>
>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>
> legally it's copyright infringement, which is informally and often
> called theft, despite being incorrect.

In order to be called "theft", you have to find a law that was broken in
the United States, and the fact you can't find even a _single_ case of
copyright law convictions for torrenting movies, means that it's not theft.

Interestingly, the _reason_ movie torrenting has zero convictions is likely
beyond your low IQ and lack of education; but that reason has a lot to do
with legal definitions as currently defined in US copyright law.

>
>> IMO they likely all are in varying degrees...
>>
>> (BTW I'm going by the dictionary, not legal definition.)
>
> if you're not going by the legal definitions, then it's theft.

The legal definition is the only one that matters, nospam.

What you have been doing for years is declaring every functionality that
you can't figure out how to do on the crippled iOS platform, theft.
a. Torrenting files
b. Call recording
c. Video downloading
d. Changing carriers
e. GPS spoofing
etc.
--
I have only two goals on the Apple newsgroups, the first is to learn from
and teach others, while the second is to show the iKooks for what they are.

nospam wrote:

>> Everything you can't do on iOS, you call "illegal" nospam.
>
> false. why do you lie?

For years, nospam, you've been claiming that anything you can't do on iOS
must be illegal... otherwise why can everyone else do it, but iOS users?

Note: Even the Mac does most of this stuff like Torrenting & Tor Browsers.
*It's just the stone-age iOS platform that is functionally crippled*

>> I don't know why.
>
> that much is clear.

It's a figure of speech because each time I say I don't know why, I provide
my assessment of why you claim everything you can't figure out how to do is
illegal.

Essentially, you iKooks are not like normal people.
You're more like those who vehemently claim the earth is flat.

There is no amount of reason that can change your mind because you have a
low IQ (which can't be solved) and you lack the education to understand US
case law.

*Hence, everything you can't figure out how to do, you say is illegal.*

>
>> The reason I spoof my GPS location is for privacy.
>
> what you fail to understand is that it doesn't accomplish that task,
> and in fact, it does the *opposite*.

You "say" that without any shred of proof, nospam.
No adult does that.

At least not any adult that owns an IQ that approaches that of normal.
This is one way I know you completely lack any formal education nospam.

An educated person would form a belief system underlain by at least 1 fact.

nospam wrote:

>> I would argue that neither is fraud.
>
> correct. neither is fraud.

Given the iKooks own a low IQ and no education in case law... I repeat:

The legal definition of fraud _always_ contains a set of from 3 to about 9
conditions, *_all_ of which must be met* for a conviction to be upheld.

It's likewise for copyright law, where, in some cases, Google _legally_
publishes entire books on the Internet for public use...

What low IQ ill-educated iKooks don't realize is this basic legal fact:
*Every tenet must be met for it to be considered illegal*

Not just one.

>> A website that serves content is not entitled to leave data on my
>> computer without my permission, and I am certainly allowed to remove
>> that data whenever I chooose.
>
> you gave it permission to leave data on your computer by choosing to
> not block cookies.

You actually believe that, which is why I claim:
a. You iKooks have a low IQ
b. And no education in case law
c. Such that you claim everything you can't do, to be illegal.

>>>> I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
>>>> demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.
>>>>
>>>> Is this a fraud or theft?
>>>
>>> if the popup to sign up is a requirement to continue and view content,
>>> then it's a paywall, same as the newspaper subscription you just asked
>>> about. if it's just a request but you can click away and continue, then
>>> blocking it is probably fine.
>>
>> So if you can click directly, it's fine, but if you have to use a piece
>> of software to choose which data you view, it's not.
>
> not necessarily.

Where did you iKooks get your law degree from?

The common theme here is everything you can't figure out how to do, you
iKooks call illegal (simply because you can't do it on the iOS platform).

Meanwhile, everyone else on every other platform (including the Mac!)
can easily do what is only difficult to do on the crippled iOS platform.

>> The Atlantic has a pop-up that covers the page, but using the Reader
>> function of Safari allows me to read the article anyway.
>>
>> Is that "theft of services?
>
> what does the terms of service of the website say?

On VPN, with an additional proxy, I just went to the Atlantic web page:
<https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/>

I clicked on what appears to be the cover story:
�<https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/07/light-noise-pollution-animal-sensory-impact/638446/>

I didn't need to agree to _anything_ that I could see, and to prove it,
below is the full text (it's just a select-all though) of what I read.

Did I break the law?

==== < cut here for what I just read as the cover story > ====

SKIP TO CONTENTSite Navigation

Popular
Latest
Sign In
Subscribe
July/August 2022 Issue
EXPLORE
SCIENCE
HOW ANIMALS PERCEIVE THE WORLD
Every creature lives within its own sensory bubble, but only humans have
the capacity to appreciate the experiences of other species. What we've
learned is astounding.

By Ed Yong
Photographs by Shayan Asgharnia
black and white photograph of an eight-inch-tall eastern screech owl
Shayan Asgharnia for The Atlantic
JUNE 13, 2022
This article was featured in One Story to Read Today, a newsletter in which
our editors recommend a single must-read from The Atlantic, Monday through
Friday. Sign up for it here.

Within the 310,000 acres of Wyoming's Grand Teton National Park, one of the
largest parking lots is in the village of Colter Bay. Beyond the lot's far
edge, nestled among some trees, is a foul-smelling sewage-pumping station
that Jesse Barber, a sensory ecologist at Boise State University, calls the
Shiterator. On this particular night, sitting quietly within a crevice
beneath the building's metal awning and illuminated by Barber's flashlight,
is a little brown bat. A white device the size of a rice grain is attached
to the bat's back. "That's the radio tag," Barber tells me. He'd previously
affixed it to the bat so that he could track its movements, and tonight he
has returned to tag a few more.

Magazine Cover image
Explore the July/August 2022 Issue
Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read.

View More
From inside the Shiterator, I can hear the chirps of other roosting bats.
As the sun sets, they start to emerge. A few become entangled in the large
net Barber has strung between two trees. He frees a bat, and Hunter Cole,
one of his students, carefully examines it to check that it's healthy and
heavy enough to carry a tag. Once satisfied, Cole daubs a spot of surgical
cement between its shoulder blades and attaches the tiny device. "It's a
little bit of an art project, the tagging of a bat," Barber tells me. After
a few minutes, Cole places the bat on the trunk of the nearest tree. It
crawls upward and takes off, carrying $175 worth of radio equipment into
the woods.

I watch as the team examines another bat, which opens its mouth and exposes
its surprisingly long teeth. This isn't an aggressive display; it only
looks like one. The bat is unleashing a stream of short, ultrasonic pulses
from its mouth, which are too high-pitched for me to hear. Bats, however,
can hear ultrasound, and by listening for the returning echoes, they can
detect and locate objects around them.

Echolocation is the primary means through which most bats navigate and
hunt. Only two animal groups are known to have perfected the ability:
toothed whales (such as dolphins, orcas, and sperm whales) and bats.
Echolocation differs from human senses because it involves putting energy
into the environment. Eyes scan, noses sniff, and fingers press, but these
sense organs are always picking up stimuli that already exist in the wider
world. By contrast, an echolocating bat creates the stimulus that it later
detects. Echolocation is a way of tricking your surroundings into revealing
themselves. A bat says "Marco," and its surroundings can't help but say
"Polo."

Join us: Ed Yong and Clint Smith in conversation at Sixth and I

The basic process seems straightforward, but its details are extraordinary.
High-pitched sounds quickly lose energy in air, so bats must scream to make
calls that are strong enough to return audible echoes. To avoid deafening
themselves, bats contract the muscles in their ears in time with their
calls, desensitizing their hearing with every shout and restoring it in
time for the echo. Each echo provides a snapshot in time, so bats must
update their calls quickly to track fast-moving insects; fortunately, their
vocal muscles are the fastest known muscles in any mammal, releasing up to
200 pulses a second. A bat's nervous system is so sensitive that it can
detect differences in echo delay of just one- or two-millionths of a
second, which translates to a physical distance of less than a millimeter.
A bat thus gauges the distance to an insect with far more precision than
humans can.

Echolocation's main weakness is its short range: Some bats can detect small
moths from about six to nine yards away. But they can do so in darkness so
total that vision simply doesn't work. Even in pitch-blackness, bats can
skirt around branches and pluck minuscule insects from the sky. Of course,
bats are not the only animals that hunt nocturnally. In the Tetons, as I
watch Barber tagging bats, mosquitoes bite me through my shirt, attracted
by the smell of the carbon dioxide on my breath. While I itch, an owl flies
overhead, tracking its prey using a radar dish of stiff facial feathers
that funnel sound toward its ears. These creatures have all evolved senses
that allow them to thrive in the dark. But the dark is disappearing.

black and white photo of bat upside down with mouth open
A big brown bat's ability to echolocate allows it to thrive in the dark.
(Shayan Asgharnia for The Atlantic)
Barber is one of a growing number of sensory biologists who fear that
humans are polluting the world with too much light, to the detriment of
other species. Even here, in the middle of a national park, light from
human technology intrudes upon the darkness. It spews forth from the
headlights of passing vehicles, from the fluorescent bulbs of the visitor
center, and from the lampposts encircling the parked cars. "The parking lot
is lit up like a Walmart because no one thought about the implications for
wildlife," Barber says.

Many flying insects are fatally attracted to streetlights, mistaking them
for celestial lights and hovering below them until they succumb to
exhaustion. Some bats exploit their confusion, feasting on the disoriented
swarms. Other, slower-moving species, including the little brown bats that
Barber tagged, stay clear of the light, perhaps because it makes them
easier prey for owls. Lights reshape animal communities, drawing some in
and pushing others away, with consequences that are hard to predict.

On 8/2/2022 9:07 AM, AJL wrote:

<snip>

> I can get can get rid of and/or stop annoying motion ads on most web
> pages by either disabling JavaScript or using an add-on like Tranquility.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

Neither.

> I can disable some newspaper's articles-per-month without a subscription
> limit and read all I want just by just periodically erasing their cookies.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

Neither.

> I can often disable a site's complete page covering pop-up subscription
> demand by using Tranquility and read the article underneath.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

Neither.

> I can get lots of pirate stuff on Usenet.
>
> Is this a fraud or theft?

Theft.

> IMO they likely all are in varying degrees...

Not true.

Using a mock location to watch free programming from another geographic
areas is neither fraud nor theft. The provider is certainly able to put
their programming behind a paywall if they don't want out of area
viewers. But since that would reduce the number of viewers, they don't
want to do that since there's a financial benefit to them by increasing
the number of viewers. They couldn't care less if someone from another
area wants to watch.

One thing that Xfinity now does is to prevent streaming of some content
by only allowing it via broadband through the registered cable modem.
This prevents password sharing. But it's annoying because if you're not
at home you can't watch that content, that you've paid for, on your
phone or tablet.