ULEZ London

[mansaxel]

Having been paid by cheque, I am very happy this is an abandoned method. Every employer after that one have paid by direct deposit, which makes the money available in my account the 25th of every month, or earlier if the 25th is in a weekend or otherwise special day.

I do not think I've seen one since then, and that was 30 years ago now. Progress is good.

I agree when it comes to your wages, direct deposit is good, but on the other hand when it comes to buying things, cheques can be a godsend at times, I'm always careful about giving my account details to anyone and a cheque can allow you to purchase something before your pay hits the bank, especially if its mail order as by the time the cheque is received and presented the money will be in your account. They also useful for sending money as a present to someone securely.

A cheque does last me a couple of years though, but as I said, they are handy at times.

Here, payments small and large are dealt with using a phone app, which uses strong online ID as login, and only requires the knowledge of the recipients phone number. I pay for bus tickets with it, and bought our present car with it too. Handy at ham fests; the recipient gets immediate (2-5 seconds) notice and has the funds available.

All parents, wifes and mine, are online banking, and have been for at least 10 years, so no such issues here.

Money as gifts has been moved to online in our family, since the children, prime recipients, always want to buy online with these funds. We actually had to take the gift money and reimburse their accounts, so decided to do away with the intermediate step.

Buying things before you have the money in general is a questionable concept, which I reserve for house and similar. Never for fun things. But the credit card is the preferred method.

Cheques are dead, and deservedly so.

[tggzzz]

I recently had to receive a small refund from a solicitor, via electronic transfer. They asked me not to send the bank details via email. Their contract also had a clause to the effect that "if we get caught out by a Friday afternoon fraud and transfer your (large amounts of) money to the wrong account, it is your bad luck". I hope I never have to find out that holds up in court!

Almost certainly not something they should have even considered putting in a contract - Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 et seq, assuming you were dealing as a consumer.

Those were my thoughts, but getting one solicitor to sue another solicitor would be expensive and possibly difficult to arrange.

[tggzzz]

Here, payments small and large are dealt with using a phone app, which uses strong online ID as login,

What is this "phone app" of which you speak?

(I recently saw an article noting that in the US there is an increase of sales of clamshell phones amongst young adults. The claim was they were wanting to get away from the "always on looking at screen notifications" pain in the arse. EDIT: found it "Dumb phones are on the rise in the U.S. as Gen Z looks to limit screen time" https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/29/dumb-ph ... -time.html )

What is the "strong online ID"? If biometric, how does it cope with the "certificate revocation problem"?

Buying things before you have the money in general is a questionable concept, which I reserve for house and similar. Never for fun things. But the credit card is the preferred method.

Very definitely. That was my father's attitude, and I taught it to my daughter.

The moniker "credit card" is a triumph of marketing. I remember the early 80s advertising slogan "It does you credit". I taught my daughter a more accurate name is "debt card", because when you use it that is what you get. OTOH "debit card" is an accurate moniker.

Credit cards are sufficient for most purchases, online or in shops.

Cheques are dead, and deservedly so.

Not dead, fortunately. But the usage has greatly reduced.

[mansaxel]

Here, payments small and large are dealt with using a phone app, which uses strong online ID as login,

What is this "phone app" of which you speak?

It is called "Swish" and is a cross-bank app for all holders of swedish bank accounts. It enables immediate transfers of money, without a transaction fee.
You can have a company account which is not tied to a phone, so your customers can pay at the counter using it. There's a QR code scanning function built in, enabling both fixed and variable amounts of money transfered.

(I recently saw an article noting that in the US there is an increase of sales of clamshell phones amongst young adults. The claim was they were wanting to get away from the "always on looking at screen notifications" pain in the arse. EDIT: found it "Dumb phones are on the rise in the U.S. as Gen Z looks to limit screen time" https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/29/dumb-ph ... -time.html )

What is the "strong online ID"? If biometric, how does it cope with the "certificate revocation problem"?

It is called Bank ID and uses the secure key storage in the phone to do a PKI style authentication and signature function. The banks co-own a company that runs it. You can use it to log on to web sites and so on, and it is required for Swish to work. I for instance authenticate myself as parent to the horrible online systems schools use, and can file taxes through it.

Buying things before you have the money in general is a questionable concept, which I reserve for house and similar. Never for fun things. But the credit card is the preferred method.

Very definitely. That was my father's attitude, and I taught it to my daughter.

The moniker "credit card" is a triumph of marketing. I remember the early 80s advertising slogan "It does you credit". I taught my daughter a more accurate name is "debt card", because when you use it that is what you get. OTOH "debit card" is an accurate moniker.

Credit cards are sufficient for most purchases, online or in shops.

Cheques are dead, and deservedly so.

Not dead, fortunately. But the usage has greatly reduced.

Here they are.

[tggzzz]

Here, payments small and large are dealt with using a phone app, which uses strong online ID as login,

What is this "phone app" of which you speak?

It is called "Swish" and is a cross-bank app for all holders of swedish bank accounts. It enables immediate transfers of money, without a transaction fee.
You can have a company account which is not tied to a phone, so your customers can pay at the counter using it. There's a QR code scanning function built in, enabling both fixed and variable amounts of money transfered.

What is this "QR code" of which you speak? Do you type the code in on the keypad?

(I recently saw an article noting that in the US there is an increase of sales of clamshell phones amongst young adults. The claim was they were wanting to get away from the "always on looking at screen notifications" pain in the arse. EDIT: found it "Dumb phones are on the rise in the U.S. as Gen Z looks to limit screen time" https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/29/dumb-ph ... -time.html )

What is the "strong online ID"? If biometric, how does it cope with the "certificate revocation problem"?

It is called Bank ID and uses the secure key storage in the phone to do a PKI style authentication and signature function. The banks co-own a company that runs it. You can use it to log on to web sites and so on, and it is required for Swish to work. I for instance authenticate myself as parent to the horrible online systems schools use, and can file taxes through it.

The magic long number is merely a mechanism for the banks to protect themselves, not you. Their traditional response to accusations of unauthorised withdrawals is "tough shit: the right magic number was received therefore you must have entered it (or broken account rules by telling someone the number)". They have a long and dishonourable tradition of trotting that out at every opportunity. (E.g. see earlier reference to the John Munden case)

Key question: what grants access to the magic long number and allows it to be used? Biometrics? 4 digit PIN?

(At least with cheques there is a paper trail that can be examined later if a transaction is disputed)

[AVGresponding]

What is this "QR code" of which you speak? Do you type the code in on the keypad?

Not sure if trolling, but:

[tggzzz]

What is this "QR code" of which you speak? Do you type the code in on the keypad?

Not sure if trolling, but:

I don't have - and will never have - a tiny computer with an inaudible phone attached.

Screen is too small to be useful as a computer, and what use is a phone you can't hear?

Hence "apps" and "QR codes" are not something usable by me.

Yes, such invalid people exist, but they shouldn't be ignored as being invalid.

[mansaxel]

What is this "QR code" of which you speak? Do you type the code in on the keypad?

Oh come on.

The magic long number is merely a mechanism for the banks to protect themselves, not you. Their traditional response to accusations of unauthorised withdrawals is "tough shit: the right magic number was received therefore you must have entered it (or broken account rules by telling someone the number)". They have a long and dishonourable tradition of trotting that out at every opportunity. (E.g. see earlier reference to the John Munden case)

Key question: what grants access to the magic long number and allows it to be used? Biometrics? 4 digit PIN?

Depends on phone. An iPhone can have Face ID or fingerprint, IIRC. Androids probably fingerprint. I do not use any of that; I stick to a PIN. Considerably longer than 4 digits.

(At least with cheques there is a paper trail that can be examined later if a transaction is disputed)

I am at this point in time tempted to tell you to go throw a clog into some textile making machinery. Make sure you don't hit any of the children working.

There is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- in modern money handling systems that involves more of a paper trail than some allowances to people acting more backwards than they ought to. And in those cases, the paper trail is a mere reflection of the actual account status, which is held in a mainframe that Mike built. Banks in Sweden operate like this, and have, for the last 30 years, and they fully well realise they can't fuck their customers over unless said customer was provably reckless.

Just like emissions standards, ULEZ, and prices for natural gas in Germany, not everything is evidence of Them being in a conspiracy and Out To Get Just You. It does bear saying, though, that these kinds of theories on conspiracies (especially Illuminati and more recently George Soros in particular) are vividly fuelled by state agencies using them as a convenient combination of smoke and mirrors and gravel in the machinery. Both KGB, GRU and FSB have been known to do this.

[AVGresponding]

Plenty of deaf people use smartphones.

[tggzzz]

Plenty of deaf people use smartphones.

I think you mean they use computers with a screen that is too small and a soft keyboard that autocorrupts what they type.

When I use a phone, everybody in the room hears the other side of the conversation better than I do

If my good ear gets any worse, I'm eligible for a cochlear implant.

[mnementh]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

mnem
you can have my hind-brain when you pry it from my cold, dead claws...

[vk6zgo]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

mnem
you can have my hind-brain when you pry it from my cold, dead claws...

Ok, but why the hell do smartphones not make their phone function the default?
You look at the bloody thing & are confronted by a thousand "apps" you never use.

You find the phone symbol, hit it, & "sometimes" get the keyboard page.
From there, you need to select contacts, if you want to call someone who you already know---all good, you do so, & "just might" get that page, but you might get some strange "settings" page instead, so have to go back to the previous page, if you can, or just shut down all apps & start again.

If you receive a call, & hit the green key again, "maybe" you might get to answer, or it might do nothing, & you are stuck stabbing the key till the call times out.
Not the end of the world, as the caller can leave a voicemail.
Not so if you are on Telstra in Oz, where the default is a "Message2text" thing that uses "speech recognition" (Hah!) that garbles the message, so you have to try to translate it.

Why doesn't the thing bring up an enlarged green key on the screen & "grey out" everything else till you successfully answer?
Going back to the alphanumeric keyboard functions like dialing or sending an SMS, why doesn't that page expand the "keyboard" to a more usable size?
Further to messages---you go there & for some reason, your most recent messages are hidden.

Except for the "Message2text" thing, we could sheet the problems home to my Samsung S21 and/or Android, so maybe iPhones do it better, although the one my wife uses has a nice little trick in the form of a switch on the side which mutes the sound.
Unfortunately, it is very easy to operate it, just in day-to-day use!

As for "apps"--Not the smartphone's fault, but so many of them are not fit for purpose, & in common with many websites, are designed by someone who has never had to do the things it is purported to be for!

I pay my bills online, buy my groceries online, & a bunch of other stuff, but I do it with a laptop as the Good Lord intended!

PS, I just turned the thing on & it is "on its best behaviour"---I got the keyboard up each time I hit the "phone" symbol!

[tggzzz]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

The latter is irrelevant, the former is - at best - adequate under ideal conditions.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Completely false for many reasons:

• smartphones have good sound reproduction - but that's completely irrelevant
• the smartphones I've tried are not loud enough - that's rather important!
• I use phones which are specifically designed for the deaf; they are rated M4 and T4 (and even those are marginal)

You can't put a smartphone in your trouser pocket, leave it for a few days, then use it. Even if it fits, the screen will have broken and the battery run out.

My daughter's smartphone breaks with monotonous regularity. I've dropped my clamshell off the two story roof onto concrete. Worked perfectly without even a scratch.

I can afford to spend £30-70 on a phone that has a the best possible chance of working for me because it is specifically designed for people with severe hearing loss.

I can't afford N*£500 to test a series of smartphones that almost certainly won't work for me. If you'll give me the money to try that, I would be delighted to prove myself wrong.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

None of the hearing aids available to me support bluetooth connections.

I don't have >£5000(!) to spare on a pair of hearing aids that might not be sufficient, might break tomorrow, might be lost tomorrow. Or, as happened to my mother, be eaten by her parrot. The ones I have are free, and are replaced free.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

You're telling me how my disability (doesn't) work?! <expletive deleted> I'll refrain from pointing out how that makes you look.

Do you also tell women what their period feels like.
Or tell people how to use kitchen implements if they don't have functioning hands.
Or how they can use cameras to overcome vision defects when driving?

[tggzzz]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

mnem
you can have my hind-brain when you pry it from my cold, dead claws...

Ok, but why the hell do smartphones not make their phone function the default?
You look at the bloody thing & are confronted by a thousand "apps" you never use.
...
As for "apps"--Not the smartphone's fault, but so many of them are not fit for purpose, & in common with many websites, are designed by someone who has never had to do the things it is purported to be for!

I've omitted your many good and pertinent points.

99% of the apps I've seen are sufficient for only one purpose: to generate revenue for the developer via the "spyware" libraries bundled in the app. That's easily seen by looking at the "permissions required" to run the app. Most apps require access to parts of your phone that are clearly completely irrelevant to the app's function.

[Specmaster]

The very best mobile phone I have ever had in terms of reliability, dependability and just pure functionality was the evergreen Nokia 6310i. It was built like a tank, had proper buttons so not much fear of the dammed thing ever doing trouser dialling, which smartphones are extremely prone to, and the battery life was nothing short of incredible.

You had proper dedicated car holders, wired into the cars electrics, so the battery was automatically charged, and the sound was directed to the radio speakers and had a dedicated microphone mounted near the sun visor. You literally take that phone out of the car and not put it on charge for days at a time, no large screen to consume power, nor loads of apps either, phone and emails was about all it would do, in other words the core functions which is really what you want from a mobile phone.

In fact it was on the standard options list for Mercedes-Benz cars.

Nokia 6310i.jpg

[mnementh]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

The latter is irrelevant, the former is - at best - adequate under ideal conditions.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Completely false for many reasons:

• smartphones have good sound reproduction - but that's completely irrelevant
• the smartphones I've tried are not loud enough - that's rather important!
• I use phones which are specifically designed for the deaf; they are rated M4 and T4 (and even those are marginal)

You can't put a smartphone in your trouser pocket, leave it for a few days, then use it. Even if it fits, the screen will have broken and the battery run out.

My daughter's smartphone breaks with monotonous regularity. I've dropped my clamshell off the two story roof onto concrete. Worked perfectly without even a scratch.

I can afford to spend £30-70 on a phone that has a the best possible chance of working for me because it is specifically designed for people with severe hearing loss.

I can't afford N*£500 to test a series of smartphones that almost certainly won't work for me. If you'll give me the money to try that, I would be delighted to prove myself wrong.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

None of the hearing aids available to me support bluetooth connections.

I don't have >£5000(!) to spare on a pair of hearing aids that might not be sufficient, might break tomorrow, might be lost tomorrow. Or, as happened to my mother, be eaten by her parrot. The ones I have are free, and are replaced free.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

You're telling me how my disability (doesn't) work?! <expletive deleted> I'll refrain from pointing out how that makes you look.

Do you also tell women what their period feels like.
Or tell people how to use kitchen implements if they don't have functioning hands.
Or how they can use cameras to overcome vision defects when driving?

Ahhh... so now the truth comes out. You're not using a plain-Jane flip-phone... you're using one custom-made for the hearing-impaired. If you'd started out with that, then we wouldn't be having this "discussion"... aside from me pointing out that they also make custom-made smartphones for the hearing-impaired. And those are the ones that have the TTS built-in, and those are designed in conjunction with various associations for the deaf and hearing-impaired, so also come pre-vetted for your use and your disability.

At least my retort had one positive effect... it got you mad enough to actually stop and think aboot what you were ranting aboot.

Now... please take a further moment and realize that comparing a flip-phone custom-made for the hearing-impaired to any general-market phone is as relevant as comparing a polar bear to a cheese grater... unless we're talking about making tiny shreds of people; that would be a valid discussion.

mnem
Food for thought; thought from food...

[mnementh]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

mnem
you can have my hind-brain when you pry it from my cold, dead claws...

Ok, but why the hell do smartphones not make their phone function the default?
You look at the bloody thing & are confronted by a thousand "apps" you never use.
...
As for "apps"--Not the smartphone's fault, but so many of them are not fit for purpose, & in common with many websites, are designed by someone who has never had to do the things it is purported to be for!

I've omitted your many good and pertinent points.

99% of the apps I've seen are sufficient for only one purpose: to generate revenue for the developer via the "spyware" libraries bundled in the app. That's easily seen by looking at the "permissions required" to run the app. Most apps require access to parts of your phone that are clearly completely irrelevant to the app's function.

If you get your phone financed from the worst pirates on the face of the planet (the wireless carriers), this is true. If you actually buy your phone and get plain vanilla iOS or Android, this is not true. It takes literally a minute to drag/drop the couple dozen apps you don't use into one folder and forget them; this is no different from any other tablet PC.

I'm talking aboot apps custom-made for the hearing-impaired, which are designed and vetted by the various associations for the deaf and hearing-impaired, not all the stoopit shit that slaps you in the face all over the Play Store, etc.

As for making a phone that is a phone first... you've all heard me rant aboot that; my Nokia 521 was the last smartphone I ever had where that was the case, and I clung to that Windows beast absolutely as I could before it simply became so outdated as to be completely useless. End of story.

Bottom line is that a smartphone with a usable-sized screen (that seems to be a minimum of 6-6.5" or so now) is so much a part of everyday life in this age that even your pants have been redesigned to accommodate; this is why they now have such roomy pockets and in some cases, even a pocket inside the pocket to keep the screen pressed against your leg for protection. This is actually remarkably effective; and I can say this from experience crawling around on floors and under desks for a living.

Note that this in general does not apply to blue-jeans; those are now the triumph of style over substance, and have become a caricature of their original purpose: durable no-nonsense workman's pants that wear like iron.

mnem

[tggzzz]

No, they actually have apps that translate spoken word to text on their screen, and their typing sent out as spoken word.

The latter is irrelevant, the former is - at best - adequate under ideal conditions.

As for poor quality speakers... most modern smartphones have a better speaker system than almost any flip-phone, because flip-phones are invariably the shittest quality product a manufacturer makes, because they're selling them to a very small market of bell-end fossils like my dad.

Completely false for many reasons:

• smartphones have good sound reproduction - but that's completely irrelevant
• the smartphones I've tried are not loud enough - that's rather important!
• I use phones which are specifically designed for the deaf; they are rated M4 and T4 (and even those are marginal)

You can't put a smartphone in your trouser pocket, leave it for a few days, then use it. Even if it fits, the screen will have broken and the battery run out.

My daughter's smartphone breaks with monotonous regularity. I've dropped my clamshell off the two story roof onto concrete. Worked perfectly without even a scratch.

I can afford to spend £30-70 on a phone that has a the best possible chance of working for me because it is specifically designed for people with severe hearing loss.

I can't afford N*£500 to test a series of smartphones that almost certainly won't work for me. If you'll give me the money to try that, I would be delighted to prove myself wrong.

Add to that the fact that most of the decent smartphones support BT and/or near-field connection to hearing aid/cochlear implant, and you really lose any benefit of the flip-phone over a smartphone, aside from terminating the eyeball thieves' favorite mechanism.

None of the hearing aids available to me support bluetooth connections.

I don't have >£5000(!) to spare on a pair of hearing aids that might not be sufficient, might break tomorrow, might be lost tomorrow. Or, as happened to my mother, be eaten by her parrot. The ones I have are free, and are replaced free.

Come on man; you're literally sounding like a Luddite here... and we know you're better than that.

You're telling me how my disability (doesn't) work?! <expletive deleted> I'll refrain from pointing out how that makes you look.

Do you also tell women what their period feels like.
Or tell people how to use kitchen implements if they don't have functioning hands.
Or how they can use cameras to overcome vision defects when driving?

Ahhh... so now the truth comes out. You're not using a plain-Jane flip-phone... you're using one custom-made for the hearing-impaired.

Que? It is a standard commercial phone that can be used by anybody. It is not "custom made" for the deaf.

If you'd started out with that, then we wouldn't be having this "discussion"... aside from me pointing out that they also make custom-made smartphones for the hearing-impaired. And those are the ones that have the TTS built-in, and those are designed in conjunction with various associations for the deaf and hearing-impaired, so also come pre-vetted for your use and your disability.

Please supply me with URLs of ones that are certain to work with my degree of disability.

If relying on TTS apps, include a definition of how well any the TTS app works with noise/distortions transmitted from the other phone, and how well they do/don't work with different accents and voices.

I will accept reviews from organisations that are set up to deal with the problems of deafness.
I will not accept reviews from random individuals, since their motives and competence are very questionable.

At least my retort had one positive effect... it got you mad enough to actually stop and think aboot what you were ranting aboot.

Bullshit, pure and simple.

I've spent a lot of time investigating this topic - certainly a damn sight more than you.

Please spare us the equivalent of barrack room lawyer legal advice.

Now... please take a further moment and realize that comparing a flip-phone custom-made for the hearing-impaired to any general-market phone is as relevant as comparing a polar bear to a cheese grater... unless we're talking about making tiny shreds of people; that would be a valid discussion.

Strawman argument, as pointed out above.

[tggzzz]

Ok, but why the hell do smartphones not make their phone function the default?
You look at the bloody thing & are confronted by a thousand "apps" you never use.
...
As for "apps"--Not the smartphone's fault, but so many of them are not fit for purpose, & in common with many websites, are designed by someone who has never had to do the things it is purported to be for!

I've omitted your many good and pertinent points.

99% of the apps I've seen are sufficient for only one purpose: to generate revenue for the developer via the "spyware" libraries bundled in the app. That's easily seen by looking at the "permissions required" to run the app. Most apps require access to parts of your phone that are clearly completely irrelevant to the app's function.

If you get your phone financed from the worst pirates on the face of the planet (the wireless carriers), this is true. If you actually buy your phone and get plain vanilla iOS or Android, this is not true. It takes literally a minute to drag/drop the couple dozen apps you don't use into one folder and forget them; this is no different from any other tablet PC.

Uninstalling pre-installed apps is Irrelevant. Whenever I've looked at apps in the gurgle playstore, the vast majority have silly requirements for permissions.

I'm talking aboot apps custom-made for the hearing-impaired, which are designed and vetted by the various associations for the deaf and hearing-impaired, not all the stoopit shit that slaps you in the face all over the Play Store, etc.

Personally I doubt that any apps "...are designed ... by the various associations for the deaf and hearing-impaired". Such organisations have no experience in implementing TTS technology.

Since you know so much about it, please provide references to competent reviews of such apps. I'll read them with interest.

As for "vetting", I have no idea what that might mean in this context.

Bottom line is that a smartphone with a usable-sized screen (that seems to be a minimum of 6-6.5" or so now) is so much a part of everyday life in this age that even your pants have been redesigned to accommodate; this is why they now have such roomy pockets and in some cases, even a pocket inside the pocket to keep the screen pressed against your leg for protection. This is actually remarkably effective; and I can say this from experience crawling around on floors and under desks for a living.

Clothes over here aren't designed that way, especially for the small and thin.

And no, I'm not going to buy an expensive product - which might or might not work - and that also requires me to buy new clothes!

That gif seems to sum up what you are trying to do: stir it for your own benefit/purposes.

If you have references to reviews that support your claims for the apps, I'm interested. Otherwise I'm not going to bother to reply to you.

[Cerebus]

And no, I'm not going to buy an expensive product - which might or might not work - and that also requires me to buy new clothes!

Tom, I think you're going to have to face the fact that someday soon you'll have to replace that 1970s Rocky Horror Show T-shirt, even if it does still fit you.

It's just a jump to the left...

[mansaxel]

Ok, but why the hell do smartphones not make their phone function the default?

Because only a minority of people use the pocket computer for its legacy voice chat function. I interacted with my wife 3 times via my pocket computer today; once via voice, using the phone in legacy mode, twice using text in Signal. And that was much phone use as phone. Normally it's like 7:1 phone to Signal or so. And I'm a bit old-fashioned, so am probably not representative for today.

[mnementh]

Now... please take a further moment and realize that comparing a flip-phone custom-made for the hearing-impaired to any general-market phone is as relevant as comparing a polar bear to a cheese grater... unless we're talking about making tiny shreds of people; that would be a valid discussion.

Strawman argument, as pointed out above.

No, it's the only relevant argument here. Your refusal to acknowledge it doesn't make that less so.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EDIT FOR SANITY'S SAKE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TIME OUT:

Okay, I guess I did take a bit of a confrontational attitude, and now it's just snowballing, so I'm going to take a step back and apologize for that.

But @tggzzz, the bottom line is your original rant attacked all things smartphone, and it certainly sounded like that was coming from a place of ignorance, not from the fact you have a medical need for certain features from your phone... features which, as shown below, I actually spent some time researching just recently for my dad, so I'm not completely ignorant.

Today's smartphones are smart not just in the apps, but in many cases, in hardware features designed specifically for the kind of accessibility problems you're talking aboot; Apple is actually one of the best in that regard, and have been for a long, long time. I'd gladly get a iPwn for my dad if he'd have one, and his hearing aid already has BTLE connectivity.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/EDIT FOR SANITY'S SAKE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I spent some time researching just this for my dad, when he needed a new phone a while back. These are just what I could remember off the top of my head today; I'd probably have gotten him a iPwn X or XS Max as they have a screen big enuf he could read it at a sane-ish price, and a volume booster in the ACCESSIBILITY options. The only roadblock was him not wanting a modern smartphone, not whether or not the features were available or the quality of smartphone hardware. Like I said, dad's a bit of a fossil where IT is concerned in general.

As recommended by the HLAA: https://www.hearingloss.org/

https://clearcaptions.com/

https://clearcaptions.com/mobile-phone/ (App for iOS; not yet on Android.)

Advert, but still a good roundup of phones with good compatibility for the variety of connection formats used in modern hearing aids:

https://www.hearingtracker.com/resource ... aring-aids

Also a commercial site (remember, healthcare is very much for-profit over here), but a good roundup of well-rated call-captioning apps:

https://www.healthyhearing.com/report/4 ... g-impaired

mnem
[expletive deleted]

[tggzzz]

"Healthy Hearing" is a self-proclaimed directory whose objective is to get a patient into a position where they can spend money. We can guess who pays their salary and can guess whether they will bite or nibble the hand that feeds them.

It is less obvious what "Hearing Tracker" is and who pays their salary. Its USP appears to be that random people can leave comments => data rather than information.

Those are not reviews. Those are lists of features lifted from adverts. ChatGPT could do that as well as the "staff writer"!

Obvious questions...

• How well do the TTS apps work with an Indian voice overlaid with lots of other Indian voices in a call centre?
• What's the latency between someone speaking and the text appearing?
• Some of the apps retrospectively change what they previously presented to you. How long does a user have to wait to be sure history won't change?

Being able to connect to an earbud is, of course, completely irrelevant.

Whether or not a phone can connect to one of my existing aids is unknown (the audiologist didn't mention the possibility), and could change when I get the next set of aids.

I tend to doubt that it is possible, since I have a BiCROS system where the aid in my left ear (-110dB) repeats what it picks up to my right ear (-60..-80,-110dB). I doubt that it can receive two radio inputs simultaneously.

What is/was your father's hearing loss?

[mnementh]

Little enough loss that he doesn't use it all the time, and sometimes prefers to just hold the speakerphone up to his ear. I really don't know the medical details; I never got that far looking into it because he wouldn't have it. He showed me the paperwork that came with when he got it; it stated it supported MFi (an Apple BTLE extension for hearing aids), and Telecoil. I forget the name, but Android has a similar BTLE extension for hearing aids.

The only voice captioning app that I know is recommended by any agency is ClearCaptions; researching them was where I got the other links. From there I found out about the FCC's HAC phone rating system, which is very useful if you'd bother to follow that trail.

Here's Apple's HAC rating chart: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202186

But none of that changes the fact that hating on any general-market phone, no matter the format, for not having the exact specifications your "prescription" phone has is just not reasonable. The fact is that the likeliest place to get a decent speaker with enough volume (or boosted volume, as iPhones have in their Accessibility settings) for you to hear and compatible connected-hearing-aid connectivity is going to be with a mid-range or better smartphone, because that is where the manufacturers spend the dev money, not flip-phones which are the bottom of the barrel tech-wise.

Aside from special-purpose devices like yours where somebody pays a premium for specific features in what would otherwise be an ordinary or even remarkets a slightly-modified budget phone, which is just plain medical racketeering (I'm looking at you, JitterBug ); the manufacturers just don't spend the money on those "budget" products.

Cheers,

mnem
*toddles off to ded*

[tggzzz]

Little enough loss that he doesn't use it all the time, and sometimes prefers to just hold the speakerphone up to his ear. I really don't know the medical details; I never got that far looking into it because he wouldn't have it. He showed me the paperwork that came with when he got it; it stated it supported MFi (an Apple BTLE extension for hearing aids), and Telecoil. I forget the name, but Android has a similar BTLE extension for hearing aids.

I envy your father; my hearing was that good a decade ago.

MFi/BLTE are irrelevant for my hearing aids. They have a telecoil, which I can't use in many places (e.g. sitting typing this) because there's a buzz from the harmonics of 50Hz.

The only voice captioning app that I know is recommended by any agency is ClearCaptions; researching them was where I got the other links.

Ref please.

From there I found out about the FCC's HAC phone rating system, which is very useful if you'd bother to follow that trail.
Here's Apple's HAC rating chart: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202186

Oh, I know all about HAC - as I mentioned earlier, the phones I use are M4/T4.

All Apples phones are only M3. Surprise, surprise, the ones you said have good have excellent sound aren't up to the task.

But none of that changes the fact that hating on any general-market phone, no matter the format, for not having the exact specifications your "prescription" phone has is just not reasonable.

Bullshit, pure and simple.

I don't have anything resembling a "prescription phone" (except in your imagination). I use mass market phones available in local supermarkets, e.g. https://www.argos.co.uk/product/2151359 (HAC: T4/M4).

• Wired phone is a bog-standard old BT speakerphone
• Cordless phones are Panasonic phones recommended by "Which?". I'd give a link to the review, but it is behind a paywall.
• Cellphone is the Doro 6020, cost £70 (plus probably £20/year phone charges).

The fact is that the likeliest place to get a decent speaker with enough volume (or boosted volume, as iPhones have in their Accessibility settings)

More ignorance: your ref indicates all Apple phones are the poorer M3. I use mass-market M4 phones.

for you to hear and compatible connected-hearing-aid connectivity is going to be with a mid-range or better smartphone, because that is where the manufacturers spend the dev money, not flip-phones which are the bottom of the barrel tech-wise.

Wrong again. Doro advertises "Looking for an easy-to use mobile phone for yourself or for an elder relative? All our phones are designed with seniors in mind and feature extra loud and clear sound, large separated keys and a high visual contrast that make them easier to use than other phones."

Aside from special-purpose devices like yours where somebody pays a premium for specific features in what would otherwise be an ordinary or even remarkets a slightly-modified budget phone, which is just plain medical racketeering (I'm looking at you, JitterBug ); the manufacturers just don't spend the money on those "budget" products.

Doro spends the money, because that is their USP. Get them in your local supermarket.

However, I notice that Doro have just introduced a M4/T4 android phone. I'll see if I can find any reviews of it.

Your comments about Jitterbug illustrate why I insist on reviews from organisations dedicated to deafness, and where I can understand who pays their salaries.