GSMArena has info on leaks of the upcoming Motorola Moto X (2015) (model name XT1542).
Reportedly via an image, the smartphone will have a 5.2″ 1440 x 2560p AMOLED display. A 64-bit octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 processor and 4GB of RAM will be inside the unit.
In a later update, GSMArena received a second image of a device with the same model number, which makes the rumor a bit more credible. According to this photo, the Moto X (2015) will run Android 5.1.1. It will also have a 16MP rear-facing camera, a 5MP front-facing camera, and either 32GB or 64GB of internal storage. All of this will be powered by a 3,280 mAh battery.
Currently, there is no word on the smartphone’s release date, as of yet.
The post Motorola Moto X (2015) tipped to feature a 5.2″ QHD display appeared first on AndroidGuys.
In 2010, Anthony Elonis threatened his estranged wife by writing rants on his Facebook page such as, “There’s one way to love you but a thousand ways to kill you. I’m not going to rest until your body is a mess, soaked in blood and dying from all the little cuts.”
For making these threats, a federal district court sentenced him to more than three years in prison.
On June 1, the Supreme Court voided that conviction, explaining that the standard the court had used to judge whether Elonis’s threats were “true threats” was not sufficient. The district court had asked jurors to consider only whether the threats would cause a reasonable person to be afraid. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that juries should also consider whether the defendant intended to make a true threat. The ruling will make it more difficult than ever to prosecute the authors of online death and rape threats.
If only everyone would follow that lead. When crimes like stalking, threatening someone with violence, calling for others to physically harm someone, and defamation take place online, they are often treated less seriously by law enforcement, friends and family, and bystanders than when they are committed in a physical, offline place.
High-profile stories over the last couple of years have raised the profile of these crimes-stories like that of Caroline Criado-Perez, a blogger and cofounder of the Women’s Room website who led a campaign to put a woman on the back of the British bank note-and consequently received a deluge of death and rape threats. Or Robin William’s daughter, Zelda Williams, who publicly left Twitter after harassment following her father’s death. Or two reporters for the New York Times, who left their homes after their addresses were posted online in retaliation for including the “address” of the police officer in the Ferguson shooting (in reality, they included the name of a street he once lived on, which had already been published by other outlets). They received robbery and death threats. Or Anita Sarkeesian, a media critic who has been harassed online since she launched a Kickstarter campaign to fund a series of videos that explores representations of women in pop culture narratives, and canceled a speaking event at Utah State University last year after the school received a threat from someone claiming he or she would commit “the deadliest school shooting in American history” if she spoke. (This wasn’t the first time someone had threatened violence at one of her events, but it was the first time that the hosting organization, due to concealed-carry laws, could not prevent someone with a permit from bringing a gun to the event.)
And yet online harassment largely goes unchecked, and not only in the cases that make headlines.
According to a study by Pew Research, 25% of young women have been sexually harassed online, and 26% have been stalked. Online harassment is a prevalent, serious problem that even the Supreme Court (albeit implicitly) agrees should be treated in cyberspace in the same way that it’s treated in real life. So why is so little still being done about such a widespread problem?
Local law enforcement doesn’t always know how to enforce online harassment laws.
Arguing with someone online, which is what many aggressors maintain they are doing, is not illegal. Neither is calling someone names. Harassment, stalking, threatening someone with violence, calling for others to physically harm someone-what many aggressors are actually doing-is illegal. You can be sued for defamation, invading privacy in certain ways, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress.
Frankly, police at the local level have a very hard time figuring out how to investigate it.
In some cases, crimes are more difficult to litigate online. Some states’ harassment laws, for instance, only cover threats sent directly to the target. Tweeting someone’s nude photo at her boss is harassment, but because it’s not directed to the target specifically, it often doesn’t fall under the legal definition. Coordinated harassment carried out by a cybermob is difficult to prosecute because individual actions may not themselves qualify, at least legally, as harassment, even though the group’s actions together have that effect. Nonconsensual pornography has also yet to be criminalized in 34 states. All these technicalities aside, “There are tons of laws that say [online harassment] is illegal,” says Citron. “We already have those laws on the books.”
But those laws aren’t being frequently enforced. “Frankly, police at the local level have a very hard time figuring out how to investigate it,” Citron says. “And they don’t want to say they don’t know.”
What can be done about it: The House of Representatives recently called on the Department of Justice to better enforce laws against severe online threats. Organizations like Working to Halt Online Abuse (WHOA) and National Network to End Domestic Violence have run education efforts for law enforcement officials. Organizations like these, as well as the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative and Without My Consent, are working to update stalking and revenge porn laws.
Another legal change that would benefit targets of online harassment, Citron argues, would be to allow pseudonymous litigation. That would allow victims of online harassment to press charges without bringing more attention to content, like revenge porn, that is intended to embarrass them.
Startups don’t think about online harassment until it’s too late.
Safety and security, if they are considered at all, are often afterthought additions to new social networks. “Harassment is a huge problem, and it’s not planned for,” says John Adams, the former head of safety at Twitter, who now works as a consultant to startups on safety and security. “It’s very easy for them to buy 1,000 servers on Amazon and build a company, but they don’t plan for privacy or security or harassment.”
Harassment is a huge problem, and it’s not planned for.
Anonymous social site Yik Yak, for instance, is for the most part, like Twitter, used without malice. But it didn’t take long before abuse surfaced. Users reported bullying and sexual harassment, and one of them started a petition to shut the app down.
Its explanation? “Yik Yak’s founders say the app’s overnight success left them unprepared for some of the problems that have arisen since its introduction,” read one recent New York Times article. It’s the “whoops, we didn’t realize” excuse.
What can be done about it: Startup founders who discover that their network is being used for harassment should not, at this point, be surprised.
The problem is that in the early stages of a startup’s life, just keeping a site online can be a challenge. By comparison, the potential for harassment doesn’t seem like a pressing issue. But it can quickly become a much bigger problem as startups grow their user bases. “Given the scale Twitter is at,” Del Harvey, head of Trust and Safety at Twitter, said in a Ted Talk last year, “a one-in-a-million chance happens 500 times a day.” Putting effective tools and policies in place before something bad happens is not only the right thing to do, but it can also help tech companies avoid a public relations nightmare and a reputation as a dangerous platform.
Startups aren’t legally obligated to address online harassment in the way that they are obligated to address, say, copyright infringement. But the pressure to do so could, Adams argues, come from their investors. “Why don’t we see more VCs making more of these plans part of their pre-funding agreements?” he asks. “‘I’m not going to give you funding until you have a security plan. I’m not going to give you funding until you address online harassment in the code of conduct.’”
Tech companies have no liability for harassment on their platforms.
Business owners can be sued for injury that occurs on their physical, offline properties if conditions likely to cause harm were present-for instance, if the business built a parking lot with no lighting. But website owners cannot be sued for creating conditions under which harm is likely to occur. “[A platform] is more liable for copyright violation,” says Nancy Kim, a professor at the California Western School of Law who studies how the law applies to online harassment, “than if someone makes a death threat on [its] website.”
Because section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects Internet properties from liability for content posted by their users, platforms have no legal pressure to create safe online environments. It also helps shield platforms that have been created expressly for the purpose of hosting destructive content, like revenge porn sites and anonymous gossip sites like Campus Gossip, which solicits a fee in order to take down content.
What can be done about it: If you ask any privacy advocate for a list of their greatest fears, any change to Section 230 will likely be on it. Making platforms at all liable for content that users post is seen by many activists as a slippery slope that ends in the destruction of public discourse as we know it. “If you introduce liability, these companies don’t have a particularly compelling reason to let everybody talk,” says Danny O’Brien, the international director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “What would happen is that you would see conversations, arguments about issues like Israel and Palestine being pushed off networks.”
But some wonder if there isn’t a way to remove protection from websites that are actively causing harm while still upholding an open Internet. Citron, for instance, has proposed exempting two specific cases from Section 230: sites that intentionally solicit content that breaks the law, such as sites that encourage posting defamatory information or inciting violence, and sites that encourage the posting of nonconsensual pornography and charge victims for its removal. “My strategy was to think of who were the very worst actors, who make a mockery of section 230,” she says. Unless Twitter and Facebook undertake a very unlikely pivot, they wouldn’t be affected by changes like these. Some of the more malicious gossip and porn sites that facilitate online harassment, however, would.
There are no easy technical solutions to this problem.
Social media companies do not want to implement technologies that censor their platforms by mistaking healthy debate for malicious harassment; for the same reason, companies are reluctant to automatically suspend user accounts. Besides, there is little anyone can do to prevent a malicious user from rejoining a site after his or her account has been shut down. Even if Twitter were to require users to provide a phone number when they create a new account, as it has done in some cases, it’s not that hard to get a new phone number.
Disallowing anonymous accounts isn’t a real solution, either; anonymity has great value for people who are, say, political dissidents or human-rights activists.
All of this makes it hard for tech companies to build truly powerful tools and features that might prevent online harassment.
Most platforms have punted the problem to users, to whom they offer tools that help block and filter harassment from users’ individual news streams, like Twitter. But this doesn’t really solve the problem. As Mary Anne Franks put it in The Atlantic, “This is the equivalent of responding to someone yelling in your face as you walk down the street by putting on a blindfold and earplugs.”
What can be done about it: After receiving a lot of bad press about how it handled Gamergate harassment, Twitter made a rush of announcements that included a more streamlined way for users to flag abusive tweets, improved features to help individual users report threats to law enforcement, and tripled the size of the human team at Twitter that fields user reports of online harassment. Twitter’s latest tool is a filter that users can turn on to automatically clean up their feeds-and, according to early reviews, this tool actually works.
The company has also been working to apply to its fight against online harassment a strategy it uses for stopping spam. Twitter is trying to identify signals that suggest an account is being used purely for harassment purposes-for example, bounced emails to the account holder, accounts that are often blocked by other users, and accounts with low follower counts-so that Twitter’s system can flag those accounts automatically, and then follow up with additional steps, like verifying account email addresses.
All of this might be summarized as playing catchup. There’s still a lot of work to do: For one thing, the new Twitter filters are only available to “verified” users. There’s still no way to stop someone from creating multiple fake accounts with which to harass other people. People who post tweets that can do a significant amount of damage-like tweets that include the phone number and address of their target-and then delete those tweets before Twitter can suspend the account are often not held accountable for their actions.
Other platforms have experimented with solutions that overcome the technical limitations of moderation. League of Legends, for instance, created a community tribunal to punish bad actors in its system. According to Jeffery Lin, one of the games’ designers, the judgments of the players coincided with developer judgments on bad behavior up to 80% of the time. Lin says that 280,000 players were “reformed” in one year, meaning they had been punished by the Tribunal but then achieved a positive standing in the community after changing their behavior.
Women and minorities are underrepresented at big tech companies and among lawmakers.
Research suggests that, in general, women are more likely to experience the most severe types of harassment. WHOA offers an optional survey to people who seek its help with their harassment cases. Of the 4,043 people who completed the survey between 2000 and 2013, 70% identified as women. In a 2006 experiment, researchers set up fake accounts with feminine and male names and launched them into chat rooms. On average, the feminine-named accounts received 100 sexually explicit or threatening messages every day; the masculine-named accounts received about 3.7 a day. According to a recent Pew study, people of all ages and genders experience harassment online. But women, in particular young women, are more likely than their male peers to face stalking and sexual harassment.
It’s not any old threats, it’s rape threats.
Online mobs do sometimes pick male targets. But the abuse is different. “[Online harassment towards women] is very much sexually humiliating and sexually threatening,” says Citron. “It’s not any old threats, it’s rape threats. It’s not any old privacy invasion; it’s a nude photo. It’s not any old defamation; it’s accusing someone of having herpes and being a prostitute.”
The same Pew survey that found women were most likely to encounter the most severe types of online harassment found that African-American and Hispanic Internet users were more likely to be harassed in general than white people.
In other words, the same people-women, people of color-who are most likely to be harassed or severely harassed are also least likely to be in positions of power at platforms like Twitter, Google, and YouTube, in police stations, and among lawmakers. And the people in positions of power in those organizations are less likely to have firsthand knowledge of what it’s like to be harassed online.
This is important, because experiencing something firsthand inevitably changes how, and how often, you think about it. The legal director at Scribd, Jason Bentley, for instance, changed his views on online harassment after someone who he had banned from the platform decided to target his personal life. The user claimed his daughter had been raped by Bentley, and he posted his accusation not only on Scribd, but on sites like Craigslist and Ripoff Report, where it would surface in Google searches for Bentley’s name.”I didn’t really feel [the problem of online harassment] until that,” Bentley says. “It was a lot more abstract. I was a lot more prone to accepting somebody’s justification that, oh no, they’re actually an advocacy journalist, this is not actually harassment.”
What can be done about it: Ideally, we would create a society in which women and minorities are not underrepresented in leadership positions. And there are lots of people working on that problem.
In the meantime, targets of online harassment are helping to explain its severity to people who have never experienced the worst forms of it, by sharing personal stories-acts of bravery, considering that being public about online harassment often leads to the speaker experiencing more online harassment.
Photo: Flickr user Susanne Nilsson
Sarkeesian, for instance, spoke about online harassment and women’s representation in games at five universities and three conferences, and did 20 media appearances and interviews last year. She has also consulted with social media platforms about how they could improve their policies and platforms to prevent harassment.
Writer and performer Lindy West told a story on This American Life and in The Guardian about how a troll created a Twitter account that impersonated her dead father. Twitter CEO Dick Costolo mentioned the story in a leaked memo about harassment on the platform. “We suck at dealing with abuse and trolls on the platform, and we’ve sucked at it for years,” he wrote. “It’s no secret, and the rest of the world talks about it every day. We lose core user after core user by not addressing simple trolling issues that they face.”
Why It Matters
As Costolo noted, having a reputation as a place where women receive death threats is a business problem for technology companies that are striving to keep people engaged with their platforms and attract new users. But it’s an even bigger problem for society. Imagine hundreds of people hurling slurs at you, urging you to kill yourself, and threatening to kill you. Or rape you, along with very specific descriptions of how they would like to do so-and your address. Your life would be disrupted, to say the least.
Over the past few months, I spoke to dozens of women who have been the targets of online harassment. One woman I spoke with about the online harassment she endured said she was so stricken with anxiety that her partner had to deliver medication to her in bed. Another was undergoing exposure therapy, during which she had been instructed to practice doing something she enjoyed-while facing an open laptop. Another had changed her name after an ex posted her nude photos all over the Internet. A game developer whose personal information had been published online had to call her father and explain why people were calling him to tell him she was a whore. Others talked about turning down prank pizza orders or worrying about a SWAT team showing up at their homes on the basis of fake 911 calls . At the very least, the harassment was a burden on their time and energy.
“What if you were doing your job, and there were just someone in the office yelling threats at you all day?” feminist author Jaclyn Friedman, who has been a target of online harassment, said. “Even if they never followed through on them, it would still impact your quality of life, and your ability to do your job. The idea that I can’t function on the Internet without people saying these vile and violent things to me is not okay, whether or not they ever actually come rape me.”
If there’s something crazy happening in the news, I won’t comment on it.
An Internet culture that allows online harassment can restrict the speech and opportunities of its targets. Though research about how harassment impacts social media use is hard to come by, back in 2005, the Pew Internet and American Life Project study attributed a 9% decline in women’s use of chat rooms to menacing comments. Anecdotally, many women admit they don’t participate on platforms like Twitter as much as they might otherwise, for fear of harassment. “If there’s something crazy happening in the news, I won’t comment on it,” says Imani Gandy, a senior legal analyst at RH Reality Check, a publication that reports on sexual and reproductive health and justice issues. “Because I know if I do comment on it, I’m just going to end up being inundated with nutjobs. I definitely self-censor a lot more than I used to because of the harassment.”
In an incident that the media dubbed “donglegate,” Adria Richards became a target of harassment in 2013 after she tweeted about two men who made an inappropriate joke at a technology conference and one of them, after losing his job, posted about it on Hacker News. She didn’t tweet for about two years after she received her first death threat. Though she used to regularly make YouTube videos with tech “how-tos” and commentary-almost 400 of them in three years-after the harassment hit, she stopped. In the last two years, she’s posted one video.
Most of us aren’t going to find ourselves in the same situation that Richards was caught up in, but after hearing her story, we might hesitate to participate in public discourse, afraid that one day we’ll be the ones who find ourselves in a swirling whirlwind of rage. “It could happen to anyone,” says Richards, who used Twitter for five years before Donglegate without ever having a problem. “Like cancer.”
- A Snapshot Of How Twitter Deals With Online Harassment
- How HeartMob Is Designing A Tool For Fighting Online Harassment
- The Supreme Court Just Made Online Threats More Difficult To Prosecute
Filed under: Internet
In a last second change, and we mean that almost literally, Sony has update their product page for the Xperia Z4 Tablet, in short, UK buyers that were hoping to see their new tablet ship out starting today, sorry, not going to happen.
Sony announced their latest flagship Xperia tablet at MWC earlier this year. We all liked the look of the device, touting the latest and greatest of specs and features to come out of the Sony camp. We enjoyed our time with the device as well, dunking it in the supplied water tanks to show off its IP certification and more.
The 10.1-inch tablet is no slouch on the spec sheets either, rocking the Snapdragon 810 SoC, 2K display, 3GB of RAM with 16GB or 32GB of internal storage, expandable via microSD slot. A 8MP rear shooter is a solid camera sensor for a tablet, and the 5MP front shooter should satisfy your video conferencing needs.
Be sure to check out our first look, hands-on overview of the Sony Xperia Z4 Tablet from MWC back in March. Then, hit the Sony product page for the Xperia Z4 Tablet itself.
Back to our point today, Sony previously had this Android powered tablet scheduled for deliveries starting today, June 6th, but, for un-announced reasons, have updated that to a June 17th delivery date. They also boldly use the word ‘expected,’ which I totally understand, but when a last moment update like this occurs once, we wonder the validity of the new date. Hopefully they’ve bought themselves extra time and will start shipping sooner.
Just a reminder, at this time you can only order the 32GB LTE equipped model, which includes the detachable keyboard. And you can only get it in black, the white version is currently not showing as an option. This setup will run you £579.00 and the tablet may be yours by the end of the month.
What do you say, are you eager to drop this kind of cash on Sony’s latest tablet?
This article originally appeared on our partner site TabTimes.
Just how bad was the hack that compromised the info of 4 million US government workers? Exceptionally bad, if you ask anonymous officials talking to Reuters. They understand that the Office of Personnel Management breach exposed data going as far back in time as 1985, which could reveal what about 1.9 million staffers did after they left federal employment. It’s not certain exactly what was taken, but the hack may have exposed bank info, birthdays and Social Security numbers — the kind of sensitive content that could lead to breaches elsewhere.
This isn’t an isolated incident, either. Investigators believe there’s a connection to earlier data theft at insurance giant Anthem as well as health care service provider Premera Blue Cross. The one consolation is that most State Department workers weren’t affected, but the branch is dealing with its own security woes. It’s still not certain whether the (allegedly Chinese) culprits were state-sponsored or simply very determined thieves, but one defense official is convinced that this was intelligence gathering. If it was, the breach could easily worsen already strained China-US relations.
[Image credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images]
Filed under: Internet
Sirron Norris is an incredible artist based in San Francisco. If you haven’t seen his work spread across the side of buildings all over the world, then you may recognize it from the set of Fox’s hit show, Bob’s Burgers.
I had the chance to chat with him this week about his artistic process, and what tools he used to create the background for the set of our new show, Dear Veronica (which premiers in two days on June 10th)! You can follow Sirron online on Twitter, Instagram, and on his website.
Filed under: Misc
Google’s Android Open Source Project (AOSP) rolled out in 2007 with the goal of creating a unified framework for mobile operating systems and, in turn, expediting the development of mobile products. The core of the code was open to everyone, but to help guarantee quality products — and promote its own services in the face of Apple’s iOS — Google also organized the Open Handset Alliance (OHA). Companies who pledged allegiance to this group effectively committed to certain standards of quality for any resultant Android hardware and software. Membership in the OHA, however, is not a requirement for AOSP and so numerous forked (read: compatible and non-compatible) versions, like Amazon’s Fire OS, have been developed over the years. We’ve pinpointed just a few of these to highlight the vibrant — and often political — undercurrent of Android’s alternate identities.
You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have: the forks of Android life.
While many people probably buy Android smartphones on contract, some people prefer to buy their handset outright and if you’ve been waiting for a deal on the Galaxy S6 in the UK, you’re in luck; Amazon UK have dropped the price of the Galaxy S6 32GB to under £485 presumably for a limited amount of time, although we’ve not been able to confirm this yet.
As spotted by Gavin, the deal is for the 32GB white Galaxy S6 UK variant SIM-free and unlocked for use on any network. Amazon has plenty of listings for the Galaxy S6 but on one listing (which is for a marketplace seller), the company is listed as another seller and is offering a brand-new handset at the reduced price of £484.99. By way of comparison, Samsung still sells the Galaxy S6 for £559 and a 13 percent saving is certainly a good deal for a brand new smartphone.
Galaxy S6 in video:
.rvs_wrapper.align_center.cbc-latest-videos ul li
.rvs_wrapper.cbc-latest-videos:not(.align_none) ul li:nth-child(2n+1)
font-weight: 600 !important;
margin: 0 !important;
font-size: 24px !important;
font-family: ‘Roboto Condensed’;
.rvs_wrapper.align_left.cbc-latest-videos ul li,
.rvs_wrapper.align_none.cbc-latest-videos ul li
padding: 0 15px 0 0;
.rvs_wrapper.align_right.cbc-latest-videos ul li
padding: 0 0 0 15px;
.rvs_wrapper.align_center.cbc-latest-videos ul li
padding: 0 7px;
.rvs_wrapper.cbc-latest-videos ul li > a
.rvs_wrapper.cbc-latest-videos ul li > a .yt-thumbnail
@media only screen and (max-width : 480px)
body .rvs_wrapper.cbc-latest-videos ul li
padding: 0 7px;
The Galaxy S6 is Samsung’s latest flagship smartphone and arguably its best flagship device ever. The handset comes with a 5.1-inch Quad HD Super AMOLED display offering a whopping 577 pixel per inch density and it’s powered by Samsung’s own octa-core Exynos 7420 processor that tops the benchmark charts along with 3GB RAM and 32GB storage; there’s also 64GB and 128GB options available and none are expandable.
On the back, it comes with an all-new 16MP camera equipped with Optical Image Stabilisation, 4K Ultra HD video recording and a 5MP front facing snapper that can shoot Quad HD video. Under the hood, its powered by a 2550 mAh battery that can’t be removed but has dual wireless charging built in and also onboard is a fingerprint scanner, heart rate monitor, revamped and optimised user interface. The best thing about the handset is the new metal and glass build that offers a premium experience that’s been lacking from past plastic Samsung flagships.
Interested in picking up this deal before it increases in price? Hit the big button below and be quick; while it’s not confirmed that it’s a limited-time deal, it’s almost certain to rise in price, especially as the handset only launched a couple of months ago!
In a tweet from Thursday morning, AT&T possibly hinted at the upcoming release of the Samsung GS6 Active.
Hit the break for the embedded tweet.
Only one thing is missing from your workout. It’s almost time to activate your full power. pic.twitter.com/PzgOS6SATJ
— AT&T (@ATT) June 4, 2015
The GS6 Active will feature the following, including a rugged body design:
- 5.1-inch, 2560×1440 (QHD) Super AMOLED display
- Samsung Exynos 7420 processor with 3GB of RAM
- 15MP rear camera / 5MP front camera
- 32GB of internal storage
- 73.6×146.9×8.8mm measurements
- 3500mAh battery
Come comment on this article: AT&T teases GS6 Active release in tweet
Android is an exciting platform, allowing you to tailor every little bit of your device to your personality. Whether it be through custom ROMs, icon packs and launchers, and right down to the notification and ringtone sounds. With Android M, customization is only going to get better.
Every device is different, but for the most part changing the sounds are straightforward. Even customizing certain ringtones to certain contacts is a seamless process.
On most devices changing the notification sound is straight forward. For this guide, I’m using Motorola’s Moto X (2013).
First, open your app tray, and then find the Settings icon and open the app.
Next, find the “Sound” option and select it.
Finally, just select the “Default notification sound” option.
After that, you should be able to go through a list of different notification sounds that are preloaded on the Android system. You can select each sound to hear a preview of what it’ll sound like. Take a few minutes and find the one you like the most. Select it, and then hit accept.
As you can see, it’s fairly straightforward!
Things are a bit different on a lot of devices from Chinese companies. For instance, some Huawei devices, instead of placing notification sound options in the Settings, it’s actually in the messaging app itself. You’ll need to go into the Messaging app, find the settings, and from there change the notification sound. It should work somewhat like the steps posted above.
Keep in mind that this is limited to a lot of their older devices. The majority of their new devices employ the same method as everyone else. So, the steps posted above should work for most Huawei owners.
Ringtones work much the same way as changing the notification sound. Follow the first steps above, and then select “Phone ringtone” over the “default notification sound.”
Tailoring ringtones to specific contacts
You can also set ringtones for specific contacts, but the method varies in just about every brand of smartphone. As for the Moto X (2014) you can select the “People” app, select a contact, hit the menu button in the top right menu, and select “set a ringtone” to setup a specific option for a certain contact.
Setting custom ringtones
If you’re not fond of the sounds preloaded on Android or just prefer something new and different, Zedge is a great solution to mix things up. It’s a free download on the Google Play Store, and has thousands of different notification sounds, ringtones, and wallpapers available for free.
When you search for notification sounds or ringtones and download them, the only difference in these steps is that once you select “Phone ringtone,” it’ll prompt you asking if you want to look at Zedge ringtones or Android system ringtones (pictured below). Simply select which one you want to look under and hit accept. It works virtually the same way with setting a new notification sound, too.
There are a lot of excellent sounds out there for custom notification sounds and ringtones. However, Zedge isn’t the only option for finding a wide variety of sounds. I’m sure there’s some other excellent solutions out there. And, there’s always the option of making your own, too.
What apps do you use to get your notification and ringtone sounds? Do you make your own? Let us know in the comments.
Come comment on this article: Customizing Android: How to change notification sounds, ringtones, and set custom ringtones
Recommended Reading highlights the best long-form writing on technology and more in print and on the web. Some weeks, you’ll also find short reviews of books that we think are worth your time. We hope you enjoy the read.
by Adrian Chen
The New York Times Magazine
There’s a super-secret group of internet trolls in Russia that’s causing problems not only online, but also in US cities. The so-called Internet Research Agency caused a ruckus in Louisiana last September with fake reports of an accident at a chemical plant — reports that eventually made national news. To find out more about the organization, Adrian Chen took a trip to St. Petersburg, Russia, in April and found himself in the group’s crosshairs.
I, Justine: An Analog Memoir
Every wonder how a person goes from obscurity to viral success? Well, our pal iJustine wrote a whole book on the topic. If you’re unaware, Justine Ezarik is what folks in the biz call a “lifecaster” — someone who broadcasts their life 24 hours a day. Her memoir chronicles the funny and not so funny stories about what it’s like to put your whole life on the internet.
Scientists Dismissed “Hot Streaks” in Sports for Decades. They Were Wrong.
If you played the Super Nintendo (and arcade) game NBA Jam, you know that the in-game announcer would label a player that made three shots in a row “on fire,” which almost always meant he’d make the next shot. Despite previous reports disproving the theory, so-called hot streaks in sports are real.
Colorblind: On ‘Witcher 3,’ ‘Rust,’ and Gaming’s Race Problem
If you played The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, you probably noticed that every character in the game is white. Polygon’s Tauriq Moose discusses that title and more in a look at gaming’s ongoing problem with race.
How Superhero Movies Are Bad At Science
Is it a Golden Age for science in pop culture? Despite the popularity of films like Interstellar, Forbes’ Chad Orzel isn’t convinced. In fact, he explains that super hero movies that rely on “outright magic” are actually creating a public perception that science is something ordinary folks can’t do.
[Image credit: Shutterstock]
Filed under: Misc