Cycling, boxing and running studios, as well as some full-service gyms, are using sophisticated lighting systems to heighten the exercise experience.
NYS Entity Status
NYS Filing Date
APRIL 10, 2014
NYS DOS ID#
1971 WESTERN AVE #1121
ALBANY, NEW YORK, 12203
NYS Entity Type
DOMESTIC LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
2014 - AJS APPROVAL SERVICE LLC
AROUND THE WEB
- Fit City: Taking Night-Life Cue, Gyms Lower the Lights
By TATIANA BONCOMPAGNI - Tuesday Jun 13, 2017
- Report Reveals In-App Purchase Scams in the App Store
By Tim Hardwick - Monday Jun 12, 2017
An investigation into App Store developer pay-outs has uncovered a scamming trend in which apps advertising fake services are making thousands of dollars a month from in-app purchases.
In a Medium article titled How to Make $80,000 Per Month on the Apple App Store, Johnny Lin describes how he discovered the trend, which works by manipulating search ads to promote dubious apps in the App Store and then preys on unsuspecting users via the in-app purchase mechanism.
I scrolled down the list in the Productivity category and saw apps from well-known companies like Dropbox, Evernote, and Microsoft. That was to be expected. But what's this? The #10 Top Grossing Productivity app (as of June 7th, 2017) was an app called "Mobile protection :Clean & Security VPN".To learn how this could be, Lin installed and ran the app, and was soon prompted to start a "free trial" for an "anti-virus scanner" (iOS does not need anti-virus software thanks to Apple's sandboxing rules for individual apps). Tapping on the trial offer then threw up a Touch ID authentication prompt containing the text "You will pay $99.99 for a 7-day subscription starting Jun 9, 2017".
Given the terrible title of this app (inconsistent capitalization, misplaced colon, and grammatically nonsensical "Clean & Security VPN?"), I was sure this was a bug in the rankings algorithm. So I check Sensor Tower for an estimate of the app's revenue, which showed… $80,000 per month?? That couldn't possibly be right. Now I was really curious.
Lin was one touch away from paying $400 a month for a non-existent service offered by a scammer.
It suddenly made a lot of sense how this app generates $80,000 a month. At $400/month per subscriber, it only needs to scam 200 people to make $80,000/month, or $960,000 a year. Of that amount, Apple takes 30%, or $288,000?—?from just this one app.Lin went on to explain how dishonorable developers are able to take advantage of Apple's App Store search ads product because there's no filtering or approval process involved. Not only that, ads look almost indistinguishable from real results in the store, while some ads take up the entire search result's first page.
Lin dug deeper and found several other similar apps making money off the same scam, suggesting a wider disturbing trend, with scam apps regularly showing up in the App Store's top grossing lists.
It's unclear at this point how these apps managed to make it onto the App Store in the first place given Apple's usually stringent approval process, or whether changes to the search ads system in iOS 11 will prevent this immoral practice from occurring in future. We'll be sure to update this article if we hear more from Apple.
In the meantime, users should report scam apps when they see them and inform less savvy friends of this scamming trend until something is done to eradicate it.
Discuss this article in our forums
- India Set to Approve Amazon's Grocery Service
Friday Jun 9, 2017
New Delhi is poised to give the online retail giant the green light to invest around $500 million to build a nationwide network to stock and deliver groceries.
- Critic's Notebook: Foreign Horror TV Shows Are Light on Monsters, Heavy on Mood
By MIKE HALE - Friday Jun 16, 2017
On the streaming service Shudder, foreign series like “Jordskott” and “Penance” offer a classic psychological dread that’s in short supply on American TV.
- Proposed Law Against Apple's 'Walled Garden' Software Approach Sparks Fears of iPhone Ban in Italy
By Joe Rossignol - Friday Jun 23, 2017
Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera [Google Translate] published a headline today that translates to "the bill that could ban the iPhone in Italy."
The bill in question, Senate Act 2484, is aimed at ensuring Italians have open access to software, content, and services. The portion of the bill potentially relevant to Apple essentially says that users should have the right to download any software, whether proprietary or open source, on any platform.
An excerpt from Article Four of the loosely translated bill:
Users have the right to, in an appropriate format to the required technology platform […] use fair and non-discriminatory software, proprietary or open source […] content and services of their choice.It's well known that iOS is a walled garden, in which apps can only be distributed through the App Store, and only if developers adhere to Apple's guidelines. The only way to download apps outside of Apple's parameters is by jailbreaking, which is in violation of Apple's end-user agreement.
Naturally, there are some concerns about how the iPhone and other devices could be affected if the bill is approved, although the prospect of any Apple product being outright banned in Italy seems highly unlikely.
The bill was introduced last year by Stefano Quintarelli, an Italian entrepreneur and member of the Scelta Civica political party in Italy. The bill was approved by the Chamber of Deputies in July 2016, and it now must be approved by the Senate of the Republic, within Italy's parliamentary government.
(Thanks, Macitynet and iSpazio!)
Discuss this article in our forums
- Twitter Urges Court To Reject Bid To Revive Lawsuit Over ISIS Attack
Wednesday Jun 7, 2017
Family members of people killed in an attack in Jordan shouldn't be able to proceed with a lawsuit accusing Twitter of encouraging terrorism, the microblogging service argues.
- EU Proposes Enforcing Data Encryption and Banning Backdoors
By Tim Hardwick - Monday Jun 19, 2017
The European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs has published draft proposals that would enforce end-to-end encryption on all digital communications and forbid backdoors that enable law enforcement to access private message data.
The proposed amendment relates to Article 7 of the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights, which says that EU citizens have a right to personal privacy, as well as privacy in their family life and at home. By extension, the "confidentiality and safety" of EU citizens' electronic communications needs to be "guaranteed" in the same manner.
Confidentiality of electronic communications ensures that information exchanged between parties and the external elements of such communication, including when the information has been sent, from where, to whom, is not to be revealed to anyone other than to the parties involved in a communication.The regulation states that the disclosure of contents in electronic communications may reveal highly sensitive information about citizens, from personal experiences and emotions to medical conditions, sexual preferences and political views, which could result in personal and social harm, economic loss or embarrassment.
The principle of confidentiality should apply to current and future means of communication, including calls, internet access, instant messaging applications, e-mail, internet phone calls and messaging provided through social media.
In addition, the committee argues that not only the content of communications needs to be protected, but also the metadata associated with it, including numbers called, websites visited, geographical location, and the time, date, and duration of calls, which might otherwise be used to draw conclusions about the private lives of persons involved.
The regulations would apply to providers of electronic communication services as well as software providers that enable electronic communications and the retrieval of information on the internet. However, the amendment goes further by stating that the use of software backdoors by EU member states should be outlawed.
When encryption of electronic communications data is used, decryption, reverse engineering or monitoring of such communications shall be prohibited.The proposals appear to have been tabled in response to comments made by EU member states such as the U.K., which has argued that encrypted online channels such as WhatsApp and Telegram provide a "safe haven" for terrorists because governments governments and even the companies that host the services cannot read them.
Member states shall not impose any obligations on electronic communications service providers that would result in the weakening of the security and encryption of their networks and services.
The U.K. home secretary Amber Rudd recently claimed that it is "completely unacceptable" that authorities cannot gain access to messages stored on mobile applications protected by end-to-end encryption. A leaked draft technical paper prepared by the U.K. government was leaked shortly after Rudd's comments, containing proposals related to the removal of encryption from private communications.
The EU proposals could also put European security policy at odds with federal legislators in the U.S., who recently called on technology companies to compromise the encryption built into their mobile software. Last year, Apple and the FBI were involved in a public dispute over the latter's demands to provide a backdoor into iPhones, following the December 2015 shooter incidents in San Bernardino.
Apple said the software the FBI asked for could serve as a "master key" able to be used to get information from any iPhone or iPad - including its most recent devices - while the FBI claimed it only wanted access to a single iPhone.
The European Union proposals have to be approved by MEPs and reviewed by the EU council before the amendments can pass. It remains unclear how the laws would apply in the U.K. after Brexit, initial negotiations for which begin on Monday.
Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
Discuss this article in our forums
- San Francisco Could Be First City To Ban Sale Of Flavored Liquid Nicotine
By Ashlee Kieler - Thursday Jun 22, 2017
Last fall, the American Academy of Pediatrics called for a ban on flavored tobacco products. Now, one city is poised to do just that: San Francisco took steps this week to become the first city to approve a sales ban on flavored vaping liquids in a bid to prevent young adults from becoming addicted to the products. The Associated …