Common Tech Myths Debunked

JFG Inc. Technology for Business ^ | 11/02/2017 | JFG Team

[fireman15]

Myth: Apple computers can’t get viruses

Truth: Apple computers are susceptible to malware just like Windows PCs. Apple once bragged they were not as susceptible until a Trojan infected thousands of computers in 2012. To learn more about how to protect against malware see Cyber Security: The Onion Approach

Myth: It’s harmful to plug your phone in before the battery is drained.

Truth: Much like the myth of leaving your phone plugged in to charge for extended periods of time, this is also false. In fact, it could even be beneficial to plug your phone into the charger prior to the battery being completely dead. Batteries have a limited number of charge cycles before losing their ability to hold a charge. By charging the battery prior to it being completely dead, you save a charge cycle.

Myth: Cellphones can give you Brain Cancer.

Truth: Many have heard this myth. Some have even seen Stephen King’s film “Cell” referring to an evil electronic signal emitted through cell phones. The truth is there is no evidence or research that supports the idea that the radio frequency emitted through cell phones have any effect on the brain or it’s tissue and to date is not linked to causing any kind of cancer.

Myth: More signal bars guarantee good cell reception.

Truth: It’s true, more bars help your service, but, it doesn’t always mean great reception. The number of bars indicate how close you are to the nearest cell tower. Other factors affect internet speed on your phone including how many people are currently using the network.

If you found this entertaining, take a look at a couple other debunked myths in 5 tech myths that won’t go away.

[fireman15]

These days there is so much about technology that people spread myths about. Many of them are spread with malevolent intent with unknown or well understood motives behind them. But I have heard each of these many times.

[CodeToad]

Much of it is spread by the social media workers at the tech companies. companies spend gobs of money on their Internet presence.

[Leaning Right]

They missed one.

Myth:
Computers programmed with sophisticated voter data can predict elections.

Truth:
Donald Trump: 304 electoral votes
Hillary Clinton: 227 electoral votes

[bitt]

P

[proxy_user]

“Apple computers can get viruses, if you type in your root password whenever anything requests you to do so...”

[fireman15]

Apple computers can get viruses, if you type in your root password whenever anything requests you to do so...

Thanks for that one. Swordmaker will be very proud of your effort to keep the myth of Apple's invulnerable security going.

[VanDeKoik]

Myth: Computers can explode if you press the wrong buttons.

Truth: You are likely above the age of 43, and seen too many cartoons.

[ctdonath2]

Those answers were way too short, and weasel-worded, to be properly accurate. They amount to myths themselves.

[ctdonath2]

“Myth: Apple computers can’t get viruses
Truth: Apple computers are susceptible to malware just like Windows PCs. Apple once bragged they were not as susceptible until a Trojan infected thousands of computers in 2012.”

Non-sequiturs galore there.

“Viruses” aren’t “trojans”.
Both are malware, yes, but that doesn’t make one platform “just...as susceptible”.
And the incident mentioned required nearly heroic levels of stupidity on a cultural level to happen: high-risk malware had to be obtained from risky sources and installed thru risky abnormal methods culminating in the user explicitly authorizing blatant security violations. Hardly on par with the heyday of Windows viruses.

[Dan(9698)]

No is a Myth

[fireman15]

You are obviously a sophisticated computer user that needs no advice or warnings from anyone. However, for others who do not believe their Apple products are vulnerable to malware... it might be wise for them to do a little reading. Here are a few links links to Mac World articles and others. They are meant to be helpful to Apple users.

https://www.macworld.com/article/1166254/what_you_need_to_know_about_the_flashback_trojan.html

http://mashable.com/2012/04/05/mac-flashback-trojan/#jQb_9sEU9Zql

http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/816966/Apple-Mac-Macbook-update-warning-malware-ransomware-Dark-Web

https://www.macworld.co.uk/how-to/mac-software/do-macs-get-viruses-do-macs-need-antivirus-software-3454926/

https://www.macworld.co.uk/how-to/iphone/how-remove-virus-from-iphone-or-ipad-3658975/

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

10 years ago the first 2 questions may have been relevant.

Question 3 is kind of silly. Since it’s a fact that your head attenuate’s the antenna the question is unanswerable.

[central_va]

Unix based OSs, like Apple OS X, are inherently more secure that windows based OSs. Still, if you get the root password then all bets are off.

All browsers are susceptible to virus/robot programs.

[fireman15]

I certainly would not argue with you about that, but vulnerability is vulnerability. If you have the key a deadbolt is no more secure than a standard door lock.

[ctdonath2]

The only people I see saying “Apple products are invulnerable” are haters setting up straw men. They’re not invulnerable to weapons-grade stupid or remarkable lab-grade conditions; this is a far cry from classic Windows viruses.

[fireman15]

The only people I see saying “Apple products are invulnerable” are haters setting up straw men.

That is OK... I am used to be called names like “denier” and “hater”. I have and use current Apple products and I like them. I do not subscribe to the hard core mythology like some of the other people here.

[dayglored]

> I do not subscribe to the hard core mythology like some of the other people here.

You're being silly, and you know it.

Nobody on FR currently claims that Apple products are "invulnerable" to malware. That's a ridiculous strawman, given that there -is- malware that affects Macs, some of which is specific to Macs. So give it up, you sound foolish. (I grant you that many years ago, some misguided Mac-heads made claims of invulnerability, and were roundly laughed into learning something about malware types.)

The article you posted has this inaccurate, stupid, but click-drawing graphic:

There was a time when intelligent technical people cared about the distinction between a "virus" and other types of malware. The reason was simple -- true viruses self-replicate without the action of the host/user. They pass from computer to computer without any human action. A true virus is as different from a trojan and other malware types as a Honda Civic is from a Corvette.

But in your view, because they are both malware, just like a Civic and a Vette are both cars, you consider them identical. That misguided conflation undercuts your comments.

Here's the fact. Despite the existence of Mac-specific malware, Macs -are- damn near invulnerable to -true- viruses, and that's been the case for a decade and a half. The few exceptions were lab curiosities constructed by virus researchers. But viruses are not trojans. Trojans and all other non-virus malware require that the user either a) actively allow it, e.g. by typing a root password or otherwise permitting it access, or b) disabling the Mac's default security in some way that allows access. And there are numerous Trojans that can affect Macs because the Mac user lets them. Hence, they're not viruses. Got it yet?

So I suggest that you do one of two things:

• Learn a bit about the difference between a virus and all other types of malware, or
• Admit that you don't give a damn about things like the difference between a Civic and a Vette, and revel in your ignorance.

I honestly don't care which. The only reason I'm writing this is that your comments remind me of those noobs who repeat the same tired, foolish misinformation, and thereby distract and misinform other readers. But you sound like you might actually know the distinction, and just don't care about being correct. So I'm calling you on your lack of caring about accuracy, and hope that my comment gives you an excuse to be more precise when you decide to go after Mac fanbois.

(Which, BTW, I'm not. I use 'em all, love 'em all, hate 'em all. I use whatever I need to get the job done.)

Other than that, have a pleasant (hour-longer) evening, and hope to see you on another thread sometime.

[fireman15]

I suppose that you did not like the link and because of your level of knowledge and experience and did not find it useful. There are others here with less experience. I do not believe this article was “inaccurate”, “stupid”, or was meant strictly for “click-drawing”.

I had a work study job in college helping other students working as a computer lab assistant. This was before Windows or Macs existed. I observed the evolution of computers and their operating systems from the dawn of the microcomputer era. I understand the differences in vulnerabilities between various operating systems. I did not realize this innocuous article would invite any form of animosity. Is there something else on your mind this evening?

[dayglored]

> I do not believe this article was “inaccurate”, “stupid”, or was meant strictly for “click-drawing”.

I was speaking only of the stupid picture of the Macbook, and the first item in the list, which was inaccurate. The article was overall okay.

But it is well established for a decade or more that any tech article, especially one about malware or software bugs, will draw more attention if it includes one or more of the following:

• The word "Apple" or "Mac" in the headline
• A picture of an Apple product, whether or not it's relevant to the article
• The word "Apple" or "Mac" in the first sentence or bullet point

This article had the latter two. That, FRiend, is called "drawing clicks", because the article itself is almost entirely about generic cellphone topics.

Meanwhile, BTW, it sounds like you've been in this field about as long as me (see my FR Profile page if you're interested in comparing personal histories).

> I did not realize this innocuous article would invite any form of animosity. Is there something else on your mind this evening?

No animosity -- computers aren't worth animus. The article was mildly interesting. What drew my comment was the tiresome repetition of the ancient, inane argument about whether or not Macs are "immune" to computer viruses. And since you had claimed that "vulnerability is vulnerability" (#14) and seen fit to insert some sarcasm into the debate (#6), I was inspired to join the fray, having not much else to do for a few minutes. No big deal.

[Gene Eric]

>> Myth: More signal bars guarantee good cell reception.

Given the precise wording of this so-called myth, I decided to check out the definitive meaning of the word, myth:

Myth: A widely held but false belief or idea

So it seems this particular entry on cellular signal bars is mythleading...