Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

android-developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#21

Post by dTal »

Animats wrote: post #14

Today we're announcing the availability of this API across all Android devices running Google Play services 11.0 and up. Of course, Google had to lock up peer to peer communication by tying it to their online store. It's also unencrypted and unauthenticated, so you don't want to use this for home control.

Play services is more than just the online store; it's a Faustian bargain of useful services in exchange for giving Google root control over "your" computer.

I refuse to Play. I don't really miss the app store, but I'm sore I can't cast media at my friend's house (Chromecast requires Google Play, of course). This is another brick in that wall.

This is more unethical and monopolistic than anything Micro$oft ever did, back when they earned that moniker.

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#22

Post by [deleted] »

Animats wrote: post #19
nickporter wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really unencrypted? The blog post says it's encrypted.

The API spec says: "Note: The Nearby Connections API does not require the user to authenticate, which means that it can be used even when the user does not want to sign in or sign-in has failed." "Warning: Messages sent through the Nearby Connections API are not encrypted. Do not send sensitive data through this API." [1] [1] https://developers.google.com/games/services/cpp/nearby

[deleted]

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#23

Post by nickporter »

Animats wrote: post #19
nickporter wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really unencrypted? The blog post says it's encrypted.

The API spec says: "Note: The Nearby Connections API does not require the user to authenticate, which means that it can be used even when the user does not want to sign in or sign-in has failed." "Warning: Messages sent through the Nearby Connections API are not encrypted. Do not send sensitive data through this API." [1] [1] https://developers.google.com/games/services/cpp/nearby

I think you're looking at either a different API, or an older version of it.

The blog post links to this documentation page:

https://developers.google.com/nearby/connections/overview

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#24

Post by joosters »

pat2man wrote: post #2

This is one of those features that really needs cross platform support. If Apple and Google could just work together and let MultipeerConnectivity and Nearby Connections work together maybe developers would actually develop interesting applications for peer to peer.

Definitely! It's amazing that two people can have smartphones with wifi, bluetooth and other comms links yet there isn't a standard, platform agnostic way to send a file to another phone.

So now we have Nearby Communications for Android and AirDrop for iOS and we still can't send stuff to friends in the same room, without sending the data through a remote third party service. The only standard supported mechanism for sharing without an app is via email!

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#25

Post by ekwogefee »

joosters wrote: post #24
pat2man wrote: post #2

This is one of those features that really needs cross platform support. If Apple and Google could just work together and let MultipeerConnectivity and Nearby Connections work together maybe developers would actually develop interesting applications for peer to peer.

Definitely! It's amazing that two people can have smartphones with wifi, bluetooth and other comms links yet there isn't a standard, platform agnostic way to send a file to another phone. So now we have Nearby Communications for Android and AirDrop for iOS and we still can't send stuff to friends in the same room, without sending the data through a remote third party service. The only standard supported mechanism for…

Shameless plug: Try Feem v4 (http://www.feem.io).

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#26

Post by ekwogefee »

reaperducer wrote: post #11
mataug wrote: post #3

This is basically Air Drop with extra features and an open API . As @pat2man mentions, It would've been great if Apple and Google made this an open standard instead of having their own proprietary solutions.

It's amazing how much things have changed since AirDrop. In the last two offices in which I've worked (both creative), AirDrop was indispensable. Even in a small team of 20 or so people, it was used hundreds of times a day. The new Apple era has strayed considerably from "it just works," except for AirDrop, which has been nothing but a pleasure to work with.

What about users with non-Apple devices? Was this hardly an issue ?

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#27

Post by matt_wulfeck »

> Imagine walking into a hotel room and having the temperature set just right, your favorite sub-genre of progressive-math-rock playing in the background, and the TV urging you to continue binging on your saved guilty-pleasures watchlist.

I really can't help but cringe. Please let that never be my future, where I broadcast out personal information to the entire room everywhere I go.

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#28

Post by jwfxpr »

Animats wrote: post #19
nickporter wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really unencrypted? The blog post says it's encrypted.

The API spec says: "Note: The Nearby Connections API does not require the user to authenticate, which means that it can be used even when the user does not want to sign in or sign-in has failed." "Warning: Messages sent through the Nearby Connections API are not encrypted. Do not send sensitive data through this API." [1] [1] https://developers.google.com/games/services/cpp/nearby

Just because the Nearby Connections API layer is neither authenticated nor encrypted, doesn't mean the developer isn't free to implement it. If I tell you an Ethernet cable requires neither authentication nor encryption, you aren't going to tell me it's impossible to authenticate or encrypt over Ethernet.

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#29

Post by Animats »

nickporter wrote: post #23
Animats wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The API spec says: "Note: The Nearby Connections API does not require the user to authenticate, which means that it can be used even when the user does not want to sign in or sign-in has failed." "Warning: Messages sent through the Nearby Connections API are not encrypted. Do not send sensitive data through this API." [1] [1] https://developers.google.com/games/services/cpp/nearby

I think you're looking at either a different API, or an older version of it. The blog post links to this documentation page: https://developers.google.com/nearby/connections/overview

One of them seems to be a wrapper for the other:

Game API (C++):

    void SendReliableMessage(
      std::vector const & remote_endpoint_ids,
      std::vector const & payload
    )
Nearby API (Java):

    public abstract void sendReliableMessage
      (GoogleApiClient apiClient, 
       List remoteEndpointIds, 
       byte[] payload)
Note that this requires a "GoogleApiClient" object, which ties it to the mothership.

Re: Nearby Connections 2.0: offline high bandwidth peer to peer device communication

#30

Post by jwfxpr »

mxuribe wrote: post #6

1. cross platform support and interactivity - at protocol level. 2. innovators build platforms and apps. 3. success and liberty for all! Seriously though, totally agree with a few commenters (pat2man, mataug), open standards will win the day; any day...including future days.

I am genuinely curious in wondering what proportion of the open standards in technology begin as innovative evolutions of existing standards with only limited support at introduction, like this is. Isn't this essentially one of the accepted pathways to open standards, build the system, invite collaborators, and see if it gains acceptance and traction?
Post reply on HN