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

Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

android.googlesource.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 84 posts

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#11

Post by gsnedders »

scrollaway wrote: post #6

This is why I love open source (as in source-available, not necessarily free-software). Transparency trumps everything. Whoever chose to commit anonymously (or gave the order to) knew they were doing something shitty and didn't feel comfortable doing it "in public". It doesn't prevent things like that from happening but it makes you question if it's the right thing to do. Sometimes that's the best we can hope for.

I wouldn't be surprised if part of the motivating factor is the fact the decision was made well above the person who wrote the code, and it wouldn't be fair for the person who wrote the code to take all the flack publicly. And, well, I'm unsurprised that the manager didn't end up with their name on it.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#12

Post by millstone »

scrollaway wrote: post #6

This is why I love open source (as in source-available, not necessarily free-software). Transparency trumps everything. Whoever chose to commit anonymously (or gave the order to) knew they were doing something shitty and didn't feel comfortable doing it "in public". It doesn't prevent things like that from happening but it makes you question if it's the right thing to do. Sometimes that's the best we can hope for.

How does “transparency trumps everything” apply here? There’s nothing transparent about this. The anon tasked with committing this change surely had no influence on the decision, so it’s doubtful the OSS nature drove any questions.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#13

Post by millstone »

dooglius wrote: post #10
foo101 wrote: post #3

Can someone who has more context around this commit explain what is going on here? What does this commit do? Why did this commit get accepted in the commit history tree published at android.googlesource.com?

>Why did this commit get accepted in the commit history tree published at android.googlesource.com? As opposed to what? Do you expect them to maintain an alternate tree without the change that doesn't match published binaries?

Google has an alternate tree. It’s used for prerelease and cancelled hardware, among other things. But probably not for this.

An alternative would have been to bury the change in “misc cleanup” commit. Kudos for at least being honest.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#14

Post by geofft »

scrollaway wrote: post #6

This is why I love open source (as in source-available, not necessarily free-software). Transparency trumps everything. Whoever chose to commit anonymously (or gave the order to) knew they were doing something shitty and didn't feel comfortable doing it "in public". It doesn't prevent things like that from happening but it makes you question if it's the right thing to do. Sometimes that's the best we can hope for.

> Whoever chose to commit anonymously (or gave the order to) knew they were doing something shitty and didn't feel comfortable doing it "in public".

That isn't necessarily true (although it definitely seems possible in this case, especially given the choice of name). The other possible reason is that they knew they were doing something perfectly reasonable but controversial, that other people would dislike, and they didn't want the Internet pitchfork mob coming after them.

It is interesting that major corporate-run-open-source projects like Android have individual names associated by commits. It's a huge change from software engineering in general - the general public doesn't know what I personally do at work, and can't come after me for it - and there's not even a need for it for open-source reasons: since copyright is owned by Google, there's no requirement to identify the individual employee more precisely. Everything could have been committed by nobody@google.com.

If the person behind this commit had the position that they stand behind this commit but they only intend to stand behind it 40 hours a week and then they want to go home, I would sympathize with that.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#15

Post by Qwertie »

DennisAleynikov wrote: post #4

What an interesting way to go about making an uncomfortable but important decision. This is Google's platform and they should do with it what they want, it's incredible how much search has changed our interaction with our phone. There isn't a day that goes by where I'm not finding everything I need with a quick google search. If google doesn't control the searches end to end on android they would have missed out on s…

I use an alternative search provider on my android (custom rom) Phone and don't feel like I have lost anything other than the ability to stay sane on a stock android device.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#16

Post by dlbucci »

DennisAleynikov wrote: post #4

What an interesting way to go about making an uncomfortable but important decision. This is Google's platform and they should do with it what they want, it's incredible how much search has changed our interaction with our phone. There isn't a day that goes by where I'm not finding everything I need with a quick google search. If google doesn't control the searches end to end on android they would have missed out on s…

I'm not seeing how those two things are related. Google could have still developed Instant Apps/Google Now without restricting users choice of search engine. And if those users missed out on those features because they use duckduckgo or whatever, so be it. At least it was their choice, right?

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#17

Post by greglindahl »

DennisAleynikov wrote: post #4

What an interesting way to go about making an uncomfortable but important decision. This is Google's platform and they should do with it what they want, it's incredible how much search has changed our interaction with our phone. There isn't a day that goes by where I'm not finding everything I need with a quick google search. If google doesn't control the searches end to end on android they would have missed out on s…

Yeah, the EU and the US both had a big investigation of Google and search on the Android platform, but clearly it's amazing that they made this change. Totally lovable totalitarian control.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#18

Post by emilsedgh »

foo101 wrote: post #3

Can someone who has more context around this commit explain what is going on here? What does this commit do? Why did this commit get accepted in the commit history tree published at android.googlesource.com?

I think a Google employee was tasked to remove the search engine choice and hardcode google search into Android.

He didn't want his name to be attached as the person who did this (and we can assume it was some sort of protest to the change) so he committed this as "Anonymous Coward".

Also "Anonymous Coward", as others pointed out, was the way Slashdot referenced guest comments.

Re: Choice of search engine on Android nuked by “Anonymous Coward” (2009)

#19

Post by matheusmoreira »

The Linux kernel does not accept anonymous contributions due to legal reasons.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/1.Intro.html

> It is imperative that all code contributed to the kernel be legitimately free software.

> For that reason, code from anonymous (or pseudonymous) contributors will not be accepted.

> All contributors are required to “sign off” on their code, stating that the code can be distributed with the kernel under the GPL.

> Code which has not been licensed as free software by its owner, or which risks creating copyright-related problems for the kernel (such as code which derives from reverse-engineering efforts lacking proper safeguards) cannot be contributed.

Does the same reasoning not apply to Android?

Post reply on HN