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

Bullshit

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 233 posts

Re: Bullshit

#211

Post by dextorious »

edw519 wrote: post #102

You forgot the biggest bullshit of all, Marco. Hacker News users: I'm so mad that the government is doing ! I'm so mad that big business is doing ! I'm so mad that venture capitalists are doing ! I'm so mad that angel investors are doing ! I'm so mad that got funding! I'm so mad that language doesn't do ! I'm so mad that I can't jailbreak ! I'm so mad that I'm actually expected to pay for ! I'm so mad that more peopl…

So, what did YOU build today?

And why do you assume we all have to build something?

Some of us have actual paid work we like, you know, we're not all "entrepreneurs" building the next whatever...

Re: Bullshit

#212

Post by myko »

jrockway wrote: post #204
huhtenberg wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask yourself - why is Google actively trying to become a major provider of webfonts? They are hiring type designers left and right and pouring money into creating a wide variety fonts - both original and knock-offs. Fonts that then they are offering for free. The only connection between the webfont and Google's core business is the fact that a Google-hosted version of former needs to be embedded in one's website in o…

Google just doesn't behave like this. I've talked to many people that work there (and I will be one of them soon), and this is just not the culture. Google maintains webfonts because someone said, "hey, our products would be better if they didn't look like shit on certain machines". Someone else agreed and now they have their own fonts. (Part of Android's look-and-feel is based on fonts, too, so it makes sense that i…

This is my experience as well, a friend of mine worked with the web fonts team and this matches the motivations he expressed to me regarding the project.

Re: Bullshit

#213

Post by dextorious »

statictype wrote: post #49
nostromo wrote: post #18

With Apple, I'm the customer, not a marketer. This makes me comfortable with our relationship. I don't really care about Ping or app store approval policies, so, meh... With Google, I can see their ability to become a shady company pretty easily, but it is just too damn easy to switch search engines. Bing isn't so bad you know. But Facebook knows so much about me, and the network effects are so strong -- this is the…

With Apple, I'm the customer, not a marketer. I believe the party line is "I'm not the product being sold". but it is just too damn easy to switch search engines. Or, you know, run an ad-blocker - much easier than jailbreaking a phone and Google Search/Gmail will continue to work well with an ad-blocker running, even if they upgrade the site.

"""Or, you know, run an ad-blocker - much easier than jailbreaking a phone and Google Search/Gmail will continue to work well with an ad-blocker running, even if they upgrade the site.""

Actually, no, Google would stop business if people used ad-blockers en masse. So that's just something that works because few people do it.

And it's not like Google is gonna decide where they want to go their services, changes, etc, with you and not the marketer's benefit in mind.

So, even if you use ad-block, you're still the product being sold (to be exact: you're just a lost sale).

You can't escape that, unless you actually pay the company whose services you use.

Re: Bullshit

#214

Post by statictype »

Terretta wrote: post #148
statictype wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever. I was just pointing out that Apple sells things that are much more expensive than what you get elsewhere. If you choose to read more into it than that, then go ahead and knock yourself out.

They also sell things, like the Macbook Air or iPad, that are much less expensive than what you get elsewhere (when you try to get an equivalently spec'd device). Given that their devices cost less, I can forgive them the convenience cost of an in-store RAM upgrade when they're helping my Mom upgrade RAM or HDD in her beloved 15" Macbook from years ago that still works a treat. Most customers are not really the NewEg…

They also sell things, like the Macbook Air or iPad, that are much less expensive than what you get elsewhere (when you try to get an equivalently spec'd device).

Perhaps this is true in America but I'm pretty sure it's not in many other places. I recently looked around for a laptop to put Windows7 on and while it was discouraging to see the quality of the laptops that were available (compared, not just to a MacBook but to other laptops that existed 3 years ago) they were significantly cheaper and higher spec'd than a MacBook.

Re: Bullshit

#215

Post by bnegreve »

tptacek wrote: post #184
funkah wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think Hacker News sucks that bad, you're free to go read reddit and bitch about the users there. This comment is shitty and cynical and you should feel bad about it.

Compare: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=by%3Ae... to: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=by%3Af... A superficial cheap shot would be to note that you have to go nine pages into Ed's results to find a comment scored as low as 'funkah's top-scored comment. Less superficial observations follow readily from actually reading the two sets of comments. Veteran status readily accounts for th…

Maybe I am missing your point, but I think that judging comments on the basis of their authors karma is a bad idea.

Re: Bullshit

#216

Post by jamesgeck0 »

jballanc wrote: post #177
blinkingled wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you could not do is run the Aqua GUI or many of the default applications that come with a Mac bought in the store Which isn't very useful at all. Android on the other hand allows you to run Market, Apps, Amazon Apps, your own in house apps on your device of choice by using the provided source code. You will have to write your drivers may be but that's not nearly the same as write your CF or Aqua or OpenGL implem…

Sure, that's essentially my point: Parts of the Android stack are open and parts of the OS X stack are open . Whether or not the important parts are open depends on who you are. Take, for example, the other story on HN today about HTC finally opening their bootloader. That, to me, is much more important than any other part of Android being open .

"Open", in this context, means open source. HTC's bootloader has always been open source, as far as I know. It's been set up to only boot signed kernels, but that's "open" as in, "customers can modify their devices" not as in, "customers can view and modify the source code we put on the device."

HTC's locking the bootloader isn't exactly an issue with Android's openness. It's an issue with the openness of HTC.

Re: Bullshit

#217

Post by robterrell »

jrockway wrote: post #206
nostromo wrote: post #18

With Apple, I'm the customer, not a marketer. This makes me comfortable with our relationship. I don't really care about Ping or app store approval policies, so, meh... With Google, I can see their ability to become a shady company pretty easily, but it is just too damn easy to switch search engines. Bing isn't so bad you know. But Facebook knows so much about me, and the network effects are so strong -- this is the…

With Apple, I'm the customer, not a marketer. Are you sure about that? Apple "sells you" as a user that will buy apps on the app store, and they take 30% of the developer's profit for that privilege. Whenever Apple can, they advertise how their users buy more apps than Android users, and bill this as a reason for developing for iOS and not some other mobile platform. You are a product.

That's a stretch. It's simpler than that: follow the money. I pay Apple, so I'm the customer. Advertisers and marketers pay Google for access to me, so they're the customer.

Just because Apple touts their user numbers doesn't mean they're selling those users. In fact, as a developer, I can't pay Apple to guarantee installs, or even visibility. Apple won't sell me customers. I might like to give Apple money to get leads or users for my apps, but Apple will not do that.

Re: Bullshit

#218

Post by jballanc »

bad_user wrote: post #195
jballanc wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hold on there. Psystar was attempting to sell copyrighted software in violation of a EULA by breaking encryption, which is specifically prohibited by the DMCA. I'm not saying that I agree with that specific case, but I think a great many open source advocates would take issue with you comparing the actions of Psystar with the desire to have a fork-able OS (which, BTW, OS X is). Had Psystar sold computers with OpenDar…

You cannot compare OpenDarwin + X with OS X. Come on ... none of the polish and mostly none of the applications working on it. It would be completely useless and it wouldn't be OS X. Your argument is like saying Windows is open because ReactOS exists [1] or that you could say a Linux distribution + Wine is Windows. It's not. And comparing to Android, you can distribute / sell Android devices, even with your own modif…

Android is much more open than OS X. No argument there.

But Psystar was never interested in a "fork". They merely wanted to make a profit by selling Apple's software on commodity hardware. Doing so was both in violation of the EULA (which forbade redistribution), and in violation of the DMCA which prohibits breaking encryption for the purpose of making a copy of copyrighted material. The EULA clause has not been tested in court (to my knowledge), and may not be valid. However, the DMCA prohibition on breaking encryption is well established. There is even a list of what encryption you are specifically allowed to break: http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2010/10-169.html

Re: Bullshit

#219

Post by tptacek »

bnegreve wrote: post #215
tptacek wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compare: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=by%3Ae... to: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/comments&q=by%3Af... A superficial cheap shot would be to note that you have to go nine pages into Ed's results to find a comment scored as low as 'funkah's top-scored comment. Less superficial observations follow readily from actually reading the two sets of comments. Veteran status readily accounts for th…

Maybe I am missing your point, but I think that judging comments on the basis of their authors karma is a bad idea.

If we're talking about my comments, I agree. If we're talking about Ed's, no. I'm not interested in a nerdy argument about whether we should have karma at all.

Re: Bullshit

#220

Post by huhtenberg »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #201
huhtenberg wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask yourself - why is Google actively trying to become a major provider of webfonts? They are hiring type designers left and right and pouring money into creating a wide variety fonts - both original and knock-offs. Fonts that then they are offering for free. The only connection between the webfont and Google's core business is the fact that a Google-hosted version of former needs to be embedded in one's website in o…

I'm glad you ended it with rant, because this is the exact brand of FUD I was referring to. >The only connection between the webfont and Google's core business is the fact that a Google-hosted version of former needs to be embedded in one's website in order to be used. All of those fonts are freely downloadable. Nothing about them requires you to go through Google (and is in fact impossible due to how webfonts work).…

> All of those fonts are freely downloadable

In exactly one format. And in order for them to be properly served to different browsers, they need to come in at least 3 other formats. Doing offline conversion yields fonts that look noticeably different from those served by Google, so for all practical intents and purposes having these fonts available for download is useless.

> Now they're dangerous because you didn't read the TOS?

They are dangerous because the other guy didn't read the TOS. I read them and declined.

Post reply on HN