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

You know, Google, the web already had this feature

blog.vrypan.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 444 posts

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#351

Post by alanctgardner2 »

Helianthus wrote: post #249
freshhawk wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really agree with you, except for one minor point: You are still thinking of google as if it's the "old google". Definitely before Google+ and probably even before the adwords division started calling all the shots. That's when google could have been called "one of the coolest companies in the world". Now they are heavily invested in building their own walled garden. Maybe it's not even anyone being "evil", and it'…

Google glass and cars are the vestiges of the old Google. The travesty is that they are subservient to G+.

Is there any evidence to back this up? In terms of consumer products, Google Now is also pretty awesome, and has no interaction with G+ that I've seen.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#352

Post by ykaranfil »

crazedpsyc wrote: post #347
ykaranfil wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if this is normal? I followed the tutorial on fixtracking.com and installed DuckDuckGo plug-in for Firefox, and later i realized by analyzing http traffic that everything i type in address bar is sent to DuckDuckGo, even it is not selected as a default search engine. I wouldn't trust DuckDuckGo

There is nothing malicious going on there. It does that so you can get instant answers where there would normally be auto-completion. This is covered very nicely in a paragraph in the addon's description, and can very obviously be disabled in the addon's preferences.

If you check the chrome page on fixtracking.com (prepared by DuckDuckGo), it is asking you to uncheck "Use a prediction service to help complete searches and URLs typed in the address bar", so what is the point here?It is enabled by default.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#353

Post by solistice »

moogleii wrote: post #333
rimantas wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes iOS is for people who want to do something on their devices, android is for people who want to do something to their devices. Like a car owner who knows how to drive, but is not a mechanic and car owner who is a mechanic and spends days in the garage tweaking the engine instead of driving. Guess which one drives more. Maybe that explains disparity between the market share and web usage stats for iOS and Android.

To me, the vocal, diehard android fan is akin to the Fast and the Furious crowd so proud that they can modify their cheaper Hondas/Scions/Dodges to be as [insert adjective of choice] as a more expensive German luxury car. When really, nobody else cares. Neither the people who want a cheap reliable car nor the people in the luxury segment. Personally, I drive a Honda. I like it. I work on it, and I could modify it, bu…

I will have to rethink my life plans of outfitting a Tesla Sports car with functioning Tesla Coils. Noone outside of me will care about it, and if it's not external respect, it ain't no respect at all. Having some fun (with dangerously high voltages)? Don't make me laugh.

I mean yes, if you don't enjoy the smell of coronal discharge and smoldering tank capacitors (They're both toxic smells by the way), and you just build one for show, you're not going to win anything. But if you're absolutely obsessed with modding/hacking/knitting/whatever, you don't care about winning anything, just the process of doing, as self-help-book-like that might sound.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#354

Post by Houshalter »

blhack wrote: post #114

You guys in this thread whining about google: It isn't google that has changed, it is the whole world which has changed. Look at the things that some of you champion; the iPhone, the iPad...anything running iOS, anything made by apple computer, the company that is pushing the hardest against openness on the internet. Oh, you want some basic browser functionality like uploading files? Spend time learning objective C,…

Few things are truly all good or all bad. Google can do shitty things, be imperfect, and it doesn't mean they still aren't a good company. But we should still be allowed to discuss things they do wrong without being called "spoiled children".

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#355

Post by solistice »

Fargren wrote: post #52
doktrin wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google and YouTube are full of smart people. Some kind of "poor comment quality" filter should be easy to implement. This touches on something I actually feel deserves a second look, if only from an academic or sociological perspective. I have never quite understood why Youtube appears to be the single largest (or, at least most prominent) internet cesspool. Comments there are routinely among the most vile I've see…

My guess is that it has huge visibility and no moderation. There's almost no chance of your comment being deleted, no matter how vile, stupid or offensive it is, and it's in one of the biggest places of the internet. It's like doing graffiti on the White House, but you can get away with it.

Its like doing Grafitti in New York with 20 Cops and 3 sanitation workers taking care of the entire city. Of course you can get away with it, and there are plenty of people getting away with it.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#356

Post by Houshalter »

criley wrote: post #344
lettergram wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google's results are starting to waver I'll be honest I don't know for sure, but I highly doubt Google would intentionally hurt themselves by ruining their search results. Also, >Google+ requirement is a cancer eating their products from the inside. I do agree it's B.S. but using 4 different computers on a regular basis and being a student I find it more useful to use their products than not. Especially, the syncing…

Google+ is a blight. I have multiple Google Accounts (I don't need my real name attached to my main gmail account!) and it's utter horror trying to use Google products. You either give up on having an anonymous email because they WILL FORCE YOUR real name to be attached to your email, or you give up on Google integration features because you simply CANNOT use Google features without a real name anymore. Trying to swi…

I tried to create multiple YouTube channels for uploading different types of videos since I didn't want them all bundled in one channel. That now requires making multiple Google accounts. It's not impossible but it's highly discouraged, and they require registering each one with a phone number.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#357

Post by hackinthebochs »

knightzero wrote: post #142
kaoD wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I've had difficulty opting out, and new Google accounts are linked to Google+ by default. E.g.: I have an Android phone and I would like to rate a scam app so people don't download it. Oops, it's not possible without a Google+ account. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5535556

Google is trying to consolidate all of their services under one account. Like it or not a Google+ is just public facing page for a Google account. In away it dose make sense and answers an age old internet problem. It requires users to be responsible for what they put online.

Why do you think people should be? There is value to anonymity, just not to Google. Therefore they are trying to eliminate it.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#358

Post by lost_name »

kunai wrote: post #122
blhack wrote: post #114

You guys in this thread whining about google: It isn't google that has changed, it is the whole world which has changed. Look at the things that some of you champion; the iPhone, the iPad...anything running iOS, anything made by apple computer, the company that is pushing the hardest against openness on the internet. Oh, you want some basic browser functionality like uploading files? Spend time learning objective C,…

There is nothing Google Glass does that my smartphone already can't. And how is Apple waging war against openness? WebKit is open-source. They're pushing HTML5 against Flash (open vs proprietary). Darwin (OS X without Quartz and DPS) is open source. A few of the apps included with OS X are open-source. Google cars? Driverless car research has been going on for years, both before and alongside Google. Look, I'm not ba…

> There is nothing Google Glass does that my smartphone already can't.

Did the iPad have features the iPhone didn't? It seems to be doing ok for being a different form factor for iOS. There may be arguments for the usefulness of Glass but I don't think this is it.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#359

Post by criley »

criley wrote: post #344
lettergram wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google's results are starting to waver I'll be honest I don't know for sure, but I highly doubt Google would intentionally hurt themselves by ruining their search results. Also, >Google+ requirement is a cancer eating their products from the inside. I do agree it's B.S. but using 4 different computers on a regular basis and being a student I find it more useful to use their products than not. Especially, the syncing…

Google+ is a blight. I have multiple Google Accounts (I don't need my real name attached to my main gmail account!) and it's utter horror trying to use Google products. You either give up on having an anonymous email because they WILL FORCE YOUR real name to be attached to your email, or you give up on Google integration features because you simply CANNOT use Google features without a real name anymore. Trying to swi…

Reply to myself: If you're an Android dev, sorry I've never rated your apps, left comments or gotten ahold of you!

The Play Store REQUIRES a fully activated real-name Google+ Account to rate apps and leave feedback, so I've been wholly unable to communicate with the dozens and dozens of apps that request feedback.

Sorry friends. Blame Google!

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#360

Post by sciurus »

Intermernet wrote: post #322
reidrac wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if it's crazy, but I wouldn't say that site is the answer. Yes, it has the open source word all over it, but have you spent two minutes to look at the content? Most of the "relevant" stuff is just to comply with third party OSS licenses (read: non APSL projects). Although not exactly the same, it looks to me more or less like this: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=2... OSS is ab…

Maybe not CUPS. From http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/license.html "CUPSTM is provided under the GNU General Public License ("GPL") and GNU Library General Public License ("LGPL"), Version 2, with exceptions for Apple operating systems and the OpenSSL toolkit." I wonder why the OpenSSL toolkit needs an exemption.

OpenSSL's license imposes additional restrictions which are not compatible with the GPL. Thus, if you release code under the GPL but want to allow people to link it with OpenSSL, you need to provide an exception.

There's an article covering the topic with much more nuance at https://lwn.net/Articles/428111/

Post reply on HN