Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed • Hacker News Board

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#101

Post by noisem4ker » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 6:20 PM UTC

kuschku wrote: post #47

Mindwipe wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be an excellent way to force Google to switch distribution of all content via YouTube to HTML5 EME with Widevine DRM, given it's pretty clear their music agreements prohibit permitting this.

That’s their problem. A browser should always give a user the upper hand. Browser block popups, forcefully enable right-click on sites that disable it, browsers allow users to forcefully enable zoom, or background playback. And just like that, browsers should also allow users to forcefully enable PiP.

In a similar fashion, Firefox for Android should prevent YouTube from pausing when it detects it has lost focus, as that's clearly an abuse of power with the shameless intent to inhibit non-Chrome browser functionality. See my other comment a little up the tree.

Too bad Mozilla won't ever dare to defend themselves from Google's bullying and will happily accept having background playback on YouTube, until now one of the primary motives for people to try Fennec out, being taken away.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1355407

RESOLVED WONTFIX

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#102

Post by kuschku » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 6:22 PM UTC

zengid wrote: post #81

kuschku wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is only available on the Pixels, not even on the Nexus 5X (which has similar hardware for that). Since 8.0, it is impossible to get any kind of night light on the Nexus 5X without a custom rom.

I have it on my Motorola Play.

Great, how does that help me on my Nexus 5X? Alternatively, do you get Android Preview Releases on your Motorola Play?

The issue is that there’s no device suitable for development (meaning that you get preview releases, so you can fix your bugs before users have the new android) which also supports Night Light.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#103

Post by kuschku » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 6:24 PM UTC

ariwilson wrote: post #75

kuschku wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the legal answer clearly places one side in the right (the user has the right to modify websites that are shown on their system however they wish to, and the right to circumvent all measures on that site, as in the countless ABP vs. ... cases has been ruled). The historical answer does the same, as browsers were explicitly designated User Agents, as their whole purpose is to act in the name of the user, and ful…

Do you have some legal references to this? Curious. The site also has the legal right to refuse to serve you content, of course.

ArsTechnica had a list of 6 of the recent court cases between AdBlock Plus and media corporations: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/11/adblock-plus-win...

There’s been countless cases brought against ad blockers, and all that were about ad blocking, were decided favourable for the blockers.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#104

Post by noisem4ker » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 6:39 PM UTC

izacus wrote: post #91

arjie wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're in the US, you can do that with Youtube Red.

But I'm not, so I'm not allowed to. I wouldn't have a problem with it if I could - paying for ad-free YouTube with added features seems like a fair deal to me.

I wouldn't call "letting me turn off the screen or switch to another application while still consuming media" an "additional feature". Especially since they must go out of their way in the first place to detect when that is happening and to prevent me from doing so, as they do on their mobile website.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#105

Post by Touche » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 7:05 PM UTC

kuschku wrote: post #103

ariwilson wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have some legal references to this? Curious. The site also has the legal right to refuse to serve you content, of course.

ArsTechnica had a list of 6 of the recent court cases between AdBlock Plus and media corporations: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/11/adblock-plus-win... There’s been countless cases brought against ad blockers, and all that were about ad blocking, were decided favourable for the blockers.

What does any of this have to do with YouTube blocking PIP?

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#106

Post by Aaargh20318 » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 7:15 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #64

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a broader question about a user's will and the sites intent especially when it comes to business plans of the site The site's business plans are not my problem. Basically, my phone and my computer should do what I want. Why is there even an API to make a video player enter/exit full-screen mode ? That's 100% a user decision and there is no valid reason why that should ever be exposed to JS.

What if I want to present an X button that the user can click to exit fullscreen? How would I do that without a programmable API?

There already is one as part of the video player component, at least on iOS, right next to the button that toggles full-screen.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#107

Post by Aaargh20318 » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 7:17 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #84

pas wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That should be a browser option. (Show exit full-screen button or not.) Also, especially for video, the browser should be able to play it full screen without any distractions. Of course, there are optional enhancements (subtitles, or different audio tracks) driven via JS. And for those the controls have to go somewhere. Ideally, if there were a standard for those, the browser could handle it. (But then we're at the p…

Sounds like you are advocating for something very different than the current APIs. You're asking that the browser define its own UI for an exit button. How does it know where to put that? What if it is a game in a ` ` element and the button overlays some important UI in the game? I think you're overreacting to one bad-actor. Inevitably your suggestion here leads to good-actor pages having much less power to present g…

> ave you ever visited a page that blocks right-click? Would you want to forbid Mouse Events because of this?

No, the left mouse button is for interaction with the webpage, the right mouse button is mine. Just don't send any events for the right mouse button.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#108

Post by Touche » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 7:25 PM UTC

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #106

Touche wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I want to present an X button that the user can click to exit fullscreen? How would I do that without a programmable API?

There already is one as part of the video player component, at least on iOS, right next to the button that toggles full-screen.

The fullscreen API is not just for video elements.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#109

Post by zeveb » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 7:48 PM UTC

kinlan wrote: post #51

avaer wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to be able to tell my browser what it should tell the pages it's loading, especially if pages are leveraging it to do things against my will. That applies to blocking Google ads, as well as fixing Youtube malfeatures. Of course, it's understandable you won't see this from a browser paid for by Google. But you can't paint in broad brush strokes like "I don't think hiding side-effects or user actions helps any…

I'm disputing the fact there was a casual offhand design, and I don't think hiding the state of the render or the browser helps anyone not least developers who need the information about the state of their page. I'm not saying that there can't be meaningful response from the browser to user hostile actions, I don't think anyone disagrees. There's a broader question about a user's will and the sites intent especially…

> I don't think hiding the state of the render or the browser helps anyone not least developers who need the information about the state of their page.

I don't care about helping developers who want to hinder my usage of my browser on my hardware. It's my CPU they are executing on, and thus it should be I & I alone who determines what is executed.

Re: Android 8.0 Oreo, thoroughly reviewed

#110

Post by kuschku » Tue, Sep 05, 2017, 7:58 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #105

kuschku wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ArsTechnica had a list of 6 of the recent court cases between AdBlock Plus and media corporations: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/11/adblock-plus-win... There’s been countless cases brought against ad blockers, and all that were about ad blocking, were decided favourable for the blockers.

What does any of this have to do with YouTube blocking PIP?

Simple, it means that if the browser would decide to force YouTube into allowing PIP, that would be the browsers legal (and moral right).

Additionally, there’s a precedent that users want to be able to control what a site does, and are willing to take extra steps to achieve this, so a browser should implement such functionality ideally in the first place.