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

361–370 of 444 posts

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

#361

Post by adamisen »

mtct wrote: post #277
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,…

> If a little bit of annoying google+ talk is the price that humanity has to pay for things like google driverless cars, google glass, and google fiber FINALLY holding bandwidth providers to task on bringing fiber to the curb, then GOOD. Driverless cars and Internet fiber to the curb aren't Google inventions.

Nor HMDs. I want all three of these things to become mature, affordable products. I don't really want any of them from an advertising company.

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

#362

Post by reidrac »

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.

CUPS is developed by Apple and released as open source using the GPL (in fact, to contribute code you must sign a contributor agreement with Apple: http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L186+T+Q).

I'm not sure if I understand your comment.

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

#363

Post by jonathansizz »

throwawayG9 wrote: post #337
blhack wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google has overstayed the web's welcome. Then stop using their products. Switch to bing, switch to Internet Explorer, get an iPhone and shut up about it. No, google has not "overstayed the web's welcome", google has overstayed the welcome of a few entitled silicon valley golddiggers who will continue feeling wronged for the next 10 minutes until they realize what wonderful things google has created in the world for…

I stopped using all of their products about a year and a half, thank you very much. And I never looked back, I feel safer than ever, I'm not being tracked all the time, I own my data, and I will never have to fear again being banned for no reason or having a service shut down overnight and losing all of my data. I can do whatever I want.

So you don't use the web anymore?

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

#364

Post by ChuckMcM »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #189
ChuckMcM wrote: post #4

I feel the author's pain. I don't hold it against Google for looking at the way RSS is (was?) used and re-implementing it in a way that they can more easily make money off it, while simultaneously removing any traction they are offering for the old non monetizable way of doing things. They are a business after all and no amount of money in the bank is enough [1]. But I find the whining a bit distracting since the sam…

> His answer was that there were a lot of unknowns facing Google and the only insurance they had for dealing with them was to have a lot of capital. Waaaat? I was at that TGIF and I do not recall any response remotely resembling the one you recount here. And: as far as I can figure, it's basically impossible that your $30 million figure is accurate. This is not based on internal knowledge, just a quick product search…

Well if you remember the bottled water centi-thread then perhaps you remember the discussions on that thread about cost and where the 30M from was $2/bottle for 'SmartWater' * 3 bottles a day * 365 days a year * 14,200 employees. That was the "crazy worst case" number of $30,660,000 per year.

"If anyone believes that 2007 Google cared about 3M in the bank, I have a bridge to sell them."

And whatever they cared about the money ($3M or $30M) they cared even less about the impact on engineers choice of place to work by deciding to stop spending it. And that lack of caring was the entire point of the question. If you have the tape you can remind me offline what Eric's exact responses was, my best recollection was that it was as I gave it. (Not that I expected much different)

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

#365

Post by [deleted] »

cleis wrote: post #323
PavlovsCat wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then actually look up Godwin's law. It says something about the probability of a Nazi comparison occuring, but nothing about that loosing the argument or ending the conversation. And that's just as well, because why would it be otherwise? Because Godwin said so? What, is he Adolf Hitler or something?

The corollary to Godwin's law is that the first person to bring up the Nazis automatically loses the argument.

[deleted]

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

#366

Post by NewAccnt »

kedean wrote: post #250
NewAccnt wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open. Everyone abandoned WebKit for some unknown reason having to do with Apple. Please list these OSS Apps, I would love to know since Google and Wikpedia say nothing like that.

>HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open What, because some vendors take liberty with codec choices? HTML5, while not officially ratified as an RFC, has an agreed-upon standard version, and the implementations of it are far more standardized than HTML4 ever was. As for openness, it's a markup language, there's nothing that CANT be open about it. The only possible thing about html5 that isn't open is the popular cho…

Thanks for making my point for me.

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

#367

Post by mtct »

adamisen wrote: post #361
mtct wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a little bit of annoying google+ talk is the price that humanity has to pay for things like google driverless cars, google glass, and google fiber FINALLY holding bandwidth providers to task on bringing fiber to the curb, then GOOD. Driverless cars and Internet fiber to the curb aren't Google inventions.

Nor HMDs. I want all three of these things to become mature, affordable products. I don't really want any of them from an advertising company.

Just for info. The research team at my university on driverless cars.

http://vislab.it/

From Parma (Italy) to Shangai(China), 15000 kilometers

report http://vislab.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/21-VisLab-VIAC-d...

Without hype and before Google.

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

#368

Post by NewAccnt »

clobber wrote: post #238
NewAccnt wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTML5 is not standard, certainly not open. Everyone abandoned WebKit for some unknown reason having to do with Apple. Please list these OSS Apps, I would love to know since Google and Wikpedia say nothing like that.

http://www.opensource.apple.com/ Crazy, huh?

http://www.puredarwin.org/blockers#TOC-OpenDirectory-depends...

Good luck with that.

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

#369

Post by mortehu »

SageRaven wrote: post #318
mortehu wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The latter is just evil. Suing farmers cause crops were contaminated through unwanted pollination by neighboring farms I already acknowledged that this view exists in the comment you replied to. However, I suspect this view stems from farmers talking to the press, and not from the careful reading of court records. See for example this quote from your second link: > The judge also called the farmers' claims that the…

Intentional contamination or no, patenting genes and extorting royalties from people propagating self-replicating organisms is very much evil. If farmers want to pay for seed stock of known features and quality, that's great. What they do after that should be totally under their control and domain. A legal precedent for interfering with the ancient practice of saving seed and selection of seeds from desirable plants…

> A legal precedent for interfering with the ancient practice of saving seed and selection of seeds from desirable plants [...]

This seems deliberately vague, and covers a lot of scenarios not covered by any court ruling I have seen. If you're going to call them evil, you need to do it with some specificity.

If you're proposing that we abolish GMO patents, I'd say that's a reckless policy that risks cutting off the funding source for increasingly important GMO research. There's probably going to be a couple billion more people on this planet, so it seems that we need better farming yields. Your arguments against the law seem to be on the form "the law is easy to break, hence it should not exist", which I think would apply to way too many laws to be a viable argument. If the law was hard to avoid breaking, I would agree more.

On the other hand, I agree that Monsanto's production of chemical weapons for the US government during the Vietnam war was probably evil.

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

#370

Post by kunai »

lost_name wrote: post #358
kunai wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Did the iPad have features the iPhone didn't?

More screen real-estate, but then again, it's like glass. It doesn't do anything my smartphone can't, except give me more room for bigger apps.

Post reply on HN