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

Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

store.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 851 posts

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#671

Post by ddalex »

ncr100 wrote: post #398
rumblerock wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former Pixel user that switched because I broke the phone and had an extra iPhone in the family, there are a number of reasons I'm heavily considering switching back (had been an Android user since 2009). 1. Spam call screening is nonexistent on the iPhone, and T-Mobile's blocker still lets a ton of them through. In my prior experience Google did a much better job in this department. It would be nice to pick up…

For 1, and 2 my individual (single data point!) experience through all versions of the Pixel have been great. I've been saddened that Google keeps the Spam filtration feature locked to the Pixel devices. It is a KILLER FEATURE. And for STT - that "just works" 95% of my time that I use it with common vocabulary. The hardware has failed me a couple of times - sudden battery failure, and battery cable tearing with a rea…

> I've been saddened that Google keeps the Spam filtration feature locked to the Pixel devices. It is a KILLER FEATURE.

Why would anybody share killer features with competition ?

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#672

Post by concinds »

aaomidi wrote: post #81
0des wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't need to have this discussion again. There's no need for this tone. People will disagree, and that's what makes this place great.

This isn't disagreeing. This is not doing basic reading before commenting.

This is not a case of "not doing basic reading". It's not a settled debate. The anti-CSAM scanning side has advanced a lot of spurious arguments and quite a lot of misinformation, some of which was spread by NGOs and orgs like the EFF (!!!) and more.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28176418

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#673

Post by londgine »

SoapSeller wrote: post #655
londgine wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://m.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_xz2_compact-9082.php Sony used to have a compact line with flagship hardware and a reasonable size. Unfortunately, it looks like they stopped making them

https://m.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_5_iii-10851.php They still have them. They grow a little bit, but the real issue for me is price...

I would categories a phone with a screen large than 6" as a phablet

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#674

Post by soylentnewsorg »

arendtio wrote: post #624
ablekh wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> underneath it runs a crusty old 2017 kernel full of holes of different sizes > LineageOS and other projects can’t fix things in kernels they can’t compile I think that you're wrong on this, that is unless you decided to use term "kernel" above too liberally, referring to all software running on a device. AFAIK, alternative Android images, such as LineageOS, include relevant - and quite up-to-date! - AOSP common ker…

So would you please help me to find an ROM with an up-to-date Android Common Kernel for my i9300 Samsung Galaxy S3? AFAIK, the only way to run it with working drivers for all hardware components, are ROMs which use the rusty 3.0.101 Linux kernel from back in the day and I think that is what DCKing is referring to. If you want to create a new ROM, you either have to use the old kernel and have an upper Limit of Androi…

It is different for phones made by the people who also make Android. Google. Which is why I was specifically talking about the pixel and the nexus phones sold by google. For example, kernel version 4.9.3 - the latest one (yes, originally released in november of 2017) supports up to the latest Android. In fact, since 4.1 supports the latest Android, and will till June 2024 according to google. I'm going to go on a limb here, and given the current timeline, project 4.9.3 is going to be supported for probably whatever android is released in 2026.

So, Nexus6 released in 2014 will be able to run the latest android, fully security patched including kernel (which is not that important), till about 2026.

Now let's keep in mind that I replied to a guy who said how great it is that ios has more longevity.

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#675

Post by MildlySerious »

Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #644
DCKing wrote: post #20

Thanks Google. Think I’ll be buying this. I want as little to do with Google’s services as possible in my life, but they really deserve credits for making a modern usable smartphone that is reasonably open. There is just one single feature I will be buying this for - the 5 years of software updates. While good image processing is definitely a pro, all of these software you’re presenting features I really don’t give a…

> Finally here’s a seemingly good Android phone with 5 years of support - from the only phone vendor outside of Apple who appears to give a damn about that aspect. FairPhone 4 not only promises 5 years of android software updates but also has 5 years of warranty , There are more reasons to trust their words than any of the other phone manufacturers. • They are not profit focused but rather towards sustainability, The…

Tangential, but the first thing I noticed is that this site itself greets me in my preferred language, and allows setting my region separately, at the top of the page.

The Pixel site sets the language based on geography and does not allow changing it without changing the region, which comes with a warning about delivery and currency conversion.

One of these makes me feel understood and accounted for as a potential customer, the other makes me want to CTRL+W and move on.

I am aware that this doesn't affect the majority of people. That doesn't make it less frustrating that Google keeps doubling down on this with many of the things they do.

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#676

Post by concinds »

gigel82 wrote: post #310
simonh wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do not have the ability to scan photos stored on your phone that are not uploaded to iCloud. The scan is only implemented in the iCloud photos upload system.

If that was the case they'd just implement it on their own servers, just like everybody else (it's not like iCloud is E2EE). In reality they probably have a "photoscanner.so / .dylib" that currently is only linked in by the iCloud uploader thing, but at any time could be called in by any other part of the system (or offer exploits new avenues for data exfiltration), which was actually spelled out in their initial ann…

> which was actually spelled out in their initial announcement (there will be a system API for accessing it).

That is completely false. They announced, a week after the initial announcement, that the on-device nudity-detection they planned on implementing in iMessage would also be open to Snapchat and other messaging apps. That doesn't report anything to the police, isn't hash-based, and is done on-device; it just pops up a bypassable warning to allow child users who are part of "iCloud Family Sharing" to avoid seeing things they don't want to see. It has nothing to do with CSAM detection.

I continue to be frustrated by the amount of misinformation on the anti-CSAM scanning side of the debate, including on HN (and it's orders of magnitude worse everywhere else).

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#677

Post by concinds »

kfprt wrote: post #483
tehnub wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why they require that you reach a certain threshold number of matches before its sent for human review. The threshold allows them to take the probability of a false collision, which they can estimate from data, and set the probability of an overall false-flag by requiring a certain number of these collisions. They've released that the threshold, to start, would have been 30 (Page 10 of https://www.apple.com/ch…

You are incorrectly assuming a non adversarial environment. Swatting 2.0.

The problem with this argument is that the "adversarial environment" argument applies to a worse degree to all cloud storage services who do the scanning in the cloud, since they have no threshold mechanism, and lack transparency on whether there is any human review whatsoever. You would still be reported to the police if someone hacks your Google Photos account and uploads CSAM to it.

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#678

Post by concinds »

sulam wrote: post #300
threeseed wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would only have access to the photos that are being reviewed. And you can either choose between (a) someone having to see your photos or (b) relying on an automated but imperfect process. You have to pick one.

Uh, can't I choose not to have my private images scanned? I think that's still a choice, right?

Not when using a commercial cloud service, no.

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#679

Post by soylentnewsorg »

ksml wrote: post #628
soylentnewsorg wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright - I'll bite. This is a smartphone, not a windows PC with a bunch of services. There is Zero listening on any port. There is no attack surface for any kernel - the only thing there would be a bug in mms. Please share your source for kernel attacks, on any android version, that's not an attack on an app - but on the kernel. No, this is not a google play attack, or an attack on an outdated app - which are update…

I think you're terribly naive if you think a phone kernel has no attack surface. It is absolutely a security risk to run an outdated kernel. It has nothing to do with whether there are services running for a hacker to connect to; it's about whether it's possible for an attacker to trigger buggy behavior somehow, whether that's sending malformed packets or Bluetooth frames or invoking patterns of syscalls that cause b…

your phone is not a linux server. yes, if you install a virus or an outdated app, someone can daisychain a priv escalation using a kernel bug. no need for that though - my phone is already rooted.

Your car has pieces that run linux too. Guess an attacker can make you crash.

> drivers

since this is about iphone and android comparison, guess what has those same driver blobs form those same exact manufacturers. apple doesn't make their own bluetooth chips. oh, btw, the drivers get updated just fine, since that's part of the kernel and os, which all get updated just fine.

google supports kernel 4.1 till 2024 for android 11. the nexus from 2014 runs 4.9. so probably 2026 kernel and android, fully patched - 12 years.

oh, sorry, did you forget this thread started with a guy claiming ios is great because you can put later versions of the OS on there? where's that iphone from 12 years ago running the latest version of ios, and still performing fast? because that's what this thread is about.

Re: Google Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro

#680

Post by sliken »

turtlebits wrote: post #374
DCKing wrote: post #20

Thanks Google. Think I’ll be buying this. I want as little to do with Google’s services as possible in my life, but they really deserve credits for making a modern usable smartphone that is reasonably open. There is just one single feature I will be buying this for - the 5 years of software updates. While good image processing is definitely a pro, all of these software you’re presenting features I really don’t give a…

Pixel phones have absolutely not been reliable for me. From the Pixel 1 microphone defect to it needing a reboot every few days, and my Pixel 4A boot looping, Google phones are absolutely not reliable IME. (Almost as bad a Razer laptops).

I've had the HTC G1 (first android), G2, every generation of nexus and every generation of pixel. Never had a problem.
Post reply on HN