Daniel14

7 ms·

1.
by Daniel14 15y ago
Motorola?
2.
by Daniel14 15y ago
> WEP is completely broken. Even if you do everything right, it's trivial fot an attacker yo access a WEP-protected network. Can you elaborate on this? I'm genuinly curious.
3.
by Daniel14 15y ago
The problem with Android being open source is that Google hasn't really got much control over what happens with it. Everyone can tweak it for the better or worse, and lately its mostly been for the worse. However, if you don't want to root
4.
by Daniel14 15y ago
You could say that about almost anything. "How can you justify commenting on HN, when the money earned in the equivalent amount of time wasted here could save n Nigerians from starvation?" You can't, not really. But Jonathan's card still is
5.
by Daniel14 15y ago
Android pays for itself, in lots of different ways, among them and by far most importantly: Being the default search provider on 550k additional phones/day. That's worth a billion $ to Google any day.
6.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I already feel rather uncomfortable about all the information apps can gather about me without me ever having to do anything. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be very easy to restrict that, and only let my friends have access to &#6
7.
by Daniel14 15y ago
From the same quote: "Google Contacts syncs with Orkut, so users can export their Orkut friends’ email addresses from Google Contacts", so it's technically wrong that Google didn't let you export your friend's mail addresses anymore. They j
8.
by Daniel14 15y ago
Well, if you care about a locked bootloader and similar restrictions (99% don't), but didn't put the effort into googling your phone to find out about them, you can always root your phone and put on the the newest version - If you didn't ge
9.
by Daniel14 15y ago
> "With Google+ in the open, Facebook finally needs to watch its step. ... Google is the only web property which can even begin to threaten Facebook’s supremacy. ... That’s the problem with monopolies, and the reason they’re illegal: if
10.
by Daniel14 15y ago
Of course, but what I think the author meant to say, was that owning those patents should have been worth more than $4.5 billion to Google, as they are crucial to Android's success. And deplorably, I think he's right.
11.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I agree with most of your points - However, I think the author's main complaint was that if you do anything somehow objectionable on any Google service, then all of them get blocked. I don't see why that's the case, but as long as it contin
12.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I feel like the author already knows the answer to this problem: "you either keep your content clean, or host [it] elsewhere." I agree there could be border-line issues with the legal system, but that mostly is about Google not getting su
13.
by Daniel14 15y ago
> This is just a regular product launch. My point was that Google is putting a lot of effort into competing with Facebook, and that they're willing to use all their other products to succeed with Plus. Think about their bonuses being
14.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I can't help but feel like they really want this to succeed, and are betting the entire company on it. From what I've heard, Google+ has to potential to turn out huge. And making sure there aren't any bugs before letting everybody in is s
15.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I imagine the number for Android lying significantly lower, because a) it's a lot harder to pay in the Android market and thus b) more apps are ad-supported. But I don't think you can ignore the market share trends in favor of how much mone
16.
by Daniel14 15y ago
An imho better poll would have looked more like this: "a) Google+ > Facebook b) Google+ < Facebook c) Couldn't try it out yet d) Don't care", since the way mrspeaker asked the question, a lot of people get left out.
17.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I don't think that's really a legitimate question. If you tell a friend e.g. your email address, you willingly give up the control you had over that piece of information, and accept that he now knows your email address. What you're expectin
18.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I think that's going to play an ever greater role in Google's expanding plans. They're pissing a lot of established companies off by competing with free, and mostly, quite simply better products. This is great for consumers because it kicks
19.
by Daniel14 15y ago
"They're too entrenched with no viable competitor, and who's going to try to 'take on' google? Where would you start?" I disagree. All their products have serious competitors people can switch to anytime: Search - Bing; Mail - Yahoo; Docs -
20.
by Daniel14 15y ago
Sorry for not specifying that, thanks for the correction. The exception to promoting being legal of course is, when the product in question has a monopoly on the market. However, I doubt that's the case with Google Search. Again, IANAL, but
21.
by Daniel14 15y ago
Google doesn't sell any data to other companies, only fb does.
22.
by Daniel14 15y ago
> They [Google] have ten times more potential for evil than Microsoft ever dreamed of having in the nineties. I disagree - Can you clarify why you think so? You see, Google is probably the most vulnerable of the tech giants: If users s
23.
by Daniel14 15y ago
> I'd rather that Facebook dominate the space completely than give Google any more of my personal information. I feel differently, but see quite a few (mostly non-technical) people agreeing with you - at least, here in Europe. Google al
24.
by Daniel14 15y ago
It wouldn't make me, because you can't just buy changes of the law, not even in the US. Three billion dollars is a lot, but will never match what other big companies stand to lose from software patents becoming less important. This is the
25.
by Daniel14 15y ago
> Why get rid of the white text for full day events? For me, it still displays full day events in white text if I select a dark color like green, and only uses black text for light colors. The only minor problem I see is that it also us
26.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I'm not too familiar with how Kickstarter operates, but since anyone can "back" a project, why didn't you pay the difference to yourself? Kickstarter doesn't keep a cut, and you could've used those thousands of dollars to start your project
27.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I can see two benefits of increasing Chrome market share for Google, that justify these expenses: 1) It speeds up the web. Since every second internet user makes Google money, making the web a great place for both consumers (speed, security
28.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I could imagine it, as always, being the guys that paid for it.
29.
by Daniel14 15y ago
I don't think it's really that simple. Here's their business model: a) The customers sign up for those offers for free, and can buy certain things for less than the normal price. b) The business owners will lose a percentage of a sale (they
30.
by Daniel14 15y ago
? Clicking on the logo takes you to the results page for the query "Les Paul", the 1st result is Wikipedia, which, if you read it, should answer your question..

More ›