Shooti

6 ms·

1.
by Shooti 7mo ago
The difference is ChatGPT Pro/Plus plans have one shared pool of token limits shared across all use cases. In contrast Google's AI plans give you at least three seperate pools of token usage limits: Gemini App + Antigravity/O
2.
by Shooti 2y ago
> o changes are being made to the .tflite file extension or format. Conversion tools will continue to output .tflite flatbuffer files, and .tflite files will be readable by LiteRT. Odd choice since it strongly undermines the stated purpo
3.
by Shooti 6y ago
They'll probably continue to co-exist: Flutter is a Declarative UI product by the Dart team, Jetpack Compose is a Declarative UI product by the Android org. Google has no problem having multiple competing products by different orgs unl
4.
by Shooti 8y ago
Due to Mark Gurmans track record a Bloomberg rumor on a tech companies future plans for a product are almost as trustworthy as official PR from the company. More leaks = more representation on HN.
5.
by Shooti 8y ago
Quote from GMail project lead: In a slight shift from how Inbox was characterized at launch, Bank says it now amounts to an experimental test bed for future Gmail features. “Inbox is the next-gen, early adopter version, whereas Gmail is th
6.
by Shooti 10y ago
There is/was no such thing as an assistant called "Google Now". That was an illusion/poor branding. There's "Voice Search", typing into the Google search box with your voice. VS Assistant, a Google's
7.
by Shooti 10y ago
>No HomeKit integration, of course, now that Google has purchased them. Probably completely unrelated since Nest doesn't even support Google's Brillo/Weave. They're going forward with their own "Nest Weave"
8.
by Shooti 11y ago
>I don't get it... Google clearly has more than enough in house talent to get those things right. Why aren't they? Why don't they seem to care? I think it's because "Google" aren't involved at all. Goog
9.
by Shooti 11y ago
Old Way: Two separate concepts called the same thing. Google+ (Unified profile/account/sharing system across services) and Google+ (Social network). This backfired because what people made the natural inference that the purpose of
10.
by Shooti 11y ago
They killed that a couple of months ago.
11.
by Shooti 11y ago
>On Android, questionable apps have direct access to the entire kernel system call interface, as well as to other OS features. Doesn't seem correct: https://source.android.com/devices/tech/security/ove
12.
by Shooti 11y ago
You can shop via an in-app browser within their Kindle app.
13.
by Shooti 11y ago
http://nextmarket.co/blogs/smarthomeweekly/29309313-google-i... Going by how closely this matches the leaks, I think the onHub actually is running Brillo. They've just chosen not to mention it just yet.
14.
by Shooti 11y ago
Fiber was part of "Access and Energy" led by Craig Barratt. Has a spot on their super out of date management page: https://www.google.co.uk/about/company/facts/management/
15.
by Shooti 11y ago
We also use personal information to help us create, develop, operate, deliver, and improve our products, services, content and advertising, and for loss prevention and anti-fraud purposes. We may also use personal information for interna
16.
by Shooti 12y ago
They already do according to the Google Wallet FAQ: "Google Wallet stores your credit and debit cards on secure servers and encrypts your payment information with industry-standard SSL (secure socket layer) technology. Your full credit
17.
by Shooti 12y ago
I think the title to this should've been something more descriptive like "Google willing to accept Chrome Sidebar API patches" as that seems to be the main reason it was reopened.
18.
by Shooti 12y ago
>Is Google Maps really that better than OpenStreetMap or Apple Maps or Bing Maps, or do people just use it because it's a default result in Google? I think its more nuanced: In-line maps are a better search result to location quer
19.
by Shooti 12y ago
Microsoft only bought Nokia's devices division, this is a product by the actual Nokia.
20.
by Shooti 12y ago
More wood behind arrows or not they could at least update the black bar so Scholar could be pinned to the users App Launcher. And no reason for it to still have the old Google Logo. It doesn't have to feel abandoned just because its
21.
by Shooti 12y ago
I think the difference is Google TV was built by the Youtube division, Android TV was built by the Android division.
22.
by Shooti 12y ago
I think it's the reverse: the main purpose of G+ was to integrate all the services together, being a Facebook competitor was just the icing. The integration wasn't a means, it was the end itself. They haven't really lost sinc
23.
by Shooti 12y ago
The design tweak they did 2-3 weeks ago to the Account switcher on Youtube makes it readily apparent which Google account/gmail address the channel belongs to.
24.
by Shooti 12y ago
Not sure you can draw such a hard line between audio/video since all the rumors point to this subscription service essentially being both: http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/11/27/apk-teardown-youtube...
25.
by Shooti 12y ago
Plausible breakdown of Google/YT's side of the story: 1. Youtube wants to offer users a subscription service with no ads. 2. Youtube needs to update its licensing/terms with artists: If a video plays for a subscriber they s
26.
by Shooti 12y ago
'Courier was much more than a clever vision. The team, which had more than 130 Microsoft employees contributing to it, had created several prototypes that gave a clear sense about the type of experience users would get. There were stil
27.
by Shooti 12y ago
http://contact.googleapps.com/
28.
by Shooti 12y ago
Actually it doesn't. You don't need a G+ Profile to connect a Youtube channel to a G+ Page. That's the crux of the whole problem, G+ is so heavily associated with being a social network connected to real identity that having
29.
by Shooti 12y ago
http://blog.schema.org/2014/04/announcing-schemaorg-actions.... Seems like Bing, Yahoo and Yandex.
30.
by Shooti 12y ago
I think, in the end, the reason it got banned was down to some clause in their terms of use that required them to use web technology in their implementation, which would have horribly crippled the app, and was not particularly feasible to

More ›