Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | felooboolooomba's commentslogin

Today is the day I realized that vscode started off as a clone of vim with smoke and mirrors.


There's probably a way of making these switches for less, if you're willing to trade money for toil and strife. Wind up toys have a very long roll of "wind up spring". 3D print a jig to bend a short piece of that into shape. Use somewhat translucent filament to print the switch. Or use a diffuser/matte thingy from a LCD monitor. I don't know. It'll probably be more expensive in the end but you'll feel good that you did it.


I think you can buy premade LED grid arrays. I would take one of those and overlay one wire per row, one per column, in tension and suspended a few mm apart. You could use a translucent 3d-printed framework to stabilize the wires and have a flexible piece above each junction to act as a button. Not sure how to make it click...


  Today’s typ.ing:
  Speed: 420wpm
  Accuracy: 100.00%
  Training Set: Onboarding
  Keyboard damage 12%
  Capitalization:   Numbers:   Punctuation:


Stop telling me what to do.


Can you imagine the flack he'd take if it turns out he'd been moonlighting whilst the GitHub ship is sailing though cat 5 with both the mast and the ship whore on fire?


Just fucking fuck off! Fuck!


> .. obtaining source code via Google Drive ...

Let this sink in. Google, this small tech company (correct me if I'm wrong), is peddling source code via tarballs on google drive.

Something the head of the Android ecosystem, Sameer Samat could be proud of on his CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sameersamat


There is a little bit of clumsiness in the way Google communicates with the public. What they really mean to say is: we need to be broken up.


I am in awe at the amount of capital Google's market dominance affords them and the consistency with which they squander that capital.

https://killedbygoogle.com/

This is not the way.


Well.

Lest you forget that modern computing exists because ATT built unix and then threw it out to the public, at speed, as they drove away from it as fast as possible. (Something about being an actual monopoly...).

There is at least one thing, on that list that I can almost assure you will be coming back (in concept and spirt) in the next 5 years. Likely open source, because google tossed it...

Meanwhile it has other very public and open winners: Golang, Kubernetes being two stellar examples of them not dropping something like a hot potato.


Yeah, its the "well, legally, we have to provide the source code, but we make it as painful and slow for you as we can without it becoming a blatant violation of the GPL."


Not quite, they could make you request it by post and send it on a stack of floppies.


Sounds like a cheap way to get my hands on some floppies.


you are right a stack of printed qr codes is better


No, that's too easily machine-read. Print it in a fancy calligraphy font or one with ambiguous characters.


Reminds me of Lavabit where the US wanted the encryption keys and they printed them out in a 4 point font :D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit#Legacy


That's too convenient, cameras can read many qr codes at a time. Encode the binary on some punch cards.


Pretty sure cameras can be used to read punchcards too.


This sounds like a fun project. Somebody already did it, apparently: https://hackaday.com/2012/07/30/reading-punch-cards-with-an-...


They don't have to be cheap.


GPL requires providing the source code via a medium customarily used for software interchange. Deliberately making it inconvenient by using a medium no longer customarily used for software interchange is a GPL violation. Google Drive is already an unusual way to distribute software.

Google is already failing to provide the Pixel kernel drivers in the preferred form for modification. Their kernel build system uses Git commands but yet they aren't providing the Git repositories it expects to be there. They had to provide a repo metadata file as a workaround but it's not the same since the revisions of the code aren't set properly in the resulting build.

Google is arguably already violating the GPL. They're deliberately making it inconvenient and are adding deliberate delays through requiring manual handling of the requests.


Greenbar printouts.


I'm pretty sure there is a lot of code in Android that belongs to Google and is not part of an upstream GPL project. They would be completely entitled to stop sharing it.


Isn't that the point of Google Play Services? To keep their proprietary code separate, in a super-app that doesn't obey the GPL?


And you have to fill out a Google Form to get that link in the first place.

> I just want to get rid of forms. Like, I never want to fill out a form again.

The opening line from this interview with Sameer Samat on the Google for Developers YouTube channel in June.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvVsdZL2ogY


HE wants to get rid of forms, and make the rest of the world enjoy the burden of requesting access to open source code through a beloved form. Hope that's clear now.


> Prior to moving it to Google Drive, they started squashing the history into a single commit prior to pushing release tags. The tarballs provided via Google Drive have exactly the same source code. However, they went out of the way to make it more inconvenient in several ways.

Ugh.

Also I can't believe it's been 10 years since they shut down Google Code.


> ...after making a request through Google Forms This is even more ridiculous to me.


At this point, without Git commit history (assuming it is a bare code dump), is it still even possible to guarantee it is what Google says it is?


You can compare against old dumps.


Sometimes I wonder if randos peek in and see this terminology and think we’re all nut cases


> Google, this small tech company (correct me if I'm wrong), is peddling source code via tarballs on google drive.

What is the context for this? It's not clear from the linked social media post.

The Android kernel source code is in git: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/

Plus there's a lot of other Android source hosted on Google's git servers: https://android.googlesource.com/


The repositories you have linked are not sufficient to build an Android distribution. In order to get the missing bits, you have to fill out a form: https://source.android.com/opensourcerequest and beg them, and if they decide you are worthy, they will email you a link to a tarball, which is hosted on Google Drive.


>The Android kernel source code is in git: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/

That's the mainline kernel. Actual devices use various LTS kernels, for instance the pixel 9a uses kernel 6.1[1], which was hasn't been updated in a year[2]

[1] https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/tegu/

[2] https://android.googlesource.com/device/google/tegu-kernels/...


There are other kernel 6.1 branches there, e.g. https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/+/refs/heads/...

I'm not sure which one the latest update for the Pixel 9a is using, I have an older Pixel 8. When I look at the Settings -> Android Version I can see it's using a build from January 2026 (also 6.1).



It's mentioned in the same thread, just scroll up a few pages in the linked social post.


Yes I read the whole thread, but it wasn't clear which bits of source code required requesting a tarball.


Don't be evil, right?

This is how a multibillion company that benefited infinitely from open source pays back.


Slogan is now "We didn't used to be evil"


Person A: Did you know Google removed access to Pixel code repo.

Person B: Well, it didn't go away, they just changed the access method to Google Drive.

Saved us that conversation here, Thanks. No matter what mental gymnastics we may do, it is pretty clear where this is heading.

On a different note, the source download form requires you to accept Google's privacy policy for the information you submit.

Is it ok to tack on accepting additional policies as requirements to access what is allowed under OSS licenses.


Google hasn't been able to properly do / fix Android gesture navigation for more than half a decade now. The amount that edge swipes in things like photo editing apps are detected as backswipes (sometimes destroying 10+ minutes of editing) is laughable.

Technically this is because a lot of apps thumb their nose at the requirement to have safe areas around swipeable elements in their app, but as a user, that is not my problem to fix. It's Google's.

The workaround is so ridiculously easy too: only allow backswipes to count in the lowest 15% of the bottom left of the screen. Yet despite having hundreds of engineers earning ±350.000 per year work on this problem for years, they haven't been able to either implement or even think of it.

The real fix would be to deprecate the three button layout in Android 18 and remove it in Android 19. Force apps to comply.


The other real fix is for apps to use the existing apis added in Android 10 to create regions where the OS will not prioritize navigation gestures over input to the app. https://developer.android.com/reference/android/view/View#se...


The real fix would be to bring back physical control buttons and leave the touchscreen for the rest.

Also, I have 6GB of RAM in my phone - switching from a browser to youtube, or vice-versa, should not cause the other to clear and start back again from a freshly-loaded state.

350,000 a year and people can't even get basic things to operate properly. Google needs broken up and their engineers need to go back to the 90s and learn some real programming skill.


I think you are grossly minimizing the effects on your change on both users and developers. Neither are going to comply and then you have further fragmented the user base and removed a bunch of apps.

I use an Android tablet and I only backswipe at the upper left.


3 years, checks out. Probably buddy buddy with someone. Reminds me of that 3rd Google Pay they made that they had to sack because it was so dumb.


What's Google got to do with GrapheneOS?


[dead]


This is absolutely not a witch-hunt. People in that position wield enormous power and take their paycheck and responsibility that comes with it. Linking to his professional linked in relation to his responsibility is nothing but professional.


Why not, his linkedin profile is public and easily findable. This is not doxxing.


anything but holding people accountable for their anti-consumer actions


Well, sounds like you have a rather weird definition of accountability. You do you.


He's the head of Android ecosystem; who else is accountable?


It's quite painful to resolve cognitive dissonance, so I understand the downvotes for your comment.

People are clever enough to reach high level corporate roles, but at the same time they're are too weak to emotionally process the consequences of their "work" on their human cash cows of below-average intelligence.

However with these kind of moral/ethical questions, it's really hard to draw the line.

Is working at Google and thereby facilitating the scamming of my grandmother worse than being an ordinary pickpocket or an lobbyist for big oil?


If you are worried about internet witch-hunts I'd stay away from the "creators" and content that Google platforms and makes money from on Youtube.


I think it's a stretch to call OP doing a "witch-hunt" here. That Android guy is a mini LinkedIn celebrity with 100k followers.


This doesn't excuse a message that literally reads like call to action.


Public companies and their executives deserve the same treatment as the government and the politicians. It is completely fine to let them know that the people are upset with their decisions.


I'm just thinking that someone who has 100k LinkedIn followers might be happy about any type of engagement, including nerdy rage bait.


What would be wrong with a call to action addressed at someone likely in a position to stop this bullshit if he cared enough?


Sigh, hi. My heart goes out to you.


Anyone remember the end of the .com era? This feels early similar.


Benchmarks? I'm currently using Tesseract (via OcrMyPDF) and would like to compare the difference.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: