|
Volmarias posted:You mean Google Duo? idk what that is
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Shaggar posted:idk what that is It's like hangouts, but for 2 people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:19
|
|
|
Basically google splintered hangouts in to 5 different apps because their promotion and incentive structure prioritized new product releases over fixes/updates. So now we have - allo - duo - hangouts - meet - hangouts business (going away in oct, replaced by meet)
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:22
|
|
|
Optimus_Rhyme posted:Basically google splintered hangouts in to 5 different apps because their promotion and incentive structure prioritized new product releases over fixes/updates. Stellar marketing. I have only heard of one of those apps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:35
|
|
|
Optimus_Rhyme posted:Basically google splintered hangouts in to 5 different apps because their promotion and incentive structure prioritized new product releases over fixes/updates. You missed one, there's also "Chat", the business text-only companion app to Meet which is probably a lot like Slack. Although I think Allo is also deprecated with future migration to "Messages". Honestly, though, Duo's probably best of breed. The rest are total wankery now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:39
|
|
|
James Baud posted:You missed one, there's also "Chat", the business text-only companion app to Meet which is probably a lot like Slack. Although I think Allo is also deprecated with future migration to "Messages". Google has never once built a chat client that makes people feel like they want to talk to each other. This tells you a whole hell of a lot about google.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
there was a small window of time when some people i knew used gchat, but it was very small and well before it turned into hangouts. i imagine if google just improved gchat, it could have grown at least a little. didnt some yosposter claim to have thought up the "hangouts" name?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 04:49
|
|
|
google should never have got rid of xmpp federation in gchat, this was a worse crime than killing off google reader imo
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 05:06
|
|
|
name a federated communication protocol that isn’t spammed up garbage
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 07:12
|
|
|
Rufus Ping posted:google should never have got rid of xmpp federation in gchat, this was a worse crime than killing off google reader imo  with both counts
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 11:08
|
|
|
pseudorandom name posted:name a federated communication protocol that isn’t spammed up garbage I almost said postal mail but no that's still full of spam Then I almost said talking to people IRL but they barf out memes and garbage so yeah I dunno
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
pseudorandom name posted:name a federated communication protocol that isn’t spammed up garbage s4b and teams aren't spammed up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
poo poo for brains?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
shaggar for business
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
braille?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
NFX posted:shaggar for business
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 17:08
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:oh. I know what it is. gently caress face idiot jonny ives decided he wanted you to see the live video of who was calling you so to make that work it creates the session setup required for the call even if you don't accept. That seems plausible that it is miscommunication of state between various api calls. Another idea is that the call is already answered but obscured from the ui in order to reduce delay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
if the call is being answered at the protocol level to get the inbound video stream and then handed to the UI for display thats even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
yeah you can get the video feed as well if the end user hits the power button
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
the inbound to the recipient of the call I mean. that inbound stream is always connected and its by design because they want to show the caller on the recipient's phone. this means its building a session in the recipient device and whether that session is being accepted without user input by design. The question is if its the phone app/ui accepting the call or if its something at the system level accepting the call and then handing it off to the phone app/ui. Both scenarios here are the device accepting calls without user interaction, but the former makes this somewhat understandable as a bug since its a disconnect between bad UI design (accepting a call without user input) and the system. The later would mean system components are designed to accept inbound calls without user input which is far worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
Rufus Ping posted:google should never have got rid of xmpp federation in gchat, this was a worse crime than killing off google reader imo agreed. it goes against their current dogshit garbage of making their own protocols, though. im not amped for AMP!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the inbound to the recipient of the call I mean. that inbound stream is always connected and its by design because they want to show the caller on the recipient's phone. Yeah, I hope it is misrepresentation of session authorization state rather than implicit authorization that leaks through an untested user story. I wonder if it was exploited through OS X calls too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
it would be a pretty "lol apple" move if it turns out to be a deep design flaw due to insistence on zero UI lag for the user
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
theres the zero lag thing which im sure is a part of it, but theres also the caller-preview thing which is probably the major driver here. Personally I hate it. its not a good user experience cause it instantly makes me think that since I can see them, they can see me (which they can thanks to this bug) plus I don't think theres any notification to the caller that their video is being sent before the recipient picks up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
CmdrRiker posted:Yeah, I hope it is misrepresentation of session authorization state rather than implicit authorization that leaks through an untested user story. I wonder if it was exploited through OS X calls too. i think i saw something that the exploit works on macOS too lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
heck of a thread https://twitter.com/glytchtech/status/1089626118397849600
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
Getting time lapse footage of traffic and clouds is going to be my next excuse if I am caught behaving suspiciously with my phone. Every time you post it makes me want to watch Real Genius. A girl's gotta have her standards. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
NFX posted:shaggar for business
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 21:00
|
|
|
My company uses Blue Jeans. It's mediocre and feels too resource intensive, but I always chuckle to myself when I say I'm about to jump on a bj call.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
my favorite bit was that the thieves parked their tow truck too far away, so the car re-immobilized itself before they could drive it all the way to the truck and get it strapped on 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
the only successful community product google ever built was barely associated with them, primarily used in Brazil, and killed off because it wasn’t interesting for the developers anymore or w/e
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
also everything about it felt out of date already at launch
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
Iirc Orkut was made by a Google employee as a personal project and took off, and people really liked it so it got integrated with g+ and was killed
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
whenever a google product gets decent it feels like someone goes "but what about the unix philosophy, heh" and they cut the app into pieces
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
cut the app into pieces, this is my last resort
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 23:33
|
|
|
who was the goog guy who was all "lol you can never have too many chat clients!  "
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
cut g chat in to pieces this is my last hang out
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:s4b and teams aren't spammed up. skype for business is terrible though secfuck content: they switched us to sfb for our corporate im and everyone hated it so much that now there’s effectively no standard and people just use whatever app they like. but special credit goes to the team that decided using a public app for work stuff would be too insecure, so they set up their own lovely internal webapp chat server thing ... over http
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
Just remember that apparently, at Google you get promoted for "inventing and launching something new", and you get no reward for bugfixing and improving the user experience. So every employee is launching their own little pet projects and that's how you get 3000 different Google chat apps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
product idea: key holder (shelf, hooks, or mat) which operates on the same principle as these secure badge holders:  run an as-seen-on-tv style campaign and make bank.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2019 00:18
|
|
