...apart from westerners who use Google services and for them it is a right pita. Dragonfly might just result in Google stuff working for once. Even so, I guess very few Chinese people will use Google since they have native equivalents. The only effect that preventing dragonfly has is to give some feeling of moral superiority to some Google engineers and maintain the frustration for GMS users in China.
We will see, but it made me look since I'm hoping for some better way of getting that content than is available atm...ie, via the licence fee, or the independent catch-up services. I suppose breaking the law is also an option.
Also, I suspect there's a good group of people who are opposed to promoting yet another American giant, and prefer there to be some competition, even in a limited geography.
What makes you think we've (Britons) have "paid for it already"? There's a group of people who don't pay for any TV, and their number are growing - well, not for a licence anyway, which means view/record broadcast TV as it's being broadcast, or use iPlayer. Of course, it's/possible/ some have contributed to some of the content, since they have had a licence at some point, even if they no longer do. That's not to mention that people pay for the same stuff multiple times in many situations - not only 'repeats' while continuing to pay for a licence, but also the same music on cassette, record, cd, etc, the same films on VCD, DVD, Blu Ray, etc. This behaviour is not without precedent, and there is an argument for paying for 'the new format' and/or convenience, which sort of applies, I think.
Of course, whie one does need a licence for iPlayer, that's not the case for the other channels' 'catch-up' services. It's still required for 'live' though, so you kind of need to be careful (if you care to be) to avoid those.
No, I would guess that, one of the reasons the BBC (especially) are doing this is exactly because they are anticipating the phasing out of the licence fee...or at least it becoming unpopular to the point of anachronistic. The 'laws' around the licence fee are increasingly complicated when attempting to apply them to modern viewing methods, and a lot of people, me included, find their inconvenience to be not worth it. TBH, I had been finding that I seemed to be paying just for the scheduling, which I found inconvenient since most interesting stuff is after 9pm which is too late for me, and also the 'live' stuff or shows that have some interactive element (talent show, for example), I find such to be 'drivel'. The only such things I actually miss are the news. I also resent being told/where/ I can be when I watch...eg, if I leave the UK, then (I think) I'm not supposed to use the services at all - well, they seem to put in some sort of geofencing on the use of the services. If I'm in the UK, of course, then I can/not/ pay, and it is perfectly easy to use the services.
It's not that I don't like the services being provided (except the above), and am not prepared to pay for them, it just that they seem to go out of their way to prevent me from using them.
I am hoping this service will simply make more sense than the existing system. In other words, it is/me/ who is 'licenced', rather than some address that is attached to me (registered to vote?). I suspect it won't stop them attempting to restrict/where/ I can use them, but those attempts usually fail - I guess I'm prepared to 'work around' those restrictions, since, in my view, they're there to stop people resident in those other countries, rather than people who do actually pay in their own country.
Exactly. I started reading "Silicon Valley based" and thought, "God no. The US government are *proven* to be terrible at spying and privacy"... And then the sentence went on to complain about China for some reason!?
I quite like the name...what do you have against it?
I quite like the look too, from what I've seen so far, and, no, I don't like the look of Teslas, though I admire the objective (ie to push the industry away from fossil fuels).
2020? That's next year, right? Tesla will/probably/ have a hovering model? LOL, right.
...now the UK just have to stop threatening to send their war ships into sensitive areas[1] and that'll help avoid pissing off the Chinese and perhaps help them post Brexit.
[1] If they really want to ensure freedom of navigation, why not send a dirt great oil tanker or something? TBH, I imagine there are very many British ships going through those seas every day. Is there any evidence of the Chinese trying to prevent *anyone* using those waters?...anyone who isn't an obvious threat to them, that is.
Exactly. I'd say the vast majority of Chinese people wouldn't care at all. I doubt many would know or care at all, tbh, since Google has lost in China, for Chinese people anyway...they're very happy with the services they get that cater directly to Chinese people.
The only difference it might make is to 'westerners' who currently use Google services and can't while they are there, and that only depends on this appeasing the authorities there to not mess with Google's IP addresses or whatever it is that is done. That isn't a given. I suppose there is a slight chance it might serve as a 'toe in the door', but I doubt it...no one there has much of an interest at all.
I seriously doubt people in the west understand just how irrelevant Google is there. It's like night and day compared to how it is in the US and/or UK. I think Google probably need to 'get over themselves' if they think their choice to deny the Chinese people their wonderful company and its services has made any difference at all. It's a fair enough choice if they think it isn't worth the effort, but even that is a questionable choice - better to have influenced from within, IMO.
No one uses the Play Store in China, so how will they make it available? Not that any Chinese are even interested in Google? Google is irrelevant and they've already lost in China. I guess they can make it available in the Chinese stores too, like Chrome is/etc.
The only value is for foreigners, since they could use this there, and perhaps it'll open the doors more so that more Google services will become usable in China./IMO
Gosh, how is this 'troll'. IMO, it is entirely accurate. Google is mostly irrelevant to China, and it's mostly Google's fault, if it is even a 'fault'.
However, I would still like to see this search engine happen, because I am a Google user and it's a pita to be in China and it not work. So, if they do this, then it'll have ~zero effect on China, the Chinese, and their life, but will help foreigners quite a lot, which I imagine is one of the motivations.
I can't see why people would be worrying about it in terms of censorship...very few Chinese will use it, imo...they don't care about Google at all and none of the phones there have GMS as far as I can tell.
It used to be that this sort of functionality was provided via an app produced by the 'telco'...eg, in the UK, O2 had TuGo, and Three had InTouch. They made them mostly useless (to me) since they prevented their use from outside the UK, I suspect for some marketing reason, rather than technical. They also only allowed them for people with contracts, not pay-as-you-go...I resorted to SIP and/or Skype. In the US, I imagine you can use Google Voice which looks very nice (not available in the UK).
There also a similar issue with having to use multiple 'app stores' to gain access to the user-base, and the varying rules they enforce.
Perhaps it'll be a 'good thing' since it'll tend to move people away from app stores, particularly Apple's but also the multitude of Android ones (Google's is irrelevant, of course, but there are other Android ones), but it's a little worrying that it moves to a single platform independent one controlled by a single company. I can't see TenCent giving up that kind of control.
PWAs have a similar problem since the level of implementation varies with platform and browser. You can develop with a single set of technologies, and distribute via the web, but the app still needs to take account of what platform its running on (different features/codecs, and even when they're the same they are implemented differently).
> WeChat's mini-programs are cementing its place as China's virtual mobile operating system: Mini-programs, which are no bigger than 10 megabytes and running in the WeChat app are gaining ground -- WeChat now hosts 1 million mini-apps, and the number of people who use them daily is expected to reach 400 million.
The penetration of WeChat is quite worrying when considering the future of internet/web (in China, at least), but also these mini-programs seem to be a direct threat to PWAs (as well as native apps). Any entity that wants to get value from the internet in China needs to master these technologies. I see Tesla have already realised this:
"Tesla has a mini-program enabling users to locate charging stations, schedule a test-drive and share their experiences about driving a Tesla car" https://walkthechat.com/wechat...
Did you read it? You seem to have replaced phrases like "seems to" and "it would appear that" with some that are more definitive.
"Again, the official numbers are not expected until the next few days, but it looks like it is very likely that it was achieved on the last day of production."
Perhaps 'close enough' is indeed 'close enough'...but it really isn't actually meeting the target unless it has actually met the target.
I suspect the Chinese position on #2 (and #4?) might be that the US IP laws are excessive and unfair (to society) and actually hurt the innovation and progress they were designed to promote.
Slashdot Mirror
...apart from westerners who use Google services and for them it is a right pita. Dragonfly might just result in Google stuff working for once.
Even so, I guess very few Chinese people will use Google since they have native equivalents.
The only effect that preventing dragonfly has is to give some feeling of moral superiority to some Google engineers and maintain the frustration for GMS users in China.
Why?
Why do they keep making them look like boats with snooty noses (reminds me of the maître d' from Ferris Beuler's day off).
You make them sound like traitors/terrorists.
No point that you can see, perhaps.
We will see, but it made me look since I'm hoping for some better way of getting that content than is available atm...ie, via the licence fee, or the independent catch-up services. I suppose breaking the law is also an option.
Also, I suspect there's a good group of people who are opposed to promoting yet another American giant, and prefer there to be some competition, even in a limited geography.
Why so verbose?
^lastest^latest
What makes you think we've (Britons) have "paid for it already"? There's a group of people who don't pay for any TV, and their number are growing - well, not for a licence anyway, which means view/record broadcast TV as it's being broadcast, or use iPlayer. /possible/ some have contributed to some of the content, since they have had a licence at some point, even if they no longer do. That's not to mention that people pay for the same stuff multiple times in many situations - not only 'repeats' while continuing to pay for a licence, but also the same music on cassette, record, cd, etc, the same films on VCD, DVD, Blu Ray, etc. This behaviour is not without precedent, and there is an argument for paying for 'the new format' and/or convenience, which sort of applies, I think.
Of course, it's
Of course, whie one does need a licence for iPlayer, that's not the case for the other channels' 'catch-up' services. It's still required for 'live' though, so you kind of need to be careful (if you care to be) to avoid those.
No, I would guess that, one of the reasons the BBC (especially) are doing this is exactly because they are anticipating the phasing out of the licence fee...or at least it becoming unpopular to the point of anachronistic. The 'laws' around the licence fee are increasingly complicated when attempting to apply them to modern viewing methods, and a lot of people, me included, find their inconvenience to be not worth it. TBH, I had been finding that I seemed to be paying just for the scheduling, which I found inconvenient since most interesting stuff is after 9pm which is too late for me, and also the 'live' stuff or shows that have some interactive element (talent show, for example), I find such to be 'drivel'. The only such things I actually miss are the news. /where/ I can be when I watch...eg, if I leave the UK, then (I think) I'm not supposed to use the services at all - well, they seem to put in some sort of geofencing on the use of the services. If I'm in the UK, of course, then I can /not/ pay, and it is perfectly easy to use the services.
I also resent being told
It's not that I don't like the services being provided (except the above), and am not prepared to pay for them, it just that they seem to go out of their way to prevent me from using them.
I am hoping this service will simply make more sense than the existing system. In other words, it is /me/ who is 'licenced', rather than some address that is attached to me (registered to vote?). I suspect it won't stop them attempting to restrict /where/ I can use them, but those attempts usually fail - I guess I'm prepared to 'work around' those restrictions, since, in my view, they're there to stop people resident in those other countries, rather than people who do actually pay in their own country.
Exactly. I started reading "Silicon Valley based" and thought, "God no. The US government are *proven* to be terrible at spying and privacy"... And then the sentence went on to complain about China for some reason!?
I quite like the name...what do you have against it?
I quite like the look too, from what I've seen so far, and, no, I don't like the look of Teslas, though I admire the objective (ie to push the industry away from fossil fuels).
2020? That's next year, right? Tesla will /probably/ have a hovering model? LOL, right.
Well, that's statics for you...
TBH, I don't even 'get' the 'Prolestar' thing...what is he getting at?
...now the UK just have to stop threatening to send their war ships into sensitive areas[1] and that'll help avoid pissing off the Chinese and perhaps help them post Brexit.
[1] If they really want to ensure freedom of navigation, why not send a dirt great oil tanker or something? TBH, I imagine there are very many British ships going through those seas every day. Is there any evidence of the Chinese trying to prevent *anyone* using those waters? ...anyone who isn't an obvious threat to them, that is.
It's meaningless anyway, since I'm sure there are many 30 second intervals that go by without any such occurrences...just plain wrong.
Exactly. I'd say the vast majority of Chinese people wouldn't care at all. I doubt many would know or care at all, tbh, since Google has lost in China, for Chinese people anyway...they're very happy with the services they get that cater directly to Chinese people.
The only difference it might make is to 'westerners' who currently use Google services and can't while they are there, and that only depends on this appeasing the authorities there to not mess with Google's IP addresses or whatever it is that is done. That isn't a given. I suppose there is a slight chance it might serve as a 'toe in the door', but I doubt it...no one there has much of an interest at all.
I seriously doubt people in the west understand just how irrelevant Google is there. It's like night and day compared to how it is in the US and/or UK. I think Google probably need to 'get over themselves' if they think their choice to deny the Chinese people their wonderful company and its services has made any difference at all. It's a fair enough choice if they think it isn't worth the effort, but even that is a questionable choice - better to have influenced from within, IMO.
No one uses the Play Store in China, so how will they make it available? Not that any Chinese are even interested in Google? Google is irrelevant and they've already lost in China. I guess they can make it available in the Chinese stores too, like Chrome is/etc.
The only value is for foreigners, since they could use this there, and perhaps it'll open the doors more so that more Google services will become usable in China. /IMO
Gosh, how is this 'troll'. IMO, it is entirely accurate. Google is mostly irrelevant to China, and it's mostly Google's fault, if it is even a 'fault'.
However, I would still like to see this search engine happen, because I am a Google user and it's a pita to be in China and it not work. So, if they do this, then it'll have ~zero effect on China, the Chinese, and their life, but will help foreigners quite a lot, which I imagine is one of the motivations.
I can't see why people would be worrying about it in terms of censorship...very few Chinese will use it, imo...they don't care about Google at all and none of the phones there have GMS as far as I can tell.
It seems a bit unclear. This seems to reflect my own experience, somewhere (though also seems a little like an ad):
https://www.travelchinacheaper...
IMO, they don't really want foreigners in China, so anything like this that will frustrate us. The main focus for such restrictions is for the locals.
It used to be that this sort of functionality was provided via an app produced by the 'telco'...eg, in the UK, O2 had TuGo, and Three had InTouch. They made them mostly useless (to me) since they prevented their use from outside the UK, I suspect for some marketing reason, rather than technical. They also only allowed them for people with contracts, not pay-as-you-go...I resorted to SIP and/or Skype. In the US, I imagine you can use Google Voice which looks very nice (not available in the UK).
interesting...do you have any references? I had a quick look for dev guides, but I didn't come up with anything.
Yes, that is surely true.
There also a similar issue with having to use multiple 'app stores' to gain access to the user-base, and the varying rules they enforce.
Perhaps it'll be a 'good thing' since it'll tend to move people away from app stores, particularly Apple's but also the multitude of Android ones (Google's is irrelevant, of course, but there are other Android ones), but it's a little worrying that it moves to a single platform independent one controlled by a single company. I can't see TenCent giving up that kind of control.
PWAs have a similar problem since the level of implementation varies with platform and browser. You can develop with a single set of technologies, and distribute via the web, but the app still needs to take account of what platform its running on (different features/codecs, and even when they're the same they are implemented differently).
> WeChat's mini-programs are cementing its place as China's virtual mobile operating system: Mini-programs, which are no bigger than 10 megabytes and running in the WeChat app are gaining ground -- WeChat now hosts 1 million mini-apps, and the number of people who use them daily is expected to reach 400 million.
The penetration of WeChat is quite worrying when considering the future of internet/web (in China, at least), but also these mini-programs seem to be a direct threat to PWAs (as well as native apps). Any entity that wants to get value from the internet in China needs to master these technologies. I see Tesla have already realised this:
"Tesla has a mini-program enabling users to locate charging stations, schedule a test-drive and share their experiences about driving a Tesla car"
https://walkthechat.com/wechat...
Did you read it? You seem to have replaced phrases like "seems to" and "it would appear that" with some that are more definitive.
"Again, the official numbers are not expected until the next few days, but it looks like it is very likely that it was achieved on the last day of production."
Perhaps 'close enough' is indeed 'close enough'...but it really isn't actually meeting the target unless it has actually met the target.
From experience of travelling around China, I think they're also betting on wind and solar. I don't know the stats though.
I suspect the Chinese position on #2 (and #4?) might be that the US IP laws are excessive and unfair (to society) and actually hurt the innovation and progress they were designed to promote.
ICE === in car entertainment
Not too sure, but the Axon 7 was quite a popular phone on XDA forums, so I imagine you can get custom firmware:
https://forum.xda-developers.c...
There's also quite a good following on the ZTE's US community:
https://community.zteusa.com/c...
This page claims it has band 13 too:
https://www.gsmarena.com/zte_a...
It's a bit dated though.