Adding 3000 buses won't do anything if they don't also add bus priority lanes and lights. Otherwise they just sit in traffic and at red lights like everyone else.
They have been building out more bus lanes and increasing their priority where they can. What makes it a little tricky is a bus will never just get straight priority/preemption because they cross other bus lines going a perpendicular direction all the time, and these will naturally conflict.
I also use GraphenOS and the regular google camera app, everything except the AI features works , and the camera quality is on par with what I got while using the Stock OS for a day (it was also one of my biggest fears, that the Camera quality would be worse, that's why I compared it).
I've tried the Graphene Camera app, but to be honest the UX is a bit janky, but I think the image quality is basically the same.
You can use most of the AI features if you install the relevant apps. Certain things can't work without privileged access we don't provide, but we do allow Google apps to use non-standard TPU acceleration by default with a toggle for people who don't want it.
> I've tried the Graphene Camera app, but to be honest the UX is a bit janky, but I think the image quality is basically the same.
It has HDR+ and Night mode. It's largely the same image quality. Pixel Camera has a lot more overall features and fancier HDR+ features. The UI in our app has gotten significantly better. Make sure you're using Latency mode to match what Pixel Camera does rather than Quality mode which purposely delays capturing until focus lock.
> Make sure you're using Latency mode to match what Pixel Camera does rather than Quality mode which purposely delays capturing until focus lock.
Aah okay that's what this toggle means, thats definitely better.
But my biggest gripes with the GrapheneOS camera app are:
1. The Zoom slider: You can't select the different lenses easily (I'd need to set the zoom slider to exactly 5x to get the zoom lens without digital zoom, which is not that easy) and there is no way to quickly reset it to 1x. I also think the position for this slider would be better at the bottom (where most other camera apps put it)
2. The brightness and zoom slider are rather hard to hit, I maybe have a bit too fat fingers for these? (The brightness slider also does not seem to work in night mode) I also can't see the zoom/brightness values while sliding and the Google Camera App allows for more smoother/finer control.
Same with the little arrow in the top left corner, it always takes like 3-5 hits to open the menu. Never had this issue in the Google Camera App.
3. I need to use the QR Code mode to scan qr codes. I did bind the Google Camera app to double click the power button so I can easily take pictures and scan QR Codes, without the need to tap anything else. But It's definitely a cool feature that the GrapheneOS camera can scan many more Code Types and also that the GrapheneOS Camera removes exif data by default
4. The mode slider at the bottom doesn't let me scroll further than one mode, this means I'd need to swipe thrice to get to the QR Code mode from the Video mode (or tap twice) because when in QR Code mode I can't see the Video mode and vice versa
5. I currently tested it out for writing this comment and my phone definitely got way warmer than when using the Google Camera App. And it used 5% Battery while being active for 7 minutes. EDIT: very weird it did now vanish from the Battery Usage list in the Settings, and in the App Info it also says it did not use any battery since the last full charge (It did before)
6. I think it does not support the Astrophotgraphy (Tripod) mode for the Night Mode.
These are all not huge issues and most people who just want to quickly take some pictures are probably not really bothered by this. But I use the Phone Camera very often (its even one of the reasons I went for the Pixel 8 Pro instead of the normal 8, to get the extra zoom lens) so these issues made me install the Google Camera App.
> 1. The Zoom slider: You can't select the different lenses easily (I'd need to set the zoom slider to exactly 5x to get the zoom lens without digital zoom, which is not that easy) and there is no way to quickly reset it to 1x. I also think the position for this slider would be better at the bottom (where most other camera apps put it)
That's not what the zoom buttons do in Pixel Camera and it doesn't switch at exactly the telephoto magnification zoom value but rather adjusts when it switches based on the available light because the telephoto camera can't handle low light as well. We could add 1x for going back to 1x but you can already easily zoom out to the ultrawide and the telephoto is more complex than people realize. You can see it often doesn't actually switch at the minimum.
> 2. The brightness and zoom slider are rather hard to hit, I maybe have a bit too fat fingers for these? (The brightness slider also does not seem to work in night mode) I also can't see the zoom/brightness values while sliding and the Google Camera App allows for more smoother/finer control.
>
> Same with the little arrow in the top left corner, it always takes like 3-5 hits to open the menu. Never had this issue in the Google Camera App.
You can swipe down for settings and can swipe left/right between modes. The arrow is mostly to imply that you can swipe down. We do plan to change the overall layout and sliders/buttons a bit.
> 3. I need to use the QR Code mode to scan qr codes. I did bind the Google Camera app to double click the power button so I can easily take pictures and scan QR Codes, without the need to tap anything else. But It's definitely a cool feature that the GrapheneOS camera can scan many more Code Types and also that the GrapheneOS Camera removes exif data by default
You can open it via the standard Android QR scan quick setting if you use it a lot.
> 4. The mode slider at the bottom doesn't let me scroll further than one mode, this means I'd need to swipe thrice to get to the QR Code mode from the Video mode (or tap twice) because when in QR Code mode I can't see the Video mode and vice versa
We can consider adjusting changing modes.
> 5. I currently tested it out for writing this comment and my phone definitely got way warmer than when using the Google Camera App. And it used 5% Battery while being active for 7 minutes. EDIT: very weird it did now vanish from the Battery Usage list in the Settings, and in the App Info it also says it did not use any battery since the last full charge (It did before)
It shouldn't consume more power than Pixel Camera. Don't know why that would be the case. It does do things a fair bit differently. CameraX is improving which brings improvements to our app without us having to do much and we implemented some things ourselves like the parallelized image saving in the background.
> 6. I think it does not support the Astrophotgraphy (Tripod) mode for the Night Mode.
> That's not what the zoom buttons do in Pixel Camera and it doesn't switch at exactly the telephoto magnification zoom value but rather adjusts when it switches based on the available light because the telephoto camera can't handle low light as well.
Ooh TIL, thank you, I just tried it out, that's definitely a bit confusing. Would it work to just have 2/3 buttons that switch between the cameras? Or is this not possible (because you need to supply a zoom level)?
> You can swipe down for settings and can swipe left/right between modes.
That works definitely better!
> It shouldn't consume more power than Pixel Camera. Don't know why that would be the case.
Will keep an eye out on this, but after quickly testing the few things you mentioned in your comment my phone already got a bit warmer.
> We'd need them to add this to the extension API.
I have found Wayland (±sway) handles this really well once configured. Even when I switch my laptop between two different external monitors at two different physical work locations.
The "once configured" is the problem for me. I would rather be working on the task, not the tool. And at this point in my life, my "tinkering" time is done in other areas.
Exactly because the consumers of those API's exhibit a strong preference for one or the other.
Library/module/API developers often seek to deliver maximimum adaptibility in their interfaces so that consumers of them can satisfy their own more specific/pressing requirements.
imo it's mainly because protos are unusable on the web without something like grpc-web (which requires a proxy) and in general web support in protobufs always seemed like an afterthought, just barely working (if at all) which is kind of ironic considering it came out of Google
I've never used protobufs with web, but I don't see why not. gRPC, on the other hand, requires HTTP/2 which can be a luxury. I remember making a side project that uses gRPC a while ago and trying to deploy on GCP AppEngine, only to find out it doesn't support gRPC.
> I've never used protobufs with web, but I don't see why not
We have a bunch of apis like this where I work. It's a huge pain, tbh. You lose the ability to just curl endpoints, or to see what data came over the wire for debugging, not to mention having to use esoteric client libs because every off-the-shelf one just assumes json over http.
well if you can't use gRPC which, as you correctly notes, is protocol-incompatible with browser APIs, you kinda need to roll your own RPC framework. Various attempts had been made at this - see connectrpc, for example, by the same company that authored this post. imo, big advantage of protobuf/gRPC ecosystem is that Google is doing all the heavy lifting for you, so unless something else catches on with wider community it's going to be pretty risky beyond hobby projects.
We've used it. It's useful to define the contract between teams.
So you have 2 teams do a meeting, we work out a contract we like, dump that into a jsonschema and you can enforce by unit tests that schema is respected on each side (producer/consumer)
I've seen OpenAPI/Swagger in the wild a few times. It's a good way to specify the API for an HTTP server, whether it's JSON or something else. Biggest downside is the confusing name change.
You would think we would just hire the dutch/swiss/italians (take your pick out of europe) to come build our HSR, similar but opposite of how we destroyed their cities when they brought in our 'traffic engineers' in the 60s and 70s.
It'd be interesting to see a breakdown of percentage of veterans in different government positions. I'd imagine they are all fairly similar levels since it's most likely just a transition from military to government rather than specifically military to TSA. In any case, I certainly wouldn't call TSA "a welfare program for veterans" as the parent comment suggests.
As a non legal person, what good is the 14th amendment then? It seems like it could be abused to no end where the ruling party could ban their opposition or a non supreme majority could fail to ban an arguably dangerous candidate?
In the 2nd case, I feel like its even worse because of the electoral college where said candidate can win without actually having the popular vote.
Not that I have any solution, just seems like you have an amendement ratified in 1868 that does effectively nothing because congress never set a precedent on how to use it?
"Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article" - 14th amendment
The 14th amendment requires states to give congress the power to enforce the 14th amendment. Many states contested this after the civil war, but was forced to ratify it in order to gain representation in Congress. From a historical perspective it seems that the 14th amendment was both a carrot and a stick to get equal rules of representation in the union, and any state wanting to have representation in congress had to give up power to congress to do so.
This ruling can be somewhat summarized that if congress can't make up their mind to define in legislation what defines an insurrection, then courts can't do it for them. It must be done by congress. In theory the supreme court might have been able to do it because they get to interpret the constitution, but in this case it seems they explicitly read section 5 as congress having that responsibility.
From a non-legal perspective, the 14th amendment gave people rights, citizenship and was part of the reason states remained in the union rather than being independent nations. If that is good or bad is up to how people feel about the union and the system of having representatives in congress writing legislation rather than having each state writing their own legislation on those subjects.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
> a non supreme majority could fail to ban an arguably dangerous candidate?
yep. working as designed. i love this quote:
"So ultimately, it will be up to the American voters to save our democracy in November." -- Jena "Captain Obvious" Griswold
