6 ms·
It is just 8 bucks for the full service... just buy the internet bro. It is actually pretty good.
by ardit33 3y ago
It is just 8 bucks for the full service... just buy the internet bro. It is actually pretty good.
- s3p 3y agoYou're not understanding the point of the comment. The Flighty team did some amazing engineering work for anyone who doesn't pay.
- catiopatio 3y ago> amazing engineering Background updates are a built-in, supported, documented feature, widely employed by applications on the platform, and accessible to anyone that reads the two pages of documentation required to use them: “Pushing background updates to your App — Deliver notifications that wake your app and update it in the background.” https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/setting_up_a_remote_notification_server/pushing_background_updates_to_your_app https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/... edited for politeness
- teaearlgraycold 3y agoWhy is that toxic?
- catiopatio 3y agoA cognitive filter that misrepresents reality is toxic.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- teaearlgraycold 3y agoThat’s how all thought works.
- tomrod 3y agoI build AI/ML systems. I think delivering digital content through alternative pipes is amazing work. It has applicability far beyond simple aerospace wifi paywalls.
- catiopatio 3y ago> I build AI/ML systems. What’s the relevance? Push notifications aren’t some odd “alternative pipe” and conveying data via push notifications is a known and supported use-case.
- mynameisvlad 3y agoThey're using push notifications in a novel way to provide the app the necessary information to update itself without needing to be connected to the full internet. That's quite a bit beyond "They're using push notifications" and no other app does that AFAIK. Almost all will use the push notification as a notification and trigger an update on app open which would fail.
- catiopatio 3y agoTons of apps do that. It’s a built-in, supported use-case! It’s also the trivial, obvious approach to anyone who asks the question “how can I push data to the application when it’s not running.”
- mynameisvlad 3y agoGive me one example, then. Of an app which uses a notification as an actual app data source and not just as a notification which opens the app. And which also updates the primary app view to reflect this new information. No other app has updated its app state based on the content of notifications. Slack/Discord/Teams et al (the ones that aren't allowed on free messaging plans) will show you previously cached messages and then an infinite spinner when you open it. Fastmail/Gmail/Outlook et al will show you existing emails but not load the new ones. Could other apps do this? Surely. Do they? No.
- catiopatio 3y agoSlack/Discord/Teams? Those are desktop web applications hosted via Electron. Failing to leverage basic platform functionality is practically their telos. It’s a trivial, documented, supported, long-standing API for a common use-case. It is widely used, as documented, for its intended purpose. I cannot share information about specific applications.
- constantly 3y agoNo one is asking for a survey of apps that do this. You’re making the claim that it’s far from rare, so you have enough knowledge to make this claim. Share with us the smallest piece of your knowledge by naming one single other app that does this. It’s the least you can do since you’re making the claim. Please, I’m very curious!
- turquoisevar 3y agoI don’t know what you have against Flighty but you through considerable lengths in the thread below to spend time on letting everyone know how unimpressed you are about their efforts. Your lack of amazement is duly noted, I suggest you don’t waste any more time on it. That said, I, like others, are indeed impressed for a couple of reasons. For starters because of the simple fact that they’ve found a novel way to use background notifications to provide users without unrestricted internet access with flight updates. Contrary to what you imply, and subsequently fail to substantiate, there aren’t many, if any, other apps that use background notifications in such a novel way, certainly not in a way to circumvent restrictions and limitations on data connections. Moreover, I have never seen background notifications being used to push concrete data to apps. This is because there are severe payload size constraints on notifications, including background notifications. Typically when background notifications have been used, it simply contains an instruction to download data from a remote server, something that wouldn’t work on a limited connection. Instead, Flighty uses the minimal payload size to push the actual concrete data used by the app. Additionally there are some limitations in how often a background notification gets delivered to the tune of a few times per hour, worse yet, delivery of these notification is inconsistent because it’s beyond the app’s control of they get delivered at all. To account for this, Flighty will use the background notifications to update the data where it can and make estimations in times it cannot not until the next time it can receive an update. I’d go as far as call that amazing engineering. You might not and I don’t know your qualms with Flighty, but you’re doing a poor job of convincing people to see it your way.
- catiopatio 3y agoYou’re right, I see that as embarrassingly trivial. This whole thread is inane — if using a simple API is “amazing engineering”, what do you call the actual amazing engineering you’re holding in your hand right now? I have nothing against Flighty — this has nothing to do with Flighty. Background notifications are trivial and all apps can and should be using them to solve this type of problem. It’s detrimental to have folks mistakenly operating under the belief that this is complex, unusual, or difficult. Sure, the payload size is limited, but it’s not impossibly small, and custom keys with arbitrary payload are explicitly and obviously documented as supported. Overly-effusive praise doesn’t do anyone any favors.
- el_benhameen 3y agoSure. But you’re on a site called “Hacker News”. I’m not sure that there’s a more perfect topic of discussion for a site with that name.
- renewiltord 3y ago[flagged]
- el_benhameen 3y agoI think the spirit of the comment was “here’s an interesting technical question” versus “how can I get eight bucks of free shit”.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jstarfish 3y agoHahaha. Reminds me of a savings "hack" my brother once shared at the dinner table with a straight face: Just take any adhesive label off of the "clearance" meat at the supermarket, and apply it to the cut you wanted to buy. Instant savings!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- arcanemachiner 3y agoWe've come full circle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU
- acka 3y ago"Oh no, not again..." quoted from (not stolen, not infringing any copyright because of fair use) from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams. This nonsense has to stop. Copying a movie, or using the internet on someone else's plan is not piracy is not theft. Quoting from memory from my old Webster's dictionary which I have owned since I was a student a long time ago: Theft: The act of taking property and removing it so that the rightful owner is no longer in possession of it. Piracy: the practice of attacking and robbing ships at sea. Equating copyright infringement or violation of terms of service with theft or piracy is completely unwarranted messing with definitions of terms that have served their purpose for centuries. Worse yet, the abuse of these terms in recent times misdirects people's attention away from the underlying flaws: artificial scarcity and the inability to enforce restrictions on use; you can not steal data (unless you steal the physical medium the data is stored on) nor can you pirate a service. Making unauthorized copies or violating the terms of use of a service may be deemed objectionable but these actions are most certainly neither theft nor piracy.
- dheera 3y agoTomorrow it'll be 8 bucks to drink water, 8 bucks to use the bathroom, ... Yeah, you can argue internet isn't a necessity. Neither is the bathroom, you can use a poo bag and a diaper. But we're a civilized society. So we provide bathrooms to anyone that needs them. And internet access.
- zeroonetwothree 3y agoThis seems like a poor slippery slope argument. It’s not as if charging for internet is new, it’s been what? 20 years? And yet they still don’t charge for water
- jrms 3y agoStill
- Martinussen 3y agoIs that an American thing? Absolutely paying for the water here.
- ShadowBanThis01 3y agoOn planes? Seriously? Where?
- mvdwoord 3y agoRecently on a 3 hour flight with ROM air I had to pay for water... not even a single glass for free. Was quite shocked.
- dheera 3y agoNot only that but at the Beijing airport there were no water refill stations and the bottle of water I bought at the airport POST-security was confiscated upon boarding. Fortunately I was boarding an airline with free water, though.
- pmarreck 3y agoIf you really think the folks here do this to save a few bucks, you both 1) don't realize what the average pay of people here is, and 2) are completely tone- and context-deaf. Look at the domain name of the site you're posting on and read it out loud. FFS dude. LOL
- dang 3y agoWe detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37691621 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37691621.