Google Pixel 2 and 2 XL announced - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/10/4/16408962/new-google-pixel-2-phone-announced-price-release-date-features <comment><USER3> I witnessed my girlfriend's Nexus 6p support experience with Google and it was not pretty. I would never buy a Google phone after that. The phone, just barely out of warranty, goes into a bootloop and becomes a paperweight. Google helpfully shrugs the problem off on Huawei, and Huawei will of course not support the product since it's out of warranty. There is no repair option.

I tried Android early on, had similarly unacceptable support experiences, and whenever I'm tempted to dip my toes back in the water I'm reminded of how bad things are with cases like this. In the case of the Nexus 6p it's Google's flagship product and it's a worthless paperweight 13 months after purchase.

<comment><USER4> It seems to make a big difference whether or not you buy it from Google. I've seen lots of complaints from Nexus 6P owners who didn't being shoved off to Huawei and their terrible support. But I bought mine from Google, who twice offered me RMAs after the warranty period was over with no resistance. Most recently they replaced it with a new Pixel XL, instead (due to stock issues, I assume).

That being said, Google needs to improve their out-of-warranty repair/replacement options. I couldn't do anything for my Chromebook Pixel once the warranty ran out, and I wouldn't count on them to randomly add a de facto additional year to the warranty like they did with the 6P, which was probably done because of its terrible, widespread battery issues.

<comment><USER5> > It seems to make a big difference whether or not you buy it from Google.

I bought my 6p from Google. I _paid for the extended warranty_. It went into a boot loop after 13 months and they still wanted me to pay the $75 fee for a refurb phone. Remember: I _paid $89 in advance for_ a 2 year extended warranty. This is for a well known issue in their hardware, that iirc they are being taken to court for.

I had purchased a new Android phone every year for many years at that point. I do Android development for a popular open source library/product.

They're banned now. No more Android phones in my house for a long time. Happy on the iPhone and know if I walk into an Apple store I'll actually receive support.

<comment><USER6> I had no warranty and they gave me a replacement 6P for free despite being OUT of warranty.

I heard others were given Pixel XLs. I guess mileage really can vary.

<comment><USER7> It sounds like they're pretty random with their support. In a way that's almost worse, if their support was fully broken then you could make your choice to buy or not based on that, but when it's 50/50 then you have to take a gamble.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I am an Android user but it seems to me that it gets more and more invasive. Everytime I go somewhere it wants me to take photos and just now it advertised some Play Store movie. Search asks for location access on almost every search. To get rid of the search bar I need to install third party software.

When I buy a premium phone I want the phone to work for me and not the other way around. The notification bar should only be used for stuff that I want to be notified about - not ads or cheap tries to get me working for free.

In the future I sometimes imagine two classes of devices: one controls the lives of their owners and one helps their owners to control their lives. What does Android want?

<comment><USER9> I hate the invasive features that seems to only increase with every Android update. So now I am getting an iPhone for the first time in years.

> And this year's Pixel will take advantage of the phone's always-on > microphones to listen for music (not just the phrase "OK Google") and > display what you're listening to on the screen, even if it's something on > the radio.

Like.. wtf? No! I don't want that. Sure it "only listens for music". I don't want Google to save my passwords in apps. I don't want anything of that. Get out of my life google.

In the process of removing Google out of my life as much as possible. This is my progress:

Completed:

\- Using DDG for search

\- Using bing maps or OSM for maps

\- Only using Firefox / Vivaldi for browsing.

TODO:

\- Move email provider completely, now I am only partly using my gmail.

\- Move to iPhone (will soon be done)

\- Youtube (unfortunately I think this is hard to avoid)

Don't really use any other Google service than that. I urge people to do the same.

<comment><USER10> "I urge people to do the same."

I am just fine with my Google service thank you. If I don't like something I disable it. Most of it I can and I appreciate the convenience of some of the stuff.

The iphone without any of the doodads feels like a dumb phone. This is a great way though to discourage constant phone use though.

<comment><USER9> On my phone at least, Google spams me for data input whenever I use maps and it seems at least to do that even if I simply have location on without actually using any app.

Ï cannot disable this, it also sends me ads from built in apps (not really Google here) that I cannot disable.

I am done with all of that. For years I have been an android enthusiast, thinking it was so much better than iPhone. How times change.

<comment><USER11> > Ï cannot disable this

Yes you can. Settings > Notifications > Your contributions.

And even if that didn't work, Android lets you turn off individual categories of notifications for Maps and other apps at a system-wide level.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> There's a reason that Samsung still leads the pack in sales, and it's not solely due to marketing: they keep the stuff people want. People want a headphone jack, they held onto the headphone jack. People want SD card slots, they keep SD card slots.

I held off on getting a GS8 about two months ago when Amazon had a great deal on them going because I was in the process of moving, and I wanted to wait to see what else was coming out. Even though the S8 is lagging behind on updates, it still seems to be the best option. The HTC 11, Pixel 2, and Essential phone have all disappointed.

Waiting on the reviews for how the Sony Xperia XZ1 compact fares, because I wouldn't mind a smaller phone.

<comment> lurker- I won't defend ditching the headphone jack, especially after Google ridiculed Apple for doing so. But as a very happy owner of the Pixel phone, I'd say the free, unlimited storage of photos and videos in original quality is a million times better than having a SD card slot.

Just today I transferred about 25GB of video and photos, and I probably wouldn't have bothered to record these videos if I had to transfer using SD card or cable. One might argue that's a sign that these videos aren't worth storing, but I'd say it shows the value of unlimited storage. In fact, if I had to choose between two near identical phones, with the only thing separating them being the unlimited Google Photos storage, then I'd gladly add an additional $250 to obtain that.

I think many of us experienced what it's like to make the jump from HD to FHD, or especially FHD to UHD on a similar sized screen. Once you make the jump, then you begin to wonder how you ever lived without it. For me, and I think for most Pixel owners, unlimited storage of high quality photos and 4k videos gives the exact same feeling. Having stock Android, best camera, slick design and great build quality just makes it that much sweeter, and I honestly do believe that marketing, brand loyalty and availability is the only reason the Pixel phone wasn't more successful than [insert any phone here] (I'd estimate 19 out of 20 who have asked about my phone never heard of Google Pixel, and had no idea Google even made any hardware products).

<comment><USER13> > Just today I transferred about 25GB of video and photos, and I probably > wouldn't have bothered to record these videos if I had to transfer using SD > card or cable.

Now try to take pictures on holiday without cheap & available 4g or wifi. I prefer a few 256 GB microSD-cards. It takes just 10 seconds to swap it out and put in a fresh new one. You can transfer the contents into a Macbook at speedy 90 MB/s.

<comment><USER14> > Now try to take pictures on holiday > I prefer a few 256 GB microSD-cards

My immediate reaction to this is, "holy crap!"

Using a 12MP camera, each image you take would roughly be 2-3MB. Assuming the higher end of 3MB (and only 230GB available per card), that's ~79,000 photos per card.

Since "a few" typically means three or more, let's assume three, that's ~240,000 photos. If it's a typical holiday/vacation, that's likely 2-3 weeks -- let's assume it's three, which comes out to be 21 days. Achieving ~11,000 photos per day during a holiday is quite a feat...

<comment><USER15> I'm pretty sure they are taking a few 4k 60fps videos as part of that holiday, and those eat space like it's nothing.

<comment><USER14> More rough napkin math...

A second of 4k60 video is ~7MB, but we'll overestimate to 8MB (though I'm using really rough metrics here). At 690GB (230 x 3), that's ~86,000 seconds. Or, more familiarly, about 24 hours of 4k60 video (holy cannoli, Batman!). I guess that's about an hour's worth of video recording every day over a three- week period. Understandable, and more doable, though still really excessive.

<comment> lurker- And when you turn it into a more realistic scenario (~1 hour video/day - something I'd almost never do with my iPhone but often do with my Pixel), it's hard to imagine not having access to WiFi throughout the week. Even the hotels/apartments with really poor connection seem to have no trouble uploading the photos/videos throughout the night.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Honest question: for those of you who own a mobile device without a headphone jack, do you find it to be an encuberment?

Personally I still find it a bit hostile to not have the jack available, since often times I find myself charging the phone and using the headphones (when watching videos for example), so having an adapter dongle for such a frequent task seems counterintuitive to me. I believe that if a device is correctly designed, then it should serve most of its usecases without the aid of an extra adapter. These should be reserved for edge cases.

Moreover, I use headphones for a good part on my day and I am not sold on the idea of having a wireless device next to my brain for such an extended amount of time. Sure, we are already exposed to a good number of electromagnetic radiations, but this one I might want to pass. Not to mention the need to charge yet another device.

<comment><USER17> you guys should try switching to a camera for your photography instead of a cellphone, then we can remove the camera from the phone too

the idea that because bluetooth headphones exist means the jack shouldnt exist is not fair -- there are plenty of reasons the jack is plenty useful to plenty enough people

the only excuse I can see to remove the jack is that when you sell a billion devices and the little jack costs a buck a device you just made yourself a billion dollars for nothing. oh and now you can sell dongles that cost $1 a pop to make for $10 a pop and you make yourself 10 billion

<comment><USER18> Exactly. I routinely switch my headset from my laptop to my phone and vice versa. Doing this with a jack is trivial. Doing this with a BlueTooth headset is very annoying and requires additional steps on both devices.

<comment><USER19> Anecdotally, my experience with Bluetooth headphones is that they're easier. I don't have to do anything more complicated than you do — if I turn on my Bluetooth headphones in range of my computer, they connect. If I turn them on in range of my iPhone or iPad, they connect.

If any of them start playing sound, it comes out the headphones. No cable twiddling required.

<comment><USER18> And if they're currently connected to your phone and you want to connect to your computer?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Edit up top: The identification is done on-device. The Verge article didn't mention this.

> And this year's Pixel will take advantage of the phone's always-on > microphones to listen for music (not just the phrase "OK Google") and > display what you're listening to on the screen, even if it's something on > the radio.

This sounds creepy. So now when excessive microphone data is seen to be going out to the cloud, they can just say "Oh, the phone thought there was music playing and was trying to identify it. Simple misunderstanding, nothing nefarious!".

<comment><USER21> Except it doesn't send any data to the cloud. They mentioned that explicitly. There's an on-phone database of songs that it is matching against.

<comment><USER22> I wonder how much space this takes on the device. How many signatures does it keep and how often is this updated

<comment><USER23> It's not very significant. Basically it stores some distances between peaks in each song's spectrogram which can then be further compressed.

Even supporting a database of millions of songs would be possible.

<comment><USER24> Spotify has 30 million songs.

Even if it takes up a small amount of space, it's basically a non-feature.

<comment><USER25> >Spotify has 30 million songs.

Many of those songs have never been played[1]. There's a really (really, really, really) long tail.

[1]: [http://forgotify.com/](http://forgotify.com/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I bought a Pixel when it came out, switching from the Nexus 5 primarily because Project Fi was an easy, cheap way to get off my parent's cell-phone plan and gain some personal independence. It was about time for a new phone anyway.

I wish I had just stuck with the Nexus 5... it was a fantastic phone. Wireless charging (which I personally found to be the most useful feature), excellent dimensions, excellent price, and the notification light was bright. The case was made of some sort of rubberized plastic, so it could withstand a real beating.

Squeezable sides and marginally improved specs aren't enough for me to consider upgrading, and at this point, as an Android fan since the Nexus 4, I would strongly considering making the switch the iPhone.

<comment><USER27> Are you planning to already switch phones again?

I have a pixel as well and feel like it will still last some time.

<comment><USER26> The Pixel is by no means a _bad_ phone, it's just been an exercise in disappointment the whole way. So I'm not actively planning to switch phones, I'm just lamenting that I don't get the same utility out of the Pixel that I was getting out of my Nexus 5. Also being on Project Fi locks me into a certain set of phones, switching would be an expensive endeavor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Be careful with the unlimited video storage deal because it's not really unlimited video?

It's unlimited until 2020[0] and then I'm guessing you'll have to pay for it afterwards, and after a few years of taking videos without caring about space, you're probably going to rack up a massive bill or have to spend a ton of time cherry picking what you want to save.

Their plan is pretty smart tho. Most people will be like "screw it, I'll just buy another phone to avoid spending that just to keep my videos".

[0]: [https://i.imgur.com/M5LYvrH.png](https://i.imgur.com/M5LYvrH.png) (read the fine print)

<comment><USER29> That's insidious if that's the case. I (and probably) many others took it to mean that photos taken through that date would enjoy unlimited storage permanently, not that they would start charging after that date. Would be nice if we could get some clarification.

<comment><USER30> Parent comment is correct. From footnote #2 from here: [https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_2](https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_2)

> Free, unlimited original-quality storage for photos and videos taken with > Pixel through the end of 2020, and free, unlimited high-quality storage for > photos taken with Pixel afterwards.

<comment><USER29> That's still not clear. It doesn't say they will start charging for original quality shots taken before 2020. To me it just seems like if you want to keep storing original quality shots taken AFTER 2020, then you will have to pay for that going forward.

<comment><USER31> Assuming it's just like all of their other storage promotions have been over the last several years.

If you are over your free cap when the promotion ends, you don't lose access to anything, you just can't add anything new.

<comment><USER32> This. To add more stuff you change the setting. (When changing from "original" to the "high" quality setting, they convert your stuff to the lower quality.)

Source: did it before, probably still works the same way.

<comment><USER33> No. The photos that I uploaded in "Original Quality" are still original quality, and they remain that. I switched to 'High quality' because I don't have a Pixel, and it hasn't retrospectively changed the previous ones. That is also what Google probably means here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I picked up the Pixel on release, but I've been disappointed by the quality of the product overall. The screen scratches easily , battery life is mediocre, and the changes to android recently have not been positive. I've had the device replaced once by Google, which was a painless process, but the new one scratches just as easily as the old, and loves to reboot on occasion.

Interestly enough, I started a new job right around the time I got my Pixel, and work provided me a brand new iPhone 7, so I've been able to compare them side by side for a year now, in nearly identical usage. I've been on the android bandwagon for a long time now, but the iPhone 7 is hands down the better hardware. The Pixel has been replaced once ~6 months ago, and spent most of its life in a soft shell case, but it has not handled general wear and tear well. The iPhone 7 has been blatantly abused (work phone, don't care) but still looks brand new. iOS leaves a lot to be desired, but with all of android's missteps the difference isn't as drastic as it used to be.

<comment><USER35> I recently switched from Android phones to an iPhone in July of this year.

This after having used android since the G1 (first android phone).

I think your sentiments are the most fair and realistic I've come across in a while (FYI for others reading).

The gap isn't as big as it used to be software wise, but the hardware is still better by a big margin. iOS has also been a little more stable, less app crashes, random reboots, etc.

The only thing I'd add is that the apple stores have been surprisingly helpful and have added more to the experience than I would have thought. Go in, try everything, get brought up to speed real quick by friendly staff, and they seem to always be conveniently located (for me at least).

All in all the experience has been better and I haven't missed Android's famous flexibility.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> As an audio engineer, the headphone jack removal trend is an absolute travesty in an industry that utilizes AUX IN audio capabilities night after night.

I'm often using iPods or other local-music devices to pump sound into concert venues between acts. Taking away 1/8" audio standards in favor of USB-C or Lightning non-standardized ports causes chaos when needing to fill in music in a pinch.

In my industry, I simply cannot live without a standard audio port, which absolutely no one was clamoring to discard.

If my 1st generation Pixel were to break today, I'd buy another 1st generation Pixel.

<comment><USER37> If you work in 'the industry', surely it would not be a big deal to carry around an adapter a long with the other standard tools of your trade? I imagine it'll be about as inconvenient as carrying around ear buds.

<comment><USER38> "I'm sure you can put up with this massive inconvenience for a job and workflow I have no understanding of or context for but sure do have an opinion on"

Found the SWE!

<comment><USER39> I say you are committing the same sin exactly.

The audio industry is the most adapter-heavy industry on the planet. I need to carry a bag of adapters, and I'm just a small-time home-recording guy.

Single/double RCA to mono/stereo big/small jack, double mono/stereo big/small jack to stereo/mono small/big jack, the other way around, and more, you name it.

Even if you got a 3.5mm jack, you'd still need adapters, because very little audio equipment uses 3.5mm jacks anyway. Even the most basic stuff only carries 1/4", RCA or XLR. My headphones do not carry a 3.5mm jack as well.

You might think of committing to a single cable-type everywhere, and being done with it – but if you've ever coded in the real world you know how realistic that sounds.

<comment><USER38> I'm with you, fellow small time home recording guy who needs to carry around adapters. My synth is 3.5mm out, my mixer is XLR / 1/4 inch Mono or Stereo, my piano puts out in mono or stereo 1/4, and on and on and on.

I still think that the hubris to say 'what's one more adaptor' is enormous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I really wish they would reintroduce the Nexus series. The money felt worth it for the phone. Not sure if I can say the same for the Pixel series.

<comment><USER41> What's in a name?

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

<comment><USER42> Pixel's goal is to be an iPhone competitor. This is reflected in its pricing and product design. Nexus was for Android enthusiasts who wanted the stock experience. I think in their own words it was "meant to showcase the best of Android."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> The only reason to remove the headphone jack is to sell more dongles and wireless headphones. That's it.

Consumers are not asking for it for the aesthetics. It doesn't make the phone much thinner. It doesn't make the phone easier to manufacture.

<comment><USER44> After finding cheap Bluetooth headsets on Amazon last about as long as a pair of earbuds, and have no cord, I don't see a problem.

I'm very rough on physical devices, and will go through 4-6 pair of earbuds a year. Because these do not physically connect to the device, they take an order of magnitude less wear, and thus last longer.

<comment><USER45> I've never had a pair of Bluetooth headsets that haven't had connection issues with my Pixel. This is especially true of the cheap Sony pair I tried, but also true of the nicer Macaws and Here Ones. Even my car's head unit has a new bug with Oreo where it connects/"plays" but is muted until I reconnect.

<comment><USER25> Interesting. I've never had bluetooth issues with pixel. My current headphones (Bose QC35, but not the fancy assistant ones) work amazingly, and even my older headphones (ancient LG Tones) worked great. My only complaints with my 5X were occasional stutter, and that was gone with Pixel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> When they mentioned the headphone jack being removed, I thought it was a joke. I have a 6S now and was considering getting the Pixel, in part because of the headphone jack and also for the more "open" ecosystem of Android (and things not proprietary-Apple). But now it's basically the same, so there's less motivation for me there. I just think Google could've swooped in and gotten the people who still appreciate headphone jacks.

Interesting round of new devices this year around, I wonder what the consensus is on who did it better, Google or Apple?

<comment><USER47> Pretty much have to stick to iPhone 6S for the rest of my life... So disappointing to see possibly THE ONLY universal port - the 3.5mm aux - <USER2> removed from devices before our eyes. I wonder what the adoption rate on Bluetooth / Lightning / USBC headphones is. Can't imagine more than 5% or so.

<comment><USER48> Bluetooth headphone sales passed wired headphone sales last year, even before the iPhone 7 was announced [1]. I have to believe it's only gone up from there.

1\. [https://qz.com/745108/wireless-headphone-sales-just-hit-a- ti...](https://qz.com/745108/wireless-headphone-sales-just-hit-a-tipping- point/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> It looks great, I hope Google can keep up the shipments. I really like the white and black XL, and the orange button really reminds me of Dieter Rams calculator from Braun.

</comment><comment><USER50> Is there a way to remove the auto-scanning and microphone listening features? I have an Iphone so I don't know. Every phone does this now I know. It just seems weird that it is brought up so non-chalantly in the article. Like I guess we are just okay with this now.

<comment><USER51> On the original Pixel there is, I assume it would be the case with the new one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Seems pretty nice.

I may consider the Pixel 2 XL over the IPhone X in a few months, but will definitely need to see some reviews of both first.

The removal of the headphone jack is devastating. I listen to music nearly every waking moment, so I am unsure about moving to Bluetooth whenever I use headphones.

<comment><USER53> It comes with a 3.5mm dongle in the box.

Just do what everyone else does and leave it attached to your headphones.

<comment><USER54> How do you leave it attached when you plug it into your laptop and how do you listen while you charge? Great that it works for you, but having another dongle that you can lose, and have to attach and remove throughout the day is a real pain for others.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> I wish Google would do a mid range Pixel, or call it something else if they want, just something like a follow up to the 5x.

<comment><USER56> I think this is what the Moto X4 is.

[https://www.blog.google/products/project-fi/project-fi- welco...](https://www.blog.google/products/project-fi/project-fi-welcomes- android-one-moto-x4/)

<comment><USER57> The Moto X4 won't get Android Preview Releases, and is therefore useless for developers.

I'm a student, but I also develop apps. Even with the emulator, there are still bugs you can only find on real devices.

So now every time a new Android version comes out, I'll either end up with a month where my apps are broken and I'm slowly working on fixing them (so ~10% of the time the app is unusable), or I have to shell out north of $900 just to get the cheapest still supported Pixel in Germany.

<comment><USER58> This is a good perspective I hadn't considered.

Additionally, my largest concern with no mid-range device supporting preview releases is that the mid-range phone experience is going to decline rapidly (slow downs, resource bloat) until the only viable equivalent experience to what we have now is on a $1000+ phone. When phones were sub $500, I could get a new one every two years pretty reasonably. Or if I didn't like my phone, it wasn't a huge hit to upgrade early. But now I'm paying more than 2x what I paid when I started using Android phones. At that price point, Apple starts to look real good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> Guess it's for many a minor thing but why can't the phone just be symmetric (top and bottom bezel have the same height)?

<comment><USER60> The top of the phone's bezel contains a camera, and the bottom doesn't. Why do you want a larger chin with wasted space? The pixel 1's chin always bothered me for that reason.

<comment><USER61> I kind of like the chin on the Pixel 1 because I know I have another option to grab the phone without touching the touchscreen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Looks great for $849. The camera is amazing with a 98 Dxo score. Also, the free unlimited Photo and Video storage is a great deal.

Only conern is the inventory, they make 100 pieces and do marketing for a million, I don't understand the logic, smh.

</comment><comment><USER63> Is that a broken link in a major Google product release blog post? Gasp! Screenshot for posterity: [https://i.imgur.com/r7TpRQY.png](https://i.imgur.com/r7TpRQY.png)

</comment><comment><USER64> No headphone jack, twice as much as my nexus 5x. You lost me and my family as a customer for both phones and service.

</comment><comment><USER65> The € price is ridiculously higher than the $ price. The smaller pixel costs 799€ which includes 19% of taxes (in Germany), the 649$ does not contain taxes. Still that's a difference of 150€ on top of my hat. There's also a fee which manufactures have to pay (GEMA which collects money for artists and so on). Guess they also include that Google Home Mini in this price which is kinda dumb. Not going to buy with such a huge price bump

<comment><USER66> If that includes 19% taxes, than its a €30 or 4% difference on the pretax pricing. Not very big really. Especially, if there's other fees they pay to sell the product in your territory.

<comment><USER67> I don't know how you came to 30 EUR difference.

        649 USD = 552 EUR
        552 * 1.2 (20% VAT) = 662
        799 - 662 = 137

The difference is 137 EUR (161 USD). That's quite a coin.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> This phone is as expensive as the latest iOS phones, at least ball-park wise. Yet, Google only supports its hardware for two years, while Apple does so for four, at least (still too little, but at least twice as good). I am using a "bricked" Nexus 5 right now and need to update because I get no more updates. No more Google phones for me, unless they cost half or less than the current iPhones.

</comment><comment><USER69> I'm very disappointed they didn't drop the price of the 1st generation Pixels more. There was a 1 day sale on the Pixels earlier this year (that included a free Google Home device) that was much lower than what they have dropped them to today. My wife's Nexus 5 recently died. I had hoped to get her the 1st generation Pixel to replace it, but I'll probably get her the iPhone SE instead.

</comment><comment><USER70> I bought a second-hand Pixel on Ebay. The seller sent it complete with boxes, manual, etc. After 6 months it received an OTA and now is a 600 dollars paperweight. They tell me that since the phone, which is not reported stolen, is assigned to another account they cannot do anything about it. I have contacted the seller but she won't respond. Be aware of this.

<comment><USER71> Have you tried sideloading an update manually? It's really easy and quick to do.

[https://developers.google.com/android/ota](https://developers.google.com/android/ota)

<comment><USER70> I will try it. I tried to get into download mode and recovery, and no luck.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> Oh dear. And I'm already seeing stock issues also. Pre-orders for the 2 XL in B&W just went "out of stock".

</comment><comment><USER73> Android Nougat still 17.8% on the market.

I've been developing Android apps since 2011, and Android development is getting worse. The support I have to deal with goes back to Android 4.4 which is like 4-5 years ago. And the phones in the market here in Asia are still mostly on 6.0. I am no longer getting excited for Android releases anymore.

</comment><comment><USER74> Very underwhelming.

The camera solution they adopted is technologically inferior to the (much more common) dual wide/tele lens solution, since the former offers only some of the advantages of the latter (e.g. bokeh: yes, 2X optical zoom: no).

And they gave that guy who retrofitted a headphone jack in the iPhone 7 a reason to come out with a new video.

</comment><comment><USER75> I love my Nexus 5X, but the high end phone market has no appeal to me. I don't need a phone that can do 5% more and cost 150% more. I'm not sure why anyone needs a phone like this really.

Perhaps the Nexus 5X is only good because it is basically an LG G phone.

</comment><comment><USER76> I wonder if Nexus 6 users would move to the Pixel XL2? I love that it has stereo front-facing speakers with the full 6 inch screen, but as Darth Shamu said: "I find your lack of a headphone jack disturbing"

</comment><comment><USER77> No wireless charging?

<comment><USER44> Wireless charging can't provide enough amps to actually charge newer Google devices. Nexus phones had them through the 5/7, but lost them with the 5x/6p.

My Nexus 5 wall charger can't even push enough amps to charge my Nexus 5x.

Edit: Does the new iPhone use the same wireless chargers as older phones? Can you use it with those Ikea lamps with wireless charging? Or does it use a different/less lossy transmission method?

<comment><USER78> I wirelessly fast-charge my Samsung S7; I'm not sure where you got the idea that it doesn't work.

<comment><USER27> Is your phone getting super hot while wireless charging?

<comment><USER79> No, I've been using wireless charging every day for nearly two years (Samsung s6)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER80> In my experience with Nexus (4&6P), it always had microphone issues (person on the other side not being able hear you for first few minutes); since I always used Bluetooth headset for calls; I didn't bother much.

But I've seen some good support cases from Google for nexus, my friend exchanged his nexus 4 after a year out of warranty by sending to US though; it was not bought from Google in India. I hope the support would be better for Pixel series of devices now that they own the manufacturer responsibility.

</comment><comment><USER81> how can an adjacent pixel be used to calculate depth map. Are they telling me the sensor and their algorithm is that sensitive to generate none binary depth info from adjacent pixels?

</comment><comment><USER82> Thanks Google. Even with your $400 trade in refund, I think I'll stick with my original Google Pixel XL and forego marginal improvements and no 3.5mm jack on the phone itself. Forget your USB-C->3.5mm plugin... it's a pathetic attempt to move us away from wired to wireless headphones which never will work as well as 3.5 mm headsets/buds.

In fact, if you don't shape up in a year or so by the time I will upgrade, I'm probably going back to Moto, or getting a Samsung...

<comment><USER83> I think wireless will eventually work as well, but that future is not now (or close to it). This would have to improve first: Sound quality, battery life (both for the phone, as bluetooth needs to be on, and headphone) and price

<comment><USER82> When they make bluetooth earbuds that have same quality sound as Etymotic ER4's, I'll switch then... the likelihood of that happening is virtually nil. reply

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> Motion photos - if I'm understanding correctly this is basically "motion stills"[1] integrated into the main camera app. It takes three seconds of video, but no photo with it like in live photos.

[1]: [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.motionstills)

</comment><comment><USER85> My pixel hardware has been a disappointment. The vibrator actually broke off from the phone and it now just makes a rattling noise as it bounces around inside the phone. The screen scratches easily. Bluetooth pops and crackles.

I couldn't have imagined buying a second pixel, so removing the saving grace, the headphone jack, almost seems gratuitous.

<comment><USER86> > The screen scratches easily.

This is an understatement. After I got a few scratches on my Galaxy S4 from putting my phone in my pocket with keys, I made sure I would never make that mistake again. I was extra-cautious with my Pixel, but after less than a year of ownership it's is already the most scratched-up phone I've ever had.

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> I'd love to buy a Pixel phone (1 or 2) but Google doesn't sell where I live just South of the border.

</comment><comment><USER88> Bit of a side conversation here, but is anyone else jaded that the only real options are iOS and Android?

</comment><comment><USER89> $649/$849

it looks like a nice phone, but i have a hard time understanding how it's 5-7x better than my xiaomi.

<comment><USER44> I paid $200 for my Nexus 5x. Not looking forward to paying 2.5x to retain the same phone-utility in the future.

<comment><USER90> My Nexus 5x runs like crap, very slow and closes apps when I do 2-3 things at a time (music, gym app, browser for example). I tried everything, reinstalled 7.X system, installed 8.0 on launch, removed most of the apps... Btw, removing facebook and messenger apps helped very much. Now I use messenger lite and don`t use facebook on the phone (thanks, Google :) ). Was waiting for new phone releases, but maybe for the first time I will try an iPhone, I just hope iOS is not that limited and bad any more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Its DX0 score is 98

<comment><USER91> I own a Pixel but this DxO stuff is really dodgy.

In the portrait pic of the girl, the difference between the Pixel 2 [1] and the iPhone 8 [2] is night and day, with the Pixel 2 looking like shit. She so pale, and the fake bokeh looks like a 5 year old smearing all over, it's simply not pleasant to look at.

And the whole push on adding the fake bokeh """scores""" to justify changing the scores so every fucking newly released device gets the highest score is stupid. Thanks for scoring the bokeh, if I had really wanted bokeh, I would have pulled out my bulky mirrorless camera.

I bet when a new phone comes out and they pay the DxO guy enough, they will add a dog nose filter score to make the new camera score the highest.

1: A [https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref1_Boke...](https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref1_Bokeh-Indoor_GooglePixel2-e1506967768712.jpg)

B [https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref2_Lowl...](https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref2_Lowlight_GooglePixel2.jpg)

2: A [https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref1_Boke...](https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref1_Bokeh-Indoor_ip8Plus.jpg)

B [https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref2_Lowl...](https://cdn.dxomark.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/ref2_Lowlight_ip8Plus-e1506980596843.jpg)

<comment><USER92> It's post-processing, not the quality of the sensor, photo from iPhone have warmer color balance.

If you compare the right eyebrow, you will see that [1] have more details, than [2]

<comment><USER91> That might be true, but I'd say if they say their expertise is to have artificial intelligence, then by that I'd like to have the picture that is the most pleasant to look at. By that benchmark, and I can confidently say that 1 is definitely not more pleasant to look at than 2.

Remember, the picture is always a depiction of what our eyes see, and that our eyes see is only a part of the reality. My eyes don't see bokehs. My eyes don't focus the same way the camera does. My eyes don't see in 3500K or 6500K or whatever the hell that is. My eyes don't care how many strands of hair there are in her eyebrows and how detailed they are. My eyes don't see in black and white, either. Yet those are what you see in pictures. Focusing on the little detail "accuracy" and forget what it really matters at the end is dangerous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> p-funk I was really looking forward to this phone. Lack of headphone jack = instant dealbreaker.

</comment><comment><USER93> As creepy as the increased invasion of privacy on the Google phones, the most disturbing is the Google Clips camera. That's literally how the movie "The Circle" started (although it's a pretty bad movie).

</comment><comment><USER94> > Though there is some bad news this year: the headphone jack is gone.

Expected, but it still stings. I guess I'll look elsewhere for my replacement for trusty Nexus 5X. Speaking of which, how's Pixel?

<comment><USER95> Great software and camera. But having seen pixel 2 xl, I find the bezel on my pixel really intolerable.

<comment><USER94> I don't really mind bezel; it's the lack of headphone jack that I take exception on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER96> I really really hope they have fixed their supply issues this time around. I live in the 4th largest city in North America and I was unable to get a Pixel within a reasonable amount of time.

<comment><USER97> Same. I waited for weeks for the Pixel to be in stock last year. I finally bought an iPhone 7 Plus after being all android since the T-Mobile G1. I love it, and it shipped in like 24 hours! I was blown away that google couldn't provide a phone to those that wanted it. (Note: I wanted to max out storage and I wanted the XL. There was stock on models with the least storage.)

I really hope they can keep these in stock.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> An LG G6 for $350 more†.

\+ Software updates

\+ Camera software (probably)

\+ Squeezing

\- Dual camera

Did I miss anything?

†Yes it's unfair to compare speculated launch price to current store price but that's the decision I'm making right now.

<comment><USER99> Snapdragon 835 instead of 821, 64GB base instead of 32GB, OLED w/ always-on display instead of IPS

<comment><USER98> Good points. I had assumed base storage would be 32GB for all time, that recent phones would use the same processor, and that LGs OLED investments had trickled down to their own devices. Times, they are a changing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> user-on1 the rounded corners on the pixel 2 xl just looks ugly... dont u guys think...

Also the huge bezels in pixel 2...

seems like these announcements just boil down to nothing...

at least those headphones could have been individual device without a need for pixel or if it needs to be paired then at least it should have been around $50

it is basically just a total waste of time, it was fun to listen to those new music in the event though...

</comment><comment><USER100> Does anyone know how consistent the squeeze feature is on phones that have already implemented such?

<comment><USER61> At least with latest Android OS you can replace the Assistant with other options/apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER101> Buy OnePlus phones instead of expensive crap. OnePlus is cheap, reliable and replaceable.

</comment><comment><USER102> Dropped my Pixel 1 in a toilet. Glad the Pixel 2 is water proof. Preordered!

</comment><comment><USER103> Thanks but no thanks. I love my Nexus 6P a lot (still)!

<comment><USER104> Same boat. It's still a fantastic phone and meets all the demands and then some! The the only reason to switch might be the battery life. Still not a serious enough issue to switch, yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> There is no privacy with those devices.

</comment><comment><USER106> The pixel 2 was made by HTC and pixel 2xl was made by LG.

Two manufacturers for what should be the same phone.

There are no words.

</comment><comment><USER107> the smaller one looks like a stictly worse oneplus5

</comment><comment><USER108> How could they neglect wireless charging and the headphone jack?

</comment><comment><USER109> I currently have a Nexus 6P. It was the flagship before the Pixel series. I use Bluetooth headphones daily on my commute using the Philly subway system (SEPTA). In center city and around suburban station I experience sound cutting in and out all the time on two different wireless bluetooth headphones. It seems to work just fine in my apartment when I don't need it but is never reliable when there's a ton of other signals around.

I can't stand the current state of the industry. New phones cost more but offer little in terms of value. They also look like trash. Who actually thought it was a good idea to make a flag ship phone have a two tone plastic case?

I'll be sticking to my aluminum cased 6P for a while. I'm also likely to get it again when this one finally dies. There's absolutely nothing that makes me want a Samsung or a Google branded Android phone right now.

<comment><USER34> I used the 6P for a fair amount of time, but I think the Nexus 5 was still the high water mark for Nexus phones. Cheap, great hardware, durable, and perfectly sized.

That said, I would have kept my 6P if I had known how disappointing the Pixel 1 was going to be. Double the price without any useful changes just feels like a rip off. No chance I'm going to throw more money at Google for another mediocre product.

<comment><USER109> This. So much this. I had the Nexus 5 as well.

The 6P offers me:

\- Aluminum case.

\- 1080p screen

\- 4K video recording

\- Slow-motion video recording @ 1080p 240fps

\- 12.3MP single shot

\- A good enough CPU for lag free web browsing, spotify, snapchat, instagram, etc.

Why the fuck would I pay $700+ for a new phone for marginal improvements???

<comment><USER57> Google just dropped support for the Nexus 5X and 6P, for unknown reasons. I hate it. Now I have no options left. (I need a device that will get android developer previews)

<comment><USER109> I'm so done with Google. This would be like Microsoft ending security updates for Windows 8.1 after only two years.

By the way you can get a custom rom from here: [https://forum.xda- developers.com/nexus-6p/development](https://forum.xda- developers.com/nexus-6p/development)

<comment><USER57> Yes, but I need to support apps.

Some of my users are on Pixel devices and will get Android 9.0 the day it is released, while in best case, the source code only drops a week later. So assuming it takes me 10 minutes to fix all bugs, my app might crash for a week.

Realistically, my apps would be at least a month unusable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER110> I'm french, i would like Google to take my money.

</comment><comment><USER111> Why would anyone pay money to buy a phone from an advertising company?

<comment><USER112> Yeah, I feel Google should re-invent itself and make some bold decisions to move out of it's ad business. They seem very capable of making excellent products. Will their shareholders be up in arms if they got out slowly from this add business?

Google Apps, Android, Pixel etc are really excellent products.

<comment><USER113> Never gonna happen. Google can do the things it does because it holds monopoly pricing in internet advertising. The freedom from competition and massive capitalization is what allows it to invest in blue sky projects.</comment></comment></comment>


Introducing the Hover Bike - <AUTHOR> http://www.notcot.org/post/49759/

<comment><USER2> Is it a prototype, yes. Is it fake, no. <http://mashable.com/2012/08/20/aerofex-hover-vehicle/>

</comment><comment><USER3> The video is well edited to show things from certain angles and it never shows the thing flying for long becaus it's FAKE.

<comment><USER4> What's funny is that it seems to use a similar perspective (fixed camera angle relative to the craft which doesn't show the entire vehicle, allowing it to be actually held up by a beam from a conventional vehicle) to that used to fake the Star Wars landspeeder scenes...!

Probably just an unfortunate coincidence I suppose.</comment></comment>


Show HN: King of the Hill Billboard via Ethereum Smart Contracts (+tutorial) - <AUTHOR> https://cryptobragging.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hey HN, here is the tutorial which documents how I built this: [https://medium.com/@neelrao_51658/step-by-step-how-to- write-...](https://medium.com/@neelrao_51658/step-by-step-how-to-write-a- basic-ethereum-smart-contract-with-a-web-interface-3ef4c7efc6a2) I hope it's helpful!</comment>


Discretion still matters – don't hurt your career by sharing too much - <AUTHOR> http://www.smashcompany.com/business/discretion-still-matters-dont-ruin-your-career-by-sharing-too-much <comment><USER3> Honestly, this is a long article, but it's worth reading. It's written somewhat in response to another article by a millennial wanting her older colleagues to share more.

Part of that is quoted in this article, including this passage:

> Most of my new colleagues are at least 10 years my senior. Several of them > have children, spouses, and mortgages. They are adults. Comparatively, I am > a child.

This really hits home, because I'm on the flip side of this now. In my current role I'm a lead on a team and am one of the oldest team members (late 30s). Most of my coworkers are 10 years my junior, so it's weird structuring conversations that don't involve in-depth discussion of kids and spouses and homes and school, etc. Not that it's all I want to talk about, but it is a pretty common place to go to when you're talking over lunch in the cafeteria. Now more of my conversations are back in the beer, sports, and video games realm, which I also enjoy, but it's just different.

<comment><USER4> I am 31, moved into a new team 1.5 years ago.

I am married 7 years, no kids... and have carried a hefty mortgage for 8 years.

My other team mates are 38-55. Have kids, some even grandkids.

While I can relate to alot of things, I can't stand their constant discussions about their kids and other family stuff... I just can't relate.(edit: not that I can't relate really, I just can't stand their constant distractions with home life... We all have issues, you might need a place to vent but work shouldn't be it. Go talk to a colleague in a discreet area not openly in professional work settings)

It really disrupts me that I either have to super zone out (which I am good at) or leave my desk constantly.

We have a open seating area with low wall shared cubicles... Which makes it worse.

While I have family issues, I don't discuss them openly at work with everyone.

I am friendly, but don't open up... If you talk to me, I will talk back and seem interested, but it's really in one ear and out the other.

When it comes up to recommend or commend a colleague, it's not the work that comes into focus... You remember all these tidbits, and factor in determining that recommendation.

Person works hard but may be unreliable because of X happening. Person is only here to talk about Y, rather than working hard. Person only comes to work, to get away from Z.

I am the guy that goes to work, to work, so he can move on with his day after work as soon as possible.

Others come for an escape from their home lives and share about it all day.

I have colleagues in other departments that feel the same way that are older, but just don't discuss family in detail at work.

In office politics, sharing can help at times being more friendly with management... But I make up for it in hard effort, top numbers.. and when it comes to review time its my work that shines.

One colleague shared alot about his personal life, and only lost out on a job cause the hiring manager felt the guy had too many personal issues. (Manager told me in confidence).

He is a hard worker, but has a stigma of being a weirdo for sharing so much of his family life.

<comment><USER5> 34 never married no kids. Probably because the sentiment that someone doesn't want to talk about family makes little sense to someone who's life revolves around family. I give people blank stares when they talk football to me. I still try to relate. "Yeah my family chose all loser teams so the game lost me." It's not a great sentiment to hear for someone who loves football, but they get why I'm out of the discussion. Plus, as I remember being 31, the reality of adultness hadn't fully hit me at that point. Life can catch up to you unawares. Sometimes I realize that in relation to other people's progressions. That can hurt. Hurt comes out as dismissiveness vocally.

<comment><USER6> Football is pretty much chess with guided missiles. The basic rule is easy enough to remember (4 tries to go 10 yards or the other team gets the ball), and I've never met a football fan who minded filling in the gaps of the current discussion.

It's the same with kids. I have no trouble finding things to talk about with my friend who's raising a kid at a similar age. It often starts with talking about how we were raised. Maybe it's worth rethinking your approach to these kinds of discussions.

<comment><USER7> I can't talk about football with serious fans because they are obsessed with minutia, personalities, who did what, what games they have to win etc. In a way its revealing of who cares enough because you have to invest (waste) hours to keep up with that sort of stuff. What you're describing sounds like kind of a meta-football discussion about rules etc that I'd enjoy.

<comment><USER6> It only seems like a waste because it's not your thing. I don't care for it, but I also don't care for 90% of what's in the tech press. Most of it is meaningless (who will remember that random funding round/the player who won't last a season five years from now?), but it's fine entertainment if that's what you want.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I really do think about this a lot, but I disagree with what the author proposes which is basically lying or deceiving others:

> Authenticity is rare, but people performing authenticity is common, and > being good at that performance can build a fortune. Not just authenticity, > of course. Being able to pretend that you are furious is a trick that all > great sales people use. And being able to create the illusion of a sincere > vulnerability can trick people into trusting you, which is invaluable

The crux of the issue is as follows: is it possible to exercise discretion, but still be authentic and empathetic? I believe the answer to that is "yes".

I also don't believe this is just about your career - it's about your life. In some circles, amongst _some_ people, in _certain_ circumstances, sharing details is beneficial. But not always. You should not overshare with every person you meet. It's simply not to your benefit.

The difficulty is determining when, where, and to whom you share. Sometimes, you just know. And sometimes, you just have to express yourself. That doesn't always mean you say exactly what's on your mind. Simply a facial expression can communicate what you're feeling in a certain moment, but still with respect and dignity.

Authenticity is extremely powerful. Even with a client, being authentic (without oversharing) will garner you a lot of respect.

<comment><USER9> Yes, you're describing discretion and reiterating the author. They never suggested lying, merely being mindful of the circumstances when disclosing truth.

<comment><USER8> Added an excerpt from the post. It seems to be the opposite of what I'm saying.

<comment><USER10> I read that section as what one is commonly exposed to, not what he's advocating doing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm a woman and I tend to be very open about a lot of things. I am generally being genuine/ authentic, but I had a very private life for a lot of years and I had to learn that communicating effectively with people who simply aren't going to be part of your inner circle just works fundamentally differently from communicating with those folks.

Understanding is very much contextual. There isn't enough time in the day for you to have a deep, meaningful, close relationship to every passing acquaintance.

I don't need to feel people are up to no good to decide that certain kinds of information are not appropriate in certain contexts. It is a waste of everyone's time and a poor communication practice to introduce personal elements that aren't pertinent.

Discretion is certainly an element of that. But I think of it more in terms of effective communication.

If someone has just met you and knows almost nothing about you, leading with talking about how scared you are is going to get interpreted very differently from saying that to people who know you well. If the entirety of their knowledge of you is "I'm scared I can't handle this job," well don't be surprised if the conclusion is that you are simply in over your head.

</comment><comment><USER12> I'm 40, and some of my coworkers are like 25. I'm about two management levels above the basic engineers, but we're a small company and everyone knows everyone.

So I'm having lunch with some of the engineers, and one of them shares out of the blue that she regrets getting a computer science degree at her (good) college, and thinks she should've gone into business instead. And my immediate thought is, "For god's sake, don't SAY that shit around me, I'm someone who has a big say in your career prospects."

I like having a casual, informal work experience. But it's a thin layer. Ultimately, this is still a hierarchy, and ultimately, you have to think about who you're talking to.

(Separately: Don't get an undergraduate degree in business. What a worthless degree.)

<comment><USER6> >> _(Separately: Don 't get an undergraduate degree in business. What a worthless degree.)_

It's hard for people to learn things like this if they're afraid to talk to people who've gone down that road for fear that an honest expression of concern will be read as a critical lack of confidence.

Just because we're yelled and beaten down for every expression of vulnerability growing up doesn't mean we have to perpetuate it into adulthood. Stop the cycle.

<comment><USER13> The thing is you can never _really_ know, in advance, who is going to be empathetic about expressions of doubt and who is going to silently and permanently pass judgement upon it.

Saying that stuff to peers has little risk especially if the peers know each other. But aetherson has a supervisor role here and he is at least being honest to us that such a remark will condition his future opinion of the blabber-mouth.

That's perhaps one of the things that takes people some time to learn after leaving school-- what you say can hurt you, asking the wrong questions can damage your career, and, your boss is not your friend.

<comment><USER14> Your boss is not your friend, but your boss can be your mentor. I've had to form a level of trust with my boss because I really needed his advice as a first time tech lead.

I knew the technology I was implementing pretty well but now knowing how to approach higher ups and people in other departments is just as important.

<comment><USER14> And adding on, I try to avoid it, but sometimes you have to tell your boss personal stuff. When I was looking for a house, I had all sorts of short notice appointments. If I didn't let him know, the first thought is that I was interviewing.

Also, I have "cold induced asthma". Whenever I catch a cold, my asthma flairs up and I'm heavily medicated. I had to explain why I spent so much time working from home.

<comment><USER13> I agree with your points. "Your boss is not your friend" just means that you can't talk to your boss just like you talk to a friend. But it can be easy to mistake one's boss as a friend, and that's where there's a risk of saying things that should not be said.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'm not a manager, but the people I've worked with best over the years are the ones who have shared a bit of themselves at work.

People who act 'professional' all the time aren't trustworthy to me. It's impossible to have a frank discussion since they're always hiding behind the veneer of professionalism. They overrate their own ability to fool an audience, and it erodes everyone's ability to trust them.

I'm not saying everyone needs to blurt out their feelings 100% of the time. I'm saying honesty isn't only reserved for touchy-feely millenials. If you cultivate a culture of honesty rather than dog-eat-dog deception, you'll get better feedback from your employees, you'll be able to give feedback easier, and teams will be more comfortable speaking up instead of sweeping the garbage under the table.

The problem with the woman in the interview wasn't that she was being honest, it's that she was framing her honesty in an unproductive way.

</comment><comment><USER16> A good article, which should probably be read alongside the one about "vulnerability" by Leah Fessler [1] that it is responding to. Mining the links, I sniff an insidious confusion about what it means show "vulnerabilty". On its face, it sounds like "exposing your weaknesses". But in pro- vulnerability literature (e.g. [2]), it seems more like "displaying honesty and courage". Those are strengths, not weakensses.

An example is when someone is confident enough to say "Hey, I don't know about [X], can you explain it?". _That confidence is good_ ; but for it to work, it must be common knowledge that, since no-one understands everything the question displays keenness to learn (i.e. strength) and not ignorance (i.e. weakness).

[Pro tip: one of the most valuable, and easiest, life skills I learned as a young man was to say "I don't know" in a confident tone of voice.]

It is bad if vulnerability-talk teaches young people to display their weakness, since _of course_ that will lead people to lose confidence in them. What else could it do? But it is _good_ if they learn to turn problems into opportunities to strengthen themselves, and to do it openly so that their colleauges can help.

[1]: [https://work.qz.com/1155475/im-a-millennial-and-i-cant- get-m...](https://work.qz.com/1155475/im-a-millennial-and-i-cant-get-my-older- colleagues-to-be-vulnerable-help/)

[2]: [https://www.fastcompany.com/3001319/why-doing-awesome- work-m...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3001319/why-doing-awesome-work-means- making-yourself-vulnerable)

<comment><USER17> Related article by Fessler about creating a "user manual" for her colleagues to understand her better: [https://qz.com/1046131/writing-a-user-manual-at- work-makes-t...](https://qz.com/1046131/writing-a-user-manual-at-work-makes- teams-less-anxious-and-more-productive/)

Such a cool concept. So much more efficient than the opaque, black-box methods we use to understand and navigate our colleagues in this discretion-oriented, anti-vulnerability-oriented status quo we currently live in. Ironically, I'd say the efficiency of it actually makes it more humanizing.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> For emphasis, I would add, if a woman says, "I'm really scared and overwhelmed by this task" then it is possible that she is sharing too much. But managers should recall that she is perhaps simply trying to create a friendship. It isn't automatically an expression of a lack of confidence.

<comment><USER18> If you never feel overwhelmed and a bit of nerveous, then you never really challenged yourself and play it too safe. Or just lie about your feelings.

I am not sure why saying something like that is seen as worst then overconfidence and acting sure when you dont know what you are doing. The latter does more harm.

<comment><USER19> Well, because of organisational biases. There are principal agent problems dotted throughout most businesses larger than a single room, and people care more about looking good than being theoretically optimal, and this is recursive. And however bad you think this problem is - it's probably worse. Robin Hanson and Eliezer Yudkowsky have both written good stuff on this subject.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "To the extent that he's been successful, it's because he's been strategic about what he reveals, and to the extent that he is heading for disaster, it is because he is often unstrategic about what he reveals."

I like the rest of the article, but this seems almost like the definition of confirmation bias.

<comment><USER19> What counterexamples would you offer? Bearing in mind that it may have been intended only to apply to consequences that he was responsible for, not things that he had nothing to do with, but I can't think of any examples of the latter right now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Traditionally, for a man among men, expressing confidence has always been safe. If a man expresses confidence in a situation where confidence is foolhardy, other men will interpret it as a performance of masculinity. I'm sure Rick understands this project is going to be a nightmare. I'm glad he's gung-ho about it. If you express fear, on the other hand, your fear will be scrutinized to determine whether it is well-founded and appropriate to the situation. I'm worried about Rick — he seems terrified by this project. I know it's going to be tough, but geez, grow a pair.

Women among women are in the opposite boat. Expressing vulnerability is always safe because it can always be read as a performance of femininity, but expressing confidence invites scrutiny as to whether it is well-founded or arrogant.

Both of those scenarios have a safe fall-back based on gender expectations. When you mix genders, the fall-backs disappear. In tech, this is virtually always a problem faced by a woman in a male-dominated workplace. If she's ever momentarily in doubt, there's no safe direction to err. She can't take the masculine safe route and project bravado, because that behavior only reads correctly from a man. Nor can she afford to fall back on traditional expectations of women, because traditional expectations of women would suggest she isn't competent at a technical job. So she has to hit the correct balance of confidence and vulnerability every time. There's no safe fallback.

And even when she hits the correct, situationally appropriate balance of confidence, the men around her might still be confused about how they're supposed to interpret it coming from a woman. Unless they analyze her confidence in a rational, point-by-point manner — and how often do you do that in a workday? — they're relying on instincts that are conditioned by cultural processes largely outside their control to 1) expect confidence from coworkers and 2) not expect confidence from women.

Anyway, it's pretty disheartening to see an incident that is heavily colored by gender expectations related and acknowledged as such but then interpreted as a story about a one-dimensional spectrum from expressiveness to guardedness. A man in the same situation would have been allowed a generous expression of confidence and self-regard, even if it reflected less technical insight than the woman's fears did. Women and men _both_ routinely filter the emotions they share with other people, sharing some and repressing others. Showing vulnerability isn't about being unguarded or guarded, or about naive "authenticity" versus Machiavellian "performing authenticity." It's about filtering differently for a different set of expectations. Nor is it about women not understanding that personal knowledge can be used against them. Witness teenage girls feeling forced to suicide when other girls use their secrets against them. Women are not (and cannot afford to be) less socially careful than men, or less aware of the dangers of sharing.

Nor is it true that "if you are ambitious, all of the top jobs are reserved for people who are closed and guarded." Successful male leaders are rarely cold fish and are often very personally charismatic. They have to be mindful of the effect their expressions of emotion have on the people around them, and of the necessity of using that power to inspire loyalty and sacrifice. You can't make it to the top without inspiring trust in people. In case that sounds overly touchy-feely, let me add that it's especially important if your ambition requires other people to fail. It's easier to knife someone in the back than take them head-on. The "closed and guarded" person is never going to enjoy someone's loyalty or take a rival by surprise, because everyone is going to treat him like a snake. (That's one path to power, but judging by the people you see in high positions, it isn't a common one. Even Donald Trump projects a lot of interior qualities such as confidence, defiance, and self- regard and inspires loyalty in people who feel that he is gifting those emotions to people who need them.)

On a final note, I suspect the author understands 90% of this but is stranded on the wrong side of the enormous dichotomous wall he has erected between authentic emotional expression and manipulative emotional performance. People always filter and selectively amplify the emotions they express. That filtering is not inherently false, malicious, or untrustworthy. It's an inevitable part of being human, another complication when understanding another human being. A person's filter can be a positive or negative aspect of them, something they use in constructive or destructive ways. That's a better way to evaluate this question of vulnerability in the workplace. What kind of filter do I want my employees or coworkers to have at work? Should we systematically favor bravado over vulnerability? My gut feeling is that we should not.

<comment><USER22> _Anyway, it 's pretty disheartening to see an incident that is heavily colored by gender expectations related and acknowledged as such but then interpreted as a story about a one-dimensional spectrum from expressiveness to guardedness._

Maybe you have said it already in the above but to ask directly: do you think the author or their colleague would have treated Lisa's remarks differently if she were a man?

<comment><USER11> FWIW:

Male characters in movies who show you their scars are seen correctly as bragging about what badasses they are. I am a woman inclined to do that and I have had to learn to stop it. It is consistently interpreted as "Oh, you poor, pathetic thing, so victimized by life! Clearly, you need to be rescued! (by which I mean treated like a doormat and taken advantage of)"

Outright bragging goes worse places. So the GP is correct that women have no good options for owning their competence or admitting that you build your chops by biting off more than you can chew and this project is an opportunity to grow, because it won't come easy.

We really don't have good paradigms for women to do that sort of thing. There are no standard ways to do it. Having to try to make up such paradigms as you go on top of handling a challenging job is a serious handicap.

<comment><USER22> That is different from what is described in the original article, though, where "Lisa" really does speak in a way that communicates fear and a sense of trepidation.

<comment><USER11> Is it? If it is, why am I so frequently interpreted as _playing the victim card_ when I am displaying my badass scars? Or even simply telling it like it is about my actual life experiences?

<comment><USER19> Maybe it's the way you tell them. With engineers, a little explicitness goes a long way, and will generally be accepted - unless you're being patronising and telling them something they already know. So try saying "I'm not saying this to gain any sympathy or anything like that, but I had a similar experience, which was... and what it taught me / how it made me stronger was..." I mean that's kind of a stilted template, but you get the general idea.

Now, this might lead to a bunfight about whether those situations were similar, in your colleagues' opinions - but then at least you'd have brought out into the open where your colleagues weren't thinking along the same lines as you - which might not always be what you expected!

<comment><USER11> Well, to be fair, I never really stopped doing it. But I do handle things differently.

I still don't think that makes it fair to assume the woman in the article wasn't doing something similar. We don't have her side of the story. We have someone else's version of events.

Also: A man telling a woman that her observations about her own experiences aren't valid and she just must be doing it wrong has a not nice name because it is not nice behavior. Which may be apropos of nothing if you happen to be female and just failed to say that.

Either way, I wasn't asking for advice, I was giving testimony, so your comment is guilty of treating me like a victim when I wasn't playing the victim card at all, just testifying from firsthand experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > We worked with Lisa for 2 years and we produced our biggest successes with > her.

So, being honest paid off for her?

Most successful CEOs are very open about everything, and don't keep secrets. Secrets and opacity are what destroy companies and relationships, not the reverse.

<comment><USER24> > So, being honest paid off for her?

The article describes how her openness almost cost her the job offer. In the author's opinion, she made a mistake by being open about her insecurities in a job interview.

I've worked with people who are probably too open about their insecurities. I think you can be open about what you don't know without saying things like "I don't know if I can do this job." Frankly, I don't really know how to respond to that kind of statement in a professional setting beyond resorting to platitudes.

I think there are better ways to talk about your insecurities, like saying "I have experience with X, but I haven't worked with Y, and I know I'll need to figure Y out for this role." That seems okay to me. Knowing what you don't know is really important.

> Most successful CEOs are very open about everything, and don't keep secrets. > Secrets and opacity are what destroy companies and relationships, not the > reverse.

Everyone has a private interior life. Everyone feels things and thinks things that they don't voice publicly.

<comment><USER23> I don't know. It might be just me, but when hiring, I fall for honesty. Corporate talk fools no one.

<comment><USER19> Funny, I got where I am today by speaking in the manner I was being spoken to in interviews. They seem corporate - I speak corporate. They seem informal - <USER2> speak real. It works for me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> There is a backlash to this ancient mode of thinking. It's called Conscious Leadership and it's predicated on the idea that vulnerability brings better results and that you need a safe environment for the dynamic to flourish. Some of it sounds very new-agey but from what I've read and experienced it has really good fundamentals.

<comment><USER26> That's very naive though. Eventually there will be someone around who is politically motivated or otherwise adversarial, and then your safe space is gone and everyone who exposed themselves remains exposed. No matter how much we want the new-agey stuff to work, it just doesn't because it requires everyone to play by its rules, which doesn't happen in reality.

<comment> white-flame The things that are exposed should still be work-related. Be honest about why deadlines were missed, what failures were in designs, etc, and basically work against just everybody putting on a "Yes everything is great!" facade.

That facade breeds distrust and low morale. Even if things aren't going great, being honest about it keeps motivation up better than the alternative.

<comment><USER19> Do retrospectives at regular intervals and encourage everyone in the team to bring up (almost) any issues, large or small, in those meetings, and discuss them, with a solution-focused outlook - what can we actually try in order to address this problem?

An essential feature of retrospectives is that upper management, and internal/external customers, are not invited - and do not get to see the raw whiteboard, but only - if they see anything from it - a sanitised summary that's relevant - and diplomatic - for them. This all helps to encourage openness.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> One piece of advice, never ever ever bring work from your previous or current employer to a job interview. I've had to reject very good candidates because of this.

<comment><USER28> You don't want to see a portfolio?

<comment><USER27> The exception may be a artist, but I don't want to see a portfolio of proprietary software or documents from a previous employer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Made it about halfway through this article but couldn't go on. There's a big, big difference between appropriate discretion and faking authenticity.

</comment><comment><USER30> If you make yourself vulnerable, a competitor can exploit it.

<comment><USER6> Your competitors will find things to exploit anyway. Opening yourself up will attract people who'll help when things get tough.

<comment><USER31> Surely a balance between sharing and not sharing is optimal. How x and y are weighted depends on the work environment.

<comment><USER6> It must be an awful workplace if it's led by people who run for the hills at a conversation over doubts. Vulnerability is not a terminal illness. A lot of people never learn how to deal with it, so their rejection of others for it is largely a reflection of their own insecurities.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> beautiful. strategic.

> Leah Fessler doesn't seem to get that she is being forced to do this to > serve the interests of capital. She is not doing this with a group of > friends. A late night session in a dorm room rewards this kind of openness, > but an exploitive economic system seeks this information to gain power over > the workers.

</comment><comment><USER33> Or don't work with shallow, narrow-minded people?

<comment><USER34> Sure, if you can ensure that you'll do that for your entire career and that you'll never be in a position where vulnerability has made you (perceptually or otherwise) a weaker candidate than your rival for a particular job, contract, or promotion.

The calculus is simple: do you gain more in your career by openly sharing everything, or by holding in reserve that which doesn't need to be shared?

It is always - _always_ \- to your benefit to be the advantaged party in any relationship with an information asymmetry. By over-sharing or not exercising discretion, you are voluntarily putting yourself in the disadvantaged position and should reasonably expect that position to be exploited by others around you at some point.

If you can avoid ever needing to transact with anyone that would exploit that asymmetry, more power to you. I'd wager that exceptionally few people have that luxury.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I've read a couple of your Smash Company articles now. I broke down in relative detail the indescribably huge problems there are with the one extolling the virtues of using one-on-one instead of group meetings. I'm not going to do that here...

I'll just say a couple things... First editorial stuff... The structure and flow of this article does not work. Much of it is unnecessary, there are entire groups of paragraphs that, more or less, repeat themselves, and there are anecdotes that are basically nonsensical. Also, "discretion" is too poorly defined, it is used far too loosely (an unfortunate tweet or a youthful blunder is pretty much incomparable to being vulnerable with your coworkers - it's honestly laughable to put them in the same category).

Second... The culture/gender thing... It's pretty much summed up in your final full paragraph. Just keep doing stuff the way we (i.e. I) have been until you inevitably shouldn't anymore because the culture expectations have changed? That's terrible advice, in absolutely any context, but especially this one. I'd be fairly confident in saying that any piece of advice that ends in that kind of qualifier should be thrown out immediately.

Third... The point... Honestly, I don't need to know anything else about your "2 years" with Lisa to know that you were better off for her willingness to be vulnerable (a huge plus when looking at a new hire, by the way). Would you have preferred her to be dishonestly confident (that would have been easy), or at least noncommittally vague (easy, but comes off as unsurprisingly insincere)? No. You don't want that in an employee. Knowing the limitations and concerns ( _actual_ concerns) is _always_ better. Sorry, it is. The rest of your anecdotes aren't strong enough to make me even consider questioning that she did anything wrong. She did something that was hard, yes. She did something that could have cost her that job, yes. But she did something that improved her (and your) ability to do the job, and you were better off for it.

To be perfectly honest, it probably is a generational thing. And, to be perfectly honest again, I welcome the cultural changes (they are already getting here) that will come as the working generations shift. We, and our businesses, will be (i.e. are) better off for them.

P.S. You should take some time for a hard think about what "professionalism" means. Too often it is used as a crutch to support some archaic, and frankly harmful (across all possible meanings of the word), business practices.</comment>


Ask HN: Betting Game Concept - <AUTHOR>

Hello Fellow Hackers,
I've got an idea about a gambling game on the web. I'd like to learn from the devs about any technical/legal difficulties which I may face while developing such a web-app.
I'd like to have multiple parallel betting scenarios. There would be an incentive for the winners but no (cash) investment for players.
Please advice,
Thanks <comment><USER2> Working in betting for >5 years. In EU, if real money involved, you will need a gambling license. Bit hard to provide you with more help with the little information you gave.

What would you like to know on technical side?

</comment><comment><USER3> Use bitcoin?

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually I wanted that there should not be any investment opportunity by players. But thanks for the reply :)</comment></comment>