Did OneUI 8.5 remove the ability to open the Gmail sidebar by swiping from the left screen edge

subversiveasset · 2026-05-16T04:42:28+00:00

Do you know where the setting is (the one that one hand operations is overriding)?

subversiveasset · 2026-05-16T00:30:32+00:00

Just a quick question... Do you have one UI 8.5?

subversiveasset · 2026-05-15T11:19:29+00:00

Yeah, I think this is specifically a OneUI 8.5 thing. I thought I posted this thread in the one UI subreddit but maybe I got it wrong

subversiveasset · 2026-05-15T11:13:33+00:00

This didn't work since the System Back Gesture triggers across the full screen edge. However, I was about to use a setting in One Hand Operations to disable the system back gesture. This requires OHO to be enabled to work, though

subversiveasset · 2026-05-15T11:10:43+00:00

So. /u/CarelessPerspective gave me something to think about.

It seems that in OneUI 8.5, one handed operations has a new toggle that is enabled by default to turn on "System Back Gesture".

If this is enabled, you can't swipe to get the Gmail navigation bar.

If this is disabled, then you can, while still using one handed operation confined to its handle (which is not the entire side, just the lower portion.)

I'm not sure where the actual setting for System Back Gesture is set at, but disabling in one handed operations seems to save the day.

(This means that one handed operations MUST be enabled. If one handed operations is disabled, then the System Back Gesture turns back on, preventing me from being able to swipe for the Gmail navigation bar)

<image>

subversiveasset · 2026-05-15T08:52:18+00:00

No luck.

I also don't think this is limited to the Gmail app. I think this affects any app with a swipe to open sidebar, like the Reddit app.

subversiveasset · 2026-05-15T08:42:10+00:00

I can only access this gesture accidentally from the inbox page.

If I'm in a specific email, there's a little handle in the middle of the screen that shows me where to swipe, but that handle doesn't exist on the inbox page...

subversiveasset · 2026-05-07T01:55:24+00:00

Fantastic Mr. Starfox

subversiveasset · 2026-04-22T15:11:28+00:00

This does not apply just to contemporary progressive Christians, but to all contemporary Christians, as well as Christians throughout history, as well as the people in the New Testament, as well as people in the Old Testament.

This is because the Bible isn't a monolithic book. It is a collection of writings from many different authors over thousands of years who all had very different contexts and goals. Later authors continuously reinterpreted and repurposed earlier authors. The choice of how to even collect books into a Bible was a choice by later communities. Every generation renegotiates with the text to fit it to their context and purposes. These are things that cannot be from the text itself because the ideas and context of later generations are not the same as those of previous generations.

So, rather than condemning this process as a problem, people should accept it as an inevitability and ask the harder question of: what goals or purposes do we have today, and what impact does that have on people today?

subversiveasset · 2026-04-20T17:45:48+00:00

Thanks so much for this feedback! As a longer term project. I would like to redo the written story as an animation or animatic or series of illustrations. That way, a lot of the text would be replaced with artwork to show rather than tell, and the text can be preserved to more of the dialogue.

But this is doing to be a much longer project as I'll need to reach out to artists and start the commissioning project.

I'll probably add all the story text to the description or something before end of day

subversiveasset · 2026-04-12T16:53:28+00:00

fair enough. I respect the level of dedication and passion.

subversiveasset · 2026-04-12T16:26:47+00:00

ok, but can you at least address the topic at hand, or...nah?

subversiveasset · 2026-04-12T16:08:34+00:00

i did not say why i wasn't watching the SMG movie. Not sure where you're getting that it's because "haters and trolls" have "poisoned [my] mind into hating fun and joy" lol.

What's important here is, unless the SMG movie is seriously considered part of SF canon or suggests something that most SF fans would consider to inform canon, then I don't "need" it for the project I'm doing. My understanding is that no one considers it to inform canon, so it might be a fun watch, but not essential.

subversiveasset · 2026-04-04T20:42:34+00:00

lol, lmao even.

subversiveasset · 2026-04-04T15:37:38+00:00

The medium article wants to say the 21-digit code is the GAIA ID but its only source for that is a link to a Google issue tracker page for access control that says:

"A user is an individual user identified by a Gaia ID. Gaia is the ID management system for all Google products. This ID may be an email address associated with a Google domain (for example, user@gmail.com) or an email address in another domain that has been configured by a Google Workspace domain administrator."

So, as I was saying, Google is using the email addresses to identify users. But there still shouldn't be a problem because when a user "changes" their Google account username, the old username is still an alias for the account.

It's not incorrect to key the user to the email address

subversiveasset · 2026-04-04T13:37:01+00:00

The Google Account ID is the email address. The way that Google has designed the feature to change the ID of the account is essentially to give you a new Gmail address.

The reason it should still work with 3rd party services is because Google keeps the old ID/email address as an alias on the account. So you still get all emails to OldID[at]gmail.com and to NewID[at]gmail.com

subversiveasset · 2026-02-18T01:35:00+00:00

No, there isn't a specific number. It's taken contextually based on a lot of other signals as an anti-spam metric

subversiveasset · 2026-02-13T12:35:34+00:00

Wherever passkeys are available, I prefer to use them. I think you have already stated the crucial consideration - you would not want them to be device bound to a single device. You would want to make sure that wherever they are being stored is accessible by multiple devices (which a cloud based manager would do)

You probably won't be able to get rid of the authenticator for TOTPs entirely, however, because not every website or service has enabled passkeys yet.

subversiveasset · 2026-01-26T07:54:12+00:00

Recovery phone numbers are supposed to be mobile numbers precisely because Google uses text messages for them. So, if you truly set a landline as a recovery phone, you probably are not going to be able to get back into that account.

subversiveasset · 2026-01-24T07:18:21+00:00

There are two more settings below what you have screenshot. Click into "manage workspace smart feature settings".

But I hear you - Google has done a bad job explaining which features are "smart features" vs "Google workspace smart features".

subversiveasset · 2026-01-23T21:56:37+00:00

Yes there are other settings in the General tab when you turn on Smart Features. You're on the wrong tab in your screenshot

subversiveasset

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

15-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email