591–600 of 734 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://xkcd.com/1807/
That's good but I think I prefer http://dilbert.com/strip/1994-04-24
Sorry to derail it, but I’m a millennial who grew up with Dilbert, and it just feels so wrong now. :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You would be collecting data from many sources in order to predict intent. This is why you need a centralized server. Please explain, exactly, what other sources you would collect data from and how the central server would process it to determine if I want the lights on in the middle of the night. IMHO, determining intent in this scenario is impossible without... 1. a mind-reading sensor, or... 2. an explicit user…
> Please explain how, exactly, what other sources you would collect data from and how the central server would process it to determine if I want the lights on. The more data, the more smarter. In fact, the only difference between a thermostat and the human mind is the number of datas. This is because the Law of Averages predicts that half of all datas will be relevant.
I have this idea of a system I would like to have in my house. It contains cameras in every room that are constantly watching where people are and relaying the coordinates to a central server. That server makes decisions on if lights should be on or if A/C should be running in that room. But I would never buy this system. I would have to make it myself. I am hopeful that open source software and hardware can produce…
The Personal Cloud is what we should be building for ourselves. Servers running in your closet at your house.
The main fight needs to happen at application level, not infrastructure. Cloud services are already mostly transparent and interchangeable. But applications aren't. The problem is, it's the application vendor that owns the code, determines where's going to run, and asks you to send over the data. How it should be working, is that you own the data and determine location of computing, and own or rent code to be run on that data.
I am oversimplifying here but: * install device that is designed to listen to speech in the house * the device is connected to internet * the device is capable of contacting other internet peers/services/hosts * the device knows a bit about its owner's internet presence such as contacts * the device is equipped with simple conversational user interface based on fuzzy human speech-command detection These basically bou…
I remember the first voice command stuff on google. Buddy of mine was trying it out and I couldn't help myself but shout: "NEW TEXT MESSAGE TO JENNY! FUCK YOU! SEND!" Fortunately the phone was too slow to take it all (even if it had Jenny would have found it amusing, she was a cube or two away). But yeah first thing I thought of was that if it's listening how easy is it for it to mistake intent or someone else or etc…
It worked several times and I found it really fucking hilarious. They did, too and now they guard their Alexas and use headphones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The chance that a random implementer has a security vulnerability is much higher than that Jeff Bezos is listening to me watch TV. A private system is more vulnerable to target attack and an Amazon system is more vulnerable to mass surveillance.
Why not just program it in Rust if you want to guarantee that the system doesn't have any security vulnerabilities?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was really hoping you were joking about that, but I can indeed get Google Assistant to pop up reliably by saying "cocaine poodle".
Well that's just great. How am I supposed to talk about my cocaine poodle now
Like, are you referring to a sculpture made of cocaine in the image of a poodle, or are you talking about a poodle train in the ways of a St. Bernard rescue dog, capable of relaying quantities of said substance, or perhaps something else entirely?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's good but I think I prefer http://dilbert.com/strip/1994-04-24
Heh, from back when Scott Adams wasn’t a crazy alt-right, moon-landing conspiracy, Alex Jones loving, jerk. Or perhaps hid it better. Sorry to derail it, but I’m a millennial who grew up with Dilbert, and it just feels so wrong now. :(
Amazon's response, from Ars' article: > Echo woke up due to a word in background conversation sounding like "Alexa." Then, the subsequent conversation was heard as a "send message" request. At which point, Alexa said out loud "To whom?" At which point, the background conversation was interpreted as a name in the customers contact list. Alexa then asked out loud, "[contact name], right?" Alexa then interpreted backgro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might be cool to add thermal sensors to that, so the lights don't shut off because you're not moving enough.
I'd also like them to dim if I'm holding a glass of wine and/or move in a particular manner. Edit: typo
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At my house, we have blinds installed on every window, and every evening I go around the house, pressing 12 switches (2 for every blind, because UX is obviously optional) so it's perfectly dark in the bedroom. In the morning, I go around the house and press those 12 switches again, to let the sunshine in. Now that's a task I would love to automate! Alas, remote controlling those blinds would be a major hassle since A…
If it bothers you enough, take a look at ZigBee switches. Not sure I understand how you operate the blinds (since the current switches are apparently not on powerlines?), but you could still make a centralized solution to control them over ZB. There's https://www.home-assistant.io/ if you don't want to program (much), and probably others. And you will smile every evening and every morning for the next few years, thin…