Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Everything I own, owned

schlarp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 367 posts

Re: Everything I own, owned

#271

Post by brusseliz »

isoprophlex wrote: post #147
simonw wrote: post #88

We have a Samsung Frame TV. I told Codex to scan our network to find it and then build a custom tool for updating the image gallery that it uses when it's in "art" mode. It did that, and now I can tell a Codex session controlled from my phone to "use this image" and it shows up on the TV a few moments later.

I desperately want this, but our Frame has never been connected to the Wifi, and I'm really reluctant to do so, as it will probably start snitching and/or delivering ads...

The tv-ws-api can be used over ethernet. I control my Frame TV from a pi through direct ethernet cable and the pi separately connects to my home LAN over WiFi and serves an app for Frame art control. The TV has never had direct access to the LAN or internet. Check the frame subreddit for several such projects.

Re: Everything I own, owned

#272

Post by _joel »

isoprophlex wrote: post #147
simonw wrote: post #88

We have a Samsung Frame TV. I told Codex to scan our network to find it and then build a custom tool for updating the image gallery that it uses when it's in "art" mode. It did that, and now I can tell a Codex session controlled from my phone to "use this image" and it shows up on the TV a few moments later.

I desperately want this, but our Frame has never been connected to the Wifi, and I'm really reluctant to do so, as it will probably start snitching and/or delivering ads...

Adguard and Smart TV blocklist might help. It's crazy how much my Sony wants to sneak out behind my back if I'd let it.

Re: Everything I own, owned

#274

Post by phh »

hypfer wrote: post #230
phh wrote: post #225

I definitely love this article and this spirit. I've accumulated a lot of crap/cheap IoT, I'll probably owning them! Two things: - to rain on the parade, the European RED directive makes secure upgrades mandatory for anything connected to the internet (I suspect that's why Elgato Key Light Mini has signed firmwares). So OEMs are now required to prevent you from doing that. (EN18031-1). It even requires that network c…

> for anything connected to the internet Are you sure? iirc that (for now?) only applies to stuff with wireless connectivity, though maybe I'm misinformed or misremembering. Which would still be "all IoT, basically", of course.

Hum, I don't really know. I was pretty sure it applies to anything connected to the internet even if it's Ethernet-only, but double checked. And reading the EU directive, it looks pretty obvious to me that you're right, it's only for devices with wireless connectivity... (the wireless connectivity doesn't need to be wifi/internet though. like if you have a 433mhz-to-ethernet gateway it still fits).

(Technically it says "which intentionally emits and/or receives radio waves for the purpose of radio communication", I'll let HN crowd determine if Ethernet emits/receive radio waves in an enclosed channel called Ethernet cable)

Re: Everything I own, owned

#275

Post by mrheosuper »

panta wrote: post #269
mrheosuper wrote: post #96

As FW engineer, I am both horrified and intrigued. The fact that there are so many devices lack even basic security features horrified me. A webcam that activity light can be turned off remotely, that's a big no no for me. But the use of LLM is also very interesting, we may put LLM in the loop to harden our devices. Sorry community, but it's our job to make the reverse engineer harder.

Why is your job to make the reverse engineer harder? When the user buys a product, it should be theirs to do whatever they want, even brick it. Your job should be creating the product the user wants to use, not building obstacles, otherwise you are creating something actively user-hostile. What if your company goes out of business and the user ends up with a device that can't be updated, that depends on cloud service…

"Making reverse engineer harder" is just a side product of "improving security" that upper-level people like to hear.

I definitely don't want my C-suite people reading "The product X of company Y has been reversed engineered" on their newspaper.

Re: Everything I own, owned

#276

Post by mrheosuper »

menaerus wrote: post #224
mrheosuper wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "Custom chip", like ASIC ? Never in my career that i feel the need to make our own ASIC.

Parent comment was likely about how are you supposed to put LLM into your chip. Commodity ICs are already optimized down to their minimums wrt compute/memory/storage. Ultimately, I think it will prove that RE examples like this are going to become a difficult problem to solve.

Oh no, i mean using LLM in the loop, keep forcing it to break our device, gives it every tool that an average tinker can access.

Re: Everything I own, owned

#277

Post by DiabloD3 »

kulahan wrote: post #102
DiabloD3 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can.... which everyone bitched about: they would do their cleaning cycle, no matter if you were busy or not.

Then they should do it at another time...? Obviously?

And thats why we have the warning that everyone bitches about: "Hey, the timer is up, but I'm not gonna make you do it, its just gonna wear the display out faster".

Early OLEDs really did need to be pixel cleaned every 8 hours according to manufacturer estimates, the choice isn't have warning or not, its have a lifespan or not.

I don't want to blame early adopters for being early adopters, but they early adopted, and this is the early adoption problem.

Re: Everything I own, owned

#278

Post by panta »

mrheosuper wrote: post #275
panta wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is your job to make the reverse engineer harder? When the user buys a product, it should be theirs to do whatever they want, even brick it. Your job should be creating the product the user wants to use, not building obstacles, otherwise you are creating something actively user-hostile. What if your company goes out of business and the user ends up with a device that can't be updated, that depends on cloud service…

"Making reverse engineer harder" is just a side product of "improving security" that upper-level people like to hear. I definitely don't want my C-suite people reading "The product X of company Y has been reversed engineered" on their newspaper.

In the old days, when businesses were not governed by pure greed, many electronic products, if not the majority, included schematics in their user manual. If a product today made a point of pride of having fully open source firmware and included a github/gitlab link, there would be no reverse engineering to write about. Security can be obtained also with an open source firmware.

Re: Everything I own, owned

#279

Post by jcelerier »

willdr wrote: post #145
ryandrake wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The user should be the final authority over what his computer does. Not the computer manufacturer. Not the OS developer. Not the 3P app developer. Not some product manager at a software company. The end user. Even time computer says no, or does something without your permission, or does something counter to your wishes, or alerts you to do something, or urges you to do something, or makes you opt-out, is a failure.

The end user disables pixel cleaning because the pop-up annoys them. They then start bitching about burn-in within 6 months, RMA the monitor even though it was their choice to do so, and spread negative sentiment about your brand going forward for being "prone to burn in".

Yes? Are you a human or a corporation talking? Has Samsung achieved singularity status and is now posting on HN?

Besides, the negative sentiment that OP shares here sis for me much stronger than any burned pixel, annoyances like this are a sure way for me to not buy a product if I read this in reviews

Re: Everything I own, owned

#280

Post by wartywhoa23 »

compiler-devel wrote: post #22

It's amazing to see LLMs give us software and hardware freedoms that the open source movement has only ever dreamed about.

Did the open source movement dream of outsourcing what they loved to do themselves for free, as in both beer and freedom, to products which are trained on the corpus of their own knowledge without any consent and sold by behemoth corporations on a subscription basis?
Post reply on HN