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

The future of Flipper Zero development

blog.flipper.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 206 posts

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#181

Post by ethbr1 »

wink wrote: post #179
aacid wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know Guild Wars had original idea in the era of "lets make new world of warcraft and get rich from subscriptions" to release mmorpg without any subscription, you only buy it once and you can play forever. It was 2005.

You have your timeline slightly wrong because GW1 (if we take dev time into account) basically launched at the same time as WoW - and WoW wasn't the first subscription MMO. I suppose if this was a major reason, EverQuest would be the one to inspire it.

Everquest was 1999. Ultima Online was 1997 and had a $10/month subscription price.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#182

Post by ethbr1 »

stevage wrote: post #59

It's slightly funny that the post says firmly that they aren't doing any form of real time engagement with the community anymore, then ends by announcing an AMA date and time.

I read the post as implied they were talking about continuous realtime engagement.

Which TBF, answering every monkey with a typewriter on the internet is a huge time commitment from any team.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#183

Post by ethbr1 »

hypfer wrote: post #160
jagged-chisel wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't something be "done"?

That's because we haven't yet started to laugh people out of the room that get uneasy and complain when the rate of updates of something starts slowing down.

I heard a graybeard story about a manager who walked into a new ~90s sysadmin shop and was immediately horrified that everyone was calmly and slowly working.

At his old company, the sysadmins had been constantly putting out emergency fires!

... seeing how the "used to infinitely patched software" generation is unable to parse "done" is interesting.

Eventually, competence means nothing to do.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#184

Post by cindyllm »

ethbr1 wrote: post #182
stevage wrote: post #59

It's slightly funny that the post says firmly that they aren't doing any form of real time engagement with the community anymore, then ends by announcing an AMA date and time.

I read the post as implied they were talking about continuous realtime engagement. Which TBF, answering every monkey with a typewriter on the internet is a huge time commitment from any team.

[dead]

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#185

Post by ethbr1 »

godelski wrote: post #128
busymom0 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was just reading something along those lines: https://infosec.exchange/@millie/115719943870742405 > We need to normalize declaring software as finished. Not everything needs continuous updates to function. In fact, a minority of software needs this. Most software works as it is written. The code does not run out of date. I want more projects that are actually just finished, without the need to be continuously mutated…

To be fair, some software does rot. But when you have control of the hardware and the software, rot is pretty uncommon. Honestly, I thought the whole point was to make a popular unified platform where the community could come together and expand on it. I really can't imagine a centralized player can predict nor create all features that users might want. But it seems like Flipper did the right thing: make the software…

Software rot is mostly about dependency size, ne?

I'm curious if the agentic-based code flows will start to optimize higher-order programming goals in future evolutions.

   1. Code works
   2. Code works in all situations
   3. Code uses defensive practices for unanticipated situations
   4. Code is maintainable
   5. Code is well architected
   6. Code minimizes impact of rot
Right now, it feels like AI coding is ~2.5, if left to its own devices without human guidance.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#186

Post by ethbr1 »

GuB-42 wrote: post #39
mikepurvis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is... that possible? I thought the whole point is that those were a challenge-response specifically to avoid ever them disclosing over the air the material necessary to impersonate one.

Some cards don't have any form of security. For example Konami "e-amusement" cards are just an ID number, which is also written on the back of the card. It is a username so to speak, the password is the PIN you enter when you start the game. Some cards use some kind of challenge-response but are weak and are easily crackable. Some cards have an anti-copy protection based on rolling codes, be careful with these. The i…

Oof, that burned-code scheme sounds like it has some painfully sharp UX edges if something goes awry in the new code resync portion.

But I'm guessing that's for serious security, where going to the guard shack is preferable to letting anyone unauthorized in?

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#189

Post by [deleted] »

HDBaseT wrote: post #43
gonzalohm wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this something you do often? I could see a few use cases and also for copying garage keys. But I don't think I would use it enough to justify the investment

You can't even clone you garage door opener key anyway. Flipper Zero and its clones have always been pseudohacker nonsense. Fun little party trick I suppose.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN