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

201–206 of 206 posts

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#201

Post by account42 »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #60
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.

Many RFID cards are literally just an ID number, and will happily allow you to copy that number to your own RFID card (look up "blue cloner guns", although they have their own downsides). Basically just security through obscurity. Cards that do fancy crypto stuff exist, but odds are your workplace badge, apartment fob, or hotel room key is the simple kind (because those are cheaper)

For a lot of applications someone being able to clone the card is also not that big of a problem. E.g. a hotel will invalidate the code on the card anyway when you check out so it doesn't matter for security whether a past guest has cloned the card.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#202

Post by dzhiurgis »

gonzalohm wrote: post #196
dzhiurgis wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO for garage much easier to just add garage door opener that works from your phone.

And then I need to pull my phone to open the garage door? No thanks

Means you don’t need to carry your keys when you go for a walk and you can trigger via voice or iPhone’s shortcut button.

I still use button on the wall and if you actually park in garage you can keep using fob.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#203

Post by ethbr1 »

godelski wrote: post #199
ethbr1 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think you're over generalizing. Software rot happens for a multitude of reasons - hardware changes - firmware changes - operating system changes - dependencies change - bits flip, thanks cosmic rays! > Right now, it feels like AI coding is ~2.5 A lot of people would argue that it's not even 1. I'd argue it sits between 0.7 and 1.2 given the task. I don't think it's close to 2. It's hyper fixated on task implementat…

In the case of Flipper, we're talking about fixed hardware (granted, eventually parts may need to be substituted) and firmware as the rotting target, so no OS level above that.

Which makes it a simpler problem.

I'd say SOTA AI coding systems are better than 1 and still improving. They often build better code than junior engineers. And with prompting and feedback harnesses, they're starting to grok architectural alignment.

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#204

Post by godelski »

ethbr1 wrote: post #203
godelski wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're over generalizing. Software rot happens for a multitude of reasons - hardware changes - firmware changes - operating system changes - dependencies change - bits flip, thanks cosmic rays! > Right now, it feels like AI coding is ~2.5 A lot of people would argue that it's not even 1. I'd argue it sits between 0.7 and 1.2 given the task. I don't think it's close to 2. It's hyper fixated on task implementat…

In the case of Flipper, we're talking about fixed hardware (granted, eventually parts may need to be substituted) and firmware as the rotting target, so no OS level above that. Which makes it a simpler problem. I'd say SOTA AI coding systems are better than 1 and still improving. They often build better code than junior engineers. And with prompting and feedback harnesses, they're starting to grok architectural align…

  > Which makes it a simpler problem.
Yes, which is what I stated in the first comment

  > I'd say SOTA AI coding systems are better than 1 and still improving.
I'm including Fable. I use agents every day. They still are very sloppy and hyper fixated on tasks and are poor at making code flexible and maintainable in the long run.

But again, I'm not surprised because that is the modus operandi of the typical Silicon Valley programmer (irrespective of seniority). They leave in their wake bugs that are avoidable and unnecessary and significant amounts of tech debt.

But then again, no one ever gets credit for squashing bugs before they exist. The agents are just as myopic as we are

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#205

Post by Aachen »

account42 wrote: post #200
Aachen wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're thinking of NFC, not RFID, and with NFC the owner might not have changed the default keys. It's a common mix-up (people barely differentiate between the terms anymore, though I'm surprised nobody in 2 hours mentioned it yet), basically RFID is (historically) an ID; a username. Like an ID field in a database. NFC is near-field communication : bidirectional. It does challenge-response and typically runs on harde…

> and with NFC the owner might not have changed the default keys Or the use case doesn't depend on any protected bits. A lot of NFC chips are being used as glorified ID tags even if the hardware could do more. And what actual security the hardware provides varies a lot - it's more like a gradient from dumb ID to full java card than a clean distinction.

Ah yes, very true

Re: The future of Flipper Zero development

#206

Post by wink »

ethbr1 wrote: post #181
wink wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

True, I had forgotten about UO, but for the sake of the argument I don't think it really matters. I don't have numbers ready, I had always seen EQ as the bigger mainstream success, could be wrong. Also was a bit before my time, I didn't pay sub fees for my games until 2004/05ish.

Edit: I didn't actually want to say that EQ invented it, but I had phrased that badly.

Post reply on HN