Anyone want to fund my kickstarter for a vibrating fleshlight that runs nodejs?
Hacking my Vagina
31–40 of 273 posts
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#32I love the breadth of skill that went into this project. It shows good knowledge of software, hardware, reverse engineering, and its even tied together in a really neat package.
Not to mention 3D modeling. She 3D printed the part with the sonar attached on top of the battery.
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#33I cannot express how much I admire this post. This is how I think women should address gender equality: not by antagonizing men, but through sound and assertive work like this.
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just neat. Now, "Hacking my Fleshlight" would be weird.
>Now, "Hacking my Fleshlight" would be weird. Why?
Females are generally supply side, males demand side in traditional sex economics. Rejection of same through toys is therefore empowering to women and degrading to men. Thus labelled "weird."
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Now, "Hacking my Fleshlight" would be weird. Why?
Females are generally supply side, males demand side in traditional sex economics. Rejection of same through toys is therefore empowering to women and degrading to men. Thus labelled "weird."
Not to be too pointed, but that attitude is socialized, largely by people who make statements like "It would be weird if it were for men." Also, I think that there is less of an imbalance than you would believe. As we know, people are quite good at saying one thing in public and doing another in private. Especially when it comes to sex.
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#36Anyone want to fund my kickstarter for a vibrating fleshlight that runs nodejs?
Pandering a bit too hard to @shit_hn_says ;)
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#37I wonder if an article called "Hacking my Penis" would ever last long the HN front page.
Why does any article focusing on women's experience have to have someone come along and say 'it's hard for us men'?
I sympathize with that point, but there's more to it than "what about teh menz?"
The question is this: is this doing well on HN because HN is full of progressive-minded feminists upvoting a neat DIY project on its merits, or is it doing well on HN because it serves as fodder for the nerd-girl fantasies of a primarily male readership?
I really think this is an important point that often gets missed on male dominated social news sites. Readers are quick to pat themselves on the back for the community's mature lack of slut-shaming, while neglecting to realize that an entirely different form of sexism and woman-objectification is taking place.
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#38I wonder if an article called "Hacking my Penis" would ever last long the HN front page.
Why does any article focusing on women's experience have to have someone come along and say 'it's hard for us men'?
I don't think it's hard for men, frankly - I think it's a bit too easy for women. Our culture has really become too carefree about showing off sex toys - but only for women, it seems. Compare the mental image of a woman accidentally dropping a dildo or a vibrator out of her purse, and that of a man dropping a rubber vagina out of his bag.
But there's a problem beyond the double standard. It's like public nudity: it sounds cool when you're a hormone-addled teenager, but then you realize that most people's bodies aren't a nice sight at all. That's why I'm thankful for common decency, and why I'm concerned about all the public dildo-waving: in most cases, I don't want to see your filthy body, and I certainly don't want to picture you having sex.
Of course, I have no problem with this blog post - but the "openness" that's bothering some of these posters does have the potential to impinge on my rights of peaceful enjoyment of our public meatspace.
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#39I wonder if an article called "Hacking my Penis" would ever last long the HN front page.
Life truly is hard for us men in tech.
Re: Hacking my Vagina
#40Really cool! Is reverse engineering the wireless protocol easy? I imagine hacking hardware involves a lot more work than software. I also love how she 3d printed out some plastic cases for her toy. I see cheap 3d printers eventually being so ubiquitous that a quick prototype may be just as easy to hack up as a working software program.
In this case, here are the clues she used to reverse-engineer the wireless protocol:
1. The specs for the radio chip are easily available, so she could identify the actual packets from looking at the voltages on four wires.
2. Each packet had two identical bytes that went up when she turned the remote up, and down when she turned it down.
3. There were some bytes which were always constant, and didn't seem to do anything.
From there, the code ended up being fairly simple:
https://github.com/scanlime/arduino-lelo-remote/blob/master/...
On power-up, it sends an initialization sequence, copied from the trace from the original remote. This has a bunch of settings that you can look up in the manual. Then for each packet, it sends a start sequence (essentially, "finish sending anything queued, and stand by"), puts a packet into the transmit queue (packet = 0x0100a5[power][power]00000005, where power is the power level byte), and then tells the radio to transmit.
And then of course you can debug this by comparing the traces it generates to the traces from the original remote.