Imagine the collective brainpower that could be used to help solve the world's ills, and instead decided, no, what we need is a camera pointed at your asshole which we feed into an AI-powered SaaS we can then sell to you for a subscription. This industry is finished.
Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
71–80 of 227 posts
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#72I feel End-to-end is over marketed. Yes it protects your data from transmission pipes, but data on both your "ends" can be easily controlled and duplicated. Your picture on your device can be accessed by 3rd party, so does your data on the server.
End-to-end encryption is not a term used for communication between clients and servers, although I saw several marketers trying to do it. For normal people E2EE means privacy, and that's why some company tries to sneak the term in products where it makes no sense.
It's misunderstood.
In the begining it's used to describe chat apps, your chat message are delivered in a secure way.
But later some marketers try to use it as a "transport channel" for client-server interactions.
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#73BTW, someone please tell me that there is/was a social media site dedicated to poop, and the founder got rich from it. I need that today.
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#74Satire is dead. A toilet company killed it.
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it’s kinda like such a reasonable thing too Doing on device compute is probably expensive and would prohibit such a product based on the economics but ITS A GENITAL CAM
Well, this waste analyzing piece of e-waste costs $600, so you could probably cram a lot of inference horsepower in there if you wanted to.
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#76Satire is dead. A toilet company killed it.
Could easily have been an SNL sketch in 2010
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah. You have no reasonable expectation that the bank itself can’t access your financial records. Anyone reading Kohler’s lies would have every expectation that the Internet of Poopcam screenshots are theirs and theirs alone.
Anyone reading that is misunderstanding what E2EE means. As the article says, that's client-side encryption. Kohler isn't lying, people are confusing two different security features.
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#78What. Who is buying a $600 camera to take pictures of your stool?
And people who are being treated for gut issues can pay for their $600 medical toilet with HSA or insurance
Honestly, that this camera toilet exists is not a WTF for me. If my doctor needs to track changes to my stool, I certainly don’t want to have to hover over the bowl with my phone out. Please, just have the toilet take the picture.
Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#79Re: Kohler Can Access Pictures from "End-to-End Encrypted" Toilet Camera
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly what E2EE means. I used to work at a bank, and our data was E2EE, and we had to certify that it was E2EE - from the person paying, through the networks, through the DNS and Load balancers, until it got to the servers. Only at the servers could it be unencrypted and a (authoried) human could look at it. Of course, only authorized users could see the data, but that was a different compliance line item.
No, E2EE doesn't mean it's encrypted until the service provider decrypts it. E2EE means the service provider is unable to decrypt it. What you are describing is encryption in transit (and possibly at rest). Bank data is never E2EE because the bank needs to see it. If banks call it E2EE they are misusing the term. E2EE for financial transactions would look like e.g. ZCash.
That being said, the person you're replying to seems to be saying that "the server" is always an "intended" end, which is wrong.