A lot of it has to do with over-promising and under-delivering. The rest is marketing.
NaibofTabr
joined 3 years ago
That's worse, not better. Ignorance of the danger is not an advantage.
SYAC: no pictures of the actual vehicle in this article, just stock images of Flock cameras. How incompetent of a journalist do you have to be to fail to include a picture of the thing your article is about?
Here is an article that actually shows the wrap on the car:
https://www.techspot.com/news/113418-cybersecurity-researcher-covered-toyota-ai-generated-pattern-confuse.html
It looks like this:
And here is a link to the mentioned Kickstarter campaign, which the Yahoo article also fails to provide:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/norecognition/norecognition-ai-adversarial-clothing/description
The campaign doesn't mention the car at all, which is a little odd. You'd think they'd be using the media attention.
I also want to share a link to a previous post about this project:
https://piefed.social/c/privacy@lemmy.world/p/2288321/anti-flock-anti-ring-ai-adversarial-clothing-demo-d-blackhat-defcon
My opinion is still the same as in that discussion - I don't think a static pattern is going to be effective for very long.
Eh, maybe buy the assets after they file for bankruptcy. Better to do it at the state level than federal though. I'm sure there are several state governments that could use a server hardware upgrade.
Ah, of course, sportsball.
People actually subscribe to Peacock on purpose?
Wet, or old dry and musty?
I just want to have control of my data!
Google:
To each their own. I prefer having the ability to adjust things from 1 central source. I'm prone to losing remotes.
My preference is for devices to be as simple and reliable and end-user repairable as possible. I have an aversion to any kind of appliance that might be dependent on someone else to update software or maintain a network service to keep operational. No software dependence at all if possible, just a basic microcontroller and firmware. Again, there's nothing to this that needs to be any more advanced or complicated than the functions of a basic alarm clock like this:
Instead of setting off an alarm, we're activating the feeding mechanism. Dead simple. Hell, you could probably make this yourself by wiring the alarm from a clock like this to a motor that moves the feeding mechanism.
Also, how would you do such a remote. You would also need a screen for feedback etc, which puts you back at square 1.
Nah, there's no reason feeding times need to be any more granular than per-hour. You can show that with a 2x6 grid of 12 indicator LEDs, with a 13th AM/PM indicator. On lights indicate hours when feeding will activate. You could have that on both the remote and the feeder, cheap and easy. Maybe you have a 14th indicator that lights up if the food in the storage bin is low and needs refilling.
Also, a remote would be considerably more expensive than the extra cost of a ZigBee/Wifi enabled microcontroller.
Definitely not, because it's not fair to count the cost of only the link hardware on the feeder, you have to account for the cost of the rest of the smart home system to operate it. A remote like this is dirt cheap:
You're over thinking what this really needs to do. It's a timer that activates a switch, that's all.
OK, add a simple remote control with buttons for adjusting the schedule and triggering a manual feed. No need for that to be any more complicated than a TV remote from the 90s. Keep it offline, no problem.
view more: next ›
They're not all gullible. A lot of VC types are obsessive gamblers, they'll throw money at anything that sounds like it might have a high return.
That's where the marketing comes in. Elon is pretty good at selling these big ideas, making them sound futuristic and world-changing. He not only sells those ideas to VCs, but also to the government. A lot of his businesses have pulled in substantial government contract money. The public rarely gets any return from those tax dollars.