> But so far, I have resisted the notion of having cameras all over the place, peering inside the home's interior spaces. Sure, I have some Ring devices guarding the front of the house, but there's nothing recording inside.
> I live in a gated community with only one way in and out, and I'm alerted immediately if someone should be let through if they aren't on my regular list.
The whole tone of the article as I read it was Security & Privacy for me, not for thee (people in my community, my dogs, my hypothetical kids).
> The whole tone of the article as I read it was Security & Privacy for me, not for thee (people in my community, my dogs, my hypothetical kids).
I sometimes jog and walk at night, especially when I had clients outside of my timezone. Some busybody reported one of their Ring videos of me walking past their house at night to the police, and for a while there I'd be stopped by beat cops for simply walking around my neighborhood.
It's a surreal feeling knowing that you're being surveilled by just leaving your home and walking around the block.
While I'm not a huge fan of these devices, that more seems like a cultural problem than anything else. Why on earth would anyone be concerned about someone walking at night? That seems... normal.
I'm pretty sure when I go for a walk (since WFH, mostly late at night) I show up on _hundreds_ of cameras, mostly business and traffic CCTV systems (it's an urban area). That doesn't bother me. It would very much bother me if my neighbours were reporting me to the police, though; that's a neighbour problem, not a camera problem.
Ring and Nextdoor turns people into paranoid nutters. Unfortunately the impact of these services is much wider than the users themselves, as your story shows.
Possible. My personal experience is that these apps increased my anxiety significantly until I got rid of them. I live in an incredibly safe city, and yet they were making me feel unsafe.
So I replaced my ring with a more privacy protecting and social media-free alternative, because video doorbells are very convenient still.
You mind recommending your solution? I'm running a cheap Wyze cam in my front window (with a view of the porch, and RTSP firmware to stream to MotionEye) But it's still Wyze, kinda sucks, and I'd rather have an actual fisheye camera and doorbell rather than a creepy camera peering out the window.
I’m using an Amcrest AD110 for my doorbell, and Reolink for external cameras. The Reolink cameras are PoE and behave nicely on my network. I’m also running a nicer network setup that lets me put these cameras on another vlan for security.
Currently I’m experimenting with Frigate as my NVR for object identification and clip tracking.
> The kernel community has surprisingly few rules regarding the addition of new features like io_uring. ... there is nobody with a checklist making sure that all of the relevant boxes have been marked before a new subsystem can be merged.
This is such a stark difference from the big tech company I work at where there are checklists from the security, privacy, performance, and maintenance teams that have to be satisfied before features can be launched.
My container (used for land-based storage) has obviously seen travel, and has nothing beyond a couple corner air vents. None of the other containers I'm familiar without here (they're quite popular for storage) have anything of the sort. That valve is a nice idea, but doesn't really exist in most of the fleet of containers on the ocean.
They are, indeed, a hazard for other boats, though they generally won't "lurk below the surface." Either they're floating from buoyancy of what's in them, or they sink. The increasing water pressure as you descend makes "floating below the surface" a particularly unstable place.
Perhaps some new ones do, but generally most containers have nothing of the sort:
"Depending on whether they are full or empty, and on the nature of the cargo inside, containers may float at the surface for several days or weeks prior to sinking. Containers are not generally entirely watertight; while an empty container is likely to sink due to water ingress, a full container will likely float until air trapped in the cargo has escaped.’"
Instagram (Facebook) updated their rules in 2016[1] demanding that off platform deals for sponsored content go through them so they get a cut. Sounds like the exact same situation; You aren't allowed to make money via Ads without paying the platform our "fair" cut. News articles suggest Some of this was FTC compliance but Facebook also wanted their cut.
Nowhere in the linked post does it mention that Facebook explicitly receive "a cut", nor is that how it works (at least on Instagram). Sure, Facebook as an opt-in label for sponsored content that adds extra functionality (and helps with FTC compliance) but most sponsored influencer content on Instagram doesn't use these tools.
This isn't anything resembling what this FB post says, nor is there anything to indicate it is even talking about content that isn't on FB/Instagram itself.
Drat, I wish I could edit; I meant deals negotiated off platform.
My understanding is it's potentially illegal [1] to pay someone to post and not tag it as being an advertisement. Instagram added new transparency guidelines [2] that require sponsored posts to be created inside their platform [3]
> Ads as a whole probably gets bucketed into goods and services outside the app (because it doesn't improve your app experience).
Kinda funny because these companies run around claiming ads are good for your user experience (via 1. funding the free experience, 2. platitudes like "connecting you with high quality offers")
Hmm, I hear what you're saying but I think it's slightly different. The key word there is "Your app experience". When you buy ads it might {improve/detract from/however you feel about ads} but it does so to SOMEONE ELSE.
It would be as if I paid money to change your app experience. Yes it is changing an app-experience but it's outside my app experience (curious how Apple thinks about in-app gifts, e.g. Farmville style)
I think in Tinder there is an in-app purchase available that boosts your profile such that more users see your profile. Notably, it does not change your app experience. I am sure Apple takes a 30% cut there.
Isn't that equivalent to an ad that drives more attention to your Facebook page?
We did some interesting experiments with Go where we inverted the label of who won and measured what impact that had on the final model. This is a binary label so it's probably more impactful (it's the only signal we are measuring)
From memory it had only a small impact (2% strength) with ~7% of results flipped, at 4% it was hard to measure the impact (<1%)
It seems like it has the table-stakes features without anything new. And certainly not anything ethereum or a handful of other crypto's don't already offer.
They're capitalizing on existing concenpts, there's hardly any innovation here. The only novelty factor is that now you can run smart contracts on a stable coin, which is not possible with the existing stable coins in the market.
Google really seems to be leading the pack with investments in silicon (e.g. TPU and recently announced edge tpu[1]). Other traditional silicon companies (Nvidia, Intel) seem to get it but I have yet to see investments from other tech companies (Amazon, FB, Netflix).
Microsoft Research is pushing along as well, they just don't publicize it as much.
Azure has already deployed FPGAs (they believe, being able to deploy and make changes including changes to workload on the fly is more beneficial than the efficiency compared to using an ASIC) for networking and accelerated ML (Project Catapult and Project Brainwave).
tbh, I do agree with using FPGAs over ASICs given the speed at which the tech is moving. Google has already cycled through 3 versions of the TPU.
The underlying operation of multiplying a shitload of numbers together hasn't changed at all. Google's revisions have essentially been more and way more multipliers, respectively.
The main problem with FPGAs is having to deal with the vendors and their evil tools. Those people have no idea what good software looks like, and no business being in my cloud. I guess if you're Microsoft and you already have demonstrated a 40-year history of having no taste in software then you'd be OK putting FPGA tooling into a datacenter. I personally wouldn't even execute that stuff in a sandbox, much less allow it to reprogram my platform.
I heard that Google was actually late to the game on this, not realizing the value of GPUs over (just) distributed computing when the DNN trend started. Now they even have custom silicon...
> I live in a gated community with only one way in and out, and I'm alerted immediately if someone should be let through if they aren't on my regular list.
The whole tone of the article as I read it was Security & Privacy for me, not for thee (people in my community, my dogs, my hypothetical kids).