mr__y

Even if the hub was actually secure this still does not prevent from someone near to your house to talk to the devices directly (this applies especially to wireless devices). The hub you described would prevent from the remote attacks only

It would be nice if such standard supported Publisher-Subscriber style of messaging. For example alarm could subscribe to events from motion sensors and security cams (a camera in addition to providing a stream could push events like motion detection) or heating controller could subscribe to temperature change events. To make security of that realistic this would need some form of ACL, probably centrally[0] controlled.

[0] central as in "home router" not as "somewhere in the cloud"

My guess: first of all, "for security reasons" your DIY device will need to be certified, any existing SBCs will need to be replaced/extended to support new type of network and due to bloated protocol specs with a myriad of abstraction levels will render it almost impossible to implement it on your own and the open source library that can do that will implement the standard as specified whereas all proprietary solutions will have some quirks and little differences from official standard making it very hard to connect to anything from your open source lib. Also the sophistication of the new standard will exceed the capabilities of any arduino forcing you to replace any boards you have with new ones that have AVR uc with Connected Home hardware support.

this provides an incentive for someone to provide vpn/tunneling service with IP pool large enough to prevent blacklisting to be effective

Yo dawg we herd you like abstractions so we put a VM in a container-runtime in a hypervisor in your CPU so you can use JIT compilation while you use other JIT compilation

If this was a conscious process, that is taking solutions from mainframe, analyzing them and deciding to use some of them also analyzing the knowledge,pitfalls, problems and experiences from the past and incorporating them into the new tech then this would be a good thing.

However if this is done through a simple reinventing the wheel route, there is a high chance of hitting the same walls and repeating the same mistakes.

This is kind of similiar to a "let's rewrite this code from scratch in new shiny lang/lib/framework" with the expectation that new code will be bug-free from the start. It's not always bad, it is sometimes necessary or it may turn out to be more effective than trying to fix bloated code. But very often the new code has problems exactly the same as previous code and effectively the developers reinvent the wheel multiple times in the process of rewriting.

> And it is not apparent whether those doing the "reinvention" knew what the constrain or trade offs or limitation the previous technology had.

I'm quite sure that very often the "reinvention" is literally a reinvention - that is not based on previous invention, but an independent solution that just happens to be similiar to something created earlier (without the reinventors knowledge of the existing previous invention). With an abstraction level high enough, many concrete problems become one abstract problem with a few abstract solutions, and sometimes only very few "obvious"[0] solutions. This leads to a situation when many independent persons/teams come up with a concrete solution to their concrete problem that coincidentally happens to be very similiar to other solutions. If one of those solutions where created in the past, and others where rediscovered later, we then retrospectively call those later solutions as "reinventions" regardless of them being literal or just figurative reinventions.[1]

[0] in this context "obvious" defined as "most likely to be independently found/created by any sane person"

[1] "literal reinvention" being a solution that was consciously based on some previously existing invention and a "figurative" when it just happens to be similiar to something created in the past but the inventor did not (consciously) base their work on something already existing

>the clients know how to do load balancing

that is of course true, but they won't be able to ommit not working/failed/overloaded nodes whereas a load balancer might be able to do so. On the other hand the client might be programmed to just use another IP from the list and resend request if one node fails to answer, but this would increase the total time required by the client to do a successful connection. I also realise that non-responsing nodes might be rare enough for this to be a negligible problem - just playing devils advocate here.

I doubt that matrix could scale even remotely enough to handle twitter-size amount of messages

it depends on how much is brazilian

>Some people are really angry about GNU Parallel's citation "nag

the way I understand this, is that by requiring to interactively enter "will cite" the ability to run it as part of a larger script is broken. This would break a cron-job as well. The non-interactive nag in output would not cause such probles.

The non-interactive message in output of course could create problems on its own - especially if the nag would or would not display randomly. If someone intends to parse the output, this would require additional code to discard the nag. If the nag would sometimes display and sometimes not, this could randomly break stuff - if there was no nag during tests someone could not notice that they need to discard it.

But there are non-intrusive ways to insert some offensive message - they could be put to syslog, or a file with an offensive name/content would be created. My general idea is not to nag the users per se but do something that does not cause actual inconvenience for the user but is unacceptable in corporate environment.

For a GUI app a simple message box appearing once a month would not cause a major problem or hurt productivity of the end-user but I assume that for example Apple or Google would not find it acceptable for their software to display "f-off" even if this was rare.

For non-interactive/non-GUI software other ways to inject that message would be needed. For instance, a http server could inject additional X-F-Off header or a daemon could require env variable ICONSUMEFECES set to "daily"

Is there any copyright/licence specialist here? I've come up with an idea of having a free open software library that randomly displays offensive[0] messages full screen that comes with a BSD type licence with a clause that forbids removing/disabling that message. I assume that many developers or end-users[1] at home are perfectly fine with a messagebox popping up once a month with a "f## off" message, while any corporation planning to use that library will find it not acceptable to have their software display offensive content. And here comes a dual licensing, where there would be a possibility to buy a different licence that allows to disable that message. What I'm asking here is whether this would be possible to do so and enforce in a court or a legal dispute.

[0] or otherwise inacceptable in corporate environment

[1] I'm assuming that this would also be acceptable for the derivative projects: end-users might find that acceptable while businesses would not.

edit: wording of last sentence, formatting

>No sensible person goes into FOSS for the money

well, going FOSS can be an effective marketing strategy: by making something open and free (in both meanings) you get much higher probability of that something becoming popular. That in turn gives a lot new opportunities to sell complementary something or other something. This is best case scenario though, and you need to have resources/other sources of income for the time it needs to get widely adopted and popular (or the very possibility that it will not happen at all)

>unless you're doing something really strange.

all you have to do is run Wordpress with Woocommerce, multiple additional plugins and an overloaded theme with visual builder/editor that needs 512 megs of RAM and 500ms to display a contact form[0]. Some themes can be amazingly CPU intensive.

[0]and 900+ queries, but since most of them are simple selects any cache like redis or memcached removes their performance impact.

>building a CSS framework library

I think that might have been the root cause of the problem.

>he implication of imprecision in the underlying data through rough looking "hand drawn" charts and graphs is a really smart design hack.

The same approach could be used for mockup apps/websites

I'm pretty sure that already in 2019 losing a linkedin accout might have serious effect on your career. Not completely unemployable, of course but this could have significant impact in some industries

Also not to be confused with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyro_(food)

>Is the 3 months interval a regional thing, or based on the heat exchanger?

both. That is it varies between different units but also varies with local conditions, if your local conditions are "heavy-duty" (very high humidity, smog, area with lots of dust or lots of pollens etc.) you should consider replacing more frequently than rated intervals.

>consolidating centralized/server compute which, coupled with 5G and AI, will lead to high-bandwidth experiences streamed to comparatively "thin" devices.

this will also give absolutely new meaning to "deplatforming" which will now mean that not only you can't post on some social media website but you can't use any computer at all.

>people and organizations who are having problems with malware and cyber attacks.

this sounds like (almost) everyone

The problem I see is that many websites that rely heavily on JS have become pretty much applications rather than websites and as a result they heavily rely on a long running process. The way I understand this problem, this would rather require a long running browser process and (socket based) API exposed for external commands/apps to work with. But then again this would be not much different than Selenium or the likes. The API could be very different but the general principle (web browser process and an API for external applications to control it) would be the same.

You could run the browser on other machine and use VNC to access this from a iphone (or any other mobile device). While this is rather complicated and probably less reliable solution, the bonus points would be (almost) perfect isolation of the browser process.

There is also other reason. More and more new content is not visible for web search engines - for instance groups on social media like facebook or linkedin. Very often the results for a very specific query are pages from some forums or discussion boards. Since more and more discussions are taking place in one or other walled garden, more and more relevant content will not be accessible through independent search engines. I'm afraid that in the future larger and larger fraction of content will be fragmented and the ability to use a single search engine to find everything will become a thing of the past.

I really hope that all those archives will be digitized and available for download.

this made me curious :) do you have some written draft of that idea or need to be asked a series of questions to get it out?

>more difficult for the "small guy" knowing that they may have to pay Goliath's team of 1000/hr lawyers if they lose.

as already posted in this thread, many countries solve this by putting a treshold on this amount to be repaid by having fixed rates for legal costs (you have to repay the legal costs but not more than those fixed rates)

>If the finding of frivolity was separate from the verdict

this on the other hand further increases costs of those frivolous cases requiring a second trial to test frivolousness of the case

>reason the lawyer took the case was that he was hoping to strike gold,

I'm pretty sure that this works pretty much like spam or nigerian prince scams. If the lawyer works on tens or hundreds of such cases some % of those cases could be won and some % will settle to avoid legal costs. Total income might be high enough to justify unpaid work on other cases. I'm pretty sure that you could even partially automate a lot of things (or at least use some templates) for multiple similar cases thereby reducing the amount of unpaid work.

Recommender system could be content based