qqq

joined 2 years ago
[–] qqq@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is also far from my personal experience, you might not even realize what free software you're depending on?

Your browser is most likely the most complex piece of software you interact with daily and it is most likely FOSS. The Linux kernel is FOSS and is incredibly robust. Most compiler suites, FOSS. Most programming languages, FOSS. These are all incredibly well written and robust tools. AOSP, kinda FOSS, and the forks like Graphene are definitely FOSS. Hell even a lot of macOS programs are actually FOSS.

There is great paid and proprietary software out there, sure, but no it's not the majority of top quality software in my personal experience and likely a lot of people's experiences and it is almost guaranteed to rely on a FOSS library somewhere

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Sounds like you're cherry picking both; I've seen plenty of garbage that costs money as well.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Oh right, thanks

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Am I misunderstanding something? Wouldn't that just be 7! = 5040 possibilities?

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I have no skin in this game, but IPs are definitely not anonymous data. Also there is a lot of great info out there about de-anonymizing seemingly random data. Interestingly enough, this is similar to the Netflix prize dataset that was one of the more famous ones. Maybe a good introduction to that would be https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/12/anonymity_and_t_2.html

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Nobody is gonna be using a quantum computer to "crack email hashes" of Plex users in a few years... I'm not even sure there is a speedup to hash cracking with quantum computers.

But depending on the hashing algorithm used, it's likely pretty easy to crack hashes of email addresses today with a normal computer. They're not particularly high entropy.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago
[–] qqq@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

What's the give away there? Not doubting just wondering.

I see impedance matched traces so seems like something fast, but that's all I'd be able to guess.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Seriously wtf did I just try to read? It sounded like AI slop.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Honestly I wouldn't even go so far as home assistant. Do you have any IP cameras or just USB webcams? If you have IP cameras all you need is the VPN and then just access them as if you're at home. If you only have USB webcams, you're going to have to stream the content and I believe ffmpeg is actually capable of taking /dev/videoX and serving it over RTSP somehow, but I don't remember exactly how. I see some references to it in some quick searches though. Maybe start here (some blog) or here (Stackoverflow question)?

Another thing to remember is that you're going to be limited by your upload speed. If you're not on fiber and in the US that's likely going to be pretty bad, so set your resolution and the like accordingly.

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Sorry about your cat. We typically have a Rover stop in to check on our cats when we're gone for a bit; it's nice to get them some human interaction and they always send pictures and give updates.

I personally have a camera setup inside that just streams to HomeAssistant so we can check on them ourselves when we're out just for the weekend. I disconnect it when Rovers are stopping by though because I don't want them to feel spied on. No need for anything fancy really, but if you really want NVR I just use Frigate (for other things, the cat camera really is just a stream). It's free and open source and really easy to set up.

WireGuard is a very easy way to set up the access. My router has just the single WireGuard UDP port forwarded

[–] qqq@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The real issue is definitely people not having total control over their own devices.

It doesn't need permissions to be sent pictures from messages though, that's all local and likely done via an exported Service. Good chance other Google products are or will make use of it in the future.

view more: next ›