stonepresto

An example of an anti-user feature I think Obsidian might fall into is making the end-user the product for the free tier. That's just how those business models work, they are inherently anti-user because the user is the product.

FOSS allows you to choose to be free tier or pay for their services. The difference is in the free tier: you can do the leg work and hack together your own systems to match their paid services (namely public hosting). Its sort of a promise that you can use, audit, help improve, and love the free product without having to be concerned about forfeiting your privacy or security.

Additionally, FOSS projects always benefit from community auditing of the code, increasing the reliability and security of the software instead of relying on a few individuals to catch bugs.

Anyways all this to say "not FOSS" might not count itself, but implies there are other anti-user features at play.

Its not FOSS, and they rely on subscriptions. Call me a hardliner, but that's two non-negotiable things when it comes to nice-to-have software for me personally.

If they created an open source version I could self-host, I would happily adopt it. Frankly it looks beautiful and is only missing easy file integration. But they don't because it would cause them to lose a vast source of value they provide to their customers (providing proxies and servers for people to access their data remotely).

Finally something FOSS I can get behind. Really dislike Obsidians business model; it's going to breed anti-user features.

This looks very hackable too (in the good way).

Open source

Way more than that. This would shift the entire geopolitical structure of the world. Humanity would never be the same.

I mean the Saudi prince got away with chopping a journalist up, so why can't Qatar get away with some light poisoning?

Open source it and I'll care.

Thank you for producing such an excellent language! I'll always recommend it, its come in handy so many times and fits nicely in a lot of workflows.

OK boomer

;)

I don't think that prevents MAC spoofing

It was probably Peter Sagan

https://youtu.be/zR3QoZWMkok

Haven't used it myself, but I'm more keen to trust open source code & communities than vendors.

Don't rely on vendors to ship you secure fimware. Use something open source such as OpenWRT. It will make implementing the protections this blog mentions much easier.

I think there's a better justification. Since IPv6 is still new-ish to SOHO, and often is lightly used at best, the firmware devs might not spend as much time building that support into the firmware. When devs get laxidasical, bugs happen.

I'm unfamiliar with it, but that would still be initiated from the host itself, not an attacker on another machine.

There seem to be two lines of thinking:

1. Who are we (US, Canada, China - heavily developed nations) to criticize?

2. Bolsonaro is bad mkay

I think the root of the problem in both situations is people in power both in the government and out of it who do not seek sustainability and often are susceptible to corruption or influence. In both situations, the profits did not go to your average human.

If there exists a backdoor, its unlikely to be remotely accessible. But privesc for any OS running a vulnerable CPU, absolutely. This would probably look like some hidden instruction to load and execute an arbitrary ELF at the XuCode level, not a magic packet.

Obviously

I had #8 happen to me. Broad daylight, no other cars around, just a distracted driver who wasn't signalling. I'd ridden road for 5 years, but haven't since (2018). No matter how hard you try, if its a problem with the driver the car will always win. Also if you're riding in an area that's not accustomed to bikes, your risk of drivers not paying attention or being actively malicious is much higher.

Now I exclusively mountain bike. The risk of injury is higher, but the average severity of the injuries is minor compared to road.

This probably means it tries to do the “device detection” when you switch inputs or plug in a new device. Tbh this is the worst feature for me, it’s exceptionally hard to get rid of even with access to the factory menu. I can blackhole my TV all day on the network, but this problem is persistent.

Also as a note, it’s become increasingly difficult to root TVs. Even getting firmware can be a chore, and forget getting anything other than a bootlog over RS232.

Best advice I’ve seen.

Some weird tips that helped me lose 50lbs, but are related to the above:

- chewing gum

- replace soda with seltzer

- Long bike rides with consistent cadence. Can be on a machine too.

- drink lots of water, it’ll help with the hunger

- replace full meals with veggies, no dressing

Seems a little spotty on finding popular PoCs for recent CVEs, but I think this is great for archiving purposes.

> so your secret agencies can harvest all the data from everyone easily

The thing is, I don’t think the people who work at those agencies would want this either, except for maybe law enforcement. It’s the bureaucrats who think it’s a good idea, everyone else knows it’s a shite one. It’s an utter farce.

> the sad thing is we kind of did it to ourselves by demanding, or at least, buying, these features.

Even more sad is it’s not like people looking for a new car have much of a choice.

Browsing this guys YouTube video titles reads like a decent into madness… culminating in “I crashed my plane”.

TP-Link loves to make things proprietary. They have a custom protocol called the Tether Management Protocol, the weird OneMesh stuff noted here, custom firmware headers and signing, etc. all without proper documentation.

Many major vulns in TP-Link devices have been a result of these protocols, save for a few prolific things such as FragAttack. But hey, I guess it gives people something to hack on.

Your feeling is correct, although as other comments have mentioned it depends greatly on how you market it and to whom. Probably well above $5-10k though.

Bug bounty is good in some respects, but the people who profit the most from it are the companies and platforms. IMO it feels dirty to exploit people’s good intentions and ethics (reporting vs selling) for profits, but that’s corporations for you.

We're doing it to ourselves. We're the ones who keep clicking "I agree", who keep feeding these companies. Of course they're going to look to make a profit off of your data, there's nothing stopping them because we willingly gave it up.

I just wrapped up writing my own. I’ve been following a lot of projects such as Archivy and Obsidian for a while, but neither of them were what I needed. Wrote a flask app that does exactly what I need.

Obsidian’s business model is really smart: creating a knowledge management system that applies to the vast majority of use cases, add room for a little modularity, and monetize it.

However for those edge use cases, which on HN might be closer to a majority, it’s important to first hash out exactly what sort of features you need.

Do you need to link files as well as notes in a knowledge graph?

Do you need to use advanced search filters?

How much data are you dealing with?

Just some food for thought.