not every tp-link model (or revision, or locale, or firmware version) that shares a web interface with the c7 requires you to manually set a password. even if that were the case, there are bound to be users who aren't security savvy and chose a very weak password (e.g. "password", "admin").
many tp-link routers also have configurable vpn servers built in, which can open up the whole network to malicious actors.
What a great writeup! It's awesome to see the process all the way from component selection, through code, to a final working demo. I'm definitely saving this for when I have time to do more hands-on FPGA learning.
Great write-up! We did something very similar when trying to find duplicate product images for a consumer review site we were working on. Our implementation desaturated the image, broke it into a fixed number of tiles, and generated a histogram of each tile's values. Then we put a threshold on the histogram values, and had each value in the tile represent a bit. Combine the bits, and we had a hash to store in the DB. Our hashes were a bit larger, so images within a certain hamming distance were flagged, rather than just looking for exact hash matches. It took quite a bit of tuning for us to get good results, but it seemed to work pretty well. Do you see many false positives with such a small processed image size (the 9x8 one, I mean)?
In practice we are using an image size of 17x16 which will result in a hash size of 256 bits and currently it seems to work pretty well. I ran the algorithm through the whole dataset (about 330.000+ icons) and I would say that from all the duplicate matches about 1% where false positives.
Also, we will be integrating this into the reviewing process for an iconset, where we also do a manual quality check, showing possible matches to something currently uploaded so skimming over one or two false positives isn't such a big deal and we where more interested in the speed of the algorithm.
this is great. i have a strange compulsion to buy awful domain names, regardless of their usefulness. is there any rule against multiple entries (aside from the possibility of exchanging with yourself?)
this is great. the positive responses you've seen combined with an interesting article i read a few days ago [1] make me want to write an ML suicide prevention bot for social media channels. a 20-30% positive response to suicide prevention would be astounding, and the cost is so small.
This is a very dangerous project idea. Have you, for one second, considered that this is not a sales funnel, where the only thing that counts is the "success rate" at the other end, but something dealing with people in a crisis? People who may just be considering suicide, and can be tipped in both ways. For example by a pseudo-empathic bot that tells them the same shit they hear all day in the US, which sounds nice but is the culturally accepted way to say "Please either pretend to be happy, or shut up" [1].
Please generously apply the hacker mentality to software, arduinos, knitting, cooking and art, if you like. Don't be afraid to fail, nothing bad happens there. Build, test, iterate, enjoy.
There are, however, things in life where the stakes are higher. They require more knowledge than you can quickly gather with a Google search, and, you know, professionalism. Healthcare is one of these topics.
what the fuck merited this response? i've read and re-read my comment, and i can't seem to find anything that would suggest that i'm seeing people simply as numbers here. are you honestly so jaded and cynical that you think someone talking about suicide prevention doesn't realize there is a human element to the matter?
The research is clear and unequivocal - suicide has elements of "contagion". Posting the content of suicide notes carries a serious risk of causing the deaths of other people. Writers have a responsibility to not cause harm and the least they should have done is to include suicide helplines prominently at the start of the article.
And it's full of lousy, lazy, unresearched information.
> and was more true to the typical format of a suicide letter,
Well, no. Research on real suicide notes shows people making requests and showing concern for those left behind rather than making any comments about how the person is feeling or why they made this decision.
> Better yet, we can deal with the threat of suicide, which is increasingly pervasive around the world as we move deeper into the 21st century.
Is suicide "increasingly pervasive around the world"? And the article only mentions finding people at risk of suicide. It makes no mention of what we actually do with these people when we find them.
Sorry for the grumpy tone of this reply. It's a topic I'm particularly sensitive about. Your idea is potentially a good one, and I wish you luck. But please please get some expert opinion on it too!
your reply wasn't really grumpy, and i understand it's a touchy subject for many people. the content of the article wasn't what interested me so much as the topic of it. it had never really occurred to me that the movement of potential suicide notes to digital media allows the opportunity for prevention.
Here's the tricky part: they do ask for permission to post on your behalf when you open the app. It's pretty muted, at the bottom of a popup, and dwarfed by a larger, more colorful call to action.
It's also not entirely obvious to me what happens in every case. If I close the popup, does it still count as my giving consent? If I close the app? My guess is that most people skim over the copy and click the big blue button, totally disregarding the checkbox down there.
Well spotted. But a user who'd disabled/cancelled/deactivated their FB account would assume that action was moot rather than that Spotify were going to illegally access a secondary service posing as you in order to enable that activity.
many tp-link routers also have configurable vpn servers built in, which can open up the whole network to malicious actors.