Currently you could say that ai is just efficiently guessing what we would want to see from pixel to pixel.
An artist may tune their style to be more similar to the art that they sold before in hopes of repeat buyers.
An AI looks at countless images and seeks out patterns which it refines. It mimics things and duplicates patterns.
An artists spends countless hours absorbed in the art of others to learn styles. Frequently they may mimic other works and iterate off of existing ideas.
Fan art, tracing, compositing - these are all things understood in the art community. If someone makes fan art of someone else's character does that invalidate their work as art?
AI invokes a reaction because it's getting "close." AI is receiving a lot of the same criticism that digital artists got for not using traditional mediums back in that technology's infancy.
Art is in the eye of the beholder. What defines art? Everything is relative. At present? AI is a tool. A bit unpolished and raw but so was CGI in the movie industry. Look how quickly that evolved.
There are a variety of options available with near feature parity. Killing the free version effectively cut out lab users which may as well say: we sure would like people to start training on a new platform. People use what they are comfortable with.... and tend to carry a hatchet for companies that burn them.
This was a short sighted play which ultimately will result in the platform dying slowly as the workforce changes. They cut off new blood: less people will be proficient with their platform and more will be pushing for a switch to the competition. In addition to the loss of the free version they massively ramped prices. They won't last. Right now the companies that are too big to pivot are already starting to weigh the costs of transitioning vs the squeeze. The C-suite are idiots.
There is an advantage to advertising their existence: the sign itself may act as a deterrent and may motivate a thief to pick a softer target.
This of course is assuming you don't need a sign for each camera with an arrow pointing to it... at that point perhaps just a big dog would be a better choice hah.
That would definitely be a good approach if you were stuck with the wireless option. Im sure some software may address those disconnections in just the way you describe.
My responses have been looking at the technology broadly - in the way I might if someone asked me for my opinion prior to investing in gear. People frequently overestimate the effort required to achieve a bypass of a security device. So my goal was to provide some core knowledge.
I do like the suggestion though- it may help somone improve their own existing setup 👍
Sure there may be a hard copy but that will only have value after the crime is committed. Deauth / jamming will prevent the more meaningful things like proximity alerts and notifications from informing the user (or security system) which could lead to intervention.
I've always viewed camera storage as a fallback in the event something fails. Don't get me wrong I think redundancy is great and it's a fine feature. It has value - just less so in this particular case.
...but he put stuck families on his car. Just look at that commitment! I'd like to imagine in reality someone is just having fun with stickers but who knows haha.
edit:
put stick families on his car...
stuck stick families...
words are hard. 😅
Low tech solution sure - you need to walk up to the camera and would need the location of any cameras that would potentially catch you as you scooter around tagging the cameras. Advantage is you are 100 sure the cam can't see you.
Deauth attacks work very well and don't require you to nuke all of the wireless space.
There's a variety of different attacks. Admittedly destroying the camera is more or less a sure thing hah.
I don't disagree with that. If someone wants in they're coming in. 100% agreed. The trick is making your self less of an easy target and cutting down on easy ins.
My statement was pretty generic as there is a lot of nuance to locks and security. My concern lies mostly with the fact that you rarely have a suitable blending of the two technologies. Either a lock company buying a kit or an electronics company buying bulk locks. Or a company that does neither and is looking for another thing to peddle on Amazon.
Some of these locks have very poorly positioned relays. You can unlock them with a magnet. Others can be actuated using a simple emf generator. Ones with passcodes can be read with consumer grade ir sensors or determined by wear and fingerprints.
Reducing attack vectors is always preferred. But it is absolutely up to the end user where their balance between convenience and security lies.
A good deadbolt and key while average is still superior as it is only 3ish attack vectors: pick or impression, destruction of door/lock, and the trusty rock:
Most doors have poorly placed windows with standard glass in or next to them.
It's been echod several times in this thread already but:
Wireless and security are oil and water. They do not mix. This goes byond wifi. If your security system has wireless sensors (door, window, motion) - you aren't secure. Please do not buy smart locks.
Wireless cameras are not security - they are a convenience. A convenience for checking on the kids in the back or seeing if that package got delivered.
If it's not wired and powered it is at best a scarecrow and at worse an indicator that you have money and you feel secure.
I consider this campaign fundamentally different than his first.
First and foremost - he is a grifter and conman at the end of a con with enemies on all sides. This is a desperate man. If elected his goal is to first wipe his slate clean via a pardon - and then will be to retain power thereafter.
To achieve these goals he will do anything. What makes this terrifying is he genuinely believes himself to be the smartest person in the room. He is a shortsighted idiot that is playing chess with blinders on while the rest of the world is playing 4d chess.
Other nations fears of another term with that man are not unfounded.
Yeah malware is everywhere - This could simply be a product of an individual actor abusing their position in a supply chain.... but this also goes for hardware as well. It is certainly a more difficult vector to attack from but due to its 'level' it's a valuable position to compromise.
Can't wait until this spurs the security community into doing a deep look at the roms on these cheap Chinese boards. Yeah the malware was caught - but what's more important is the intent. This is a country that is constantly behind breaches and botnets... and here we have these PCs being marketed as router replacents and mini servers. It doesn't take much to figure out that this is free back door territory.
Chrome is the container housing that website the developer decided to include 15 libraries at 50 meg each because he couldn't be bothered to optimize shit and that's just "standard" now. Oh and tack on the 15 scripts running to mine your data and load unfiltered ads into your userspace.
Get more ram pleb, it's cheap.... has been the excuse for ages. Makes it easy to ignore the problem.
Don't get me wrong- chrome is a pig... but in general it's the dogshit-bad coding and development choices that turn even a small page into a massive footprint.
I'd strongly recommend you look into the damage both of those elements have caused to the democratic process. I fully expected that comment to not sit right with people... it needed to be said though. Nobody likes finding out how the sausage is made. We have the technology to have a popular vote directly drive elections... why doesn't it? Simple: Control. We could, as a nation, cast 0 votes as a show of no confidence... and I promise you someone would still be elected. This is a broad topic. I wasn't referring to local- which definitely have their own issues.
For the price you can by a pretty competent n100 based mini PC which beats the hell out of the pi for a lot of tasks. Makers can get a cheaper solution via esp32 or clones... so what real market is there for it?
Pi isn't dead but the IPO would be a hail mary for funding while they figure out how not to go bankrupt.
In unrelated news 2,725 Russians died in a bizarre radioactive tea poisoning incident. The poison would have been fatal had the fall from the open windows not happened.
Yes and no.
Currently you could say that ai is just efficiently guessing what we would want to see from pixel to pixel.
An artist may tune their style to be more similar to the art that they sold before in hopes of repeat buyers.
An AI looks at countless images and seeks out patterns which it refines. It mimics things and duplicates patterns.
An artists spends countless hours absorbed in the art of others to learn styles. Frequently they may mimic other works and iterate off of existing ideas.
Fan art, tracing, compositing - these are all things understood in the art community. If someone makes fan art of someone else's character does that invalidate their work as art?
AI invokes a reaction because it's getting "close." AI is receiving a lot of the same criticism that digital artists got for not using traditional mediums back in that technology's infancy.
Art is in the eye of the beholder. What defines art? Everything is relative. At present? AI is a tool. A bit unpolished and raw but so was CGI in the movie industry. Look how quickly that evolved.