The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
This is my area (www.charmedquark.com), and it's bad. The problem is that there is no ubiquitous home automation backbone. And, since all these companies are just looking to sell doo-dads, not systems, they only option they have is wireless (or maybe if you are lucky wired) local LAN. Some of them maybe even actually think that's a good thing, though they are wrong. But, even if they don't, there's no other option for most of them. So, they throw some LAN connectivity into it, and probably don't remotely give enough thought to security.
Throw in the extra, modern issue that a lot of these companies making small doo-dads are probably just interested in getting bought out and they know that that is a lot easier if they have keywords like 'cloud based' and 'data collection' in their sales pitches. That drives them straight to cloud based interfaces, where you have to go to their servers and back to talk to something you are standing right in front of.
'Traditional' automation products were generally serial connected. You'd see a lot of newbies screaming about how horrible and old fashioned that is, but it's a completely safe system of point to point, unshared connections between the controller and the controlled devices. USB is reasonable as well in that way.
That mostly only works for devices in the closet with the controller. Though, to be fairly, typically there would be a gateway type box in the closet and that would have wired connections to the various doodads. So none of these security issues existed, and all control was local.
If you buy into a system like Lutron's Radio RA2, you can get the core stuff (lights, thermos, motion sensors, button panels, drapes, and a few other things) all wireless but via proprietary wireless protocol that isn't accessible from the outside.
The generic option should be Zigbee. It's a good quality, local-only wireless protocol. But it's not caught hold in the home automation world in a significant way yet (though it's huge otherwise.) It's used underneath the hood, in a proprietary way, by some products (Hue, Control4 and some others.) But it could be the ubiquitous automation wireless backbone from the home.
Z-Wave is the VHS to Zigbee's Betamax. It's a low end, not terribly reliable scheme that should die but refuses to. It's never going to be something that lots of IoTs doodad makers are likely to support and that's a good thing.
But, anyway, everything is pushing the whole boat in the wrong direction. You can still do the right thing at the more professional level. But for the consumer, it's a mess of disconnected doo-dads that are just sitting there in the local LAN, making outbound connections to who knows where, downloading firmware from those same places to run locally with full access to your network. And few customers are remotely savvy enough to wall them off into a DMZ or some such.
I've had to mess with some settings here and there. Recently VP9 videos would stutter like crazy or outright freeze so I had to change media.ffvpx.enabled to false to revert back to libvpx which fixed the issue.
The warranty thing caught me off guard at first too until it dawned on me it was a joke
It's not a disclaimer; navigate to it, and you'll see that it is not even presented as legal-speak.
I also happily ignore the legalese in the TOC of any software or website; what is legal and isn't is up to the court and the judge. BS-agreements aren't legally binding, as are agreements that are pushed unto you, or that are mis-presented.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Changing these advanced settings can be harmful to the stability, security and performance of this application. You should only continue if you are sure of what you are doing.
Show this warning next time.
I accept the risk.
No warranty is mentioned. Must just be an EU thingy.
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
There were a few bits of the book that were obviously Gaiman, but I do think the majority of it was Sir Terry. Gaiman did the screenplay conversion though. How was it?
Not sure about the Alan Moore reference. Are you trying to say Pratchett hated the conversion? (So much that he died before it happened). That seems to be a pretty universal Alan Moore reaction (the hating, not so much the dying).
The Yeti refused to have his name associated with the movies based on his comics, so was not named in the credits (even though he writes full script, so most of the creative input is his), and he even refused the money, after the first one or two.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Gaiman did the screenplay conversion though. How was it?
I made it through the first episode...it was rough. I'm not a fan of continued narration in movies to begin with, and the narrator in question is simply terrible.
Secondly, I know people would kvetch regardless, but a lot of dialogue that works on the page simply does not translate well to an actual, physical, dialogue. Some re-writes for screen are called for, and some movies/shows do this well. Good Omens is not one of them.
The scene I was most looking forward to, the "evolution" of "Dog", left me a bit flat as well.
Maybe it'll get better. The actors are doing a great job with what they're given, so there's that.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor