The problem with government services is the rampant fraud. In such cases, fraud is often guilt-free since the government is perceived to have infinite resources. This tempts otherwise honest people to "try their luck" free of conscience, and in most cases, consequence. These silly rules and barriers are meant to increase friction for fraudsters. Unfortunately it comes at the expense of legitimate claimants. I feel your pain and I also feel hers.
Back then, computers didn't had competition from the analog world, so vendors had to provide excellent service such that users would be convinced into switching over to the digital way if doing things. Now comouters have a monopoly on how we work and live, so vendors care as little as possible.
I am not a bot and I am not associated with this company in any way. But I am a happy user of Ente Auth as well. This AI thing they made however just gives off "we have to do something with AI or we'll be left behind" vibes.
agreed. i have never seen anyone (let alone an assortment) of hacker news users saying "i switched my 2fa to this after seeing how great it was!" Not really sure how one 'switches their 2fa' to an LLM...
This thread is about the 2FA app, not the LLM app. I don't care about the LLM app. What's this witch hunt? This app literally solved a (self-inflicted) problem I was having for some years now where I was keeping an old phone around just for MFA. I even thought about creating an iOS app that's compatible with Aegis files (actually I even _started_ working on that, but didn't get far) just to solve my problem. Now I don't have to, thanks to a comment here, and that's why I posted. Geez. I guess I'll stay with negative comments for the future, they seem to be more trustworthy.
I mean I get it, astroturfing is a real problem and an annoying one for communities. But I also have no idea how to prove to you that I am neither a bot nor shilling here.
It's not the router part that's hard. Any PC can become a router. You still need a wireless AP with an RF transceiver. That's where the restrictions are and why the FCC regulates them in the first place.
It's not so simple. Routers, like most tech emitting and modulating an RF signal by design, are certified products. The radio frequency bands, output power, allowed channels are all tightly controlled. Allowing end-users control without restrictions over such equipment would be unsafe.
It's quite different. The transceiver in your device is mainly a low-power receiver, transmit power is limited to ~100mW at best. Meanwhile a typical AP can go up to 1W per antenna for transmit. Also, the firmware that operates the wifi stack on your network card is not open source or user-modifiable beyond firmware updates issued by the manufacturer. I suggest reading up on wifi and RF before going further.
> I suggest reading up on wifi and RF before going further.
I'd suggest neither matter in the face of how the problem is solved in the consumer cards the OP was talking about. They solve it by locking down the firmware that controls the radios.
The reality is most routers do that too. You can replace the firmware in most of them with OpenWRT or something similar. You still can't exceed regulatory limits because of the signed blobs of firmware in the radios.
Nonetheless, here we are getting comments like yours, which imply all firmware in the device must be behind a proprietary wall because a relatively small blob of firmware in them must be protected. It has its own protections. It doesn't need to be protected by the OS or the application that runs on top of it.
Yet it's in those applications where most of the vulnerabilities show up. Making them consumer replaceable would help in solving the problem. Protecting the firmware is not a good reason to not do it.
I was responding to the original post about open standards. My point is that anything with an RF transceiver will never be as open as a standard PC with replaceable components. The radio portion will always be blocked off. That relatively small blob will always limit how much control you can exert over the device.
We don't have to look far. The embedded space with Arduinos, ESP32s and even RPis is a hacker's paradise. Yet the radio stack is restricted in all of them. For instance, it's not possible to take an ESP32 board and turn it's single antenna into a MIMO configuration, even if you make a custom PCB with trace antennas.
My point is that anything with an RF transceiver will never be as open as a standard PC with replaceable components. The radio portion will always be blocked off.
sure, but again, why would the RF transceiver on my desktop PC or in my laptop be any different than the one in my router?
This is still a "hard" problem from a scientific perspective. LLMs haven't taken us any closer to solving the perception, actuation, learning loop. It will require multiple new developments in material science and a new ML paradigm.
This is true about LLMs themselves but the developments behind them have been a boon for robotics. I’m mostly familiar with computer vision so I can’t speak to everything, but vision transformers (ViTs is the term to search for) have helped a ton with persistence of object detection/tracking. And depth estimation techniques for monocular cameras have accelerated from the top of the line raw cnn based models from just a few years ago; largely by adding attention layers to their model.
I agree that they’re not there yet but I don’t want to discredit the benefits of these recent advancements
While you're correct we still need a lot more, the advances in the past 5 years represent more than I've seen in most of my life.
Just look at the speed in which we can train a humanoid robot things now. We can send out a mo-cap human, get some data, and in few hours run a few hundred trillion simulations, and publish a kernel that can do that task relatively well.
LLMs allow us any perception at all. They feed vision to scene comprehension an then let the robot control part calculate a plan to achieve a goal. It's not very fast, and fine motor controls have a long way to go, but it is possible.
Double Insulation was dire in the early 20th century as well. It works great for self-serving elite politics until, to stretch the analogy, the voltage gets high enough. Then it breaks down.
reply