Fortunately, a lot of "padded" videos can be viewed at 1.5x speed with no loss in comprehensibility.
Another word for "padded" videos is "bad" videos. I have a better solution for dealing with them: I don't watch them, and stop following channels that have too many of them.
There's a lot of content out there, and so there's no reason for me to put up with any that I find even mildly irritating.
Well, there's no point in debating whether or not SSH is possible to implement on a given device, really. It depends on the specific device in question for sure.
However, even if you can't support SSH, that's no excuse to implement telnet. Telnet shouldn't be supported on any device that might be exposed to the internet, period. If you can't support a secure communications channel of some sort, then you shouldn't make the device.
I remember a lifetime ago, in a journalism class, we covered the relative strengths and weaknesses of reporting news in print vs in video.
One of the exercises was to take a news broadcast and write up the transcript for it. It pretty much drive home this little fact: the amount of information in an hour's news broadcast fills about 2/3 of a single page of a newspaper.
Some stories work better in video -- but all video has serious time constraints, and so in terms of actual information, video (even long-form video like documentary movies) can only ever give you a summary.
The same hold true for fiction. Movies, for example, are the equivalent of a written short story.
I'm reminded that when radio was introduced, everyone got all concerned that it would be the death of print media. It wasn't, because radio sucks at the things print excels at.
Then, when TV became popular, everyone got all concerned that it would be the death of print media. It wasn't, for the same reason as radio.
This is no different. It is literally impossible to replace written word with video -- especially for things like news -- because video sucks at the sort of thing writing is great at.
If they aren't connected, they are just dumb devices
Umm, no. A smart device is one that can do its own computations. Being connected to the internet is not part of the definition.
Likewise, if you have a device that relies on a server to do its computations, it's only a smart device in the sense that it has enough brains to connect to the internet. In every other respect, it's a dumb device.
If someone can place a small device within your WiFi range for a few days, and you have devices connecting and disconnecting during that time, then WPA2 is totally crackable.
If you're very concerned about security, you want all your devices to be using good crypto and authentication procedures even when you're using WPA2.
The problem isn't the credentials. It's the IP addresses.
Kinda. These addresses are trivially discoverable. If you run a firewall, take a look at its logs sometime. You'll see tons of portscans. Many of these are probes looking for devices like these.
The only thing the list does is make it a little more convenient.
Video works if what is spoken is also available as text.
Even if it is, it's still incredibly inefficient. Video has an incredibly low information density -- those transcripts show it: look at how short they are, and how light on information.
Point is it's all going video and writers are being fired.
If that's the point, it's simply straight-up wrong. There will always be written alternatives, because the the relative strengths and weaknesses of the various formats. What the article is saying is that the Big Boys are moving to video. That may very well be true, but they're very far from the only fish in the sea.
Interesting how many internet neutrality proponents are all for it except when it concerns content and expression they don't like.
None of the issues you've brought up are related to internet neutrality. Internet neutrality is about how ISPs handle packet routing, not about the content of the packets.
This seems like a very nice approach. Nobody's being censored this way, and making BS less profitable will certainly reduce the amount of it being made.
The future is an entire generation of purebred social media narcissists who are sponsored from their synthesized test-tube birth, born to be a product and pre-programmed to maximize revenue.
But put that into perspective: pretty much the exact same thing can be said of every past generation going back, at least, to ancient Rome. The only thing that changes is the style of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Another one is the slide out video ad that pushes down the article text as you read.
You need to use NoScript. You'll never see that sort of thing again.
effectively communicating both complex information
I've never seen a video, ever, that accomplished this. Not to say they don't exist, but I maintain they're pretty rare.
Fortunately, a lot of "padded" videos can be viewed at 1.5x speed with no loss in comprehensibility.
Another word for "padded" videos is "bad" videos. I have a better solution for dealing with them: I don't watch them, and stop following channels that have too many of them.
There's a lot of content out there, and so there's no reason for me to put up with any that I find even mildly irritating.
There's really nothing wrong with 1% milk!
This is correct if you're disregarding taste and substance. Just like video vs writing!
Well, there's no point in debating whether or not SSH is possible to implement on a given device, really. It depends on the specific device in question for sure.
However, even if you can't support SSH, that's no excuse to implement telnet. Telnet shouldn't be supported on any device that might be exposed to the internet, period. If you can't support a secure communications channel of some sort, then you shouldn't make the device.
I remember a lifetime ago, in a journalism class, we covered the relative strengths and weaknesses of reporting news in print vs in video.
One of the exercises was to take a news broadcast and write up the transcript for it. It pretty much drive home this little fact: the amount of information in an hour's news broadcast fills about 2/3 of a single page of a newspaper.
Some stories work better in video -- but all video has serious time constraints, and so in terms of actual information, video (even long-form video like documentary movies) can only ever give you a summary.
The same hold true for fiction. Movies, for example, are the equivalent of a written short story.
Yeah, we'll see.
I'm reminded that when radio was introduced, everyone got all concerned that it would be the death of print media. It wasn't, because radio sucks at the things print excels at.
Then, when TV became popular, everyone got all concerned that it would be the death of print media. It wasn't, for the same reason as radio.
This is no different. It is literally impossible to replace written word with video -- especially for things like news -- because video sucks at the sort of thing writing is great at.
You need a TCP/IP stack to run a telnet server, too.
99% of the time, if your microcontroller can handle telnet, it can handle ssh. (This didn't used to be true, but hardware is amazing these days).
If you have a case in the 1%, the only responsible options are to use a different microcontroller or to not support TCP/IP at all.
Real developers certainly do
Real incompetent developers do.
This is 100% correct.
You'd be amazed what you can do with even a ten-cent, 6 pin microcontroller.
You are correct in terms of sniffing existing data streams. You are incorrect in terms of preventing attackers from gaining access to your system.
Telnet is intrinsically insecure.
If they aren't connected, they are just dumb devices
Umm, no. A smart device is one that can do its own computations. Being connected to the internet is not part of the definition.
Likewise, if you have a device that relies on a server to do its computations, it's only a smart device in the sense that it has enough brains to connect to the internet. In every other respect, it's a dumb device.
unless you can crack wpa2
If someone can place a small device within your WiFi range for a few days, and you have devices connecting and disconnecting during that time, then WPA2 is totally crackable.
If you're very concerned about security, you want all your devices to be using good crypto and authentication procedures even when you're using WPA2.
These are commercially manufactured devices, not hobbyist ones made by people who don't know any better.
There is exactly zero excuse for these devices to be running telnet servers.
The problem isn't the credentials. It's the IP addresses.
Kinda. These addresses are trivially discoverable. If you run a firewall, take a look at its logs sometime. You'll see tons of portscans. Many of these are probes looking for devices like these.
The only thing the list does is make it a little more convenient.
Even devices that have mediocre security know not to use telnet. Properly installed and configured, it's still a pretty severe security hole.
Video works if what is spoken is also available as text.
Even if it is, it's still incredibly inefficient. Video has an incredibly low information density -- those transcripts show it: look at how short they are, and how light on information.
Point is it's all going video and writers are being fired.
If that's the point, it's simply straight-up wrong. There will always be written alternatives, because the the relative strengths and weaknesses of the various formats. What the article is saying is that the Big Boys are moving to video. That may very well be true, but they're very far from the only fish in the sea.
For some things, like that, you don't need Snopes to know it's bullshit.
Interesting how many internet neutrality proponents are all for it except when it concerns content and expression they don't like.
None of the issues you've brought up are related to internet neutrality. Internet neutrality is about how ISPs handle packet routing, not about the content of the packets.
You do understand that there's no coherent, organized group called "leftists", right? This isn't self-dealing in the way that you state.
This seems like a very nice approach. Nobody's being censored this way, and making BS less profitable will certainly reduce the amount of it being made.
Just because they make videos (content or ads) doesn't mean I have to watch them. Create away!
The future is an entire generation of purebred social media narcissists who are sponsored from their synthesized test-tube birth, born to be a product and pre-programmed to maximize revenue.
But put that into perspective: pretty much the exact same thing can be said of every past generation going back, at least, to ancient Rome. The only thing that changes is the style of it.
I couldn't agree more.