5 ms·

(Disclosure: I make robots for mobile testing.) I wish more companies realized all the spying and stealing of information would be unnecessary if they started

by hugs 8y ago

(Disclosure: I make robots for mobile testing.) I wish more companies realized all the spying and stealing of information would be unnecessary if they started collaborating on making open source hardware testing equipment. A robot that taps a screen shouldn't be considered a super important trade secret.

jeroenhd 8y ago
There was a civil lawsuit and Huawei won. This is probably just part of the general witch hunt the US is undertaking against Huawei.
- Cacti 8y ago
  Witch hunt? Are you seriously suggesting that Huawei _doesn’t_ engage in corporate espionage?
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  It's abundantly clear from the emails that Huawei was maliciously trying to steal IP, to the point wherein they snuck people into a facility to carry out industrial espionage. There are numerous reasons why a civil suit might have failed even when the aforementioned is true. Moreover, this seems to be not an isolated case, but a systematic behaviour instituted within the organization, and others, including the state. However ridiculous it is for people to be trying to copy the 'tappy robot' (!!) - this is a serious issue that needs to be addressed.
  - hugs 8y ago
    My point is that one way to address it is to not consider a screen tapping device a trade secret and make these devices open source. But yes, all the stealing is wrong and should be dealt with, too.
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      If one is in the business of making such robots, then it would definitely be a good idea to protect one's IP. We don't get to automatically assume the position of one player in the value chain (say mobile manufacturer) and assume it would be 'beneficial' to just open source the IP of some supplier. Every 'buyer' everywhere would want all the 'supplies' as cheaply and freely as possible (!) but it can't usually work that way. In the article, there's an email referring one person to the 'manufacturer of the robot and not Tmobile' - which I guess indicates that the thing is not made by Tmo but by some 3rd party supplier. Should that 3rd party who ostensibly invested in designing that thing just 'open source' their products? How would they benefit from that? It's possible they may, but doubtful. I guess because this isn't exactly 'advanced robotic's it all seems a little clownish, but most of what we make isn't super hight tech, yet laden with specific know how and knowledge.
- daveguy 8y ago
  Civil suits and criminal suits are separate. I'm not sure if settling a civil suit can be seen as exonerating for a criminal suit. Standard of proof is higher for a criminal suit, and civil suits can be settled easily with money. I don't think witch hunt is the right term, as there was obvious unethical acts (possibly criminal). Although, it is definitely an escalation and I do wish there was more communicating through diplomats than through legal systems.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    A classic example: OJ Simpson was found not guilty in his criminal trial, but was found liable in his civil trial.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  Actually, Huawei did not win. The jury found for t-mobile. See, e.g., https://www.geekwire.com/2017/jury-sides-with-t-mobile-in-case-of-alleged-theft-of-tappy-robot-technology-by-huawei/ https://www.geekwire.com/2017/jury-sides-with-t-mobile-in-ca... They then settled the case.
retSava 8y ago
Nor especially difficult to recreate. I don't get it, it should be so simple. There are three dimensions in which the tapper has to traverse, probably not changing the angle of it either. It probably has some squishiness in the tip, so it doesn't have to be super super precise. This was in 2012, when there already where 3d-printers with much more harder requirements. Well, sure, this would run 24/7 likely so should have better components and be quite robust. So, some development but not like inventing anything drastically new. What am I missing? edit: ah, other comments raise some interesting points regarding detecting state of the phone and apps. I looked at it from mostly a hardware perspective since that's the impression I got from the article.
- syntaxing 8y ago
  Someone bought up this point in the other discussion but 3D printers is a really bad example for a gantry for production based systems. This is mainly because of the open loop design and the asynchronous motion profiles between the motors. There was a lot of work that went into GRBL to make the axis seemed sync. Also, getting into motion profiles is super tricky as well (which is trapezoidal preset in GRBL). The thing with these devices is that it has to be working 100% of the time with a feedback making sure its doing what you expect. That being said, besides the kinematics, instrumentation for hardware is the tricky part. Getting repeatable and consistent measurement for large production quantities is not an straight forward task. Processing and digesting the results is also another hurdle.
  - Bartweiss 8y ago
    I'm curious whether there's a better reference for gantry robotics? It looks like the hard parts here are non-mechanical, but I'd be interested to know more generally. Automated brick-layers come to mind as another 3D positioning task with no pitch or roll, but I'm not familiar enough with the general space to know if they're at all representative. Among other things, I seem to remember they can't corner properly, which suggests they might be operating on a linear axis and a width rather than a proper 3D workspace.
- HillRat 8y ago
howard941 8y ago
> if they started collaborating Note possible anti-trust red flag
- hugs 8y ago
  Is it an anti-trust red flag if web browser vendors started collaborating on testing tools, too?
- HashHishBang 8y ago
  > on making open source hardware testing equipment Anti-trust red flag? That would be a real hard sell to even the most anti-corporate type.

by hugs 8y ago

jeroenhd 8y ago

There was a civil lawsuit and Huawei won. This is probably just part of the general witch hunt the US is undertaking against Huawei.

Cacti 8y ago
Witch hunt? Are you seriously suggesting that Huawei _doesn’t_ engage in corporate espionage?
sonnyblarney 8y ago
It's abundantly clear from the emails that Huawei was maliciously trying to steal IP, to the point wherein they snuck people into a facility to carry out industrial espionage. There are numerous reasons why a civil suit might have failed even when the aforementioned is true. Moreover, this seems to be not an isolated case, but a systematic behaviour instituted within the organization, and others, including the state. However ridiculous it is for people to be trying to copy the 'tappy robot' (!!) - this is a serious issue that needs to be addressed.
- hugs 8y ago
  My point is that one way to address it is to not consider a screen tapping device a trade secret and make these devices open source. But yes, all the stealing is wrong and should be dealt with, too.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    If one is in the business of making such robots, then it would definitely be a good idea to protect one's IP. We don't get to automatically assume the position of one player in the value chain (say mobile manufacturer) and assume it would be 'beneficial' to just open source the IP of some supplier. Every 'buyer' everywhere would want all the 'supplies' as cheaply and freely as possible (!) but it can't usually work that way. In the article, there's an email referring one person to the 'manufacturer of the robot and not Tmobile' - which I guess indicates that the thing is not made by Tmo but by some 3rd party supplier. Should that 3rd party who ostensibly invested in designing that thing just 'open source' their products? How would they benefit from that? It's possible they may, but doubtful. I guess because this isn't exactly 'advanced robotic's it all seems a little clownish, but most of what we make isn't super hight tech, yet laden with specific know how and knowledge.
daveguy 8y ago
Civil suits and criminal suits are separate. I'm not sure if settling a civil suit can be seen as exonerating for a criminal suit. Standard of proof is higher for a criminal suit, and civil suits can be settled easily with money. I don't think witch hunt is the right term, as there was obvious unethical acts (possibly criminal). Although, it is definitely an escalation and I do wish there was more communicating through diplomats than through legal systems.
- mikeash 8y ago
  A classic example: OJ Simpson was found not guilty in his criminal trial, but was found liable in his civil trial.
DannyBee 8y ago
Actually, Huawei did not win. The jury found for t-mobile. See, e.g., https://www.geekwire.com/2017/jury-sides-with-t-mobile-in-case-of-alleged-theft-of-tappy-robot-technology-by-huawei/ https://www.geekwire.com/2017/jury-sides-with-t-mobile-in-ca... They then settled the case.

retSava 8y ago

Nor especially difficult to recreate. I don't get it, it should be so simple. There are three dimensions in which the tapper has to traverse, probably not changing the angle of it either. It probably has some squishiness in the tip, so it doesn't have to be super super precise. This was in 2012, when there already where 3d-printers with much more harder requirements. Well, sure, this would run 24/7 likely so should have better components and be quite robust. So, some development but not like inventing anything drastically new. What am I missing? edit: ah, other comments raise some interesting points regarding detecting state of the phone and apps. I looked at it from mostly a hardware perspective since that's the impression I got from the article.

syntaxing 8y ago
Someone bought up this point in the other discussion but 3D printers is a really bad example for a gantry for production based systems. This is mainly because of the open loop design and the asynchronous motion profiles between the motors. There was a lot of work that went into GRBL to make the axis seemed sync. Also, getting into motion profiles is super tricky as well (which is trapezoidal preset in GRBL). The thing with these devices is that it has to be working 100% of the time with a feedback making sure its doing what you expect. That being said, besides the kinematics, instrumentation for hardware is the tricky part. Getting repeatable and consistent measurement for large production quantities is not an straight forward task. Processing and digesting the results is also another hurdle.
- Bartweiss 8y ago
  I'm curious whether there's a better reference for gantry robotics? It looks like the hard parts here are non-mechanical, but I'd be interested to know more generally. Automated brick-layers come to mind as another 3D positioning task with no pitch or roll, but I'm not familiar enough with the general space to know if they're at all representative. Among other things, I seem to remember they can't corner properly, which suggests they might be operating on a linear axis and a width rather than a proper 3D workspace.
HillRat 8y ago

howard941 8y ago

> if they started collaborating Note possible anti-trust red flag

hugs 8y ago
Is it an anti-trust red flag if web browser vendors started collaborating on testing tools, too?
HashHishBang 8y ago
> on making open source hardware testing equipment Anti-trust red flag? That would be a real hard sell to even the most anti-corporate type.