3 ms·
Excellent point that strikes at the essence of this. Already there were valid concerns about hardware backdoors and tampering, and now with such a dramatic even
by monkeyfun 2y ago
Excellent point that strikes at the essence of this. Already there were valid concerns about hardware backdoors and tampering, and now with such a dramatic event... well I can't exactly say I expect any change, but I do greatly hope this could motivate more such hardware transparency.
However, a counter-thought:
When a shipment can simply be intercepted and parts quickly swapped out, and when the batteries are difficult to casually detect alteration-of, how far do we take transparency to feel safe-enough?
Footage inside every cargo container? Even more aggressive anti-tampering packaging with hard to replicate seals?
(Meant to be a very genuine question, if it sounds silly I'm just not very informed as to what good solutions would be.)
- kkfx 2y agoIt's not sufficient, of course, but it's still the best we can do now, not only for mere safety but also for innovation, interoperability. In such an open world there is little room to purposefully sell crap to sell after fixes for instance, and that's very bad for some business but very good for the society and for nature, much reducing waste. After a certain amount of evolution even swapping component became harder, because anything is really transparent enough you still have margins, but with higher risks than now and more important much bigger reputation damage, which hurt much in such society (remember the Internet Manifesto for reference). Beside that the guarantee does not exists in nature, but the likeliness of an event have a really big impact on our life.