Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: webcam viewer?
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 08:59:30 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <uuc196$1sdmo$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vgv80j5cnva6ib2959eo3v61j8nnijo2tj@4ax.com>
 <nd8d0j9jmpp4okfugpatctivbmt6r7bs4g@4ax.com>
 <l47e0jt0ivt8abq11u4tnrec9o0724o55t@4ax.com> <uu7ced$hc00$1@dont-email.me>
 <26fe0jpbfttsdmm3beeebf9acm58s2qigm@4ax.com> <uubpkc$1qlr9$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 15:59:35 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c91440ed0d5bc93ff3915a7048361ce6";
	logging-data="1980120"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Z2FehuwRnThjpPFNzrhY6"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6/fRkXNPEqYaNwTyI5wiFyRHgk0=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <uubpkc$1qlr9$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3427

On 3/31/2024 6:49 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> Oh that's easy. Because they have been piling shit over heaps
> of shit for decades now.

It's not that they are "piling it"; rather, that they don't understand
the stuff they are piling onto or piling on!

How many fools think "Oh, we'll just run Linux!" and base their entire
product on a piece of software that, I suspect, NO ONE in their
organization has the skillset to understand?

With hardware components, you understand their limitations and
see all of their interconnections (on a sheet of paper).
You know what operating limits exist on its use and can verify
that it's use in a particular application (circuit) will
not subject it to stresses outside of those limits.

["Here are some electronic components that APPEAR to be able
to provide this particular functionality.  Please design a product
around them with incomplete knowledge of how they work"]

That's not possible with software.  Especially for software that
you inherit/embrace without having an intimate understanding of
it's design, goals, technology, etc.  Do you know what the first
instruction executed after reset is -- in the *source* code?
Or, even the basic order that modules are invoked to bring the
system up?

Notice how many folks will add a network stack to a device...
and not even understand the protocols that they will be using
(nor their expectations, vulnerabilities, etc.).  Or, glob
some layer of "security" onto a design ("Let's require a password
to access this functionality!") without considering how it can be
subverted.

["I put a note on my front door saying 'Keep Out'.  Surely that should
be sufficient to prevent any theft!?"]

And, with the legions of "programmers" who are just trying to
get something to APPEAR to work, there isn't even a real desire
to ACQUIRE any of this understanding.  Who can blame them?  Will
they be rewarded for producing a robust product ("But, that's
your JOB!  Why should we reward you for doing it?!") or
penalized for making a shitty one?  Is there even anyone in
the organization who has the skills to be able to make such
an assessment??