Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday February 11 2021, @05:40PM   Printer-friendly
from the we-promise-little-to-no-injury-or-your-money-back dept.

Fantastical News Everyone! Remember an earlier SN article about CELLMATE, a male chastity device that got hacked and would not unlock your hardware? Well, now the maker of that IoT device says it's now totally safe to put your equipment into their device once again! They promise! This time for sure! Nothing could go wrong!

Chastity Penis Lock Company That Was Hacked Says It's Now Totally Safe To Put Your Penis Back In That Chastity Lock

While we've covered the Internet of Broken Things for some time, where companies fail to secure the devices they sell which connect to the internet, the entire genre sort of jumped the shark in October of last year. That's when Qiui, a Chinese company, was found to have sold a penis chastity lock that communicates with an API that was wide open and sans any password protection. The end result is that users of a device that locks up their private parts could enjoy those private parts entirely at the pleasure of nefarious third parties. Qiui pushed out a fix to the API... but didn't do so for existing users, only new devices. Why? Well, the company stated that pushing it out to existing devices would again cause them to all lock up, with no override available. Understandably, there wasn't a whole lot of interest in the company's devices at that point.

But fear not, target market for penis chastity locks! Qiui says it's now totally safe to use the product again!

Since this device uses a proprietary API, there is still the issue of Vendor Lock In to be concerned about.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by progo on Thursday February 11 2021, @06:53PM (3 children)

    by progo (6356) on Thursday February 11 2021, @06:53PM (#1111669) Homepage

    640 bits might be enough to encode all possibly emoji as a distinct name of an idea.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday February 11 2021, @07:19PM (2 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 11 2021, @07:19PM (#1111684) Journal

    Imagine that a font includes a set of glyphs1 that draw every possible 8x8 grid of squares with some squares white and some black. That is 2^64 characters (and corresponding glyphs). In a 2^640 space, you can easily carve out a space of 2^64 extra characters. That would now give us a set of characters that can draw every 8x8 dot matrix pattern there is, including all of the old green screen CRT fonts.

    With UTF-640 we can also have characters for every known science fiction language. Klingon. Vorlon. Etc.

    In the future, human language will be all emojis and the familiar alphabet of our ancestors will be long forgetted. It will be possible for all ideas to be expressed using only emojis. Everyone will have forgotten how to repair the ancient machines that were built by their ancestors. Smartphones will stop receiving upgrades, but also no more hackers.

    1Glyph ("gliff") - the visual image or shape that is drawn for a character. For example, the outline shape that causes the letter T to be drawn the way you expect to see it.

    --
    Satin worshipers are obsessed with high thread counts because they have so many daemons.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2021, @08:39AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2021, @08:39AM (#1111886)

      Silly question time. Then why not just generate the nonstandard chars? As in like BMP.. Then compress the bits to hex?
      <c AC7362EAaC>

      Or is that just too much and unwieldy for when you want to "paint" a character?
      Is this better or worse than all of these font libraries?

      I could write this in JS...
      First bit - 0 white background 1 = black
      Allow for single bit paint, cords with outline or fill, sect or circle or triangle,
      Can have defaults line outline vs fill in a configuration at character or page or scope level...
      If contains coords then paint opposite color to BG - 0,2 4,4 for a rectangle..

      In theory you could paint anything..

      • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday February 12 2021, @03:57PM

        by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 12 2021, @03:57PM (#1111982) Journal

        What you suggest is interesting, but contains too much sanity to ever be adopted by any standards setting committee. Especially an international standard setting committee.

        ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI.

        --
        Satin worshipers are obsessed with high thread counts because they have so many daemons.