I have had an itch to disect an Aura frame and do something akin to the Tonie Box jailbreak. But I am too afraid of being responsible for bricking our frame and I can't justify spending the money on one just for R&D.

If you’re confident that you can reverse it, happy to throw $50 at this. It would be extremely great if you did this.

Anybody else want to crowdfund? :)

P.s. if you end up absolutely bricking it, but at least get one great blog post out of it, it’s still worth it ha

I have had PMs and POs spend hours with the dev team spilling all the tea because they think it will help the devs better craft their vision. This particular aspect is very plausible to me.

yeah I've worked at a startup where there was one PM that tried really hard to get all the rest of the PMs to stop talking business with the engineers but it just didn't stick. It's too easy to talk about and especially an easy way for newer PMs to bond and gain acceptance with the devs

My tinfoil hat might be on too tight again... but the timing of this exploit coinciding with Google's full court press on Android user rights is just a little suspect. Especially after the ongoing public education campaign about the evils of "sideloading" an Android application.

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45984143

Thanks, we'll put that in the top text as well.

This article is much, much better than the LinkedIn article though.

As an American solo developer, I am close to doing the same. These mega-corps are out of control.

Out of control in what way?

My tinfoil hat has me wondering if it's just coincidence.

For anyone else who thought this was simply a rad chip, it's radiation hardened

https://www.microchip.com/en-us/product/pic64-hpsc1000

If one wanted to attend the festival without being subjected to facial recognition software, I might recommend masks from http://www.urmesurveillance.com/ or something similar. A number of sites selling "anti-facial-recognition" masks have opened in the last few years.

I'd be curious to hear from a lawyer if a system like this would cause a Rosario violation (in New York, for instance).

Unless I'm missing something, this doesn't address the author's concern of keeping all IM sessions confined to a single desktop window. It's simply a method of using Facebook's Messenger platform without having facebook.com loaded in a browser. So it placates users with privacy concerns regarding opening Facebook on a corporate network, but it does nothing for the advocate of a single chat client.