Talk:Futurehome Smarthub mandatory subscription fee: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

VisualWikitext

Add topic

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-== Re: how lying companies damage the Rossmann brand ==
+==Re: how lying companies damage the Rossmann brand==
 Since no email was provided, only the URL to history page, I suppose I shall write here.
@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
-== Re: how lying companies damage the Rossmann brand ==
+==Re: how lying companies damage the Rossmann brand==
 Funny thing, during your video I start thinking about idea of a archiving services before you even mention it.
 I tried to find a way to contact you as well, but without email, here I am!
-- P2P platform. More resilient against DMCA since it allows more peoples to participate. Still can cause issues since some peoples are more likely to be backbone of content. It is also great on the resources sides. Easy to expend the storage, add new contents.
+*P2P platform. More resilient against DMCA since it allows more peoples to participate. Still can cause issues since some peoples are more likely to be backbone of content. It is also great on the resources sides. Easy to expend the storage, add new contents.
-  - Worst case, you end up with different communities ("private archiving services"
+**Worst case, you end up with different communities ("private archiving services"
-- P2P over ToR? Don't even ask me if that is even possible.
+*P2P over ToR? Don't even ask me if that is even possible.
-- Possible issues:
+*Possible issues:
-  - Captcha
+**Captcha
-  - Cloudflare (trying to block bots)
+**Cloudflare (trying to block bots)
-  - dynamic pages. As per, it is unlikely two peoples will get the same exact page. Maybe the page append a timestamp for example. Maybe it offuscate html against automation, ... Now, you may not know if the page is indeed different or if somebody is messing with the page. On the good side, that shouldn't be too much of your case right now? That alone, could cause security in the whole system around integrity if enough of bad actors are there.*
+**dynamic pages. As per, it is unlikely two peoples will get the same exact page. Maybe the page append a timestamp for example. Maybe it offuscate html against automation, ... Now, you may not know if the page is indeed different or if somebody is messing with the page. On the good side, that shouldn't be too much of your case right now? That alone, could cause security in the whole system around integrity if enough of bad actors are there.*
-=== Integrity ===
+===Integrity===
 I end up with similar issues. Thinking about it, it is also normal to have the same issues. It is what internet is good for, having too much of anything which allow its flexibility. What if we try to use some of its ideas?
-==== Identity ====
+====Identity====
 Each user has an identity (using a public/private certificate, what is driving HTTPS, also named SSL certificate). So you can't impersonate someone else (except if its private certificate leak).
-==== SSL Features (if you want to read more) ===
+====SSL Features (if you want to read more)====
 SSL certificates allow sub-certificate, which allow trust to be inherited.
@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 That, however, need more thinking around it. SSL idea is to trust its parents. There is no "by the way, X become Y, so transfer trust to it". Which open up a wide open of issues.
-==== Trust ====
+====Trust====
 How SSL work currently on the internet? Companies have a root certificate that OS trust. OS trust them because they are transparent on sub-certificates they created. And nowday, their transparency is even one level higher and 3rd party are doing audit as well. Unfortunately, we are going to need a somewhat similar way.
@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 You could also do it more on a passive way (which may also be an issue for the page integrity, as per, if only one guy visit it in 5 years... it is possible the page has been updated in the meanwhile). Peoples add a browser extension that try to push into the system page they are looking. (But for privacy... that may be another issues)
+==Internet Archive with Signed Timestamps?==
+Perhaps we could interest the Internet Archive to add timestamps/digital signatures to pages they archive, so that we could then download said page, with a timestamp and a signature that could persist past any DCMA takedowns in our own archives and be used for proof of past existence of content despite legal denial of service?
+The flow would be.... see website page with bad terms, ask archive.org to archive said page with timestamp/signature, wait for that to happen, then grab a local copy and use that with "retrieved on" added to the footnote on a given wiki page.
+[[User:Mikewarot|Mikewarot]] ([[User talk:Mikewarot|talk]]) 19:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
+==adrians futurehome github??==
+just wondering if there was a legal reason this isn't linked here? https://github.com/adrianjagielak/home-assistant-futurehome
+It's linked on the utube vid, so doesn't really make sense that it wouldn't be there, but maybe linked on the vid by mistake? Not that it matters too much, as I found it by searching before I saw it on the vid...
+asked this in the discord as well, but placing here too in case it gets lost in the threads...
+[[User:Mandle Rex|Mandle Rex]] ([[User talk:Mandle Rex|talk]]) 06:36, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
+:We don't really tend to show alternatives to products (or in this case, apps). That's probably why. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 07:34, 26 May 2026 (UTC)