@mjg59 so you're looking at the security model of your fridge?and thankfully it's against local attackers and not remote ones to a smart fridge? that's nice these days! :D

@mjg59 it's a sad state of things that my first though reading the original post was “what about civil disobedience”then I've read what this is about, and nope, not the case here.

@etchedpixels @mjg59 the producers could still provide the complete¹ source for that firmware, with the caveat that installing a custom firmware will void any kind of warrantyof course it would be an expense for the producers, and they have zero incentives to do so when even the niche that could have likely to be asking for it and buying from the few producers who did decided to ask for silly “proprietary firmware on a read-only chip” instead.¹ availability of building tools etc. included

@jwz @mjg59 the elder Fortran gods patiently dream of their time to return

@mjg59 and then stuff break, and you go AAAA(H)(sorry)

@mjg59 and this is why the US has an opiate crisis, and AFAIK the UK doesn't!

@mjg59 @Di4na wait, I know more about womanswear than menswear, but I'm sure that to call at somebody's house you'd be expected to wear a morning suit or something similarmaybe for receiving calls at home you could wear something a bit more informal, but the fancy kind of informal, the equivalent of a woman's tea gown, but still pretty presentableoh, wait. checks the calendar. 21st century. both¹ people are at home during “calls”, proper² dress is not expected :D¹ all of the. whatever number :)² for a Victorian value of proper. I think people are still expected not to show significant nudity during modern calls :D