The blog post argues that Vice President Kamala Harris should not wear her Apple Watch, citing security risks. It contends that smartwatches, particularly those connected to cell networks, are vulnerable to hacking and could be exploited to eavesdrop on sensitive conversations or track her location. The author emphasizes the potential for foreign intelligence agencies to target such devices, especially given the Vice President's access to classified information. While acknowledging the convenience and health-tracking benefits, the post concludes that the security risks outweigh any advantages, suggesting a traditional mechanical watch as a safer alternative.
Motivated by the lack of a suitable smartwatch solution for managing his son's Type 1 diabetes, a father embarked on building a custom smartwatch from scratch. Using off-the-shelf hardware components like a PineTime smartwatch and a Nightscout-compatible continuous glucose monitor (CGM), he developed software to display real-time blood glucose data directly on the watch face. This DIY project aimed to provide a discreet and readily accessible way for his son to monitor his blood sugar levels, addressing concerns like bulky existing solutions and social stigma associated with medical devices. The resulting smartwatch displays glucose levels, trend arrows, and alerts for high or low readings, offering a more user-friendly and age-appropriate interface than traditional diabetes management tools.
Hacker News commenters largely praised the author's dedication and ingenuity in creating a smartwatch for his son with Type 1 diabetes. Several expressed admiration for his willingness to dive into hardware and software development to address a specific need. Some discussed the challenges of closed-loop systems and the potential benefits and risks of DIY medical devices. A few commenters with diabetes shared their personal experiences and offered suggestions for improvement, such as incorporating existing open-source projects or considering different hardware platforms. Others raised concerns about the regulatory hurdles and safety implications of using a homemade device for managing a serious medical condition. There was also some discussion about the potential for commercializing the project.
The original Pebble smartwatch ecosystem is being revived through a community-driven effort called Rebble. Existing Pebble watches will continue to function with existing apps and features, thanks to recovered server infrastructure and ongoing community development. Going forward, Rebble aims to enhance the Pebble experience with improvements like bug fixes, new watchfaces, and expanded app compatibility with modern phone operating systems. They are also exploring the possibility of manufacturing new hardware in the future.
Hacker News users reacted to the "Pebble back" announcement with a mix of excitement and skepticism. Many expressed nostalgia for their old Pebbles and hoped for a true revival of the platform, including app support and existing watch functionality. Several commenters questioned the open-source nature of the project, given the reliance on a closed-source phone app and potential server dependencies. Concerns were raised about battery life compared to modern smartwatches, and some users expressed interest in alternative open-source smartwatch projects like AsteroidOS and Bangle.js. Others debated the feasibility of reviving the app ecosystem and questioned the long-term viability of the project given the limited resources of the Rebble team. Finally, some users simply expressed joy at the prospect of using their Pebbles again.
Google has open-sourced the Pebble OS, including firmware, apps, developer tools, and watchfaces. This release, dubbed "Pebble.js," allows developers and enthusiasts to explore and tinker with the code that powered these iconic smartwatches. The repository provides access to the entire Pebble software ecosystem, enabling potential revival or adaptation of the platform for other devices and purposes. While official support from Google is limited, the open-source nature of the project invites community contributions and future development.
The Hacker News comments express excitement about Google open-sourcing the Pebble OS, with many reminiscing about their fondness for the now-defunct smartwatches. Several commenters anticipate tinkering with the newly released code and exploring potential uses, like repurposing it for other wearables or integrating it with existing projects. Some discuss the technical aspects of the OS and speculate about the motivations behind Google's decision, suggesting it could be a move to preserve Pebble's legacy, foster community development, or potentially even lay the groundwork for future wearable projects. A few commenters express a degree of disappointment that the release doesn't include all aspects of the Pebble ecosystem, such as the mobile apps or cloud services. There's also a recurring theme of gratitude towards Google for making the source code available, acknowledging the significance of this move for the Pebble community and wearable technology enthusiasts.
Rebble, the community-driven effort to keep Pebble smartwatches alive after Fitbit discontinued services, has announced its transition to a fully open-source platform. This means the Rebble web services, mobile apps, and firmware will all be open-sourced, allowing the community to fully control and sustain the platform indefinitely. While current services will remain operational, this shift empowers developers to contribute, adapt, and ensure the long-term viability of Rebble, freeing it from reliance on specific individuals or resources. This represents a move towards greater community ownership and collaborative development for the continued support of Pebble smartwatches.
The Hacker News comments express cautious optimism about Rebble's future, acknowledging the challenges of maintaining a community-driven alternative for a niche product like Pebble. Several users praise the Rebble team's dedication and ingenuity in keeping the platform alive this long. Some express concern over the long-term viability without official support and question the eventual hardware limitations. Others discuss potential solutions like using existing smartwatches with a Pebble-like OS, or even designing new Pebble-inspired hardware. The overall sentiment leans towards hoping for Rebble's continued success while recognizing the significant hurdles ahead. A few users reflect nostalgically on their positive experiences with Pebble watches and the community surrounding them.
Summary of Comments ( 12 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42990000
HN users generally agree with the premise that smartwatches pose security risks, particularly for someone in Vance's position. Several commenters point out the potential for exploitation via the microphone, GPS tracking, and even seemingly innocuous features like the heart rate monitor. Some suggest Vance should switch to a dumb watch or none at all, while others recommend more secure alternatives like purpose-built government devices or even GrapheneOS-based phones paired with a dumb watch. A few discuss the broader implications of always-on listening devices and the erosion of privacy in general. Some skepticism is expressed about the likelihood of Vance actually changing his behavior based on the article.
The Hacker News post "Dear Mr. Vice President, Please Take Off Your Apple Watch" sparked a discussion with several comments focusing on the security implications of wearing smartwatches, particularly for government officials.
Several commenters highlighted the potential vulnerabilities of smartwatches to hacking and surveillance. One user pointed out that any device connected to a network is susceptible to compromise, emphasizing that smartwatches, with their microphones and data collection capabilities, pose a significant risk. This sentiment was echoed by another who mentioned the possibility of adversaries exploiting vulnerabilities to eavesdrop on conversations or access sensitive information. The potential for such devices to be turned into listening devices was a recurring theme.
The discussion extended beyond just smartwatches to the broader issue of personal device security. Some commenters argued that the focus on smartwatches was misplaced, suggesting that mobile phones present a far greater security risk due to their wider range of functionalities and data storage. Others noted the irony of focusing on the Vice President's Apple Watch when other, potentially more vulnerable, technologies are used within government circles.
One compelling comment suggested that the real issue wasn't the specific device but rather the lack of robust security protocols and awareness. They argued that even seemingly innocuous devices could be compromised if proper security measures aren't implemented and followed.
A few users expressed skepticism about the article's premise, questioning the likelihood of a targeted attack against the Vice President through his Apple Watch. They suggested that other attack vectors might be more appealing to adversaries.
Finally, several comments touched on the practicality and cultural acceptance of such security measures. Some questioned the feasibility of government officials completely abstaining from using smart technology, while others emphasized the importance of balancing security concerns with the benefits and convenience these devices offer. The thread also briefly touched on the broader implications of ubiquitous surveillance in modern society.