I have the same skills. What I don't have is the time.

Well, I guess I did believe the lies on the box.

No, I am an ongoing subscriber because I want access to the camera features and servers cost money.

You are right, but this solution is not equivalent. It can't tell the door state, nor send events on door state changes.

I'm a paying customer. I wish that meant I could retain access to the API. It does not.

They’re apparently discontinuing the bridge, too.

This used to be true, but it isn’t any longer. Internal security coding within the garage door opener system itself prevents (or at least dramatically complicates) this kind of hacking. Your opener button does not merely close a circuit. It sends a custom code to the opener, just like your wireless remote does.

Short of building your own garage door opener, there simply ISN’T another option. Chamberlain makes virtually every brand out there.

Not since DeBeers has their been a cartel so in need of dramatic “correction.”

It’s worse than the story even says.

If you try to use the Alarm.com integration, you will find that you cannot view or record anything from any built-in cameras. The Alarm.com integration simply DOES NOT support that device. And, to even use the Alarm.com integration, you have to dissociate the device from MyQ, meaning no other integrations can be used at the same time. Say goodbye to Amazon Key Delivery if you wanted that option.

So, the claims on the box are a demonstrable LIE.

And now I can’t eve use Home Assistant as a workaround? This is just criminal fraud.

That class action lawsuit for implied merchantability looks pretty good to me. Sign me up to join the class.

PS, they can spare me the BS about how hard it is to build a public-facing API. That noise is either another lie, or a straight-up admission of incompetence.

Venture capitalists fighting with journalists, you say? Hmm. Can I hold their coats for them?

The "ratio" is a measure of what people think about a particular tweet and refers to the ratio of retweets vs responses. In general, it is thought that if a tweet receives far more responses than retweets, it's because most people think the idea expressed was not a very good one and are pushing back against it.

Since this pattern was first noticed, users on Twitter have reinforced it, often by piling on with short replies on tweets (or personalities) they find risible, in an attempt to drive home the point.

With this change, Twitter is doubling down on removing content they don't agree with and making it harder to see when dumb comments from their anointed "blue checks" are being ratio'd into oblivion. "Conform or be cast out."

Is "controversial" how the headline writer decided to say "unfathomably stupid"? https://science.nasa.gov/scien...

Will it still be against the rules to say out loud that men and women aren't exactly the same and may need different things from the workplace in order to thrive?