Wyze is a Chinese Company ( Discussion Continued)

That’s really good, thanks.

ODM, or original design manufacturing, is also also referred to as “private labeling.” This is where an importer selects an already-existing product design from a factory catalog, makes a few small changes and sells it under their own brand name. Changes can include things like packaging or product bundles, colors and branding, and some limited adjustments to components or functionality

OEM stands for Original Equipment Manufacturing, and refers to products that are fully designed by one company and then licensed out to a manufacturer to produce.

3 Likes

The US will loose substantial self reliance if we delegate all manufacturing to any foreign entity. We ( consumers ) are just too predictable in that we buy at lowest cost. That would map to a certain countries leaderships desire to displace one sector after another. Would wyze be willing to source their hardware from domestic ( US) sources? Ok . Call me protectionist

3 Likes

Thank You!!!

The US will loose substantial self reliance if we delegate all manufacturing to any foreign entity. We ( consumers ) are just too predictable in that we buy at lowest cost.

That ship left port 20 years ago. The US cannot compete with foreign labor, because US workers can’t live on $3 (or less) an hour, as can workers in dozens of other countries. Are you personally willing to pay 5 to 10 times as much for everything you buy in order to stop delegating manufacturing to foreign countries? Protectionism has a very substantial cost. Perhaps you are willing to pay that cost, but the average American is not. You can buy a Mac Mini for $700, or MacBook Air for $999, both made in China. Or you can buy a Mac Pro, made in Texas, for $6,000 to $20,000.

You can apply the same test to clothing, appliances, or just about any other product.

3 Likes

And a re-berth stateside has been made nigh on impossible by the dictates of global financial capitalism.

Demonizing any particular nation (‘they are benefiting at our expense’) is kind of futile in an irreversibly global economy.

One writer’s synopsis from 1976:

1 Like

Why am I getting notifications for this thread. I never subscribed to it.

I’m guessing probably because it originated in a thread you were subscribed to, and the mods cut it out of that thread and made it into it’s own and I’m guessing it inherited the following settings from the other thread.

You can change it back from watching to normal or muted though, then you’ll stop getting the updates for it. Hope that helps.

2 Likes

Thank you for that! These nice, well-intentioned kids think they are discovering a relatively new issue and imagine they can roll back history to a time that only existed a century before they were even born, whereas this dilemma was already treated back in our economics classes in the 1950s. Protectionism was already dead and buried way back then. The chances of digging it up and restoring to life now are zero.
The global economy is not going away. Whether we like it or not is irrelevant as we are realistically powerless to reverse it.

1 Like

3 Likes

We’re living in a global capitalist wet dream and ‘they’ are just about to… finish. :blush:

image

Wyze is glad to draft behind that vision. :star_struck:

image

What about the skepticist? :slight_smile:

He or she is busy searching DuckDuckGo to confirm whether the Churchill quotes are accurate.

1 Like

LOL! :rofl:

2 Likes

Not verifying a quote is like not using turn signals. Isn’t it? :no_mouth:

And what about Wyze last year aspiring to be the New Henry Ford. What was that? Did I dream it??

Things were simpler say a million years ago, experience has become this tangled knot. I can’t really now clearly remember where I read anything anymore, where I’ve seen things. Was it in the New York Times? Was it on Fox News? Was it on the internet on one website or another? [host: Was it real?] Was any of it real?

Click to expand

I had watched this movie by Ross McElwee [who I know and admire] called Six O’clock News and I was talking to Ross one day and I said I was in Santa Monica standing on the Santa Monica Pier and I watched them filming Baywatch.

And I started describing this in detail and he looked at me and he said, “No, you didn’t.” I said, “What do you mean, of course I did.” He said, “No, you didn’t, you were watching Six O’clock News, you were watching my movie which has a scene of me filming them filming Baywatch off of the Santa Monica Pier.” And of course, he was right. So where are we in all of this? Who in hell knows?

Unedited transcript and source

And, the situation for me gets worse and worse every year. I think that when natural selection or whoever created our brains… the things were simpler say a million years ago, that experience has become this tangled knot. I can’t really now clearly remember - maybe this is my problem maybe this is shared by no one in this room - but I can’t remember where I read anything anymore, where I’ve seen things. Was it in the New York Times? Was it on Fox News? Was it on the internet on one website or another? [host: Was it real?] Was any of it real?

It’s very interesting I saw this film the opening night film here, and It’s a Family Affair, and I had selected as one of the films here a film by Ross McElwee who I know and admire and the director pointed out how influential McElwee had been on his own filmmaking. The idea of one guy holding a camera actually making an entire movie.

I had watched this movie by Ross McElwee called Six O’clock News and I was talking to Ross one day and I said I was in Santa Monica and I was standing on the Santa Monica Pier and I watched them filming Baywatch, which is a television movie in America, and I watched them filming Baywatch off the Santa Monica Pier.

And I started describing this in detail and he looked at me and he said, “No, you didn’t.” I said, “What do you mean, of course I did.” He said, "No, you didn’t, you were watching Six O’clock News, you were watching my movie which has a scene of me filming them filming Baywatch off of the Santa Monica Pier. And of course, he was right. So where are we in all of this? Who in hell knows?

From:
IDFA 2015 | Masterclass | Errol Morris - YouTube

1 Like

Maybe they finally realized modeling themselves after the 20th Century’s second most virulent antisemite wasn’t the greatest idea.

2 Likes

Thank you very much for the long, fascinating quotation, of which this paragraph is just a great introduction!

1 Like

You guys are way off topic

TUTK is technicallyTaiwanese, which I guess is somewhat debatable worldwide as to whether one counts it as a part of China or not (CCP/PRC China says it is China and has strong-armed the international community into using this distinction), and ROC China (and most in Taiwan) says it’s actually distinct from CCP/PRC China), but are powerless to do much about it. So maybe TUTK is Chinese and maybe it’s not depending on your point of view (agree with China, then yes, agree with Taiwan, then no).

But here’s the reason I’m bringing this up (since there are few threads discussing TUTK): There’s an interesting article about a recently discovered TUTK vulnerability:

Highlights include:

“Successful exploitation of this vulnerability could permit unauthorized access to sensitive information, such as camera audio/video feeds,” CISA said in the alert.

ThroughTek recommends original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) using SDK 3.1.10 and above to enable AuthKey and DTLS, and those relying on an SDK version prior to 3.1.10 to upgrade the library to version 3.3.1.0 or v3.4.2.0 and enable AuthKey/DTLS.

I don’t know what version of the SDK Wyze uses, but I assume they either have, or will be upgrading their SDK to 3.1.10 (or higher). Regardless, I believe Wyze has taken greater precautions than most companies with their TUTK connections. As I understand it, ThroughTek is only used by Wyze to locate the cameras and telli f they are online, rather than the actual camera feeds themselves (which for Wyze is a direct connection).

Still, it does make one wonder if some of the weird (rare) posts about “hearing someone through the camera” or some-such are related to this issue. Seems like an easy fix though, just upgrade the SDK (if it’s not already) and ensure AuthKey and DTLS are enabled. They might already be, and even if they aren’t, I’m not sure this issue would apply to Wyze anyway since they implemented steps to prevent TUTK from accessing the Wyze camera stream directly anyway as explained so well in that link you (Customer) posted. Still, I thought it was an interesting read anyway.

2 Likes

Maybe not this time. We’ve been asking for Wyze’s position on this vulnerability going on 3 months now. No response at all.

2 Likes

Interesting, it might soon be irrelevant anyway. I can’t speak for Wyze at all, from what I gather online, it sounds like when Wyze switches to WebRTC, they are no longer using TUTK on those cams, so most V2’s and Pan Cams no longer use TUTK? And V3’s, WCO’s & VDB’s should also be switched off TUTK and be on WebRTC soon? I don’t claim to be an expert or have inside knowledge, but that’s what it sounds like from what I’m reading. Apparently they are now using Amazon Kinesis for their video streams (because it supports WebRTC via simple API’s.

So, WebRTC will soon mean the TUTK variable is irrelevant anyway, though it would’ve been nice to get some communication on the concern a few months ago.

1 Like