You keep using that word.

SpiderOak founder here... A few cryptographers have noticed SpiderOak's marketing term Zero Knowledge is inconsistent with the academic definition. Maybe it doesn't mean what we think it means[1]? SpiderOak was one of the first companies to use this phrase commercially and the need has only grown stronger. At the heart of the issue is the difficulty for end users to decipher the terms cloud vendors use to describe their security. Doing so would require discrimination between transport encryption, data encryption, meta data encryption, encryption at rest vs. in motion, and then most importantly evaluate key management and access. This vocabulary is foreign to most folks. Vendors often exploit the inaccessibility of these topics to make a series of statements that, while often factually correct individually, together create a false sense of privacy. SpiderOak launched a online backup product for Linux, Mac, and Windows in 2007. The competitors were companies like Xdrive, Mozy, Carbonite and SugarSync. Each claimed that customer data was fully encrypted. Even the most credible journalists writing for well funded publications with fact checking budgets were fooled and repeated these misleading claims to end users. [2] In 2009 when Dropbox launched, they made misleading claims about the encryption of customer files and their internal ability to access customer's data or provide that data to 3rd parties, leading to a well publicized FTC deceptive trade practices complaint. [3] The

Well, I'm not sure that I "misunderstand" "MVP," because, after the dust has settled, and the smoke has cleared, a significant percentage of what is out there, and carries the label "MVP," is duct-tape-and-baling-wire-last-checkin-five-seconds-before-ship dross. I know what I consider "MVP" to be, ideally , and that pretty much jives with your description. It's just that I don't think most folks actually do it. It's like "Agile," in that respect. As someone that practices high-Quality development, I am regularly laughed at and told that I'm "wasting my time," doing Quality coding. Words come to mean whatever their most common usage implies, so I think that both of these wonderful words now mean something other than what they used to mean. [this video]

The Arduino 1kHz busy-loop and ISR designs is not real-time or necessarily guaranteed latency. RTLinux or FreeRTOS are guaranteed-latency OS, that can reduce timing jitter. "Real-time" is another term hijacked by people that think it means the same thing. It was a disservice to students, but thankfully FPGA or Raspberry Pico io DMA with mcu parallelism can teach people to understand clock domain crossing. Part of the Arduino appeal, was convincing people the mcu and application SoC problem domains were the same. They are not, and never were... Hence the new Arduino board dual chip layout is twice as bad in some ways. Cheers =3 [this video] risc v -- a new hope, but 20 years too late stm32 -- a solid competitor to Microchip/AVR, but 14 years too late esp32 -- FreeRTOS with hardware flash paging can pose an issue, but at least it already doesn't need Arduino software lol