[HN Gopher] The S in IoT is for Security ___________________________________________________________________ The S in IoT is for Security Author : rauhl Score : 468 points Date : 2021-03-22 12:43 UTC (10 hours ago) (HTM) web link (puri.sm) (TXT) w3m dump (puri.sm) | edf13 wrote: | Isn't this just a vailed SEO/Content filled blog post/Ad for | puri.sm? | alpaca128 wrote: | I don't see a veil on a blog post where the author's name and | CEO position in the company is the first thing you see. | | Sure you can argue Purism won't exactly publish something that | doesn't agree with their marketing, but at the same time I | prefer seeing a blog post than some other product page on here. | And they're not the only one, in fact right now the very top | post on HN is a blog entry by Mozilla about a new feature in | their product. | KETpXDDzR wrote: | My way to deal with IoT devices: A virtual "guest" WiFi w/ AP | isolation using DD-WRT. Devices in there can access the Internet. | That's it. They can't see other devices in my local networks. | That makes me sleep better. | soheil wrote: | There doesn't have to be an S in it to be secured since the T is | for Trustworthiness. | hnedeotes wrote: | and the three "asses" in that stand for simply super secure. | soheil wrote: | I'm one person shouldn't that be singular? | z3ncyberpunk wrote: | Poignant way show show how there is no security in IoT | mixedmath wrote: | I think I'm missing a few major points. I wonder if someone here | might be able to clarify. | | 1. The real meat of this "pwning" was (it seems) a google search | to identify the WEB API endpoint. Then it turns out that sending | POST requests to this endpoint can turn the light on/off, change | its temperature, and change its brightness. | | 2. In order to turn a light on/off using the "found" api, it is | first necessary to connect to the lamp's network. So if I were | doing this on my own linux machine, which cannot as far as I can | tell connect to multiple wireless networks at the same time, my | script to change the settings on the light would include | disconnecting from my true wifi network, connecting to the lamp's | network, sending the signal to the lamp, disconnecting from the | lamp, and then reconnecting to my own network. Is that right? Is | this what the bash scripts and apps mentioned in the post are | doing? | | 3. If I lived in the apartment above the OP's (say), and I were | malicious, I could even now _also_ access the lamps ' networks | and, say, set their values to be whatever I wanted. And there is | simply no way of stopping this (S in IoT, after all). | Spivak wrote: | Yeah this is so far from pwning that it's hilarious to be | presented as such. This is literally authorized access. He | built an integration for his smart bulbs the same way Google | Home or HomeKit would access it but with some weird Wi-Fi | paranoia that actually made him less secure. | | The security model of pretty much all smart lighting "if you | can reach me on the network you're trusted" just like the | security of light switches "if you can reach the switch you can | flip it." | spongechameleon wrote: | I mean the alternative was installing the propietary app so I | would say this is still a big win. But also yes, any wifi | capable device in your home with no authorization is clearly | a disaster waiting to happen. | Spivak wrote: | I don't disagree that it's a huge improvement over some | proprietary app but I still don't think "using the light's | API as designed" counts as pwning it. | | It's the same API that openHAB or Home Assistant would | consume to control it. | shp0ngle wrote: | Yeah this article is mostly ranting disguised as something more | adolph wrote: | I thought it was mostly sales for "for PureOS and the Librem | 5" on "my Librem 5 phone as well as Librem Mini desktop" to | do something an alias to curl performs perfectly fine. | sdlion wrote: | One way to solve 3 and maybe 2 would be adding to the ecuation | an ESP32/8266 and use it as an access point for the lamps. Then | you might create any physical controls for the lamps or with | some network magic add it to your infrastructure through a | segmented network. I'm not sure if this can be done with an ESP | alone (hence "network magic") or you could just use a second | ESP connected to your private network and passthrough your | commands via a serial port to the Lamp's ESP AP. | | ESP32's are fairly cheap, easy to use and can even be | programmed through micropython. | porbelm wrote: | This is pretty much how I read it, but I thought maybe it's | worse: I would bet that when you connect to the lamp's network | _and set it up to connect to your network as you should_ the | lamp 's internal WiFi ceases to broadcast, and you'd need the | reset switch to enable setup again. | | What this guy seems to have found out is possibly (and how, I | don't know--the article is horribly lacking in detail) that the | lamp accepts API calls /when it is in hotspot mode for setup/ | as well as in HAZ_EXT_CONNECSHUN=1 mode | | So what I think is that /anyone/ close to the lamp can send the | API calls and affect it. Because the lamp is in perpetual setup | mode with its unsecured hotspot active... | | "A browser hitting that returned a page to connect the lamp to | local WiFi. That is a no-go, so maybe there is a web API..." he | said | | the dumbass | | e: Sorry, I misread your post on the lamp network part. I'll | leave this here but now you know I spotted it. My apologies. | gautamcgoel wrote: | Took me a moment to get the joke, pretty clever title. | drivinmecrazy wrote: | Can you believe Generac standby generators need you to download | an app and receive an activation code which no doubt you key into | the generator before it will work. I nearly got caught out with | this when we were looking to replace our cottage genny. We don't | have internet access how stupid a concept is this. Thankfully I | found out before completing the purchase so I bought a different | brand but I'm with this guy all the way. I'm not connecting my | lightbulbs, toaster or intelligent microflushing loo to anything | internet just to use the product. | beckingz wrote: | Good overview of how to hack a specific internet connected lamp | to avoid installing the manufacturer's app. | 1cvmask wrote: | This is a great article explaining the need for open standards | and non-proprietary approaches to IoT just like we have in the | digital world. Vendor lock-in is a real issue for security and | non-dependancy as well. | flyinghamster wrote: | Another problem: Even when the device is working as it should, | there needs to be a "lock" mode that says, "don't download new | firmware." Nothing like having your smoothly-functioning lighting | setup FUBARed by an unnecessary and buggy firmware update - | especially if you're far away from home when it happens. | astrea wrote: | What about the inverse where it was shipped with buggy software | or one with a massive security hole that now can't be patched | because it is "locked"? | grenoire wrote: | What if we built simpler systems that are less prone to | security issues, without the cpre assumption that we can | 'just patch it up' whenever after it's shipped off? | astrea wrote: | What if we were born without the need to consume or | generate matter? I think it's easy to generate idealistic | scenarios, but not so easy to implement them in reality. | There's a couple counter-pressures to your question. The | first being that the average consumer has come to expect | and demand a higher level of functionality out of even | simple devices. The next is that there's no monetary | incentive in creating the perfect system from the start, | especially when you can just use premade things. Finally, | hackers (whether they be nation-state actors or your | neighbor's bored teenager) are CONSTANTLY on the prowl for | vulnerabilities in all things connected to the internet. | With that in mind, it's not quite as easy to develop the | perfect, unhackable system. | sebastien_b wrote: | Pretty sure that title was coined by Steve Gibson on his Security | Now! podcast[1] (at least that's where I've first/only heard it). | | [1]https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-586.htm | monocasa wrote: | I've heard/said it before that point. | driverdan wrote: | That style joke predates IoT. "The [letter] in [acronym that | doesn't contain letter] stands for [punchline]" | ullevaal wrote: | > Pretty sure that title was coined by Steve Gibson on his | Security Now! podcast | | In your source he explicitly says he does not know who the | originator is. | | > I don't know who the originator was because I saw it coming | from several different sources over the past week. But I just | love this. I mean, I liked the acronym IDIOT, I-D-I-O-T, which | of course stands for I Don't Internet of Things. But I think | even better is this slogan: "The 'S' in IOT Is for Security." | sebastien_b wrote: | Good point - I missed that. | lrvick wrote: | This is why I just flash ESPHome firmware on all all the IoT | stuff I buy to make them useful, trusted, and easily updated | elements of my home. | | I even run tuya-convert to switch over my dozens of light bulbs. | | Anything that can't run open firmware I control doesn't get to | live on my internal LAN. | formercoder wrote: | I'd encourage anyone who enjoys these projects to check out Home | Assistant. It's an incredible open source project with support | for countless devices. | alpaca128 wrote: | The U in Smart (devices) stands for user-friendly. | | We need an app to control a stupid lamp but at the same time are | expected to buy a "smart home" system so that we don't have to | pull the phone out of the pocket. Originally smartwatches were | marketed for the same purpose, but I guess now there's also the | severe risk of having both hands unavailable at the moment so we | need to be able to delay the system update via voice command. Of | course with tracking so they can "improve the user experience", | and the occasional personalised ad. | | Meanwhile I'm wondering how people got convinced this is better | than just pressing a physical button, but then I remember even | $500+ appliances nowadays are built with such cheap buttons that | after a few years I'm forced to learn where to smack the fist on | the front cover so they work again for a few minutes. | melomal wrote: | > I'm wondering how people got convinced | | FOMO and PR. I have friends that have plenty of money and read | the latest reviews/gadget magazines. They assume whatever is in | the recommended area you should be buying it or your neighbours | will have it first. | outadoc wrote: | If you want to, you can turn it into a Home Assistant plugin (or | even add it to the core). It's a great project that aims to | provide this kind of interface for all kinds of "smart" devices | in a user-friendly way. | | https://github.com/home-assistant/ | hirundo wrote: | I have found Home Assistant to be very user unfriendly and | difficult to use. I have about $1000 in switches that are among | the most popular Z-Wave devices on the market that I have not | been able to get working, as well as other devices. I'm | admittedly clueless with hardware, but I build software for a | living. The few things that do work required hours of | spelunking on forums into incomprehensible details of | configuration. It's not a system I'd recommend to a typical | consumer. | BrandoElFollito wrote: | HA is not the easiest system to get into, but once you are | there is is fantastic. | | It is a state machine that I also use for some other | software, not to mention that it has tons of integrations. | | I use Zigbee and it took me 10 minutes to have it | successfully running (via MQTT autodiscovery, or via the ZHE | module (which I tested byt keep with MQTT)). | | It certianly is not something would suggest to my parents, | but someone who is technical (especially with software, and | especially-especially with Python) it is not difficult. | | The main issue is how the docs are organized, it takes quite | sometime to understand the way the whole thig works. After | that it is downhill. | | Finally there is a strong move to the UI where many things | become click-n-go. | connorproctor wrote: | How long ago did you try it? | | I had a similar experience with Home Assistant a couple years | ago, but they've made a ton of progress on UX recently. I | still wouldn't recommend for a typical consumer, but should | be easy for someone building their own apps. | outadoc wrote: | Agreed! It was really terrible, it's much better now - at | least you don't need to fiddle with YAML anymore for _most_ | things. There 's still a ways to go, but for the audience | reading this, it should be accessible. | hirundo wrote: | Maybe two and half years. I'll give it another try, thanks. | xyzzy21 wrote: | As in the S is missing! :-) | thitcanh wrote: | thatsthejoke.jpg | steve_gh wrote: | IoT runs across a range of use cases and connections. There is a | lot of emphasis on WiFi IoT applications, but this makes things | hard in other places. | | I'm working on various IoT sensor products that require a | cellular connection - NB-IoT is preferred for this use case due | to the good penetration characteristics. But the problem is that | UDP is recommended as the NB-IoT transport layer due to the | problem with TCP ack timeouts due to NB-IoT latency. That means | that you are practically reduced to MQTT-SN as a data protocol, | which in turn means you lose TLS. | | There are partial solutions - we whitelist our MQTT data sources | (i.e. only the Cellular provider's NB-IoT gateway), and we can | verify and whitelist the IDs of all connected devices). But it is | a partial and imperfect solution. | | Security is hard... | ridaj wrote: | Good point by the author, but iiuc neighbors can just walk up and | control the lamp too if operating on the lamp's presumably open | wifi? | | Missing from the home IoT security works is a decentralized auth | infrastructure story. I don't fully subscribe to the notion that | people do this because they want to monetize... That may be the | case sometimes but here I tend to believe you get to this kind of | solution if you want something that is usable by average | consumers and has some form of auth. | cute_boi wrote: | and P in IOT is for privacy lol. | blablabla123 wrote: | Software needs to be updated though, certificates need to be | checked and all that. That's only possible with Internet - unless | you run your own CA, Package Mirror on the local network. That | said, there is also a trade off between having a having ports | open for REST vs. having a gateway (whether that's on the local | network or on the Internet). Also it's probably a difference | whether one plans to update the installed system every now and | then or whether that should be fully automated... | denysvitali wrote: | This is true, but honestly I have almost never seen an IoT | device getting updated for security reasons - instead they seem | to update things OTA to just add more crap to it. | | In any case, a CA lasts ~20-30 years. Hopefully the IoT device | will be dead by then | KETpXDDzR wrote: | One can't spell "idiot" without "i", "o", "t". | wojciii wrote: | Ok.. so he needs to scan for an unique AP first and then send the | command to the device on this network. Is the phone capable being | connected to multiple 2.4 networks or does controlling the light | mean having to first scan and the connect to a network? This | approach sounds slooow. | mafro wrote: | I imagine it's mentioned elsewhere in this commentary, but the | key point I think this chap missed was not connecting to a wifi | network under his control. | | "A browser hitting that returned a page to connect the lamp to | local WiFi. That is a no-go ..." | | You can buy prosumer routers nowadays for $99 USD which enable | one to setup different subnets and VLANS such that a device is | accessible on the network but unable to access the internet. | | I'm not afraid of IoT like some other tinfoil types commenting | here - just make sure they can't call home (I'm looking at you | Samsung TV) | danhor wrote: | Many of these WiFi-LED lamps contain esp8266 devices, which have | a lot of open source alternative firmware available, like | esphome[0] or tasmota[1]. You can reflash them by opening them & | connecting a cheap (1$) usb-to-tty adapter. | | If that isn't an option (for reasons like not wanting to | permanently damage them or being afraid of electrical shocks) a | lot of them come with tuya firmware, which you can (still) often | exploit and convert with TUYA-CONVERT [2]. | | I found the Tasmota Device Templates Repository[3] to be a really | valuable resource, although I've been using zigbee devices for | lightbulbs. | | [0]https://esphome.io/ | | [1]https://github.com/arendst/Tasmota | | [2]https://github.com/ct-Open-Source/tuya-convert | | [3]https://templates.blakadder.com/index.html | kissgyorgy wrote: | Shameless plug: We are working on the solution! Our motto is | actually "Put the S into IoT" :D by working with security | researchers on an automated tool which can scan and find | vulnerabilities in all kinds of IoT firmwares. Check it out: | https://www.iot-inspector.com/ | | Our old UI is "not very nice", but we already have a GraphQL API | and pretty UI very soon. | | If you are a security researcher or IoT shop, you should contact | us! | _joel wrote: | Is there a curated list of IoT devices from a security | perspective? Like is the firmware flashable with open code, how | chatty is the device/callhome, update frequency (if any) etc? | schnable wrote: | > A brief search returned the web API URL path that returns a | JSON structure | | A brief search of what? | johanbcn wrote: | Yeah, I'm wondering the same, since he refused to use the app | at all, so no sniffing packets either. | durnygbur wrote: | of lamp endpoints I presume! | codazoda wrote: | Yeah, I assumed he was vague here because hacking your own | device, or writing about how to hack it, might be against the | law in some jurisdictions. | sigmonsays wrote: | i took it as a google search, which made me laugh at how much I | read before i got to the point. I enjoyed reading this post | actually but there is very little meat to what actually | happened. | crescentfresh wrote: | Agreed, talking about how he discovered this API is what I | would have wanted to read. He said the only opened port was | 8xxx and it was a dead-end, so what port was this API running | on then? How did he discover it without sniffing packets from | the app? various, etc | bellyfullofbac wrote: | And if the browser "404'd", that means there's actually a | web server listening (different to connection refused/timed | out error messages). So was it a 404 or something else but | you don't understand HTTP so you just called it 404? | | From the writing my impression is this is a guy flexing his | "I know tech" muscles. Calling it "pwn"? Talking about his | Librem phone/desktop? Well done 1337 hacker! /s | adolph wrote: | Put signature and stated use case appears to match the | Elgato Key Lights API. | | https://www.elgato.com/en/key-light | | https://www.npmjs.com/package/elgato-light-api | djcooley wrote: | Chipset developers like Silicon Labs* are developing very | advanced but approachable security capabilities into their latest | products (secure boot, secure debug, physical protection (DPA | countermeasure, anti-tamper), key management, key storage, crypto | engine, etc.)*. | | The tools are there now to address this, and this should go a | long way toward actually securing the application, the data, the | IP, and overall simplify lifecycle management. | | * - disclaimer, I am an employee * - | https://www.silabs.com/security | tpolzer wrote: | The issue here isn't hardware capabilities, it's that vendors | like to make their gadgets centrally connected for convenience | and analytics and then on top often don't care about hygiene | (e.g. no crypto at all). | temac wrote: | Would it only allow for the lamp to be "secure" in the sense | that the owner would not be able to take back control anymore? | If that's the case, that's a "solution" worse than the problem, | that's even unethical as hell given this will short/medium term | accelerate the ecological nightmare. | ls65536 wrote: | Unfortunately I've often found these capabilities end up being | used against users as much as, if not vastly more than, they | are used in their favour. | | For example, secure boot and anti-tamper measures are often | used to lock out users from being able to examine or modify | equipment and software for their own benefit. Sure, these | measures can be argued as ways to "protect" the user from | themselves (preventing inadvertent/unsupported changes of | hardware causing malfunction, or preventing the installation of | malware, and so on), but to rob the users of their agency to | decide what's best for themselves in these circumstances is | fundamentally disrespectful. | | Nonetheless, I hope your employer is in a position to be part | of a movement to buck the trend here, but based on what I've | seen in the industry over the years, I've learned to be very | skeptical whenever I hear of such "security" capabilities being | thrown around as universally beneficial for everyone. | TheRealDunkirk wrote: | I don't care how "secure" one can make an internet-connected | lamp. I don't want or need a lamp to connect to the internet to | change its operating conditions. The problem is that we, as a | society, are being so suckered by cheap consumer devices that | it's becoming difficult to even FIND NON-connected devices in | some categories. Like the lamp in the article, I'm willing to | bet that he looked for something with purely physical controls, | and couldn't find one in a comparable price point. I honestly | don't get it. I can't fathom what some company could possibly | be doing with my usage data from some internet-connected LAMP, | or why they would go about designing all the infrastructure to | make it work. It would be orders of magnitude more easy to just | put some buttons on the side of the unit. At this point, I | guess someone out there thinks, "Oh, neat!" but this sort of | situation is paving the way for it to be impossible to buy ANY | consumer electronic device that doesn't phone home in the very | near future. | godot wrote: | Just out of curiosity, if that web API request is made while | connected to the lamp via its WiFi access point, I am guessing | that means whenever they wanted to control the lamp using this | custom app, they'd have to make their phone disconnect from the | main WiFi, reconnect to lamp WiFi, do actions, then reconnect | back to main WiFi (I suppose that could all be automated within | the custom app) Wish the lamp would just put that control as a | knob on the lamp.. | DarkCrusader2 wrote: | One thing I haven't seen mention much with these "smart" devices | is how inconvenient lack of physical buttons is. Instead of just | reaching over and adjust the volume/brightness whatever, I now | have to unlock the phone, find the app and do some gestures to | achieve same results, all of which now requires some mental | bandwidth for these banal tasks. | Cthulhu_ wrote: | I have a few 'smart' things in my house. One is my living room | mood lights, but that's a combination of a simple RF plug relay | switch on the one hand, and an ikea (also RF?) spot system, no | internet required. | | The other thing is my thermostat, where it's mainly convenience | to control it remotely via my phone. I'm not comfortable with | it, it has a dongle directly in my router giving the company | behind it access to it and its data. I mean the charts are | convenient, but I think the whole thing could be made offline | as well. Anyway, that one has a simple screen (LED light | matrix?) and touch buttons so anyone can adjust the temperature | until the next time block, making just the unit without the app | as useful as the old dial thermostat it replaced. | | Final 'smart' thing I have is my wifi router, which I can | manage via my phone; a big improvement over the old | router/modem which had a very 2000's looking web interface. | mason55 wrote: | That's just bad smart home planning. Any smart home device | should work on top of existing physical control. Don't buy | smart bulbs that require you to use your phone or voice to | control them. Instead, buy smart switches that work just like | normal wall switches but also give you smart home/automation | possibilities (and work perfectly fine for guests or if the | whole smart home system is down). | | Don't buy some garage opener that requires internet access to | control your garage, hook a smart relay into the existing | garage opener. | | Make sure there's a physical remote for your TV or sound system | in addition to phone control. You can buy third party remotes | just for this purpose. | | Etc., etc., etc. | | Pretty much any smart home project can be done in a way that | keeps all physical control in place. Yes, it costs a little | more and requires a little more work, but it's the only | reasonable solution. | gpanders wrote: | This is exactly right. If you set out with some requirements | such as 1) everything must be able to still work without | internet access and 2) it must be simple enough that my | mom/grandma/whatever can still use it, then you can still | benefit from the convenience of these devices without all the | downsides. | | This is what I do. I insist that any "smart" whatever be | strictly additive; that is, it must only _add_ functionality | but not remove anything. I will never buy a product that | can't be controlled physically or that requires Internet | access. The net result is pretty great! | mason55 wrote: | Yup. With this approach the only thing that goes wrong is | you start to rely on some of the automations and it's a bit | annoying if one stops working for some reason. | rootusrootus wrote: | 100% agree, this is how I approach all of my home automation | toys. Periodically I disconnect my HA server and then the | Internet connection just to verify that the fallback position | for my house that everything still works manually just like | you expect. | 8note wrote: | This looks very dependent on whether you're renting or | owning. | | If I'm renting a place, swapping out the light bulbs is | feasible, swapping out the light switches is not | mason55 wrote: | Sure, lots of reasons you can't create the most very | optimal experience. But even if you can't swap out the | switches in your rental there are other options if you keep | "physical first" in mind. There are even smart switches | made to stick over a regular light switch so you can keep | people from turning it off (and this deactivating the smart | bulb) and still have a physical switch, but it's actually | controlling a smart light. | | Starting with a hard requirement of physical control still | leaves lots of things on the table. | hunter2_ wrote: | When your hands are occupied by cooking or some such, it's nice | to bark orders at a voice assistant for timers, lighting | adjustments, adding to the shopping list, etc. | _Microft wrote: | I think the parent commenter was not annoyed by the fact that | they _could use an app_ but that they _have to_. | mattwad wrote: | He's got a point. My smart lights are the only reason I | even own a Google Home assistant. The rest of the features | are not very important to me. | _peeley wrote: | I don't really mind having less buttons to accidentally push on | my phone or other devices that go in my pocket, but I can't | stand this when it comes to car dashboard interfaces. | Thankfully I still drive a car from before this trend but in | newer cars where e.g. changing the radio station requires | fiddling with a touch screen. With physical buttons or knobs I | can do this almost unconsciously, but with a touch screen I | have to take my eyes off the road to even see what I'm poking | on the screen. | | With this kind of stuff, it always makes me wonder why it's | there in the first place. Surely there's not much demand for | touch screens in cars, and it must be more expensive to produce | than analog buttons and knobs. Why has it become so ubiquitous? | ktpsns wrote: | I absolutely second this. "IoT" is a keyword to furnish up | cheap hardware where the price of physical switches would have | harmed the profit margin too much. This is not really ironic: | Physical switches (with a price of probably 0,2 USD per | component) are more expensive then SoC having Wifi implemented. | Also it's cheaper to hire software-only developers to do as | little hardware engineering as possible. It's all about cutting | the price per unit down. | soheil wrote: | It probably costs more to add physical knobs/switches. They | will end up taking more space/require more material to | manufacture than the IoT device itself. | cube2222 wrote: | This problem will depend on the vendors you buy your products | from. | | Having a few brands of smart home devices which are all | compatible with homekit, I just swipe down on my lockscreen and | have all of them as shortcuts in the single native interface or | use my watch to operate them with voice. | | Android seems to have the Google Home app for this exact same | reason, but I have no idea how well that works. | mrb wrote: | Usually the factory default WiFi network that IoT devices create | during setup is open. No password required. It seems the author | left the device in that state when he reverse-engineered the API. | So anyone in the vicinity of the network can connect to his lamp | and control it. I wouldn't call this "secure." | DannyB2 wrote: | The SH in SHIoT is for Security Hardened IoT. | BrandoElFollito wrote: | Well, hacking such devices gets immediately easier when you can | google the API endpoint, and that endpoint is REST (or REST- | like). | | I have a wifi radio (Ocean) and I tried several times to hack it | so that I can programmatically start and configure it but failed | every time because the whole system is completely closed and non | standard. | | I would love to buy a radio that has an API (actually I would buy | three right away) | ShakataGaNai wrote: | Ah yes. Elgato Key Lights. | | Let's be thankful that they are, in fact, using ESP32 for a | central control chip and use a very simple REST protocol. It | could be a lot worse, a lot more proprietary. | | These are simple devices, but expensive as far as lights go. You | can very easily get dumb lights that have only physical controls. | For a lot cheaper too. | throw080700 wrote: | The open KNX Standard seems to be the answer to IoT's woes. But | nobody seems to have heard of it. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KNX_(standard) | | This classic talk - Learn how to control every room at a luxury | hotel remotely (2015) [has eng subtitles]: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX-O4XuCW1Y | markild wrote: | Also Zigbee and Z-Wave. | throw080700 wrote: | Zigbee got problems with non-free licensing. Z-Wave seems | open, is it completely open? | pantalaimon wrote: | Zigbee is IEEE 802.15.4, you can also run 6LoWPAN on top | instead of the Zigbee stack. | danhor wrote: | Z-Wave is very closed, afaik only a few chips are available | and need to be licensed. Compared to that Zigbee seems to | be much more open. | throw080700 wrote: | Ok. The top thread of this HN post about Zigbee not being | that open: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21825822 | motohagiography wrote: | The S in IoT should be for "Stop buying stupid disposable junk." | I can't listen to anyone complain about climate change while they | fill their homes with cheap consumer electronics from globalized | supply chains that spy on them. | | I also can't imagine letting an internet connected anything in my | home, and I keep all internet electronics in one room. Sure, | other people can live in a surveillance zoo, but I prefer to keep | mine limited. | | If it has a circuit, stow it. | kgin wrote: | Say what you will about Apple's Homekit but every Homekit | device can be set up with local-only control. | hackeraccount wrote: | Check out Home Assistant and mqtt. If motivated you can | actually go pretty far with just on-prem. If home automation | floats your boat that is. I'm thinking maybe it's not just the | surveillance part that you don't care for but that the whole | thing does nothing for you. Which is cool. | crazypython wrote: | I can't imagine letting non-free software- the proprietor can | modify it, but I can't, and under the control of someone else- | hexing a piece of property I have bought. It's my property, yet | it's cursed by the proprietor. | simias wrote: | I would be willing to compromise if at least there was a | widely adopted set of standard protocols that I could use to | interface these devices with my own favourite controller. | | Instead it's a mish-mash of bespoke proprietary smartphone | apps that have terrible security and privacy practices. | pwinnski wrote: | The Venn diagram of IoT devices with reasonable default | security and IoT devices that are not proprietary does not | overlap at all. | | Apple makes IoT devices with reasonable default security, but | they're also as proprietary as proprietary gets. | jrm4 wrote: | For better or worse -- "Buying stupid disposable junk" the | absolute central driving force and core of this economy and | perhaps our culture and society. I'm with you on the idea, but | there's a LOT of work to do... | pengaru wrote: | > I also can't imagine letting an internet connected anything | in my home, and I keep all internet electronics in one room. | Sure, other people can live in a surveillance zoo, but I prefer | to keep mine limited. | | Out of curiosity, how often is your smartphone resting on a | surface within reach @home? | motohagiography wrote: | Alerts have been 95%+ off for years. Sometimes it's nearby, | but it doesn't go to the 2nd floor where bedrooms are. I | don't do social media or slack either. | | It's just a way of living where you don't give other people a | free 24h real time option on your attention. | pengaru wrote: | Notifications/alerts have zero bearing on surveillance | capabilities. | motohagiography wrote: | Keeping your phone on you or at your side to respond to | notifications and alerts means you are generating | surveillance data the whole time via the accelerometer, | mic, camera lighting changes, reachable bluetooth | devices, signal changes, wifi availability, and every | other onboard sensor. | | Having alerts off means you relate to the device | differently. Would be curious what you suppose I | misunderstand about surveillance and security though. | Dylan16807 wrote: | > The S in IoT should be for "Stop buying stupid disposable | junk." | | The joke is that there is no S, which means you're saying we | _shouldn 't_ stop buying. | fortran77 wrote: | > I can't listen to anyone complain about climate change while | they fill their homes with cheap consumer electronics from | globalized supply chains that spy on them. | | Your hearing must be better than mine! I didn't hear Todd | Weaver, the author of this blogpost, complain about climate | change. | viraptor wrote: | There's a lot of IoT stuff which doesn't reach out to the | internet. You can also reflash some commercial solutions with | open firmware. Also, there's quite a few local only solutions | using ZigBee / zwave that you can manage from Home Assistant. | prower wrote: | Or you could just flip the switch with your actual thumbs. | | There's a discussion to be had to on placing every basic | action on our daily lives on a finicky smartphone. | wccrawford wrote: | There are lights in our home that are simply hard to get | to, especially in certain cirumstances. I could probably | rig up a physical switch with some extension cords | (potentially dangerous) or rewire the house (expensive and | messy) or I could use a wifi bulb or switch. | | And once that was the case, it just made sense to have | others for convenience, too. For instance, we can turn off | almost every regularly-used light at the same time now when | we go to bed. The remaining ones are lights we only turn on | for a short time anyhow, so they don't get left on. | tehlike wrote: | Automation is what you are missing. | | I love that my light turns on in the hallway when sun sets. | Or the lock locks/unlocks as I leave or approach the house. | Or that I can see my camera over vpn. | tails4e wrote: | I agree, but what I dont like is how to function a device | needs Internet connectivity. Our smart vaccum cannot work | with its app unless its connected to thr Internet. The | nice thing is we can see its progress on mobile data, | etc, but its a little ott for a 3rd party server to be | involved. I'd prefer it to be local only. | _carbyau_ wrote: | I don't know of an off-the-shelf one you could buy. | | For the tinkerers, https://dontvacuum.me/ and | dustcloud/dustbuilder as search terms. | | I have a roborock(Xiaomi sub-corporate brand) firmware | flashed to no longer need internet, hosts "the database" | on itself which is great for latency/responsiveness, | provides web page functionality so you can use it from | your phone, computer etc. | | I quite like it. | prower wrote: | I totally understand it for security, as ironic as it is | (given the topic). For everything else though, I feel | like there's a "honeymoon" effect in place, where the | theoretical and immediate convenience overshadow the | implications. | | To make a silly comparison, it's like buying digital | videogames on a console instead of their physical | versions, knowing you're trading immediate convenicence | while giving away control, ownership and future | availability. | | I would have much less problems processing IoT if the "I" | was scrapped and optional by default. | | I guess I have an hard time understanding people relying | on the internet at all. | mason55 wrote: | In addition to what the other reply said about going | local-only using Zwave/Zigbee, the other key is that home | automation should be "in addition to" not "instead of." | | Want to control your lights remotely or automate them? | Use an in-wall smart switch. They still work as physical | switches even if all your automation/smart home stuff is | down. Guests don't need to know anything about the smart | home, they can just operate them like regular switches. | You get smarts "in addition to" the normal light | operation that everyone in the world understands. | | Smart garage? Hook into a regular, tried and true garage | opener using some kind of remotely controllable relay. | The button on the wall still works, the opener in your | car still works, but you can have smarts in addition to | all that. | | Replacing regular bulbs with smart bulbs and then | requiring a phone or internet connected voice device | "instead of" a normal wall switch is insanity. | tehlike wrote: | Correct. Most people like myself go with no cloud | versions of smart home gear. And use vpn to have a lot | more control. | | A camera that works only locally (dafang hacks + wyze), | home assistant, zigbee/zwave for example. | jabroni_salad wrote: | That's definitely a popular stance in the community of | people who care enough to join the home automation and | general electronics community, but if 'most people' is a | factor, Amazon's best sellers are all "works with alexa" | and "no hub required", and all of those products will | surely die when their cloud tenancy is turned off. | titzer wrote: | Other people feel differently. | | I personally hate living in a haunted world which is | filled with devices watching me, ready to pounce and fill | me with delight at their fulfilling my every desire. It's | absolute exhausting and downright terrifying when you | think through the hell some motivated hacker (or hater) | could subject you to. | | Is it unthinkable that all this stuff will turn on you | one day? What if you become infamous for crossing the | wrong person and a viral video sends the firehouse of | political hatred from one group or another your way? | "Swatting" is a thing. Just wait until people start | hacking your house. They could burn it down while you are | away by just turning on your oven maybe! | | Me? I'd like my bricks, locks, doors, lights, and life to | stay dumb. | TheCapn wrote: | I like not having to get up and walk across my house to | reset the internet because my ISPs modem is garbage and | locks up under heavy load. | | I like being able to schedule my plant's grow lights to | get the appropriate amount of light regardless of season | and being able to keep that schedule even when i'm not | home | | I like knowing that I left my garage door wide open as I | drove away because I forgot to look back over my shoulder | to see that the button in my car didn't get picked up. | | I like being able to unlock the door for my neighbor to | let my dogs out if I end up stranded at work longer than | I had intended to when I left that morning. | | I like that my garage camera turns on and takes shots of | whoever is entering though the door when its opened. | | I like that my system texts me if a door/window is opened | after 10pm (if its me? no biggy. If its an intruder? BIG | HELP) | | I like that these devices are on a segregated VLAN with | firewalling protecting my personal computers/NAS | | --- | | There's a lot of negativity to be said about smart | devices, but you can't focus solely on the negativity | while ignoring the advantages. | | There's also a level of risk and comfort each individual | should be willing to set for themselves. I don't 100% | trust my garage automation, that's why I have monitored | security on my house. I'm not willing to automate devices | that can harm my house (oven as your example) but I _am_ | willing to monitor their power state (is the oven on?) | | This isn't all or nothing in the end. | whydoyoucare wrote: | Your dual-edged sword is a valid argument, but one can | only set the level of risk and comfort iff he/she is | aware of the risks in the first place. Look at how busy | the Best Buy "Geek Squad" is setting up TVs' and helping | new owners with use of their smart remote! :-) | barneygale wrote: | I'd go further: smart devices are largely a status | symbol. You're advertising to your guests that your | concerns are those of convenience and luxury, to the | point where you won't even use a light switch. That alone | is pretty gross before you add in the implicit support | for the megacorps. | tehlike wrote: | That's a little too cynical. | | I use smart home stuff, because: 1. I use it as security | device (i have tons of zigbee sensors for motion, and | contact). 2. I forget about simple things, all the time. | I forget to lock my door, i forget to get my keys etc. | All of this is taken care for me in case i forget. I | haven't hooked up my garage door yet, but my kid (1 yo) | likes to find the remote and press it mindlessly, and i | really don't want to leave it open. 3. I like the | convenience in general. | | If you come to my house, it's definitely not something | you'd say a "status symbol". It's only expensive because | it's in bay area, otherwise it's a mediocre house. | | I have been a programmer for as long as i remember, and | these things excite me, that's another aspect. | yusefnapora wrote: | "Ghastly," continued Marvin, "it all is. Absolutely | ghastly. Just don't even talk about it. Look at this | door," he said, stepping through it. The irony circuits | cut into his voice modulator as he mimicked the style of | the sales brochure. "All the doors in this spaceship have | a cheerful and sunny disposition. It is their pleasure to | open for you, and their satisfaction to close again with | the knowledge of a job well done." - Douglas Adams, The | Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy | | People just can't get enough of Alexa and her Genuine | People Personality! | kps wrote: | The door refused to open. It said, "Five cents, please." | | He searched his pockets. No more coins; nothing. "I'll | pay you tomorrow," he told the door. Again he tried the | knob. Again it remained locked tight. "What I pay you," | he informed it, "is in the nature of a gratuity; I don't | have to pay you." | | "I think otherwise," the door said. "Look in the purchase | contract you signed when you bought this conapt." | | In his desk drawer he found the contract; since signing | it he had found it necessary to refer to the document | many times. Sure enough; payment to his door for opening | and shutting constituted a mandatory fee. Not a tip. | | "You discover I'm right," the door said. It sounded smug. | | -- _Ubik_ , Philip K Dick, 1969 | wl wrote: | There's value in automation across different devices. Just | a silly example: I've got a CO2 monitor in my office. If | the level goes above a certain threshold, it triggers a fan | and changes the color of an LED light strip to alert me. | filleokus wrote: | Slightly OT: But what sensor are you using? I've been on | the lookout for one for years but always decided they've | been too expensive. But now working from home I think | it's time to finally get one. | wl wrote: | I'm using the Kaiterra Laser Egg+ CO2. | jxcl wrote: | I was looking at this sensor available from Adafruit (and | others): https://www.adafruit.com/product/4867 | | Seems like a reasonable price for a true CO2 sensor. | smolder wrote: | Automation is great. What's nice is the thing you | described can also be implemented extremely cheaply | without any fancy logic or network connectivity, and then | it's just a Thing, not an IoT thing. | monsieurbanana wrote: | ... Are you really using iot for a co2 sensor of all | things? It's one thing if your smart toaster fails to | start when your car enters the garage, it's another when | a device to save your life decides to do an npm update at | the wrong time and you go to sleep. For good. | wbradmoore wrote: | are you thinking of CO? | adrianN wrote: | CO2 is pretty safe because your body has a built in | sensor. | Filligree wrote: | This is probably to keep CO2 below 500/600 ppm, not a | safety device. | wl wrote: | Sitting in an increasingly concentrated puddle of my own | CO2 when I close the door of my small home office is not | a life safety issue. It just seems to affect my cognitive | performance at some point. If there were CO2 tanks or | combustion in play, I'd be using a proper industrial CO2 | alarm. | viraptor wrote: | There are some good use cases for connected devices. Some | are just gimmicks, but there's no point in being smug and | discounting all of them. | GuB-42 wrote: | You probably mean home automation. IoT is connected to the | internet by definition. | | Home automation is a mess, IoT or not. There are standards | like KNX, but the problem is the same as it was 30 years ago | when the idea of home automation arose: manufacturers want | captive markets and can't agree on a single standard. As a | result, I can't buy any A/C unit, rolling shutter, light | fixture and thermostat and just connect them to my home | network, the selection of "smart" appliances is actually very | limited. | | I mean, home installation is thought out on the scale of | decades, because renovation is a pain. People want something | simple and reliable, that is the reason why some taps, | switches, sockets, etc... are 10 times more expensive than | others while looking the same and people still buy them. It | is the complete opposite from what Silicon Valley is pushing. | Qwertious wrote: | >but the problem is the same as it was 30 years ago when | the idea of home automation arose: manufacturers want | captive markets and can't agree on a single standard. | | I think the "solution" to this is some sort of open | hardware system, where instead of someone manufacturing and | selling for a profit, the design includes a standard set of | parts you order, and then there's a very simple assembly, | Ikea-style. | chrisBob wrote: | I think the I in IoT is really for Internet, so I am not sure | if it counts if it is local only. | NegativeLatency wrote: | Intranet? | Mordisquitos wrote: | Surely it would be Intranet _S_ of Things. | tehlike wrote: | Vpn | unethical_ban wrote: | Literally yes, but come on. "connected home" and IoT are so | close in use case, and _because_ most connected home things | are Internet-only, let's not pick at terminology too much. | | I would love to have a connected home that did not require | _any_ external connectivity or web accounts. Why did I need | to login with my Google account and enable location | services to set up a Chromecast Audio? | 8note wrote: | I imagine it enables Google to enforce location based | licensing for where you can listen to certain songs at a | given price point. | | Listening to a song in the forest is free, listening to | it in a bustling street costs 10C/ per play because | you're performing it to people walking by | baxtr wrote: | I use an old Philips TV from 10 yrs ago. It works fine, has | HDMI and all that. No WiFi and other shit of course. | | I am totally worried about the day it will break down. | devoutsalsa wrote: | The thing that drives me bonkers about "smart" TVs is how | slow they can be. Cheap processor + lots of software to | compute = sluggish user experience. It's not not only is it | spying on me, it's letting me know that it cares more about | making me wait to spy on me before adjusting the frikkin' | volume. | gambiting wrote: | Like most other things, it's the good old "you get what you | pay for". I got the LG CX OLED few months ago and that | thing is lightning fast. Starts up nearly instantly, apps | switch without any delay....I have no problems with it | being "smart". Compared to my old Sony Bravia which | literally took a minute to even start up, urgh. | 8note wrote: | Now you have to pay more for features that used to come | standard, in addition to making tv ownership ad | supported. | | Nobody had a lighting fast or slow RF remote, the volume | just went up and down when you clicked the button (after | getting it pointed in the right direction) | xvector wrote: | Really? That's strange, because I don't remember my old | TV supporting AirPlay. I also don't remember ever seeing | ads on my LG. | cute_boi wrote: | "Smart" is just a marketing buzzwords. These days due to | this smart tv thing I can't find any decent dumb TV. | | Their is nothing smart in "Smart TV" they all should be | labeled "Scam TV". | meowster wrote: | Sceptre makes dumb 4K TVs up to 75". | sickofparadox wrote: | https://www.sceptre.com/ makes dumb, consumer TVs. As far as | I can tell they are basically the only brand doing it. | AdmiralAsshat wrote: | Are they _good_ , though? I, too, want a "dumb" TV, but I | still want high color accuracy, refresh rate, viewing | angles, etc. I don't necessarily want a Hotel/Office | Waiting Room TV. | | Also, taking a look at the site, and not a single 4K UHD TV | is in stock at the moment. Yikes! | ed312 wrote: | Can't vouch for the TVs, but I owned one of their 1080P | monitors in the last 2000s/early 2010s. Upper-middle | quality, very basic OSD, great customer service. Used the | monitor for ~7 years before upgrading to a 4k, sold it | still working with original cables & box. | meowster wrote: | Walmart has better stock of Sceptre TVs last time I | checked. Unfortunately they only make dumb 4K TVs up to | 75" | | (I was looking for 85", so I just unplugged the WiFi | module in the TV I bought before I turned it on the first | time.) | hackeraccount wrote: | This. All I want out of a T.V. is a dumb monitor. If I want | "smart" I'll just plug something in - that's why a TV has | HDMI ports. Instead you get something you can't replace, | can't fix and can't get rid of. | dmarlow wrote: | Same here. I have a plasma LG that I absolutely love. It has | an amazing picture, but it's heavier than wet sand. | | My friend recently got a new TV and I was appalled at the | controls, picture (soap opera effect), "smart features" (how | it instantly goes into this app like experience that you | can't ever get out of). So many things bother me about modern | TVs. If my TV ever dies, I don't know what I'll do. | loloquwowndueo wrote: | Replace with a projector :) you don't watch OTA channels, | do you? So any other media source should be hookable to a | projector. Sure you need a dark room to watch stuff, but | that's a plus as it'll induce you to watch less tv ;) | | Also - the soap opera thing can be turned off in decent | newer TVs and as discussed in other HN threads you can just | deny the TV an internet connection so it behaves dumbly. | You might still need to contend with clunky UI but really - | just select your video source and start watching, so the | pain is minimal. | throwaway889900 wrote: | I got myself a nice chunky laser projector with more than | enough lumen output to overpower the sun. In fact I loved | it so much I got a second one for basically the same | price. Sure it's not 4K, but I get the screen size. | dmarlow wrote: | I wouldn't be surprised that by the time I buy a | projector, they're all "smart". | Filligree wrote: | I replaced mine with a computer monitor. It's a bit more | expensive, but that's the price of not being spied on. | hatch_q wrote: | Soon all 'smart' TVs will just come with 5G connection. | Will make it much harder (if even possible) to deny them | internet connection. | fixIt83 wrote: | I bought a guitar, TV went unused, sold it, less gadget | worry. Bought more guitars! | | I've dramatically slashed my personal gadget footprint. | Phone, watch cause I like the exercise data, a Linux box I | barely touch, old iPad for movies and video chat. | | I pickup the guitar rather than sit at the TV or computer. | Learning an instrument connects both sides of the brain like | no other skills based activity. | | No ads, acoustic road trips easy enough, no worry about | charging, smart speakers would hear some bad covers of Wonder | Wall. | | It's a life changing experience. | | So when the TV breaks, maybe consider replacing it with $500 | digital piano to get weighted keys and decent built in sound | instead of paying for an ad distribution device. | w0mbat wrote: | What were you saying? I was busy upgrading the firmware on | my guitar amp. | 6510 wrote: | Is anyone doing a smart guitar with ads already? | adolph wrote: | Kinda, its an app that trains people to tune guitars in | different scenarios. The ads are mostly for pro versions | of itself, its sibling apps and a far field mike array | for adjusting tuning based on the room. The killer | feature is artificial intelligence that learns how the | person perceives sound and adjusts the tuning from | "technically correct" to "perceptually correct." It is | gamified with a blockchain verified leaderboard. | xmprt wrote: | I'm not sure if you're joking. This seems like a | reasonable feature to have but then you threw in | blockchain and now I'm not sure anymore. | adolph wrote: | Cheating devalues games. Ambiguity heightens absurdity. | Maybe I should have added that the IP has rock solid | patents, is open source* and the startup is still in | stealth while raising a series G. | | * some restrictions apply, please agree to the terms of | service to allow super cookies and review that the | license SKU matching your service region to a stacked | arbitration regime established in the People's Democratic | Republic of Korea and Delaware | driverdan wrote: | Most TVs work fine without an internet connection. I recently | got a new Samsung TV. It really wanted an internet connection | but works just fine without it. | Robotbeat wrote: | Doubt that electronic gizmos have much to do with climate | change unless you're running kilowatts for Dogecoin mining or | whatever. | | It's heating and cooling, transport, and food. Maybe cement as | well. If you buy a new conventional car, I have more to | question you on climate change over. | MikeKusold wrote: | Electronics require lots of metals that are sourced through | mining. Mining is an essential but dirty business that often | leaves pools of toxic heavy metal water behind. These pools | are damned up, but inevitably leak out into the surrounding | environment. | | It's important that everyone Reduce, Reuse, Recycle properly | in order to reduce our impact to the environment. | Robotbeat wrote: | You know what requires a lot more metals? Cars and houses | and apartments and railroads and highways. When we're | trying to reduce our impact on the environment, we've got | to not waste time on the small fry while ignoring the | elephants. Problems should be attacked proportional to | their impact. Don't think that using metal straws but | driving a new gasoline powered SUV is making an | improvement. | stonesweep wrote: | > You know what requires a lot more metals? | | I believe the argument is about the _refining_ process | and the chemical waste it creates, which is substantially | higher when trying to extract 99.99% pure copper, zinc, | gold, silver and other industrial elements which are | converted into electronics. I 'm a hobbyist fan of silver | and know just the basics - refining for 99.99% pure | silver looks like making crack to my eyes. :) Breaking | Bad level chemicals. | | I'm to understand the act of creating and "washing" | circuit boards also uses a large amount of caustic | chemicals, as does the attempted recycling/recovery (to | basically eat away the coatings to expose the reclaimable | metals). Refining for purity has a high environmental | cost to get it from ore -> 99.99% and to reuse/recycle | it, I speculate much higher than iron ore (train tracks, | etc.) require/use. | Robotbeat wrote: | Interesting claim, but to justify a few milligrams of | metals is worse than literally tons of metal and cement | is going to require a quantitative argument. | | 99.99%, even if you're right, only gets us to 10kg | equivalent if you start with 1 gram. | | (And keep in mind that these processes to make bulk | materials themselves use alloying agents and specialty | materials in cutting heads, etc, to fabricate them.) | stonesweep wrote: | It requires tonnes of ore processed to produce ounces of | gold (I read roughly 13 tonnes on average, but it's | highly dependent on the quality of the deposit and | refinement difficulty), there are metrics and studies: | https://www.businessinsider.com/tons-of-rock-for-an- | ounce-of... | | Edit as I'm curious myself, this study shows it's about | 150 tonnes of ore input for one ton of copper output | (with other minerals reclaimed during the process): | https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk2/1988/8808/880811.PDF | Robotbeat wrote: | Keep in mind your conventional car's catalytic converter | contains grams of platinum group metals, worth about | $1000 or so now ($3000 for older, larger catalytic | converters). Due in large part to the spike in rhodium | prices. | stonesweep wrote: | Platinum is extracted as a by-product of nickel and | copper mining (as are other elements) as it's primary | source, unlike gold and copper which are mined for their | element directly. Not arguing your point (45% of platinum | is used in auto) only that how we get Pt and Pd is | already in progress to get at the other elements like Cu, | Au and Ag. | Robotbeat wrote: | But IS it a mere byproduct? If it adds significant | revenue, it's no longer a mere byproduct but now part of | the business proposition of the mine. About $30 billion | of nickel is mined per year. About $8 billion in platinum | mined per year. 30 tons of rhodium are mined per year, | which at current >$900/gram prices, means the revenue | from rhodium is actually HIGHER than platinum and on par | with nickel. | | So you could as well argue that nickel is a byproduct of | rhodium (and platinum group metal) production. | stonesweep wrote: | The USA mints alone use roughly 4,400 tonnes of nickel to | produce coins every year (one specific industry with one | type of output in one country). Around 133 tonnes of | platinum and 1,800 tonnes of gold are mined per year in | total for all use globally. | coldpie wrote: | We are now at the point where everything matters. | Industry is responsible for about 21% of GHG emissions | globally (more than transportation!)[1]. Reducing that by | using simpler technologies is a good thing to look into. | | Do you really need to replace your perfectly functional | doorbell with a big pile of electronics? Probably not. | Would not driving to work every day make a bigger | contribution? Yes. Would not doing either be best? Yes. | | [1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse- | gas-emiss... | Robotbeat wrote: | Using an incandescent light bulb is not "better" than an | LED bulb, even though the latter is a "pile of | electronics" while an incandescent bulb is just a little | tungsten wire. So I really don't think this is a good | rule to follow. Simpler technologies are often far less | efficient and often have a far larger ecological impact. | | LED bulbs are comically more efficient than incandescent | bulbs (by a factor of 5-10), which in turn are comically | more efficient (by 10-50 times) than like a candle or oil | lamp. "Simple" is actually a terrible heuristic for "low | ecological impact." | coldpie wrote: | Are you really making the claim that a simple doorbell | switch has higher environmental impact than a Ring | doorbell? | Robotbeat wrote: | It actually might. If the Ring doorbell allows you to | avoid opening your door just once or twice a week, the | energy savings could exceed the environmental footprint. | | A Ring doorbell has a 22Wh battery that lasts about a | month or two per charge. | | Having the door open for 10 seconds on a cold winter day | can easily waste that much energy. About 10kW of heat | loss for 10 seconds is 100kJ, higher than that 22Wh. | Likewise, the embodied energy of that 22Wh battery is | about 22MJ, and might dominate the embodied energy of the | Ring camera. So if it saves you from opening the door | 200-300 times in its lifetime, that might be enough to | pay for its own embodied emissions. | | Plus not having to drive home to pick up a package, etc, | etc. | | Plus think of other smart devices like smart thermostats | that might be part of the whole Ring system. Or perhaps | if the Ring device prevents destruction of part of your | home from theft. | | I don't even own a Ring doorbell, but I can see how it | could actually help. Also, traditional doorbells aren't | that efficient. Especially if they have a little light. | | Ring could also replace a window to see who is there, | which is a big source of heat leakage. | harpastum wrote: | The argument is that the "simpleness" of the doorbell | isn't a good heuristic for the amount of impact. | | According to wikipedia [1], the transformer on a standard | doorbell can use 2-3 watts of power at all times. That's | 1400-2100 watt hours per month -- about _one hundred_ | times as much as a ring doorbell uses (Less than 20 Wh | per month). | | The cost and impact of the Ring includes more | manufacturing, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Ring | ended up having a larger environmental cost, but it's not | as clear cut as your incredulity makes it seem. | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doorbell | gaius_baltar wrote: | > According to wikipedia [1], the transformer on a | standard doorbell can use 2-3 watts of power at all | times. That's 1400-2100 watt hours per month -- about one | hundred times as much as a ring doorbell uses (Less than | 20 Wh per month). | | Interesting thing to know because here in Brazil we don't | route PELV (Protected Extra-low Voltage) to the doorbell. | The external switch just carries the full voltage from | the mains (127 Vac or 220 Vac, according to the state). | Maybe it's not the safest design after all. | | However this constant power usage can be safely removed | by using a non-rechargeable 12V battery that would power | a relay that will trigger the mains-powered bell when the | (purely mechanical) external switch is pressed. This | removes the constant power usage and such battery should | last for years with a typical usage scenario (less than | one second per push or so). | eldaisfish wrote: | >We are now at the point where everything matters | | You are missing the point and mischaracterising the | problem. Resources are finite. Human attention spans are | limited. Emissions from ships in international waters are | an absolutely huge problem and addressing that will make | a huge impact on future climate. | | Funny how no one mentions that but we are all focused on | paper straws and smart doorbells. | acka wrote: | It is all related, so everything taken together does | indeed matter. When we as consumers insist more on buying | locally produced, durable, interchangeable, replaceable, | repairable (!) components to build things we're actually | likely to use for a long time, we can stem the flow of | cargo ships and ditto planes shipping "stupid disposable | junk" halfway across the world, thereby limiting all the | pollution and waste of (fossil fueled) energy that goes | with it. | | While we're at it, we should demand to put an end to the | senseless hoarding of patents and IP, in particular those | that hamper interoperability between components, and for | information on interfaces to be made public, so no more | proprietary connectors, protocols, APIs, no more | artificial restrictions on consumables such as printer | ink, etcetera. | midasuni wrote: | Local odeon stopped using plastic straws in their drinks. | Paper ones were awful. Bought some metal straws also | awful. Ended up taking 2x500ml bottles instead - far more | plastic than was used before. | | Yeay? | sixstringtheory wrote: | Stop using straws... completely unnecessary. | | Use a reusable water bottle. One can be had for the price | of those 2x500ml bottles. | midasuni wrote: | I don't want water. | | Charge me for the plastic for the 6 straws a year I use, | which is far far less than the plastic others "waste". | | Put a price in the pollution and let the market sort it | out | madpata wrote: | I'd just say that both contribute and stop this whataboutism. | matkoniecz wrote: | gizmos in total probably have some noticeable impact and | unlike heating or food are mostly useless/not needed/harmful. | Robotbeat wrote: | It's amazing how after 2020 work from home and school from | home orders, people still insist "gizmos" are mostly | useless. | dkersten wrote: | Using them maybe not, but producing them and then shipping | them across the globe? Also, as with all things, its not like | one iPhone in isolation is a problem, but millions, year | after year, that does add up. | | Maybe that's still not much compared to other industries, but | in the context of the conversation here, its still something | that an individual who might complain about climate change | does have a little control over. I mean, if I complain, but | then don't change MY behaviour, even if that change wouldn't | by itself change anything, why should I expect companies to | change theirs? | ryandrake wrote: | I remember when the primary threat you considered when setting | up your firewall was hackers trying to infiltrate your network. | Increasingly I find myself using my firewall to sandbox devices | already on my LAN and preventing them from phoning home to | exfiltrate. | walton_simons wrote: | My thoughts exactly. And even this seems to be getting | harder. I keep reading about "smart" TVs which barely | function if they're not allowed to phone home, and IOT | devices which query their own hardcoded DNS servers, ignoring | whatever your DHCP server has told them to do. | | I think it's only a matter of time before we start seeing | more and more of these things with built in cellular modems | which can't be disabled. Makes me want to start stockpiling | older technology in order to prepare for a time when every | single available lightbulb, washing machine, TV, or vacuum | cleaner has to be online all the time and controlled by some | privacy destroying app. | | I'm only half joking when I say that I can imagine a future | where something purely mechanical is considered the height of | luxury. Look at this! A door lock with a metal key which | doesn't log and transmit the comings and goings of your | family and friends. Incredible! If only we could afford such | a thing, but there are only a few artisans left in the world | who can make them... | wiremine wrote: | > Stop buying stupid disposable junk. | | I get the frustration, but this is a narrow perspective. | _Consumer_ IoT is still waiting for some good use cases. But | IoT touches a lot more industries than that: medical, earth | science, manufacturing, heavy industrial, logistics, energy... | they are all being improved with useful IoT solutions. And we | need solid security in all these areas, not just the home. | | I'd also note that privacy and security, while related, are | separate issues. Most IoT solutions don't factor in either | concern well. | bsder wrote: | > And we need solid security in all these areas, not just the | home. | | Who is _we_ who need solid security? | | I haven't met them. They don't sign a check for security. | They don't do anything other than put "Security" on a | PowerPoint slide and forget about it. | | We make our shipping IoT stuff secure because it's a point of | pride and point of competence. But we built the whole | architecture around that idea, and it _definitely_ slowed us | down at the start. | | Until people start cutting checks for _actually secure_ IoT, | it 's going to remain a giant field of cow dung. | paranoidrobot wrote: | > Who is we who need solid security? | | Anyone with a modern medical device is the 'we'. | | My grandmother got a new pacemaker installed a while back. | She now has a device sitting beside her bed with a 4G modem | in it, that talks to her pacemaker at night and sends the | data back to some service, which in turn her Doctors can | access. | | This is apparently the normal thing to do. | | What level of security is there in either of those devices? | | How do you ensure that there isn't open ports? Does it get | security updates pushed to it? (I wouldn't be money on | that) | | How does one ensure that this can't send malicious commands | to the pacemaker? | | This isn't just an issue with pacemakers, either - plenty | of other medical devices are coming with various wireless | chips in them. | HeyLaughingBoy wrote: | They really do exist. Believe it or not, just last week I | had an actual meeting with an actual paying client who took | IoT security seriously because "we've got some hydraulics | on this machine that can cause real damage if someone hacks | into it." | | Unfortunately, I think this is going to be the perspective | for a long time: if the customer sees real liability (read: | a lawsuit for physical damage) as a possibility, that's | probably going to be the only motivating factor to take | security seriously. | | Whatever. One step at a time! | rglullis wrote: | One of my "please steal my idea" projects is to get any of | these Youtube personalities that are famous for commentary on | consumer tech (such as Linus from LTT, MKBHD, mrwhosetheboss) | and convince them to create a company that would mix together | something like drop.com with a "design studio" focused on | coming up with high-quality kits for consumer gadgets, with the | twist that every kit is open source and freely available. | | Every month or so, they would make a video about the ongoing | projects and show what kind of features are already available. | Partner with manufacturer companies that can provide pre- | assembled systems. For those that don't care about the DIY | part, offer a subscription-based option where they can get | early review units, prioritize their change requests, | _troubleshoot_ support, personalization options, discounts for | bulk buys, etc. | | The revenue from these subscriptions should be more than enough | to fund the team of open source developers/designers _and_ to | make up for the "lost" revenue of a video made that is | sponsored by any of the big tech companies. The most | interesting though would be to see if this could lead to a | change in consumer demand: could an influencer changed the | public's perception of what is really "hot"? Would we start | seeing things like "/r/mechanicalkeyboards" for all sorts of | products like TV panels, wireless speakers, home automation | light systems, F/OSS-based smartphones? | mkoubaa wrote: | I had a similar idea where devices are all just a bunch of | input and output devices that declar themselves via zeroconf | on wifi/5G. And you can have a portal on your PC where you | choose which software to use one which device and control it | all from there. | adriancr wrote: | It's difficult to even find non-internet-vendor-locked in | sensors/controls/lights... (sensors/controls ideally running on | batteries with sane local network API) | | So far I've been lucky with cheap zigbee devices but these seem | to be getting phased out in favor of locked in items... | | and before people suggest - no, I don't have the willingness to | build/maintain my own devices with raspberry pis or ESP etc | dec0dedab0de wrote: | FYI Phillips hue is not vendor locked, and does not require | the internet. They're not cheap though. | iaml wrote: | Phillips hue does require the internet for setup. | babas wrote: | You can join Phillips hue units to your own zigbee | network without Internet or even the Phillips hue app. | | Zigbee2mqtt and a cheap zigbee dongle is all you need | really. You could add home assistant for a better | interface but there is no need to involve Phillips or the | Internet. One of the huge advantages of zigbee imo. | noxToken wrote: | I hate that this dominates the conversation. I tried some | stuff with a pi once. It was a nightmare. I fidgeted around | with the installation, and after some slight hiccups, I | finally get to install the package for my security system. | | Errors. A screen full of errors barfed everywhere. I look at | the repository for some basic debugging, and without some | serious dedicated time, I can't fix the issue. | | This is why people don't want to fiddle with a Pi for these | things. Time is dedicated to get the system up, but you're | not given any kind of guarantee that it will work out of the | box. | bigiain wrote: | This is also the reason why some of us enjoy futzing with | Raspberry Pis (And a Arduinos and ESPs et al.) | | But yeah, I understand your pain, and recognise that it's | not a hobby everybody wants... | xmprt wrote: | I feel like anytime a hobbyist says a Pi is the solution to | your IoT or cloud problem, it's because they enjoy fiddling | with the errors and getting it work. When it does, I'm sure | it's rewarding, but a lot of people have other hobbies that | they'd rather spend time on. | | It's like telling someone who complains about video game | DLC to go skiing. Yes, you might enjoy skiing, but skiing | isn't a drop in replacement for the person complaining. | SavantIdiot wrote: | I just bought a Laird BLE temp sensor (BT510) and have | complete control over it. I can scan-response it with a | Raspberry Pi and get the temperature and display it on a | small LCD screen. The pi is also my home automation gateway | and it sends this (and other data) to my cloud so I can read | it from my personal website (which is password protected). | | The BT510 It has crazy range and has only dropped 10mV | battery in 14 days. | | It CAN be done, because sensor makers have no interest in | reporting home: costs are too high! | | We need more open source projects to enable people to | automate their homes with a list of suppliers who provide | "dumb" edge node sensors. | Cu3PO42 wrote: | Ikea sells Zigbee bulbs and control devices as well as a | Zigbee bridge. Seeing how they joined the Zigbee alliance's | boards of directors I don't think they're going away. In my | experience they work fine and are reasonably priced. | | They support HomeKit and while their own API technically | isn't open, it's documented and has libraries to interact | with it programmatically. | connor4312 wrote: | +1. I run entirely Zigbee devices in my home. They don't | have internet access and talk to the Home Assistant[1] | instance running on my home server. | | The downside of Zigbee is that, as a user, there isn't a | strong ecosystem of DIY IoT solutions like there is with, | for example, the wifi-connected ESP8266/ESP32 chips. And, | of course, it requires a hub and some degree of knowledge | to set up. | | At the moment I'm evaluating launching a small IoT | startup/side-business in an underserved market. As much as | I love Zigbee, these devices will probably end up being | wifi. I'm not an expert in the hardware side of things, and | the ability to pay <$1 for an ESP chip that does everything | I need off the shelf is great, and I don't want to create a | hub or require users to buy a (often $80+) hub just for my | set of (<=$5) devices. | | Although it'll be wifi-based, I plan to make these | guarantees: | | - The cloud service (supported by a small yearly | subscription) will stay online for at least 1 year after | the last device is sold. | | - When the service is shut down, its software and hardware | will be released under an open source license. | | - The subscription fee will never be increased faster than | inflation rate. | | - 3rd party analytics software won't be used and data will | never be shared with 3rd parties (outside from Stripe | during checkout). In all cases a minimum amount of data | will be collected. | | Maybe this'll make my product slightly less likely to | appear on the @internetofshit Twitter account[2]. | | 1. https://www.home-assistant.io/ | | 2. https://twitter.com/internetofshit | anaerobicover wrote: | > They don't have internet access | | Do you mean they don't as a matter of manufacturing, or | that you have blocked them yourself? (I ask because I am | also interested in getting some lights, but would also | like them to be local-network-only.) | Cu3PO42 wrote: | Zigbee devices don't have internet access because they're | not on the network. Zigbee is a seperate wireless | protocol. Lights and switches implement a pairing step | which allows them to interact. If you would like to | control such devices from your PC, you'll need a device | with a Zigbee transceiver to talk to these devices. | | Typically, manufacturers sell you a "bridge" or | "gateway", which is a networked device including such a | transceiver. You could isolate this single device from | accessing the internet or you could just not rely on any | closed option. You can buy a USB Zigbee transceiver for | 30 EUR and use it with your PC or a Raspberry Pi. | StavrosK wrote: | I think Zigbee is what IoT _should_ be. It doesn 't | access the internet, it doesn't clutter the frequency | band like my 30 WiFi IoT devices, it doesn't need to be | in range (since other Zigbee devices can relay the | messages)... I'm going to buy some Zigbee devices from | IKEA just so I can play around with them. | | It's a really nice standard, I hope it takes off. | Semaphor wrote: | > The downside of Zigbee is that, as a user, there isn't | a strong ecosystem of DIY IoT solutions like there is | with, for example, the wifi-connected ESP8266/ESP32 | chips. | | Luckily, as you probably know, you can connect all those | different protocols together with homeassistant. So you | can use pre-built solutions for some devices and DIY for | others and still easily connect them. | Cu3PO42 wrote: | I really don't know anything about the availability of | Zigbee chips for DIY projects, but I would just like to | say that I paid just 20 EUR for Ikea's gateway [0]. | | But if you do go Wi-Fi, why use a cloud service at all? | Is there a specific reason not to go with mDNS/DNS-SD and | handle everything on the local network? | | [0] https://www.ikea.com/de/de/p/tradfri-gateway- | weiss-40337806/ | Macha wrote: | How hard have you looked for the lights? Or are you | specifically looking for the whole "customisable rgb lighting | with ecosystem with apps etc." | myself248 wrote: | I have a few friends running Shelly devices locally with | HomeAssistant and other agents. They can also do the cloud | thing (and are unfortunately named that), but the local-first | functions work. I don't know more, but the hass forums are a | good start. | yummypaint wrote: | Lack of maintenance is a good reason to use a | microcontroller. I can understand not wanting to deal with | the complexity of a pi and the associated software updates, | but if you just need to read a sensor or toggle a relay and | send a few packets you can write arduino code that is | effectively set and forget. Most importantly you can be | certain its behavior wont unexpectedly change because of some | remote update. It's easier now than it ever has been to get | started, things have improved alot in just the last 5 years | or so. | mkup wrote: | Yeah, the new microcontroller boards that have Arduino Uno | MCU (ATmega328P) and cheap Wi-Fi (ESP8266) bundled on a | single board and connected together via UART are really | great. I recently got a couple of these from AliExpress for | $12 including shipping (for experimenting with sensors), | and I noticed that they are really well supported by the | Arduino IDE and the open source community in general. | wiremine wrote: | I'd encourage you to check out the ESP-32. It's not that | much more money and supports more features (BLE, actual | hardware encryption, etc.) | pradn wrote: | Electronic lights seem like a small convenience for a high | price, not to mention how they require even more use of | smartphones and such. | thebean11 wrote: | Disagree, as a renter smart bulbs are by far the easiest | way to get dimmable lights in my apartment. Being able to | dim the lights in the evenings while I watch TV is amazing. | mixmastamyk wrote: | We simply switch to string lights and "bedtime bulb" in | the evenings, no dimming or internet needed. | | (Although, I did install a dimmer into the dining room | wall switch, but it's worth it I think if you'll be there | at least a year.) | tekromancr wrote: | I would totally be down for that, but I don't have access | to the breaker box, and I don't feel like trying to | install anything into anything that has hot wires. | thebean11 wrote: | No internet needed for my setup either, local network | only. | AdmiralGinge wrote: | They don't need to be internet-connected though, there's | many "smart" LED bulbs that run off a traditional remote | control. | thebean11 wrote: | I don't want to add a remote control to my life, the | "smart" bulbs are better because I can control them with | my phone, watch, and any other devices I might get in the | future. | | Not to mention, I have ~10 of these bulbs. Can't imagine | how a remote control would deal with that. They also | aren't connected to the internet, they are controlled by | a hub that only has local network access. | pimeys wrote: | We have automation to turn off all lights in the apartment | when nobody's home, which saves a lot of energy due to us | forgetting to turn of lights quite often otherwise. Also | adds nice things like turning on lights on movement in the | bathroom and kitchen, where you don't need to have lights | on all the time, turning on lights 45 minutes before sunset | if somebody's home and turning on lights in the hallway | when coming home if it's dark already. | | I find all of this extremely convenient and ZigBee is a | great platform to do things like this. | tifadg1 wrote: | I don't know if I'm just that jaded, but it feels like | it's more trouble that just using a light switch and | getting in the habit of not leaving lights on. | emj wrote: | Depends on how many lights you have, and how often you | need to do it. I've installed extra wires from all light | buttons so one master switch per room, not as flexible | but same cost over 10 years. It saves me a ton grief | every night turning off all the lamps in the apartment, | some partners never learn that light switches can turn | something off. The monetary savings are not enough to | break even in 20 years, the time saved is priceless. ;-) | samatman wrote: | I get a lot of subjective value out of being able to | adjust colour temperature, brightness, and hue. | | For instance, the last hour or two of the day, I have | lights in the bedroom and kitchen either dim red or off. | | Being able to do the routine of "try to go to sleep, | fail, tell my watch to turn the lights red, get a glass | of water or a snack, turn lights off" is really nice. | Even dim white light would be like splashing cold water | on my face. | | There are other ways to solve for this, approximately, I | guess. This is simple and works, though. | Diti wrote: | There is enough choice of MQTT-compatible devices, running | Tasmota or other (for example Shelly devices). No vendor | lock, open protocol, no single point of failure (well, | usually people only setup one MQTT broker, but it is possible | to publish-subscribe to several brokers at once). | yabudemada wrote: | I think this is common across all technological phases: wild | west implementations preceeds standardization. | soheil wrote: | I don't understand why hate like this gets so many upvotes. IoT | devices are in their infancy, it's not fair to constantly | berate their inadequacies instead of focusing on the | technological marvel that they are, what they can achieve and | how they can be made more whole. The resistance to change on HN | is real. | simias wrote: | Home automation is really not particularly novel. Quoting | Wikipedia: | | >In 1975, the first general purpose home automation network | technology, X10, was developed. It is a communication | protocol for electronic devices. It primarily uses electric | power transmission wiring for signalling and control, where | the signals involve brief radio frequency bursts of digital | data, and remains the most widely available.[4] By 1978, X10 | products included a 16 channel command console, a lamp | module, and an appliance module. Soon after came the wall | switch module and the first X10 timer. | | Of course electronics have progressed immensely in 45 years, | so we can now do a lot more with a lot less. | | I still feel like very little has change in practice though. | I find myself actively avoiding "smart" equipment, both | because it's overpriced and a bit of a pain to use in my | experience. They all have their own software stack, their own | apps (which are often cloud-based instead of running locally, | adding all sorts of privacy issues) etc... | | On top of that you never know when the company is going to go | under or stop supporting your device, leaving you with a not- | so-smart device in the best case, or a useless plastic brick | in the worst. | pjmlp wrote: | Not only IoT devices aren't on their infancy, the device | makers keep using C to program them, and don't provide any | kind of updates on top of that. | f1refly wrote: | Can't wait for my javascript powered IoT kettle that has a | cpu more powerful than my laptop and includes 4gb of ram to | load half of npm into memory! The future looks ever so much | brighter! | pjmlp wrote: | I did not mention JavaScript, whose only worthy place is | the browser. | mtgx wrote: | Good luck buying a TV that isn't a "smart" (aka a really slow, | hackable, and generally quite dumb) TV. | mkoubaa wrote: | I'm with you but I made an exception for a baby monitor | ChuckMcM wrote: | I get the sentiment. That said, consider that "iOT" is | sometimes simply re-implementing something that used a | different moniker before. A printer that connects to Wifi to | print is "iOT" but the link is just replacing the bulky copper | printer cable (or the USB cable). Security cameras on WiFi | replace installing labor intensive (expensive) hard wires | between cameras and base station. It goes on and on. Basically | re-implementing the same things that have sold before but with | "improved" logistics that lower cost, add capabilities, or | both. | clajiness wrote: | You do know that you can prevent IOT devices from reaching the | internet, right? Our Wemo gear, cameras, etc, get blocked by my | firewall. Problem solved while still benefiting from their | convenience. | milankragujevic wrote: | I hope you do know that most consumers don't even have their | own router, let alone anything that can isolate devices or | block certain traffic. | extrememacaroni wrote: | What an amazing solution, so simple and accessible to the | average consumer. What's the next revelation, that you can | prevent the IOT devices from reaching the internet by reverse | engineering and rewriting their software? | greyw wrote: | An even easier and more accesible solution to move your | boot with a high enough acceleration towards the IoT device | thereby totally disabling the internet functionality! | Doesn't even need any technical skill. | JKCalhoun wrote: | I know you're being humorous but.... | | If only there were a big sign on every such device saying | "We are spying on you!". | | Otherwise how is the average consumer to know which ones | to apply boot to? | | (Also, the boot needs mass and velocity, acceleration is | orthogonal :-)) | laurent92 wrote: | This is where Sigfox has a lot of added value: It is like a | simcard, but you only pay per million packages instead of per | SIM, and you save the trouble of customers trying to disable | your hardware. If you build electronic components and the TV | integrator doesn't want to bother providing ethernet to the | power unit, at least the power unit can self-report its | location to the grid. | TamHagmas wrote: | Interesting point. I have also been thinking about how | LPWANs could, in theory, be used to exfiltrate data from | consumer devices without anyone noticing. I mean, it would | be trivial to hide a tiny Sigfox / LoRa transmitter in | kitchen appliances, washing machines, televisions, cars or | whatever and claim that you need information like location | and how the devices are used for "market research". | | It feels like it should be illegal, but I'm not sure if it | is or if there are loopholes. Do you, by chance, know of | any actual consumer products with covert Sigfox / LoRa | transmitters? | laurent92 wrote: | No I don't, I've just be loosely afraid of TVs with sim | cards, and since I discovered Sigfox I know that will | happen someday. Same as the MH370 (I think) which went | dark at transponder level but the engines continued to | return the technical data for 4hrs. | ville wrote: | Amazon has built a LoRa transmitter (Amazon Sidewalk) in | their Echo and Ring devices since 2017, it seems. | | They're not hiding it though. It's marketed as something | you might want to keep enabled and "help your neighbors" | by sharing its location. | | - "if your Echo device loses its wifi connection, | Sidewalk can simplify reconnecting to your router" | | - "customer support can still troubleshoot problems even | if your devices lose their wifi connection" | | - you "support community extended coverage benefits such | as locating pets" | coldtea wrote: | > _The S in IoT should be for "Stop buying stupid disposable | junk." I can't listen to anyone complain about climate change | while they fill their homes with cheap consumer electronics | from globalized supply chains that spy on them._ | | ...but you can order your IoT to "set a mood" from your phone | or speaker and have 5-6 lights in your house change color and | some Barry White to start playing like some cheesy 70s | playboy's penthhouse. | | Who wants to go back to physically walking to close a light? | Walking? We've got expensive tredmills we've bought for that | purpose! | wolfi1 wrote: | somehow ironic that he uses flatpak for his "secure" app, | considering an article about flatpack security hit the HN | frontpage a few days ago | [deleted] | rolph wrote: | >>The S in IoT is for Security<< | | I cant help noticing, the s in IoT comes last, after all other | things and is lower case, and not even important enough to appear | in the acronym /s | warmfuzzykitten wrote: | Um. There is no S in IoT. I think that's the joke. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-03-22 23:00 UTC)