5 ms·

I've never understood the desire to add smart technology to the smoke alarm. Once properly installed a smoke alarm should be interacted with when (1) there is a

I've never understood the desire to add smart technology to the smoke alarm. Once properly installed a smoke alarm should be interacted with when (1) there is a fire, (2) the battery is running flat. False alarms pretty much mean you've installed it wrong.

mschuster91 11y ago
> I've never understood the desire to add smart technology to the smoke alarm. Because very few things suck more than coming home from work and your house is burnt down because the smoke alarm wasn't heard by anyone and by the time the fire crews arrive it's too late. Happened to a friend of mine, house was beyond repair even though fire crews arrived 10min after a passing driver noticed the blaze.
- jfim 11y ago
  A smoke detector is there to alert the occupants of the building so that they get out. If it was an actual alarm system that is connected to a dispatcher, the firefighters would've been notified.
  - webXL 11y ago
    Yeah, as originally designed perhaps, but what if you could add a bit of tech to make sure your pets are safe? Or you're not coming home only to inhale carbon monoxide? I don't think $99 is a ridiculous expense for such peace of mind, even if it's not proven to be full proof just yet.
    - JupiterMoon 11y ago
      My CO alarm sounds pretty loudly. You notice it the moment you open the door again smart it does not need to be. How would you get your pet out in time if your CO alarm or smoke alarm went off when you were at work?
      - webXL 11y ago
        Perhaps coming home hours earlier from work and/or calling a neighbor would increase their odds of survival. I find it odd that people are questioning the value of this life and death information while there are plenty of frivolous IOT devices.
        JupiterMoon 11y ago
        Because CO kills surprisingly quickly -- unless your commute is in the order of a couple of minutes you'd be too late. Also you don't send a person into a house with a CO leak so asking you neighbour to retrieve your cat would be placing them in danger. My point is that the smoke alarm and the CO alarm should be exactly what they are simple alarms that allow occupants to escape in an emergency. Adding IOT capabilities doesn't add to the alarm functionality in sensible ways. However, it does risk introducing vulnerabilities. I don't want my smoke alarm to start sending spam emails (this really happened with a smart fridge a couple of years ago).
        webXL 11y ago
        You're being awfully pedantic. Have the neighbor shut your gas off. Have your landlord alert the neighbors. What if you just left for work? I can find a bunch of scenarios where the information can be useful, whereas you seem determined to argue that only the occupants (who might just be kids burning toast) should have this information.
        JupiterMoon 11y ago
        The information is intended to allow the occupants to escape safely if required. In the case of a CO alarm no one should enter the premises until qualified engineers have made it safe. The the case of a smoke alarm the occupants are the only ones that can safely decide if it is a false alarm -- if there is a fire no one should enter the premises until the fire has been dealt with by qualified personal. What you are suggesting would mean adding a general purpose computer to essential safety equipment. Anything that adds complications and could affect the main function of the safety equipment would need to be considered very carefully.
wpietri 11y ago
A friend of mine, a great cook, regularly performs what she refers to as The Dance of Smoke Alarm Supplication, wherein she and a broom jointly try to persuade the alarm gods that everything is fine. When she heard that there was a smoke alarm that would pop up a notification on her phone first so she could mute it with zero shrieking, she was very excited. It may be that her landlord installed it wrong, but landlords (and homeowners) install an impressive number of things wrong, so a business that didn't depend on "amateur does X perfectly" doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.
- gherkin0 11y ago
  > A friend of mine, a great cook, regularly performs what she refers to as The Dance of Smoke Alarm Supplication, wherein she and a broom jointly try to persuade the alarm gods that everything is fine. When she heard that there was a smoke alarm that would pop up a notification on her phone first so she could mute it with zero shrieking, she was very excited. The Dance of Smoke Alarm Supplication can still apply to smart smoke alarms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsMkLaEiOY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsMkLaEiOY
  - wpietri 11y ago
    I don't know why this was downvoted; I thought it was very relevant.
- johnminter 11y ago
  Ah, the Smoke Alarm Supplication Dance. Great term. My wife and daughter had the same issue. They like to cook and can tomato sauce. Our smoke alarm would go off very easily - lots of false positives. One day my wife is vacuuming the hall and the motor in the vacuum cleaner overheats and starts putting out thick, black smoke right under the smoke alarm. Nothing from the smoke alarm... Needless to say we quickly replaced both the vacuum cleaner and the smoke alarm and made certain to get one with dual sensors...
- JupiterMoon 11y ago
  Yes the landlord installed it wrong. However in what scenario does a landlord install a £100 smoke alarm when s/he can install a £10 one though? No landlord I've ever had would have done this -- given that over here bills are paid by the tenant a thermostat is usually not provided. Homeowners can at least move them when they realise they have installed them wrong.
alistairjcbrown 11y ago
That's not true - you're meant to test your smoke alarm weekly. Also false alarms can be the smoke detector acting correctly to the presence of smoke, eg. Burnt toast. In this case the ability to remotely check the alarm status from a self check, or to remotely snooze a false alarm while clearing the smoke can be very handy
- JupiterMoon 11y ago
  OK so you find it easier to find your phone open the app and then press that button. I find it easier to press the button on the unit. I also find it easier to touch a £10 device with food covered/wet fingers whilst cooking than to get out a £300 smart phone and touch that with food covered or wet fingers.
marincounty 11y ago
I agree. They are so cheap. The ones I install are less than ten dollars. Won't name the brand. They are usually on the bottom of the shelf. Hidden away from worrisome consumers that equate price with function. Many contractors buy them by the case. I usually install two, and run a electrical line to one. Yes, an app is fine if you burn food, and have the disposable income? I would rather see home owners spend the money on running a line to their smoke, and CO detectors though.

mschuster91 11y ago

> I've never understood the desire to add smart technology to the smoke alarm. Because very few things suck more than coming home from work and your house is burnt down because the smoke alarm wasn't heard by anyone and by the time the fire crews arrive it's too late. Happened to a friend of mine, house was beyond repair even though fire crews arrived 10min after a passing driver noticed the blaze.

jfim 11y ago
A smoke detector is there to alert the occupants of the building so that they get out. If it was an actual alarm system that is connected to a dispatcher, the firefighters would've been notified.
- webXL 11y ago
  Yeah, as originally designed perhaps, but what if you could add a bit of tech to make sure your pets are safe? Or you're not coming home only to inhale carbon monoxide? I don't think $99 is a ridiculous expense for such peace of mind, even if it's not proven to be full proof just yet.
  - JupiterMoon 11y ago
    My CO alarm sounds pretty loudly. You notice it the moment you open the door again smart it does not need to be. How would you get your pet out in time if your CO alarm or smoke alarm went off when you were at work?
    - webXL 11y ago
      Perhaps coming home hours earlier from work and/or calling a neighbor would increase their odds of survival. I find it odd that people are questioning the value of this life and death information while there are plenty of frivolous IOT devices.
      - JupiterMoon 11y ago
        Because CO kills surprisingly quickly -- unless your commute is in the order of a couple of minutes you'd be too late. Also you don't send a person into a house with a CO leak so asking you neighbour to retrieve your cat would be placing them in danger. My point is that the smoke alarm and the CO alarm should be exactly what they are simple alarms that allow occupants to escape in an emergency. Adding IOT capabilities doesn't add to the alarm functionality in sensible ways. However, it does risk introducing vulnerabilities. I don't want my smoke alarm to start sending spam emails (this really happened with a smart fridge a couple of years ago).
        webXL 11y ago
        You're being awfully pedantic. Have the neighbor shut your gas off. Have your landlord alert the neighbors. What if you just left for work? I can find a bunch of scenarios where the information can be useful, whereas you seem determined to argue that only the occupants (who might just be kids burning toast) should have this information.
        JupiterMoon 11y ago
        The information is intended to allow the occupants to escape safely if required. In the case of a CO alarm no one should enter the premises until qualified engineers have made it safe. The the case of a smoke alarm the occupants are the only ones that can safely decide if it is a false alarm -- if there is a fire no one should enter the premises until the fire has been dealt with by qualified personal. What you are suggesting would mean adding a general purpose computer to essential safety equipment. Anything that adds complications and could affect the main function of the safety equipment would need to be considered very carefully.

wpietri 11y ago

A friend of mine, a great cook, regularly performs what she refers to as The Dance of Smoke Alarm Supplication, wherein she and a broom jointly try to persuade the alarm gods that everything is fine. When she heard that there was a smoke alarm that would pop up a notification on her phone first so she could mute it with zero shrieking, she was very excited. It may be that her landlord installed it wrong, but landlords (and homeowners) install an impressive number of things wrong, so a business that didn't depend on "amateur does X perfectly" doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

gherkin0 11y ago
> A friend of mine, a great cook, regularly performs what she refers to as The Dance of Smoke Alarm Supplication, wherein she and a broom jointly try to persuade the alarm gods that everything is fine. When she heard that there was a smoke alarm that would pop up a notification on her phone first so she could mute it with zero shrieking, she was very excited. The Dance of Smoke Alarm Supplication can still apply to smart smoke alarms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsMkLaEiOY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsMkLaEiOY
- wpietri 11y ago
  I don't know why this was downvoted; I thought it was very relevant.
johnminter 11y ago
Ah, the Smoke Alarm Supplication Dance. Great term. My wife and daughter had the same issue. They like to cook and can tomato sauce. Our smoke alarm would go off very easily - lots of false positives. One day my wife is vacuuming the hall and the motor in the vacuum cleaner overheats and starts putting out thick, black smoke right under the smoke alarm. Nothing from the smoke alarm... Needless to say we quickly replaced both the vacuum cleaner and the smoke alarm and made certain to get one with dual sensors...
JupiterMoon 11y ago
Yes the landlord installed it wrong. However in what scenario does a landlord install a £100 smoke alarm when s/he can install a £10 one though? No landlord I've ever had would have done this -- given that over here bills are paid by the tenant a thermostat is usually not provided. Homeowners can at least move them when they realise they have installed them wrong.

alistairjcbrown 11y ago

That's not true - you're meant to test your smoke alarm weekly. Also false alarms can be the smoke detector acting correctly to the presence of smoke, eg. Burnt toast. In this case the ability to remotely check the alarm status from a self check, or to remotely snooze a false alarm while clearing the smoke can be very handy

JupiterMoon 11y ago
OK so you find it easier to find your phone open the app and then press that button. I find it easier to press the button on the unit. I also find it easier to touch a £10 device with food covered/wet fingers whilst cooking than to get out a £300 smart phone and touch that with food covered or wet fingers.

marincounty 11y ago

I agree. They are so cheap. The ones I install are less than ten dollars. Won't name the brand. They are usually on the bottom of the shelf. Hidden away from worrisome consumers that equate price with function. Many contractors buy them by the case. I usually install two, and run a electrical line to one. Yes, an app is fine if you burn food, and have the disposable income? I would rather see home owners spend the money on running a line to their smoke, and CO detectors though.