4 ms·

> Are there really people who want to futz with their thermostats all the time? Yes. I would regularly turn the heat down before leaving, turn it back up when

by dalke 11y ago

> Are there really people who want to futz with their thermostats all the time? Yes. I would regularly turn the heat down before leaving, turn it back up when coming home, and make it cooler before going to bed. I can see the In general though, I am also baffled by it, for the reasons you list. (Also, Amory Lovins, the Passivhaus movement, and others have convinced me that the real problem was the need to have a large furnace in the first place. There would be little call for an improved temperature controller if the heating bill were under 10% as large as they typically are now. But that's a different topic.)

marssaxman 11y ago
My thermostat already does exactly what you describe, and it has no internet anything; it's just a timer. I set it up once, a couple of years ago, and haven't touched it since.
- dalke 11y ago
  Congrats. Mine didn't. I'm "not clear on what the value proposition" is in replacing "something as straightforward, reliable, and inexpensive as a thermostat" with a more expensive, error-prone timer-based thermostat with a additional fault modes.
  - marssaxman 11y ago
    I don't know either; it came with the house. It hasn't proven to be error-prone, though, probably because devices like it have been available off-the-shelf for thirty years.
    - dalke 11y ago
      The equivalent of the you of 30 years ago would have asked the same questions about the then-new programmable timer-based devices. The equivalent of you in 30 years might, on the other hand, consider secure network-controlled thermostats to be normal off-the-shelf technology.
      - marssaxman 11y ago
        Sure, I'm aware of that process, but that's not really what I'm asking. Thirty years ago, were I feeling skeptical about programmable thermostats, I could have asked why such a thing would be worthwhile, and someone could have explained how I could save money on heating by having my house cool down while I was asleep and then warm up again before I got up in the morning. We could then have a reasonable conversation about the risks and benefits of the new technology, about whether this new ability justified the increased cost and decreased reliability implied by the added automation. With this IoT stuff, though, I feel like someone is trying to sell me glow-in-the-dark sunglasses, or an electric belt buckle. Okay, so you can embed a TCP stack and a terrible web interface in this gadget, that's great, but so what? What problem is it supposed to solve? I can't even have the conversation about whether this technology is worth its extra cost, because nobody within my filter-bubble is explaining what the potential benefit is supposed to be. I'm commenting about it here because I hope somebody can point me to wherever it is that people are talking about the potential benefits of IOT devices, which might even theoretically justify them, because right now all I see are lots of really obvious downsides.
        dalke 11y ago
        paulddraper's answer gave two examples of new abilities - the ability switch to vacation mode after starting a long trip, and the ability to turn the heat on shortly before arriving home. You write: "With this IoT stuff, though, I feel like someone is trying to sell me glow-in-the-dark sunglasses" I think a better example is, why in the early 1980s would you want to buy a microcomputer? Here's an example from 1983 concerning the IBM PCjr - https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1320&dat=19831230&id=isYxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=m-kDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2959,4276070&hl=e https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1320&dat=19831230&id=... . It came with 12 miniprograms, used 'to put the first-time user at ease', include 'a word game, a recipe organizer, a home-loan calculator and a checkbook program'. Does that sound like it's worth $1,000 in 1983 dollars ($2,300 in 2016 dollars)? FWIW, my personal experience is that it wasn't worthwhile on an early 1980s micro to keep track of recipes or the checkbook. Certainly others thought otherwise, but for many people the practical uses were also an excuse to buy a machine that you could play games on. So, perhaps think of the many IoT devices as fun games for the early adopters, rather than a serious cost savings that the last adopters would want?

by dalke 11y ago

marssaxman 11y ago

My thermostat already does exactly what you describe, and it has no internet anything; it's just a timer. I set it up once, a couple of years ago, and haven't touched it since.

dalke 11y ago
Congrats. Mine didn't. I'm "not clear on what the value proposition" is in replacing "something as straightforward, reliable, and inexpensive as a thermostat" with a more expensive, error-prone timer-based thermostat with a additional fault modes.
- marssaxman 11y ago
  I don't know either; it came with the house. It hasn't proven to be error-prone, though, probably because devices like it have been available off-the-shelf for thirty years.
  - dalke 11y ago
    The equivalent of the you of 30 years ago would have asked the same questions about the then-new programmable timer-based devices. The equivalent of you in 30 years might, on the other hand, consider secure network-controlled thermostats to be normal off-the-shelf technology.
    - marssaxman 11y ago
      Sure, I'm aware of that process, but that's not really what I'm asking. Thirty years ago, were I feeling skeptical about programmable thermostats, I could have asked why such a thing would be worthwhile, and someone could have explained how I could save money on heating by having my house cool down while I was asleep and then warm up again before I got up in the morning. We could then have a reasonable conversation about the risks and benefits of the new technology, about whether this new ability justified the increased cost and decreased reliability implied by the added automation. With this IoT stuff, though, I feel like someone is trying to sell me glow-in-the-dark sunglasses, or an electric belt buckle. Okay, so you can embed a TCP stack and a terrible web interface in this gadget, that's great, but so what? What problem is it supposed to solve? I can't even have the conversation about whether this technology is worth its extra cost, because nobody within my filter-bubble is explaining what the potential benefit is supposed to be. I'm commenting about it here because I hope somebody can point me to wherever it is that people are talking about the potential benefits of IOT devices, which might even theoretically justify them, because right now all I see are lots of really obvious downsides.
      - dalke 11y ago
        paulddraper's answer gave two examples of new abilities - the ability switch to vacation mode after starting a long trip, and the ability to turn the heat on shortly before arriving home. You write: "With this IoT stuff, though, I feel like someone is trying to sell me glow-in-the-dark sunglasses" I think a better example is, why in the early 1980s would you want to buy a microcomputer? Here's an example from 1983 concerning the IBM PCjr - https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1320&dat=19831230&id=isYxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=m-kDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2959,4276070&hl=e https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1320&dat=19831230&id=... . It came with 12 miniprograms, used 'to put the first-time user at ease', include 'a word game, a recipe organizer, a home-loan calculator and a checkbook program'. Does that sound like it's worth $1,000 in 1983 dollars ($2,300 in 2016 dollars)? FWIW, my personal experience is that it wasn't worthwhile on an early 1980s micro to keep track of recipes or the checkbook. Certainly others thought otherwise, but for many people the practical uses were also an excuse to buy a machine that you could play games on. So, perhaps think of the many IoT devices as fun games for the early adopters, rather than a serious cost savings that the last adopters would want?