3 ms·

Remember the good old days when software was designed from the assumption that Internet wouldn't be available, and then if it happened to be, it would do some o

Remember the good old days when software was designed from the assumption that Internet wouldn't be available, and then if it happened to be, it would do some other interesting things? I get that these are connected "smart" devices, but is it that difficult to tell the NEST thermostat that when the service is unavailable to simply keep running whatever settings were last used and just wait for it to come back? I cannot imagine sitting through a features meeting where we decided if our support smart thermostat has no internet connection, it just shuts everything the hell off. My beefs with smart devices are numerous, but I think their most offensive component is software that seems to have been all designed by the same kind of moron.

pbhjpbhj 11y ago
It's a failsafe to shut things off. If it fails on then there are disastrous possibilities, failing off leaves more annoyances, no?
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  Losing power is a disaster, a ruptured gas line is a disaster, and both of those things are required to have an operating furnace. Losing Internet is not a disaster, it's in fact a pretty much daily occurrence for I would argue the majority of Internet users (at least here the States, where Internet sucks). Losing the Internet shouldn't break my thermostat, much like having a clogged toilet shouldn't cut my power. They're two entirely different systems in the home.
  - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
    If your toilet clogs and literally floods the house then it's safer that the power gets cut, hence circuit breakers and the like. When you connect your thermostat to the Internet then they're no longer entirely separate systems.
- Someone 11y ago
  That depends on what the automated process is. If you live in Alaska, you don't want your heater to switch off if something goes wrong. If you are on holiday, you don't want the software watering your garden to "failsafe" by stopping doing anything at all a week before your return.
  - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
    The valves in your watering equipment failing open doesn't seem better to me, can't imagine the bill and how flooded the garden (neighbours garden, and house) would be. Perhaps better to leave fail state optional. On the Alaskan situation I'd expect a frost sensor to put the heating on when it fell below 5deg C, or a settable temp, as a separate system to the normal thermostat.
    - FussyZeus 11y ago
      You're both forgetting that according to the situation as I understand it, NOTHING HAD FAILED, other than the Internet. The NEST thermostat was working perfectly as far as we know. Nothing had broken, it had lost connection to a resource, yes, but that should not prevent it from doing it's job, i.e. keeping the temperature of the home at or near a given temperature.
    - Someone 11y ago
      "The valves in your watering equipment failing open doesn't seem better to me" I was reacting (a bit 'shoot from the hip') to the categorical statement that failing off is the better option. However, as you acknowledge for the heater, depending on the reason for failure, there may be other options. For example, if the humidity sensor fails in a plant watering system, the system could fall back on an average regime instead of shutting down completely. If it has a clock, that regime might be adjusted for the season. The designer of a system should design its failure modes, too.

pbhjpbhj 11y ago

It's a failsafe to shut things off. If it fails on then there are disastrous possibilities, failing off leaves more annoyances, no?

FussyZeus 11y ago
Losing power is a disaster, a ruptured gas line is a disaster, and both of those things are required to have an operating furnace. Losing Internet is not a disaster, it's in fact a pretty much daily occurrence for I would argue the majority of Internet users (at least here the States, where Internet sucks). Losing the Internet shouldn't break my thermostat, much like having a clogged toilet shouldn't cut my power. They're two entirely different systems in the home.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  If your toilet clogs and literally floods the house then it's safer that the power gets cut, hence circuit breakers and the like. When you connect your thermostat to the Internet then they're no longer entirely separate systems.
Someone 11y ago
That depends on what the automated process is. If you live in Alaska, you don't want your heater to switch off if something goes wrong. If you are on holiday, you don't want the software watering your garden to "failsafe" by stopping doing anything at all a week before your return.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  The valves in your watering equipment failing open doesn't seem better to me, can't imagine the bill and how flooded the garden (neighbours garden, and house) would be. Perhaps better to leave fail state optional. On the Alaskan situation I'd expect a frost sensor to put the heating on when it fell below 5deg C, or a settable temp, as a separate system to the normal thermostat.
  - FussyZeus 11y ago
    You're both forgetting that according to the situation as I understand it, NOTHING HAD FAILED, other than the Internet. The NEST thermostat was working perfectly as far as we know. Nothing had broken, it had lost connection to a resource, yes, but that should not prevent it from doing it's job, i.e. keeping the temperature of the home at or near a given temperature.
  - Someone 11y ago
    "The valves in your watering equipment failing open doesn't seem better to me" I was reacting (a bit 'shoot from the hip') to the categorical statement that failing off is the better option. However, as you acknowledge for the heater, depending on the reason for failure, there may be other options. For example, if the humidity sensor fails in a plant watering system, the system could fall back on an average regime instead of shutting down completely. If it has a clock, that regime might be adjusted for the season. The designer of a system should design its failure modes, too.