4 ms·

This is why I don't understand the "Internet of Things." A light switch is a pretty effective solution to the problem; there seems little advantage to networkin

This is why I don't understand the "Internet of Things." A light switch is a pretty effective solution to the problem; there seems little advantage to networking it. Ditto for a toaster, refrigerator, et cetera, et cetera. Now get off my lawn!

watty 11y ago
This is not "Internet of Things", this is "Building Automation" and it's been the norm for decades.
- goodcanadian 11y ago
  Depends what you mean by "Building Automation." If you mean things like a thermostat to control my heating, sure that has been around for decades. However, it can be a very simple mechanical device. Even for the computerized ones, I see little advantage to networking it (at least compared to the disadvantages). If, however, by "Building Automation," you mean networked computers controlling your lights and every other aspect of your environment, this is not the norm now, never has been, and I would hazard a guess that it won't be any time soon because the cost and complexity is not worth the marginal advantages. Yes, some elements are creeping in: particularly systems to shut off lighting and environment control in office buildings at night because the power savings are worth it, but those systems are relatively simple and closed. There is no need to connect them to the sort of network that is featured in the article let alone the internet at large.
  - watty 11y ago
    Lighting systems are very common in the building automation industry but they're typically connected to physical switches. Placing a computer or tablet there doesn't really change things - this could have been hacked regardless of the end-user input. The core protocol Modbus/TCP has been available and easily hackable for decades. Building Automation is exactly what your describing and it is the norm. It's common for schools, hotels, and commercial buildings to be "smart", with something like Modbus or BACnet connecting lighting, HVAC equipment, smart meters.
    - goodcanadian 11y ago
      I will defer to you re: Modbus/TCP as it is outside my area of expertise. Even if these systems are "common," I would still claim that they are not the "norm" for the simple reason that I have been in buildings that were clearly "smart" buildings and ones that were clearly not, and the latter outnumber the former. However, even if it were the norm for commercial buildings, I was thinking far more generally and that may be the source of our disagreement. Automatic doors, for example, are the norm for major retail stores (as well as airports, et cetera), but they just don't exist in private homes. It would be expensive and serve no purpose, and that is how I feel about most "Internet of Things" devices [EDIT: and most "home automation" devices].
- gregmac 11y ago
  Yes, but now it's "on the internet". Therefore it can be called Internet of Things. IoT is an amazing, awesome, innovative and entirely new concept. Just like "The Cloud" was. /s
zanny 11y ago
You want to have your lights come on at a certain time. You want to add motion detection to lights turning on. You want to attach light sensors to have variable intensity bulbs be brighter or dimmer depending on ambient lighting conditions. You want your lights to turn on inside your garage when the garage door opens. You want your front hallway light to come on when your door is opened. You want to be able to check all the lights in your house at a glance to make sure you did not accidentally leave any on. You want to have all your lights auto-off when your kids should be in bed. And of course, most importantly: You want to turn your house into a rave party, or an epileptic seizure inducing disaster, and I don't think there is actually a difference there. Your networked toaster might have online profiles for how to optimally toast bread, bagels, rolls, etc based on the type of bread and they would be available on a per-toaster basis. Rather than just odd balling how you want your toast done, you could buy a toaster that has profiles with high ratings that will toast your bread to your exact desire with your given model of toaster. For your fridge, it could have isolated temperature and humidity per compartment, give alerts when different foods are low in quantity / going bad, track the expiration dates of all your food, and have the same lighting features as your house lights. There are plenty of applications of "smart" devices. The problem with the IoT is that once you put software in a device you need to be responsible for it, and I don't believe there is actually a single hardware manufacturer on Earth right now who is legitimately responsible for their hardware and respectful of their users (particularly their software freedoms in relation to that hardware).
- goodcanadian 11y ago
  None of these things sound like killer applications, and few of them require any kind of computational power let alone networking. There are much simpler ways of accomplishing the same things. That is my point; IoT proponents are adding unnecessary complexity for dubious gains. Some examples: You want to have your lights come on at a certain time. I can get a timer at a hardware store. You want to add motion detection to lights turning on. I can get a motion sensor switch at a hardware store. You want your lights to turn on inside your garage when the garage door opens. Yep. That happens with most existing garage door openers. You want your front hallway light to come on when your door is opened. I've never seen this implemented, but it could be done in a multitude of ways such as the motion sensor or a simple contact switch on the door itself.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

watty 11y ago

This is not "Internet of Things", this is "Building Automation" and it's been the norm for decades.

goodcanadian 11y ago
Depends what you mean by "Building Automation." If you mean things like a thermostat to control my heating, sure that has been around for decades. However, it can be a very simple mechanical device. Even for the computerized ones, I see little advantage to networking it (at least compared to the disadvantages). If, however, by "Building Automation," you mean networked computers controlling your lights and every other aspect of your environment, this is not the norm now, never has been, and I would hazard a guess that it won't be any time soon because the cost and complexity is not worth the marginal advantages. Yes, some elements are creeping in: particularly systems to shut off lighting and environment control in office buildings at night because the power savings are worth it, but those systems are relatively simple and closed. There is no need to connect them to the sort of network that is featured in the article let alone the internet at large.
- watty 11y ago
  Lighting systems are very common in the building automation industry but they're typically connected to physical switches. Placing a computer or tablet there doesn't really change things - this could have been hacked regardless of the end-user input. The core protocol Modbus/TCP has been available and easily hackable for decades. Building Automation is exactly what your describing and it is the norm. It's common for schools, hotels, and commercial buildings to be "smart", with something like Modbus or BACnet connecting lighting, HVAC equipment, smart meters.
  - goodcanadian 11y ago
    I will defer to you re: Modbus/TCP as it is outside my area of expertise. Even if these systems are "common," I would still claim that they are not the "norm" for the simple reason that I have been in buildings that were clearly "smart" buildings and ones that were clearly not, and the latter outnumber the former. However, even if it were the norm for commercial buildings, I was thinking far more generally and that may be the source of our disagreement. Automatic doors, for example, are the norm for major retail stores (as well as airports, et cetera), but they just don't exist in private homes. It would be expensive and serve no purpose, and that is how I feel about most "Internet of Things" devices [EDIT: and most "home automation" devices].
gregmac 11y ago
Yes, but now it's "on the internet". Therefore it can be called Internet of Things. IoT is an amazing, awesome, innovative and entirely new concept. Just like "The Cloud" was. /s

zanny 11y ago

You want to have your lights come on at a certain time. You want to add motion detection to lights turning on. You want to attach light sensors to have variable intensity bulbs be brighter or dimmer depending on ambient lighting conditions. You want your lights to turn on inside your garage when the garage door opens. You want your front hallway light to come on when your door is opened. You want to be able to check all the lights in your house at a glance to make sure you did not accidentally leave any on. You want to have all your lights auto-off when your kids should be in bed. And of course, most importantly: You want to turn your house into a rave party, or an epileptic seizure inducing disaster, and I don't think there is actually a difference there. Your networked toaster might have online profiles for how to optimally toast bread, bagels, rolls, etc based on the type of bread and they would be available on a per-toaster basis. Rather than just odd balling how you want your toast done, you could buy a toaster that has profiles with high ratings that will toast your bread to your exact desire with your given model of toaster. For your fridge, it could have isolated temperature and humidity per compartment, give alerts when different foods are low in quantity / going bad, track the expiration dates of all your food, and have the same lighting features as your house lights. There are plenty of applications of "smart" devices. The problem with the IoT is that once you put software in a device you need to be responsible for it, and I don't believe there is actually a single hardware manufacturer on Earth right now who is legitimately responsible for their hardware and respectful of their users (particularly their software freedoms in relation to that hardware).

goodcanadian 11y ago
None of these things sound like killer applications, and few of them require any kind of computational power let alone networking. There are much simpler ways of accomplishing the same things. That is my point; IoT proponents are adding unnecessary complexity for dubious gains. Some examples: You want to have your lights come on at a certain time. I can get a timer at a hardware store. You want to add motion detection to lights turning on. I can get a motion sensor switch at a hardware store. You want your lights to turn on inside your garage when the garage door opens. Yep. That happens with most existing garage door openers. You want your front hallway light to come on when your door is opened. I've never seen this implemented, but it could be done in a multitude of ways such as the motion sensor or a simple contact switch on the door itself.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]