5 ms·

>I am also quite surprised by the number of comments here at HN siding with Garadget. I don't agree with disabling the customer's device, but I also don't agre

by dqv 10y ago

>I am also quite surprised by the number of comments here at HN siding with Garadget. I don't agree with disabling the customer's device, but I also don't agree with customers somehow being absolved of having a minimum level of decorum.

kungtotte 10y ago
He called their product a piece of shit and that justifies bricking his device? I don't think customers get to behave however they want without repercussions, but come on...
atemerev 10y ago
Thanks to psychology, there is a nice way of making it work for both sides (not in this particular case, of course — the damage is done). Hardware companies should (and will, eventually) offer the devices for free and switch to subscription model. Devices like these are not products, they are services. They are useless on their own without the operating backend, support and maintenance. If I am buying the device, I expect it to be working. If I am subscribing to a service, I know that it can be cancelled anytime. (And $5/month are worth much more these days than $99 once. If you can keep the customer that long, of course).
- raverbashing 10y ago
  I agree But "subscription model" for a garage opener is, sorry to say, stupid Of the things in my home I want a garage opener to have pretty good reliability. I need a plan B if the power is out for a conventional one. I don't want to get locked out if I miss a payment (this is not like rent where these things are regulated and lack of payments are handled through actual notices) Relying on the internet to open your garage is just naive.
  - dangrossman 10y ago
    The product is basically a cloud-enabled garage door remote. It doesn't replace the buttons on the wall in the garage, nor does it replace the garage door opener you use in your car, or however it is you work your door. It supplements them, like buying a spare remote, except this one is app-enabled and can be used without line-of-sight to the door. I have a smart garage door opener, smart deadbolt, smart car (remote start/heat/cool/etc), smart thermostat, smart light fixtures, smart smoke detector... all of them function without internet, or power, as applicable. Light switches, buttons, keys, etc still work. Most smart devices are like that; the remote functionality is supplemental, not a replacement.
    - atemerev 10y ago
      It is not that simple. Do you remember one of those bear toys that were sending the recordings of their conversations with children to an exposed MongoDB instance? I bought one of them for my daughter a few months before. And I am a software engineer who knows what an exposed MongoDB instance is. My voice and my daughter's voice are now in the leak. Thankfully, the toy was only used with my supervision, so I know what was said there. The problem is that is was advertised as a Bluetooth-powered toy to communicate with your child via recorder messages. "It's fun" -- I have thought, so I bought it. Only later I realized that it forwarded everything that was said to their servers via their "cloud app". OK, I have thought, so they have the recording. But at least do they have some decency to not share it with the public? And that, indeed, turned out to be a little naive. The toy became "broken" a few weeks before the leak when I was finally fed with it, but the damage is done. Now I have similar worries about my NetAtmo devices. They do look cool and measure CO2 content in my rooms, which is the reason I bought them, but they also contain an always-on microphone for measuring "noise pollution", and I am not sure at this point if they don't transmit everything I speak in my room to the CIA, NSA, Russians, our reptilian overlords, or whoever else needs to hear the shit I say at home.
      - tnone 10y ago
        There's a really easy solution to this. Don't buy junk you don't need sold by people who don't care. Who convinced you you needed it in the first place? That's probably a bigger source of noise pollution...
        reagank 10y ago
        I love the idea that you have any concept at all about whether or not someone needs an item. We're all glad you aren't materialistic, but we don't really care about your opinions on other people's spending habits
        atemerev 10y ago
        I want (in fact, I need, because of my sensitivity to CO2 levels) a nicely working CO2 sensor in my room. I tried a few cheaper options, but they didn't work as reliably. I did my research, and it was either NetAtmo or some industrial-grade sensors, more expensive and ugly.
mmjaa 10y ago
>minimum level of decorum Free speech doesn't mean much? Entire nations were founded on the basis of individual rights to bitch about things they don't like, without incurring oppressive retaliation. Really, this is imperialism versus the free market. Either you harden up and listen to the people whose participation influences your survival directly (i.e. customers), or you go out of business. In this case, the latter condition appears appropriate.
- deadbunny 10y ago
  > Entire nations were founded on the basis of individual rights to bitch about things they don't like, without incurring oppressive retaliation. From the Government.
  - rapht 10y ago
    > From the Government. Because we shouldn't be protected from business interests when they get too powerful?
    - IncRnd 10y ago
      The discussion is about words, and no you shouldn't be protected from the words and speech coming from business interests.
      - quirkafleeg 10y ago
        That's not even remotely what he was saying people should be protected from WRT business.
        IncRnd 10y ago
        Words were exactly the subject of his parent comment.
  - mmjaa 10y ago
    One mans business is another mans government. Yes, we should be protected from business interests when they usurp our basic rights to free speech. We should be protected - by our governments - whenever our rights are misused/abused. What else is government for if its not to protect our basic rights?
roystonvassey 10y ago
If you operate a business in the Internet age and delude yourself that customers are required to have decorum, you are in for a rude shock, sooner than later.
- barking 10y ago
  You can require your customers to show decorum if you choose.
  - Steve0 10y ago
    Fair enough, but please tell them that before they enter a contract with you. Don't take their cash followed by not providing a service for reasons not stipulated before accepting the money.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      You would think "please don't be an asshole" would be common sense, but I suppose adding it your product description about you providing support is being explicit.
      - jtmb 10y ago
        Not only providing support, but unilaterally disabling the product they purchased after the fact. That should be incredibly explicit. And even then. Just look at Ham Radio Deluxe.
  - robryan 10y ago
    This is actually not true if you hope to sell long term as an Amazon marketplace seller.
    - barking 10y ago
      Is existing only at Amazon's pleasure any kind of long term strategy for a business?
sametmax 10y ago
People don't have decorum IRL. When something doesn't, they tell of their friends it's a piece of shit. If you submit yourself to a review system, you gotta expect it. If you can't accept that you need to change your view to see the world the way it is, not rambling, expecting the world to change for you. Unless you are able to change the world. But people rambling never do.
PeterisP 10y ago
Calling a product a piece of shit is perfectly acceptable behavior, it often is a reasonable and accurate opinion about a product and definitely meets the standards of the "level of decorum" expected for customer product reviews. Customers shouldn't be absolved of having a minimum level of decorum, but that minimum is at the level of (a) personal insults at specific people ("Bob in customer support is a piece of shit" wouldn't be ok but "your customer support system is a piece of shit" is fine) or (b) libel, as decided by the legal system. For direct criticism of a product or service literally anything that I imagine would be above that minimum level of decorum. Insulting people is not ok, but insulting products definitely is.
- victorhooi 10y ago
  No, I'm sorry, that is not perfectly acceptable behaviour. It's not illegal - but it's also not helpful, or constructive, and nor is it desirable if you're trying to build a helpful community. There are other ways of getting your point across, without resorting to insults such as "piece of s*it". In Chinese, we might call this 家教 - or "upbringing". If you have no decorum, or class - it suggests that your upbringing was poor, or that your parents failed to raise you well. We often forget that there's another person at the other end of the phone, or at the other end of our comment. In this case, a real-life person who put a lot of work into a product. You don't have to love it - but if you are going to criticise it, at least don't be a jerk, and make some good-faith efforts to work with them through the issue. It's not exactly like the developer didn't try to help.
  - PeterisP 10y ago
    The audience of Amazon product reviews is other customers, not the developer. "Don't buy this product, it's a piece of shit" is constructive, helpful, actionable advice to other customers. It is desirable if you're trying to build a helpful community where customers help other customers differentiate between good products and products that sometimes don't work on arrival or have software reliability problems; a community that recommends to avoid certain companies is a helpful community to have for a buyer.
  - yunolisten 10y ago
vidarh 10y ago
The problem with this, is that now I don't expect to be able to believe any of the reviews of this product, because their behaviour will make any of their customers who are aware of this event more timid. To me, this is the seller trying to manipulate public perception by silencing reviews from those with a bad experience. I'll put up with a lot of problems if the seller is responsive and handle issues well, but if I risk having them stop me from using the product? This seller has demonstrated I can't trust them not to turn off my access to their servers without warning. To me, that is an absolute deal-breaker that would stop me from ever considering their product. I can understand anger over a customer that rushes to give a bad review without waiting for a support response first, but their response in my eyes made things ten times as bad.

by dqv 10y ago

kungtotte 10y ago

He called their product a piece of shit and that justifies bricking his device? I don't think customers get to behave however they want without repercussions, but come on...

atemerev 10y ago

Thanks to psychology, there is a nice way of making it work for both sides (not in this particular case, of course — the damage is done). Hardware companies should (and will, eventually) offer the devices for free and switch to subscription model. Devices like these are not products, they are services. They are useless on their own without the operating backend, support and maintenance. If I am buying the device, I expect it to be working. If I am subscribing to a service, I know that it can be cancelled anytime. (And $5/month are worth much more these days than $99 once. If you can keep the customer that long, of course).

raverbashing 10y ago
I agree But "subscription model" for a garage opener is, sorry to say, stupid Of the things in my home I want a garage opener to have pretty good reliability. I need a plan B if the power is out for a conventional one. I don't want to get locked out if I miss a payment (this is not like rent where these things are regulated and lack of payments are handled through actual notices) Relying on the internet to open your garage is just naive.
- dangrossman 10y ago
  The product is basically a cloud-enabled garage door remote. It doesn't replace the buttons on the wall in the garage, nor does it replace the garage door opener you use in your car, or however it is you work your door. It supplements them, like buying a spare remote, except this one is app-enabled and can be used without line-of-sight to the door. I have a smart garage door opener, smart deadbolt, smart car (remote start/heat/cool/etc), smart thermostat, smart light fixtures, smart smoke detector... all of them function without internet, or power, as applicable. Light switches, buttons, keys, etc still work. Most smart devices are like that; the remote functionality is supplemental, not a replacement.
  - atemerev 10y ago
    It is not that simple. Do you remember one of those bear toys that were sending the recordings of their conversations with children to an exposed MongoDB instance? I bought one of them for my daughter a few months before. And I am a software engineer who knows what an exposed MongoDB instance is. My voice and my daughter's voice are now in the leak. Thankfully, the toy was only used with my supervision, so I know what was said there. The problem is that is was advertised as a Bluetooth-powered toy to communicate with your child via recorder messages. "It's fun" -- I have thought, so I bought it. Only later I realized that it forwarded everything that was said to their servers via their "cloud app". OK, I have thought, so they have the recording. But at least do they have some decency to not share it with the public? And that, indeed, turned out to be a little naive. The toy became "broken" a few weeks before the leak when I was finally fed with it, but the damage is done. Now I have similar worries about my NetAtmo devices. They do look cool and measure CO2 content in my rooms, which is the reason I bought them, but they also contain an always-on microphone for measuring "noise pollution", and I am not sure at this point if they don't transmit everything I speak in my room to the CIA, NSA, Russians, our reptilian overlords, or whoever else needs to hear the shit I say at home.
    - tnone 10y ago
      There's a really easy solution to this. Don't buy junk you don't need sold by people who don't care. Who convinced you you needed it in the first place? That's probably a bigger source of noise pollution...
      - reagank 10y ago
        I love the idea that you have any concept at all about whether or not someone needs an item. We're all glad you aren't materialistic, but we don't really care about your opinions on other people's spending habits
      - atemerev 10y ago
        I want (in fact, I need, because of my sensitivity to CO2 levels) a nicely working CO2 sensor in my room. I tried a few cheaper options, but they didn't work as reliably. I did my research, and it was either NetAtmo or some industrial-grade sensors, more expensive and ugly.

mmjaa 10y ago

>minimum level of decorum Free speech doesn't mean much? Entire nations were founded on the basis of individual rights to bitch about things they don't like, without incurring oppressive retaliation. Really, this is imperialism versus the free market. Either you harden up and listen to the people whose participation influences your survival directly (i.e. customers), or you go out of business. In this case, the latter condition appears appropriate.

deadbunny 10y ago
> Entire nations were founded on the basis of individual rights to bitch about things they don't like, without incurring oppressive retaliation. From the Government.
- rapht 10y ago
  > From the Government. Because we shouldn't be protected from business interests when they get too powerful?
  - IncRnd 10y ago
    The discussion is about words, and no you shouldn't be protected from the words and speech coming from business interests.
    - quirkafleeg 10y ago
      That's not even remotely what he was saying people should be protected from WRT business.
      - IncRnd 10y ago
        Words were exactly the subject of his parent comment.
- mmjaa 10y ago
  One mans business is another mans government. Yes, we should be protected from business interests when they usurp our basic rights to free speech. We should be protected - by our governments - whenever our rights are misused/abused. What else is government for if its not to protect our basic rights?

roystonvassey 10y ago

If you operate a business in the Internet age and delude yourself that customers are required to have decorum, you are in for a rude shock, sooner than later.

barking 10y ago
You can require your customers to show decorum if you choose.
- Steve0 10y ago
  Fair enough, but please tell them that before they enter a contract with you. Don't take their cash followed by not providing a service for reasons not stipulated before accepting the money.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    You would think "please don't be an asshole" would be common sense, but I suppose adding it your product description about you providing support is being explicit.
    - jtmb 10y ago
      Not only providing support, but unilaterally disabling the product they purchased after the fact. That should be incredibly explicit. And even then. Just look at Ham Radio Deluxe.
- robryan 10y ago
  This is actually not true if you hope to sell long term as an Amazon marketplace seller.
  - barking 10y ago
    Is existing only at Amazon's pleasure any kind of long term strategy for a business?

sametmax 10y ago

People don't have decorum IRL. When something doesn't, they tell of their friends it's a piece of shit. If you submit yourself to a review system, you gotta expect it. If you can't accept that you need to change your view to see the world the way it is, not rambling, expecting the world to change for you. Unless you are able to change the world. But people rambling never do.

PeterisP 10y ago

Calling a product a piece of shit is perfectly acceptable behavior, it often is a reasonable and accurate opinion about a product and definitely meets the standards of the "level of decorum" expected for customer product reviews. Customers shouldn't be absolved of having a minimum level of decorum, but that minimum is at the level of (a) personal insults at specific people ("Bob in customer support is a piece of shit" wouldn't be ok but "your customer support system is a piece of shit" is fine) or (b) libel, as decided by the legal system. For direct criticism of a product or service literally anything that I imagine would be above that minimum level of decorum. Insulting people is not ok, but insulting products definitely is.

victorhooi 10y ago
No, I'm sorry, that is not perfectly acceptable behaviour. It's not illegal - but it's also not helpful, or constructive, and nor is it desirable if you're trying to build a helpful community. There are other ways of getting your point across, without resorting to insults such as "piece of s*it". In Chinese, we might call this 家教 - or "upbringing". If you have no decorum, or class - it suggests that your upbringing was poor, or that your parents failed to raise you well. We often forget that there's another person at the other end of the phone, or at the other end of our comment. In this case, a real-life person who put a lot of work into a product. You don't have to love it - but if you are going to criticise it, at least don't be a jerk, and make some good-faith efforts to work with them through the issue. It's not exactly like the developer didn't try to help.
- PeterisP 10y ago
  The audience of Amazon product reviews is other customers, not the developer. "Don't buy this product, it's a piece of shit" is constructive, helpful, actionable advice to other customers. It is desirable if you're trying to build a helpful community where customers help other customers differentiate between good products and products that sometimes don't work on arrival or have software reliability problems; a community that recommends to avoid certain companies is a helpful community to have for a buyer.
- yunolisten 10y ago

vidarh 10y ago

The problem with this, is that now I don't expect to be able to believe any of the reviews of this product, because their behaviour will make any of their customers who are aware of this event more timid. To me, this is the seller trying to manipulate public perception by silencing reviews from those with a bad experience. I'll put up with a lot of problems if the seller is responsive and handle issues well, but if I risk having them stop me from using the product? This seller has demonstrated I can't trust them not to turn off my access to their servers without warning. To me, that is an absolute deal-breaker that would stop me from ever considering their product. I can understand anger over a customer that rushes to give a bad review without waiting for a support response first, but their response in my eyes made things ten times as bad.