5 ms·

This is a bit unfair -- charging / discharging / safety on that scale in a home should be actively monitored and managed, otherwise you end up with real danger

This is a bit unfair -- charging / discharging / safety on that scale in a home should be actively monitored and managed, otherwise you end up with real danger a few years down the road.

Animats 9y ago
That's what local alarms are for. Green, yellow, and red lights, and a message display, both on the unit and remotable to the house, should be sufficient. If you want remote maintenance, you go to the unit and push the "remote maintenance" button, and then it phones home, if it can. The service it connects to probably won't last as long as the device. "Cloud" services seem to have a life of about 5 years. Sometimes less.
- ukulele 9y ago
  This is essentially how it does work, except the maintenance button is pressed automatically for you. You can take a Darwinist approach and say anyone who forgets to press the button deserves to potentially die in a fire, or you can say if it's really a potential problem don't release it, or you can actively monitor it. Also note that if your internet goes down the unit doesn't just shut off -- that would be a poor feature for a backup power source.
- smsm42 9y ago
  > That's what local alarms are for. Ideally, yes. In practice, people neglect them and then sue the company for $millions if something happens because "they clearly should have made alarms more prominent so I couldn't neglect them". Remote monitoring ensures there a) independent record of what was going on and b) ability to monitor the system and take proactive steps if something goes south. That's not even getting into situations of how unreliable the users are in reporting both what they did (the dreaded "I didn't do anything and it doesn't work!") and what happens with the system (the dreaded "it doesn't work, fix it NOW!"). If you install a complex system on user's side which requires maintenance (and what system doesn't) you better have remote diagnostics or you'd be a very frequent guest there. I don't see a reason why Tesla things would be different.
  - sametmax 9y ago
    In practice, we have lethal systems at home already: the electrical system and the hot water balloon. They have been working fine for the last decades without an Internet connection. We do have accidents, but compare to the incredible deadly danger they pose, it's very low. How ? Well they have fail safes that disable the system when it enters a dangerous state. You should not need an Internet connection for anything essential in your home. Certainly not for something that is marketed to take your "off the grid".
    - smsm42 9y ago
      Well, the difference is boilers are old, and Powerwalls are new. People always discount risks from old things and emphasize risks from new things. Thus, the risk of being successfully ruinously sued for boiler manufacturer, if they follow accepted industry practices and something goes wrong, are known, priced in and probably not very high. The risks of the same for manufacturer of a system that has no precedent, no established industry practices and no experience of running it into home environment for decades is much higher. And if something goes wrong, the first question that will be asked would be: why didn't you create a monitoring system? And, also, whoever made old systems has no option for remote internet monitoring. If they were designed today, the option would probably be added. > You should not need an Internet connection for anything essential in your home. You don't need it. Tesla does. And you need Tesla if something goes wrong, thus by extension you need it too. > Certainly not for something that is marketed to take your "off the grid". You can really be "off the grid" if you can maintain this system for decades. Can you? How many of average citizens can? Given the newness of technology, you'd probably will go to Tesla for fixes within couple of years for this or that thing, and will repeat that several times over the next decade (if it keeps working). You can manage that loop without internet connection, but the fact is you and Tesla are working together for the life of the product, so why make it harder? You can design the system that works Sneakernet-style, but why?
      - sametmax 9y ago
        > Well, the difference is boilers are old, and Powerwalls are new. People The legal and perception issues are a good point. Annoying, but I get it. > And you need Tesla if something goes wrong, thus by extension you need it too. No, what you mean is that they can get away with it, because among their customer base, more people don't care that people that do. > And you need Tesla if something goes wrong, thus by extension you need it too. Trying to get "off the grid" rarely is extreme to the point that you cut yourself from civilization completely. It's ok to have external help from time to time. It's just that your daily operation should not depends on it.
colechristensen 9y ago
That's absolute nonsense. I shouldn't need to phone home for my electricity to work, it's functioned just fine for a hundred years without Internet access. If you can't build a self-contained system to handle a home-level amount of electricity, you shouldn't be allowed to participate in the market.
- ukulele 9y ago
  > If you can't build a self-contained system to handle a home-level amount of electricity, you shouldn't be allowed to participate in the market. What if you can do it, but you're not certain of all the possible modes of failure over a decade of use in people's garages?
  - DannyBee 9y ago
    "What if you can do it, but you're not certain of all the possible modes of failure over a decade of use in people's garages? " You aren't serious, right? This is not a new thing to be thinking about. You should be certain of all the possible modes of failure over a decade of use. Otherwise, as the comment said, you shouldn't be allowed to participate in the market. This isn't new secret whizbang technology. The only major difference is battery type. If Tesla doesn't know enough to know what may happen there over a decade of use, ...
    - ukulele 9y ago
      > The only major difference is battery type. That's the part to be worried about.
- new299 9y ago
  I can understand the reticence in this situation. Lithium Ion batteries are dangerous. When they fail, they can release a lot of energy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAZ62tUtc0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAZ62tUtc0w The PowerWall seems to be impressively safe: https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/tesla-fire-powerpack-test-safety/ https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/tesla-fire-powerpack-test-saf... But I can still understand a desire to keep in constantly monitored.

This is a bit unfair -- charging / discharging / safety on that scale in a home should be actively monitored and managed, otherwise you end up with real danger a few years down the road.

Animats 9y ago

That's what local alarms are for. Green, yellow, and red lights, and a message display, both on the unit and remotable to the house, should be sufficient. If you want remote maintenance, you go to the unit and push the "remote maintenance" button, and then it phones home, if it can. The service it connects to probably won't last as long as the device. "Cloud" services seem to have a life of about 5 years. Sometimes less.

ukulele 9y ago
This is essentially how it does work, except the maintenance button is pressed automatically for you. You can take a Darwinist approach and say anyone who forgets to press the button deserves to potentially die in a fire, or you can say if it's really a potential problem don't release it, or you can actively monitor it. Also note that if your internet goes down the unit doesn't just shut off -- that would be a poor feature for a backup power source.
smsm42 9y ago
> That's what local alarms are for. Ideally, yes. In practice, people neglect them and then sue the company for $millions if something happens because "they clearly should have made alarms more prominent so I couldn't neglect them". Remote monitoring ensures there a) independent record of what was going on and b) ability to monitor the system and take proactive steps if something goes south. That's not even getting into situations of how unreliable the users are in reporting both what they did (the dreaded "I didn't do anything and it doesn't work!") and what happens with the system (the dreaded "it doesn't work, fix it NOW!"). If you install a complex system on user's side which requires maintenance (and what system doesn't) you better have remote diagnostics or you'd be a very frequent guest there. I don't see a reason why Tesla things would be different.
- sametmax 9y ago
  In practice, we have lethal systems at home already: the electrical system and the hot water balloon. They have been working fine for the last decades without an Internet connection. We do have accidents, but compare to the incredible deadly danger they pose, it's very low. How ? Well they have fail safes that disable the system when it enters a dangerous state. You should not need an Internet connection for anything essential in your home. Certainly not for something that is marketed to take your "off the grid".
  - smsm42 9y ago
    Well, the difference is boilers are old, and Powerwalls are new. People always discount risks from old things and emphasize risks from new things. Thus, the risk of being successfully ruinously sued for boiler manufacturer, if they follow accepted industry practices and something goes wrong, are known, priced in and probably not very high. The risks of the same for manufacturer of a system that has no precedent, no established industry practices and no experience of running it into home environment for decades is much higher. And if something goes wrong, the first question that will be asked would be: why didn't you create a monitoring system? And, also, whoever made old systems has no option for remote internet monitoring. If they were designed today, the option would probably be added. > You should not need an Internet connection for anything essential in your home. You don't need it. Tesla does. And you need Tesla if something goes wrong, thus by extension you need it too. > Certainly not for something that is marketed to take your "off the grid". You can really be "off the grid" if you can maintain this system for decades. Can you? How many of average citizens can? Given the newness of technology, you'd probably will go to Tesla for fixes within couple of years for this or that thing, and will repeat that several times over the next decade (if it keeps working). You can manage that loop without internet connection, but the fact is you and Tesla are working together for the life of the product, so why make it harder? You can design the system that works Sneakernet-style, but why?
    - sametmax 9y ago
      > Well, the difference is boilers are old, and Powerwalls are new. People The legal and perception issues are a good point. Annoying, but I get it. > And you need Tesla if something goes wrong, thus by extension you need it too. No, what you mean is that they can get away with it, because among their customer base, more people don't care that people that do. > And you need Tesla if something goes wrong, thus by extension you need it too. Trying to get "off the grid" rarely is extreme to the point that you cut yourself from civilization completely. It's ok to have external help from time to time. It's just that your daily operation should not depends on it.

colechristensen 9y ago

That's absolute nonsense. I shouldn't need to phone home for my electricity to work, it's functioned just fine for a hundred years without Internet access. If you can't build a self-contained system to handle a home-level amount of electricity, you shouldn't be allowed to participate in the market.

ukulele 9y ago
> If you can't build a self-contained system to handle a home-level amount of electricity, you shouldn't be allowed to participate in the market. What if you can do it, but you're not certain of all the possible modes of failure over a decade of use in people's garages?
- DannyBee 9y ago
  "What if you can do it, but you're not certain of all the possible modes of failure over a decade of use in people's garages? " You aren't serious, right? This is not a new thing to be thinking about. You should be certain of all the possible modes of failure over a decade of use. Otherwise, as the comment said, you shouldn't be allowed to participate in the market. This isn't new secret whizbang technology. The only major difference is battery type. If Tesla doesn't know enough to know what may happen there over a decade of use, ...
  - ukulele 9y ago
    > The only major difference is battery type. That's the part to be worried about.
new299 9y ago
I can understand the reticence in this situation. Lithium Ion batteries are dangerous. When they fail, they can release a lot of energy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAZ62tUtc0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAZ62tUtc0w The PowerWall seems to be impressively safe: https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/tesla-fire-powerpack-test-safety/ https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/tesla-fire-powerpack-test-saf... But I can still understand a desire to keep in constantly monitored.