6 ms·

> do we hand over all the cloud passwords as well? Or do we factory reset everything and let them go through the dull process of setting up new accounts? Wow,

> do we hand over all the cloud passwords as well? Or do we factory reset everything and let them go through the dull process of setting up new accounts? Wow, I hope this is rhetorical. No, you never give anyone your password for anything. Yes, you absolutely let them go through the dull process of setting up new accounts. > When I move into a house, do I want to spend the first day looking up manuals online to try and work out which buttons to hold down in order to claim the devices as my own? shrug, yeah, why not? That's the kind of stuff I would do anyways. Moving into a new home requires all kinds of "oh, ok, that's how that works" kind of discoveries. "Hmm, the breaker panel says '#5: kitchen' but that one also apparently has the garage lights. But not the garage door opener, for some reason." > not be able to easily set the heating until they've moved in ... the epitome of "first-world problems" I will concede that this is truly a PITA and a drawback of modern life. Computers are so cheap that we can "afford" to put them everywhere. Hopefully the next generation of these devices will have sane fallback/factory reset modes that behave like their ancestor devices until they've been setup/enabled.

TallGuyShort 9y ago
> Wow, I hope this is rhetorical. No, you never give anyone your password for anything. Well assuming it's a unique password, not connected to other accounts and you've deleted any sensitive data, why is this so obviously not even an option to you? Sometimes deleting an account is a ginormous pain and it saves some trouble for the buyer.
- esra 9y ago
  Or you could just change the password.
- sailfast 9y ago
  ...because they would have access to data that is not theirs. I know we get so used to leaving our trail everywhere so folks don't care, but if you think about it, the Nest thermostat probably knows every time you've walked by it for the past few years, when you've interacted with the thermostat, settings / preferences, and a host of other data. Left to the new owner, maybe "who cares!" but one should really try to get rid of data they no longer need / use wherever possible.
pavel_lishin 9y ago
> A bit of a faff - and possibly annoying to the new occupiers to not be able to easily set the heating until they've moved in, configured the WiFi, and registered for an account. I would argue that that's a failure of the thermostat. It absolutely needs to have a dumber fallback mechanism, not just for new residents, but for the current ones. (What if my internet goes down? What if the cat pees on my router?)
- subway 9y ago
  You should probably start by changing the litterbox... More seriously though, this is a major pet peeve of mine. Many of these devices will also become completely unusable when the manufacturer decides to terminate the service. This is a big reason why I hesitate to pay for products that don't adhere to open standards, and allow for local/offline use as a primary mode.
  - rightos 9y ago
    Yes, the #1 rule of IoT - if it doesn't have a solid LAN-only protocol, don't buy it. Anything relying on a single cloud service isn't worth your time or money. If you have LAN-only access it means not only that you'll have the ability to use it after the manufacturer goes away but also that you can always secure it by simply dropping it behind the appropriate NAT or firewall.
  - mcguire 9y ago
    I was just reading a review of a sous vide stick the other day that mentioned that issue. Fortunately, it supported Bluetooth...
    - briandear 9y ago
      Yeah fortunately. I was just thinking the other day how terrible life was before Bluetooth enabled sous vide. This has got to win HN today for the most HNist of comments. ;)
    - Chaebixi 9y ago
      Even Bluetooth is a no-go. What happens if the control is app no longer available or drops support for your model? Something like a sous vide stick should have control buttons. Ditto for stuff like Roombas. I've noticed all the new ones have their schedules set via an app. WTF? My current one has buttons and that works just fine. I'm seriously thinking of getting a spare now. Smartphones are great solution for controlling a lot of things, but it seems like we're in a place where people stupidly think it's the solution to control all things.
devmunchies 9y ago
> not be able to easily set the heating until they've moved in ... the epitome of "first-world problems" Staying warm is a first-world problem? How out of touch can the author be? That's a basic need.
- libria 9y ago
  Meh, the furnace is perfectly operational and you could hold a screwdriver across two terminals to force it on. Not convenient, but not dire need.
- btgeekboy 9y ago
  One would think that a new homeowner, if actually locked out of the thermostat somehow, could go to their local hardware store and pick up a cheap $30 thermostat to control the furnace.
  - cbr 9y ago
    Or just remove the thermostat from the wall, and turn the heating on by shorting the signal wires together.
    - btgeekboy 9y ago
      Yes, or that. Point is, the only thing that’s locked/secured is easily removed and replaced by a dumb, easily acquired device. Nobody that has accepted the responsibility of home ownership will be denied access to heat due to a smart home thermostat that they don’t have full access to.
      - andrewem 9y ago
        After I bought a house, I couldn't turn off the dining room chandelier lights for three days while I figured out the box they'd stashed in a cabinet had a radio transmitter that talked to the light. A while later I paid an electrician to run some wire through the ceiling and a wall, and install an outlet with a switch. There was also an outlet in another room with some complex controls. It stopped working after a while. Turned out the switch - which is connected to a freaking electrical wire - required a battery to work. I had that taken out too, and good riddance to all of it.
edent 9y ago
I wasn't being rhetorical. If I have a separate account for my home - say 742EvergreenTerrace@example.com - then it would be easier to hand that account and password over the the new owner.
- wyldfire 9y ago
  Yes, I suppose that does seem like an interesting solution. But it seems like more trouble to go through than it's worth. Not to mention that if the new owner is sufficiently paranoid, then maybe they wouldn't trust that changing the password is sufficient to remove your access. So it would be all for naught.
- mrmekon 9y ago
  It's almost certainly against the Terms of Service agreement. Presumably, you click-through agreed to a ToS for each one, and you have no right to transfer that agreement to someone else. The agreement is obviously tied to the human who "read" it, not whoever happens to control the account credentials. Not that the ToS for your light bulb dimmer matters much in practice, but technically it's probably forbidden.
  - tzs 9y ago
    One might be able to work around that by creating a corporation, 742 Evergreen Terrace Management Company, in some state where it is cheap to incorporate, and having the corporation own all the accounts related to the house. When you sell the house, transfer ownership of 742 Evergreen Terrace Management Company to the new homeowner.
    - WorldMaker 9y ago
      That's not entirely outrageous. There are even existing Corporate and Trust structures in use for ownership transfer needs (mailbox keys and similar shared infrastructure that maybe can't be directly deeded/titled) in deed-restricted communities (Home Owners Association) and condo buildings (Condo Owners Association). A "smart neighborhood" could work to make sure that smart home functionality transfers smoothly between home owners.
pythonaut_16 9y ago
That could be a cool exercise for your home. Document the various quirks and routines in a Github repository, then the new owner can gain access by forking it. Taking it a step farther, your family could submit issues or pull requests for various issues as they come up, generating an easy list of things that should be documented or fixed. Now realistically the person buying your house probably doesn't know how to use Git and your family probably isn't gonna make pull requests, but it seems like a novel use of Git and Github. Maybe if it were effective enough a wrapper could be made?
- whatshisface 9y ago
  It would be in your interest to conceal the problems that your house has, in order to compete with the ignorance offered by everyone else. While this would benefit humanity, nobody would do it.
  - fastball 9y ago
    All houses have problems. The selling point is, "yeah, we have problems like everyone else, but they're out in the open, so you'll never be surprised and you'll have a clear gameplan to deal with all of them". You're selling it as a mitigation of stress.
    - gjjrfcbugxbhf 9y ago
      Except that many buyers would see this as an elaborate attempt to hide bigger issues...
    - Jemmeh 9y ago
      YMMV. But I do this when I sell cars. I try to be up front with every issue I can, and take loads of pictures. Not only does it save people time, but I can basically say, "Well, I've factored all these things in already" and it's harder for them to use something like "there's a dent here" in negotiation, because I'm the one who brought it to the table. They also see me as more honest in my experience. Car sells faster. On the flip side, I can only really get the true value of the car. If I didn't list the issues I could probably inflate the price and only discount on what they happen to find during inspection.

TallGuyShort 9y ago

> Wow, I hope this is rhetorical. No, you never give anyone your password for anything. Well assuming it's a unique password, not connected to other accounts and you've deleted any sensitive data, why is this so obviously not even an option to you? Sometimes deleting an account is a ginormous pain and it saves some trouble for the buyer.

esra 9y ago
Or you could just change the password.
sailfast 9y ago
...because they would have access to data that is not theirs. I know we get so used to leaving our trail everywhere so folks don't care, but if you think about it, the Nest thermostat probably knows every time you've walked by it for the past few years, when you've interacted with the thermostat, settings / preferences, and a host of other data. Left to the new owner, maybe "who cares!" but one should really try to get rid of data they no longer need / use wherever possible.

pavel_lishin 9y ago

> A bit of a faff - and possibly annoying to the new occupiers to not be able to easily set the heating until they've moved in, configured the WiFi, and registered for an account. I would argue that that's a failure of the thermostat. It absolutely needs to have a dumber fallback mechanism, not just for new residents, but for the current ones. (What if my internet goes down? What if the cat pees on my router?)

subway 9y ago
You should probably start by changing the litterbox... More seriously though, this is a major pet peeve of mine. Many of these devices will also become completely unusable when the manufacturer decides to terminate the service. This is a big reason why I hesitate to pay for products that don't adhere to open standards, and allow for local/offline use as a primary mode.
- rightos 9y ago
  Yes, the #1 rule of IoT - if it doesn't have a solid LAN-only protocol, don't buy it. Anything relying on a single cloud service isn't worth your time or money. If you have LAN-only access it means not only that you'll have the ability to use it after the manufacturer goes away but also that you can always secure it by simply dropping it behind the appropriate NAT or firewall.
- mcguire 9y ago
  I was just reading a review of a sous vide stick the other day that mentioned that issue. Fortunately, it supported Bluetooth...
  - briandear 9y ago
    Yeah fortunately. I was just thinking the other day how terrible life was before Bluetooth enabled sous vide. This has got to win HN today for the most HNist of comments. ;)
  - Chaebixi 9y ago
    Even Bluetooth is a no-go. What happens if the control is app no longer available or drops support for your model? Something like a sous vide stick should have control buttons. Ditto for stuff like Roombas. I've noticed all the new ones have their schedules set via an app. WTF? My current one has buttons and that works just fine. I'm seriously thinking of getting a spare now. Smartphones are great solution for controlling a lot of things, but it seems like we're in a place where people stupidly think it's the solution to control all things.

devmunchies 9y ago

> not be able to easily set the heating until they've moved in ... the epitome of "first-world problems" Staying warm is a first-world problem? How out of touch can the author be? That's a basic need.

libria 9y ago
Meh, the furnace is perfectly operational and you could hold a screwdriver across two terminals to force it on. Not convenient, but not dire need.
btgeekboy 9y ago
One would think that a new homeowner, if actually locked out of the thermostat somehow, could go to their local hardware store and pick up a cheap $30 thermostat to control the furnace.
- cbr 9y ago
  Or just remove the thermostat from the wall, and turn the heating on by shorting the signal wires together.
  - btgeekboy 9y ago
    Yes, or that. Point is, the only thing that’s locked/secured is easily removed and replaced by a dumb, easily acquired device. Nobody that has accepted the responsibility of home ownership will be denied access to heat due to a smart home thermostat that they don’t have full access to.
    - andrewem 9y ago
      After I bought a house, I couldn't turn off the dining room chandelier lights for three days while I figured out the box they'd stashed in a cabinet had a radio transmitter that talked to the light. A while later I paid an electrician to run some wire through the ceiling and a wall, and install an outlet with a switch. There was also an outlet in another room with some complex controls. It stopped working after a while. Turned out the switch - which is connected to a freaking electrical wire - required a battery to work. I had that taken out too, and good riddance to all of it.

edent 9y ago

I wasn't being rhetorical. If I have a separate account for my home - say 742EvergreenTerrace@example.com - then it would be easier to hand that account and password over the the new owner.

wyldfire 9y ago
Yes, I suppose that does seem like an interesting solution. But it seems like more trouble to go through than it's worth. Not to mention that if the new owner is sufficiently paranoid, then maybe they wouldn't trust that changing the password is sufficient to remove your access. So it would be all for naught.
mrmekon 9y ago
It's almost certainly against the Terms of Service agreement. Presumably, you click-through agreed to a ToS for each one, and you have no right to transfer that agreement to someone else. The agreement is obviously tied to the human who "read" it, not whoever happens to control the account credentials. Not that the ToS for your light bulb dimmer matters much in practice, but technically it's probably forbidden.
- tzs 9y ago
  One might be able to work around that by creating a corporation, 742 Evergreen Terrace Management Company, in some state where it is cheap to incorporate, and having the corporation own all the accounts related to the house. When you sell the house, transfer ownership of 742 Evergreen Terrace Management Company to the new homeowner.
  - WorldMaker 9y ago
    That's not entirely outrageous. There are even existing Corporate and Trust structures in use for ownership transfer needs (mailbox keys and similar shared infrastructure that maybe can't be directly deeded/titled) in deed-restricted communities (Home Owners Association) and condo buildings (Condo Owners Association). A "smart neighborhood" could work to make sure that smart home functionality transfers smoothly between home owners.

pythonaut_16 9y ago

That could be a cool exercise for your home. Document the various quirks and routines in a Github repository, then the new owner can gain access by forking it. Taking it a step farther, your family could submit issues or pull requests for various issues as they come up, generating an easy list of things that should be documented or fixed. Now realistically the person buying your house probably doesn't know how to use Git and your family probably isn't gonna make pull requests, but it seems like a novel use of Git and Github. Maybe if it were effective enough a wrapper could be made?

whatshisface 9y ago
It would be in your interest to conceal the problems that your house has, in order to compete with the ignorance offered by everyone else. While this would benefit humanity, nobody would do it.
- fastball 9y ago
  All houses have problems. The selling point is, "yeah, we have problems like everyone else, but they're out in the open, so you'll never be surprised and you'll have a clear gameplan to deal with all of them". You're selling it as a mitigation of stress.
  - gjjrfcbugxbhf 9y ago
    Except that many buyers would see this as an elaborate attempt to hide bigger issues...
  - Jemmeh 9y ago
    YMMV. But I do this when I sell cars. I try to be up front with every issue I can, and take loads of pictures. Not only does it save people time, but I can basically say, "Well, I've factored all these things in already" and it's harder for them to use something like "there's a dent here" in negotiation, because I'm the one who brought it to the table. They also see me as more honest in my experience. Car sells faster. On the flip side, I can only really get the true value of the car. If I didn't list the issues I could probably inflate the price and only discount on what they happen to find during inspection.