4 ms·

You don't really need a "smart" light for it, a traditional radio-controlled "dumb" light switch is good enough for this purpose. Just press a button, and the r

You don't really need a "smart" light for it, a traditional radio-controlled "dumb" light switch is good enough for this purpose. Just press a button, and the remote control sends a RF signal at 433 MHz to switch it on or off, there's no IoT complexity like firmware updates, Linux kernel, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, an Internet connection or other nonsense. It can either be a light switch installed on the wall, or an integrated unit that comes with the LED light fixture (which may also allow you to change the color). Also, neutral wire is not a problem, some wall switches don't need it [0]. "Smart" lightbulbs are more flexible with more features, but personally I'm not a fan of them - many features with few additional benefits (with high price tags, possible bugs, and privacy concerns). Nevertheless, if you are not allowed to change any electrical wiring in the room, using "smart" lightbulbs can be a justified choice. Another genuine use may be controlling many wired-together lightbulbs on a large light fixture as separate groups without a laborious rewiring. Meanwhile I'll keep using my dumb wireless light switch. [0] They solve the neutral problem by using an always-on high resistance in series with the "hot" wire. The lightbulbs on the light fixture completes the circuit, a tiny current starts to flow, which is harvested by the switch to power itself. Clever hack!

Semaphor 6y ago
The question was for wireless lights. A radio-controlled dumb-switch used this way is still wireless lightning. And what privacy concerns are there with lights that have no internet connection whatsoever?
- segfaultbuserr 6y ago
  First, some context. When I was replying to this thread, there were only three comments, the first said wireless lighting was an useless solution waiting for a problem, another said it was a hobby and not too useful, and only you said it was useful. Hence, it thought it was natural to add some comment under your comment. Furthermore, the original article described how the author designed a Wi-Fi based system, and other readers seemed to have "smart" or "Wi-Fi" lights or lightbulbs in mind when they were expressing their disapproval to wireless lightning, so I thought it was useful to make the point that a remote-controlled light is not necessarily a IoT "smart" light, which constitutes the first paragraph of my reply. And the second paragraph in my reply was my personal opinion to those "Wi-Fi" / "IoT" based lightbulbs - they do have legitimate uses, however they may contain "possible bugs, and privacy concerns" (as in: a Wi-Fi controlled lightbulb with a mobile app), thus "meanwhile I'll keep using my dumb wireless light switch". I hope my comment makes sense to you now. > A radio-controlled dumb-switch used this way is still wireless lightning. Yes, and it was also the point I was trying to make.
  - Semaphor 6y ago
    > I hope my comment makes sense to you now. It does, thank you :)

Semaphor 6y ago

The question was for wireless lights. A radio-controlled dumb-switch used this way is still wireless lightning. And what privacy concerns are there with lights that have no internet connection whatsoever?

segfaultbuserr 6y ago
First, some context. When I was replying to this thread, there were only three comments, the first said wireless lighting was an useless solution waiting for a problem, another said it was a hobby and not too useful, and only you said it was useful. Hence, it thought it was natural to add some comment under your comment. Furthermore, the original article described how the author designed a Wi-Fi based system, and other readers seemed to have "smart" or "Wi-Fi" lights or lightbulbs in mind when they were expressing their disapproval to wireless lightning, so I thought it was useful to make the point that a remote-controlled light is not necessarily a IoT "smart" light, which constitutes the first paragraph of my reply. And the second paragraph in my reply was my personal opinion to those "Wi-Fi" / "IoT" based lightbulbs - they do have legitimate uses, however they may contain "possible bugs, and privacy concerns" (as in: a Wi-Fi controlled lightbulb with a mobile app), thus "meanwhile I'll keep using my dumb wireless light switch". I hope my comment makes sense to you now. > A radio-controlled dumb-switch used this way is still wireless lightning. Yes, and it was also the point I was trying to make.
- Semaphor 6y ago
  > I hope my comment makes sense to you now. It does, thank you :)