3 ms·
Surely this can be circumvented by, say, lighting a candle next to the thermostat, or any other small heat source?
by madaxe_again 4y ago
Surely this can be circumvented by, say, lighting a candle next to the thermostat, or any other small heat source?
- ezfe 4y agoIt can be circumvented by not enrolling in the program that does this.
- hammyhavoc 4y agoOr by not purchasing third-party cloud-connected IoT products. For every convenience, there is inevitably a compromise.
- Semaphor 4y agoThe "convenience" here is that the users literally get paid for this remote control option. The company gives them money, so they can prevent excessive energy use in case of emergency… This is not a convenience compromise, it’s "get paid for inconvenience"
- hammyhavoc 4y agoThe "inconvenience" here is that their thermostat is "locked". Like I said: for every convenience, there is an inconvenience. It isn't going to please everybody, but where people draw the line as individuals is going to vary as much as preference for food and drink.
- ezfe 4y agoWell yes, but the convenience here isn't having an IoT thermostat, it's the $30 bucks they throw your way for allowing remote control.
- hammyhavoc 4y agoWhat I said.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jshprentz 4y agoYou can still buy the X10 Powerhouse thermostat setback controller [1]. "Mounts on the wall under your thermostat and plugs into an appliance or wall receptacle module. Selector switch (low, medium, and high) 'fools' your thermostat into 'thinking' the room is 5, 10, or 15 degrees F warmer than it really is." [1] https://thex10shop.com/products/x10-powerhouse-th2807-thermostat-set-back-controller https://thex10shop.com/products/x10-powerhouse-th2807-thermo...