44 ms·

This is fundamentally why I'm so sceptical of putting "smart" control equipment into my home. It's very expesive to fit in the first place, and then there is th

This is fundamentally why I'm so sceptical of putting "smart" control equipment into my home. It's very expesive to fit in the first place, and then there is the incredibly high chance it will become redundant or unmaintainable in the next 5 to 10 years. You just won't see the payoff in that time. Much better to just turn the lights off when you leave a room, or turn the heating down and wear another layer. We have Nest to control our heating, we have turned off all the "intelligent" features, they don't work. Now it's just a heating scheduler and thermostat that we can control when out of the house, which frankly is all we want. But on this case specifically, I assume they had "smart" lighting control panels in each room, and these have failed. The idea of not having some sort of manual override in each room is nuts.

amelius 4y ago
Electronics hobbyist magazines of the 70s and 80s are full of better Nest replacements.
- autora 4y ago
  Considering parent, myself and most people I talk to consider the point of Nest being the ability to control their thermostat when they are out of the house, I don't understand how any system in the 70s or 80s could even work at all like a Nest, let alone better. No mobile phones, no widespread use of the internet and a hobbyist can make a thermostat you can control when out of the house? Would love to know how?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - HPsquared 4y ago
    Something connected to the phone line maybe?
  - braingenious 4y ago
    I’m curious, what is the big draw of controlling your thermostat in real time that is significantly better than just (for example) a timer? As an argument against connecting one’s thermostat to the internet, I’ll point to this article: https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-energy-companies-remotely-raised-smart-thermostats-temperatures-2021-6?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-energy-companies-remot...
    - dtech 4y ago
      I have a system with the capability. It's quite convenient for dynamic on/off. E.g. instead of having a timer I turn on the heating when I wake up from bed, and if I go home I put it on before leaving or while underway.
    - richrichardsson 4y ago
      I'm not sure how intentionally[1] opting into an agreement to have your thermostat remotely controlled is an argument against having it connected to the internet. The best argument would be the hypothetical remote control by a bad actor without any consent. [1] what's curious about this particular story is how "intentional" this was; the report is vague and hints that some people were unaware exactly what they were opting into.
      - braingenious 4y ago
        >I'm not sure how intentionally[1] opting into an agreement to have your thermostat remotely controlled is an argument against having it connected to the internet. ??? I think you immediately followed that up with more than one answer to that?
        richrichardsson 4y ago
        Users being stupid and not reading what they are signing up for is not a argument against connecting the thermostat to the internet, and hypothetical bad actors are just that, "hypothetical". If you'd linked an article demonstrating concrete proof I'd accept it as an "argument against connecting one’s thermostat to the internet".
  - ridgered4 4y ago
    LGR on youtube had a video on a home automation system from the 80s. IIRC it had a modem listen interface, although I don't recall the details.
woile 4y ago
It reminds me of my sister installing an Alexa controlled light in the living room with no switch. My dad, who doesn't speak english, couldn't turn them on when he stayed there. I keep thinking turning on lights with a switch takes even less time than interacting with Alexa.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  I have wireless light switches in my rented apartment, and I don't like them. 1. I can't see from the position of the switch the state of the light, so I still after 5 years press the wrong switch sometimes. 2. Sometimes, maybe 5% of the time, the light doesn't change instantly, but up to 2 seconds after I pressed the button. 3. About 5% of the time, the light doesn't change at all. Then I either think I've pressed the wrong switch (see 1), or I have to turn around, walk back and try again. I think the benefit is for the company who built the apartment, since they saved a few crowns not needing to run wires near the doorways. There is no benefit to the occupant, only problems. At least the batteries in the switches are still fine.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - mcv 4y ago
    I also have a few wireless switches, and in some cases, the light doesn't immediately respond to a press requiring a few tries, and sometimes it doesn't respond at all. Could be distance, could be the battery is running out, but either way it's a problem I'd never had with regular light switches. At our last remodeling, I had some of them removed and replaced by regular wired switches wherever possible. Nothing beats the user experience of direct interaction with a system.
    - cameronh90 4y ago
      Every light in my house is Hue, and all rooms have those Hue dimmer switches mounted over the normal light switch. I absolutely love it. It's never been anything other than instantly responsive, works without the internet and I can turn all the house's lights off from my bed. Additionally, the utility rooms, hallways and bathroom lights are just fully automated so you never think about it. The regular switches are still there if you need them, but in over a year since installing it, I've not touched any of the traditional light switches. My only issue is that the Hue Bridge has a maximum limit for the number of lights and accessories you can run, which I'm starting to get close to. The lights are also expensive, especially the low voltage outdoor lighting, so for that I just use a standalone ZigBee dimmer switch which integrates with the Hue system.
iLoveOncall 4y ago
Just looking at the absolute nightmare that Linus from Linus Tech Tips (a popular YouTube tech channel) is going through with his smart house is enough to make it obvious that those solutions just suck.
- automatic6131 4y ago
  If a highly consumer tech literate person with a near unlimited budget (either from freebies or business expenses or just because he's a multi millionaire) struggles with this stuff, you can be sure it's not ready for even enthusiast adoption.
  - shapefrog 4y ago
    > highly consumer tech literate person Watching his videos on this subject I do not get the impression that he falls into this category.
    - KptMarchewa 4y ago
      If he's not then pretty no one is; and the solutions are overcomplicated.
      - shapefrog 4y ago
        My grandmother, at the grand age of 95, shows better understanding of tech than is demonstrated in those videos.
        iLoveOncall 4y ago
        Care to highlight any specific example?
- sandos 4y ago
  Just looking quickly at one video where he had trouble with heating, they seem to use, lets say, not exactly finished products. Instead controlling things via Home Assistant. Which does not to me scream having lots of money, even is he has that. I believe there are much more expensive and more ready-made systems than what was used there.
parker_mountain 4y ago
I went with standards based stuff, zigbee specifically. Matter/thread are the new standard that seems to stick. Basically, anything that doesn't require a specialized app to work, but rather a standardized protocol through a hub - and if the hub fails or sucks, you can replace it. Fortunately, it seems like the vendors are finally standardizing.
- switch007 4y ago
  Standardising on Matter? What was wrong with Zigbee/Zwave? How long until another standard comes along :D
  - _djo_ 4y ago
    Thread has IP-based routing, can use 6LoWPAN, has a simpler gateway implementation in border routers, and they've separated out the application layer into Matter to allow for easier interoperability and evolution. Zigbee's fine, but it's dated.
  - jon-wood 4y ago
    Matter is in many ways a meta-standard. The transport layer may well be remain as Zigbee or Zwave, but by having at least the controllers supporting Matter you get interoperability between different protocols, rather than having to go all in on a specific one.
  - parker_mountain 4y ago
    Thread is basically an evolution of Zigbee/Zwave, which both have been around for 20 years. Some of its key deficiencies include its routing, encryption, and meshing. If we get another 20 years out of Thread/Matter, that's a pretty good outcome. I will be slowly moving to T/M. My Zigbee hub is local only, and I have no reason to believe it won't continue to be stable.
jchw 4y ago
Smart equipment is fine as long as the "smart" part is just synchronization built on top. I have ZigBee and Zwave (yes both for now unfortunately) switches and dimmers, these work completely fine manually in absense of home assistant. I do also use some smart bulbs (also ZigBee/Zwave) and when paired with a smart switch, they can work in absense of the controller still, allowing you to still control the lights as long as the radios in both devices can reach eachother. To me this is the common-sense answer. The design works in absense of any central controllers and definitely does not (ever) depend on any internet services, and yet you can still do anything you'd normally do (including integration into something like Google Home if you really want. Though, I don't care about "voice assistants" or anything, so it's not really that useful to me.)
- yencabulator 4y ago
  > Smart equipment is fine as long as the "smart" part is just synchronization built on top. ... until you hit that bug that tells all the lights in the school to turn off about 100 times a second.
  - jchw 4y ago
    You can unplug the controller if need be, but truth is that if we're talking about ZigBee or Zwave, I don't think there's nearly enough bandwidth to do that :)
tiborsaas 4y ago
Check this out: https://www.shelly.cloud/en-hu/products/product-overview/shelly-plus-1 https://www.shelly.cloud/en-hu/products/product-overview/she... It's inexpensive and easy to install. The most important feature is its REST API, so you can control it any way you like if you don't like the official app.
stdbrouw 4y ago
I used to have a huge aversion to any kind of smart control, but the new generation of home automation (2010-now or whatever) is fundamentally different from the kind of 80's and 90's domotics that we all have vague memories of. Older systems (like the school system, probably) relied on an expensive central panel and wiring and accessories that were potentially tailored to that particular system, and if something went wrong you were totally out of luck, and only the installer could make changes or apply fixes. But now, all you need is mains power and a smartphone, Hue lights default to working like a regular light if something goes wrong with the Zigbee bridge, Shelly switches can be added onto regular switches so that it's just something on top of exactly the same tactile interface you already had, and so on and so on. And if all of it does mysteriously fail and you need to replace it, a new set of 10-20 light bulbs and some smart relays would set you back no more than a couple hundred dollars / euros. Almost makes you wonder whether the school would be better off with a consumer grade system.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  >But now, all you need is mains power and a smartphone, And a server owned by Jesus McJesusFace in WhereTheHellistan propped up by shitnickles funds. Just no. A simple physical switch works every single damn time without external dependencies. Perfection is simplicity, not complexity.
  - Semaphor 4y ago
    I mean, if that’s what you want, sure. Or, as parent said, you could go with local control. The choice is there, if you really think McJesusFace’s server is great, go for it. Personally, I prefer not relying on any outside server and having everything locally and still get all those smart features. Oh, and as an extra: That simple switch still works.
  - sidpatil 4y ago
    > And a server owned by Jesus McJesusFace in WhereTheHellistan propped up by shitnickles funds. No you don't. Just use Home Assistant or openHAB — fully local control by default. I've been using the former for a while now, and it's been working great.
Mvandenbergh 4y ago
Earlier generations of Nest didn't have proportional control capability of any kind, no ability to apply Load or Temperature compensation either which are things that less polished looking heating and cooling control systems have been able to do for decades. To be fair to Nest, newer versions are able to do this but many heating and cooling systems don't expose those functions on a standards compliant open way. As a result, a vast number of heating and cooling systems runs about 10% less efficiently than they should but there's really no way for end customers to know that since they don't have a reliable benchmark to compare against.

amelius 4y ago

Electronics hobbyist magazines of the 70s and 80s are full of better Nest replacements.

autora 4y ago
Considering parent, myself and most people I talk to consider the point of Nest being the ability to control their thermostat when they are out of the house, I don't understand how any system in the 70s or 80s could even work at all like a Nest, let alone better. No mobile phones, no widespread use of the internet and a hobbyist can make a thermostat you can control when out of the house? Would love to know how?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- HPsquared 4y ago
  Something connected to the phone line maybe?
- braingenious 4y ago
  I’m curious, what is the big draw of controlling your thermostat in real time that is significantly better than just (for example) a timer? As an argument against connecting one’s thermostat to the internet, I’ll point to this article: https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-energy-companies-remotely-raised-smart-thermostats-temperatures-2021-6?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-energy-companies-remot...
  - dtech 4y ago
    I have a system with the capability. It's quite convenient for dynamic on/off. E.g. instead of having a timer I turn on the heating when I wake up from bed, and if I go home I put it on before leaving or while underway.
  - richrichardsson 4y ago
    I'm not sure how intentionally[1] opting into an agreement to have your thermostat remotely controlled is an argument against having it connected to the internet. The best argument would be the hypothetical remote control by a bad actor without any consent. [1] what's curious about this particular story is how "intentional" this was; the report is vague and hints that some people were unaware exactly what they were opting into.
    - braingenious 4y ago
      >I'm not sure how intentionally[1] opting into an agreement to have your thermostat remotely controlled is an argument against having it connected to the internet. ??? I think you immediately followed that up with more than one answer to that?
      - richrichardsson 4y ago
        Users being stupid and not reading what they are signing up for is not a argument against connecting the thermostat to the internet, and hypothetical bad actors are just that, "hypothetical". If you'd linked an article demonstrating concrete proof I'd accept it as an "argument against connecting one’s thermostat to the internet".
- ridgered4 4y ago
  LGR on youtube had a video on a home automation system from the 80s. IIRC it had a modem listen interface, although I don't recall the details.

woile 4y ago

It reminds me of my sister installing an Alexa controlled light in the living room with no switch. My dad, who doesn't speak english, couldn't turn them on when he stayed there. I keep thinking turning on lights with a switch takes even less time than interacting with Alexa.

Symbiote 4y ago
I have wireless light switches in my rented apartment, and I don't like them. 1. I can't see from the position of the switch the state of the light, so I still after 5 years press the wrong switch sometimes. 2. Sometimes, maybe 5% of the time, the light doesn't change instantly, but up to 2 seconds after I pressed the button. 3. About 5% of the time, the light doesn't change at all. Then I either think I've pressed the wrong switch (see 1), or I have to turn around, walk back and try again. I think the benefit is for the company who built the apartment, since they saved a few crowns not needing to run wires near the doorways. There is no benefit to the occupant, only problems. At least the batteries in the switches are still fine.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mcv 4y ago
  I also have a few wireless switches, and in some cases, the light doesn't immediately respond to a press requiring a few tries, and sometimes it doesn't respond at all. Could be distance, could be the battery is running out, but either way it's a problem I'd never had with regular light switches. At our last remodeling, I had some of them removed and replaced by regular wired switches wherever possible. Nothing beats the user experience of direct interaction with a system.
  - cameronh90 4y ago
    Every light in my house is Hue, and all rooms have those Hue dimmer switches mounted over the normal light switch. I absolutely love it. It's never been anything other than instantly responsive, works without the internet and I can turn all the house's lights off from my bed. Additionally, the utility rooms, hallways and bathroom lights are just fully automated so you never think about it. The regular switches are still there if you need them, but in over a year since installing it, I've not touched any of the traditional light switches. My only issue is that the Hue Bridge has a maximum limit for the number of lights and accessories you can run, which I'm starting to get close to. The lights are also expensive, especially the low voltage outdoor lighting, so for that I just use a standalone ZigBee dimmer switch which integrates with the Hue system.

iLoveOncall 4y ago

Just looking at the absolute nightmare that Linus from Linus Tech Tips (a popular YouTube tech channel) is going through with his smart house is enough to make it obvious that those solutions just suck.

automatic6131 4y ago
If a highly consumer tech literate person with a near unlimited budget (either from freebies or business expenses or just because he's a multi millionaire) struggles with this stuff, you can be sure it's not ready for even enthusiast adoption.
- shapefrog 4y ago
  > highly consumer tech literate person Watching his videos on this subject I do not get the impression that he falls into this category.
  - KptMarchewa 4y ago
    If he's not then pretty no one is; and the solutions are overcomplicated.
    - shapefrog 4y ago
      My grandmother, at the grand age of 95, shows better understanding of tech than is demonstrated in those videos.
      - iLoveOncall 4y ago
        Care to highlight any specific example?
sandos 4y ago
Just looking quickly at one video where he had trouble with heating, they seem to use, lets say, not exactly finished products. Instead controlling things via Home Assistant. Which does not to me scream having lots of money, even is he has that. I believe there are much more expensive and more ready-made systems than what was used there.

parker_mountain 4y ago

I went with standards based stuff, zigbee specifically. Matter/thread are the new standard that seems to stick. Basically, anything that doesn't require a specialized app to work, but rather a standardized protocol through a hub - and if the hub fails or sucks, you can replace it. Fortunately, it seems like the vendors are finally standardizing.

switch007 4y ago
Standardising on Matter? What was wrong with Zigbee/Zwave? How long until another standard comes along :D
- _djo_ 4y ago
  Thread has IP-based routing, can use 6LoWPAN, has a simpler gateway implementation in border routers, and they've separated out the application layer into Matter to allow for easier interoperability and evolution. Zigbee's fine, but it's dated.
- jon-wood 4y ago
  Matter is in many ways a meta-standard. The transport layer may well be remain as Zigbee or Zwave, but by having at least the controllers supporting Matter you get interoperability between different protocols, rather than having to go all in on a specific one.
- parker_mountain 4y ago
  Thread is basically an evolution of Zigbee/Zwave, which both have been around for 20 years. Some of its key deficiencies include its routing, encryption, and meshing. If we get another 20 years out of Thread/Matter, that's a pretty good outcome. I will be slowly moving to T/M. My Zigbee hub is local only, and I have no reason to believe it won't continue to be stable.

jchw 4y ago

Smart equipment is fine as long as the "smart" part is just synchronization built on top. I have ZigBee and Zwave (yes both for now unfortunately) switches and dimmers, these work completely fine manually in absense of home assistant. I do also use some smart bulbs (also ZigBee/Zwave) and when paired with a smart switch, they can work in absense of the controller still, allowing you to still control the lights as long as the radios in both devices can reach eachother. To me this is the common-sense answer. The design works in absense of any central controllers and definitely does not (ever) depend on any internet services, and yet you can still do anything you'd normally do (including integration into something like Google Home if you really want. Though, I don't care about "voice assistants" or anything, so it's not really that useful to me.)

yencabulator 4y ago
> Smart equipment is fine as long as the "smart" part is just synchronization built on top. ... until you hit that bug that tells all the lights in the school to turn off about 100 times a second.
- jchw 4y ago
  You can unplug the controller if need be, but truth is that if we're talking about ZigBee or Zwave, I don't think there's nearly enough bandwidth to do that :)

tiborsaas 4y ago

Check this out: https://www.shelly.cloud/en-hu/products/product-overview/shelly-plus-1 https://www.shelly.cloud/en-hu/products/product-overview/she... It's inexpensive and easy to install. The most important feature is its REST API, so you can control it any way you like if you don't like the official app.

stdbrouw 4y ago

I used to have a huge aversion to any kind of smart control, but the new generation of home automation (2010-now or whatever) is fundamentally different from the kind of 80's and 90's domotics that we all have vague memories of. Older systems (like the school system, probably) relied on an expensive central panel and wiring and accessories that were potentially tailored to that particular system, and if something went wrong you were totally out of luck, and only the installer could make changes or apply fixes. But now, all you need is mains power and a smartphone, Hue lights default to working like a regular light if something goes wrong with the Zigbee bridge, Shelly switches can be added onto regular switches so that it's just something on top of exactly the same tactile interface you already had, and so on and so on. And if all of it does mysteriously fail and you need to replace it, a new set of 10-20 light bulbs and some smart relays would set you back no more than a couple hundred dollars / euros. Almost makes you wonder whether the school would be better off with a consumer grade system.

Dalewyn 4y ago
>But now, all you need is mains power and a smartphone, And a server owned by Jesus McJesusFace in WhereTheHellistan propped up by shitnickles funds. Just no. A simple physical switch works every single damn time without external dependencies. Perfection is simplicity, not complexity.
- Semaphor 4y ago
  I mean, if that’s what you want, sure. Or, as parent said, you could go with local control. The choice is there, if you really think McJesusFace’s server is great, go for it. Personally, I prefer not relying on any outside server and having everything locally and still get all those smart features. Oh, and as an extra: That simple switch still works.
- sidpatil 4y ago
  > And a server owned by Jesus McJesusFace in WhereTheHellistan propped up by shitnickles funds. No you don't. Just use Home Assistant or openHAB — fully local control by default. I've been using the former for a while now, and it's been working great.

Mvandenbergh 4y ago

Earlier generations of Nest didn't have proportional control capability of any kind, no ability to apply Load or Temperature compensation either which are things that less polished looking heating and cooling control systems have been able to do for decades. To be fair to Nest, newer versions are able to do this but many heating and cooling systems don't expose those functions on a standards compliant open way. As a result, a vast number of heating and cooling systems runs about 10% less efficiently than they should but there's really no way for end customers to know that since they don't have a reliable benchmark to compare against.