4 ms·

I'm amazed you're getting downvoted for an obvious and sensible set of statements. But I guess it's easier to downvote than articulate a counterargument. Inter

by john_b 12y ago

I'm amazed you're getting downvoted for an obvious and sensible set of statements. But I guess it's easier to downvote than articulate a counterargument. Internet of things systems have terrible security at the moment, and what many such systems presently amount to is people selling a portion of their privacy and exposing themselves to security risks to save a few bucks or have some small marginal household convenience.

dang 12y ago
You're right that rsync's comment does not deserve a negative score. (I suspect that somewhat overwrought language like "I want nothing to do with" tends to attract downvotes from people who already disagree with the opinion being expressed. But this is about as minor a case as you can get.) All: when you see a substantive, civil comment that's unfairly faded out, it's good community practice to upvote it back to par. In most cases, users already do. But this practice is more important now that we've made some downvotes more powerful. When a comment has been downvoted unfairly, simply upvote it and keep your own post focused on the topic at hand. If instead of its first sentence this one had said "I agree", it would be a very good comment instead of a mixed bag. A simple "I agree" or "good point" is a more effective way to pipe up for a downvoted comment than going off-topic is. Let fair-minded users notice the situation for themselves.
rsync 12y ago
Yes, the security is terrible, but that's not my concern ... that is, I just assume the security is terrible and that everyone understands that ... it's just a given. The real issue is the complexity of "smart" systems and how that complexity grows exponentially as you connect them together. It's just a rabbit hole you can never climb out of. Or, in the words of _Normal Accidents_, a book everyone should know well, tightly coupled systems with interactive complexity fail in a predictable way that you should expect. Add some production pressures (perhaps in the form of your wife needing the thermostat to raise right now) and you're sunk.

by john_b 12y ago

dang 12y ago

You're right that rsync's comment does not deserve a negative score. (I suspect that somewhat overwrought language like "I want nothing to do with" tends to attract downvotes from people who already disagree with the opinion being expressed. But this is about as minor a case as you can get.) All: when you see a substantive, civil comment that's unfairly faded out, it's good community practice to upvote it back to par. In most cases, users already do. But this practice is more important now that we've made some downvotes more powerful. When a comment has been downvoted unfairly, simply upvote it and keep your own post focused on the topic at hand. If instead of its first sentence this one had said "I agree", it would be a very good comment instead of a mixed bag. A simple "I agree" or "good point" is a more effective way to pipe up for a downvoted comment than going off-topic is. Let fair-minded users notice the situation for themselves.

rsync 12y ago

Yes, the security is terrible, but that's not my concern ... that is, I just assume the security is terrible and that everyone understands that ... it's just a given. The real issue is the complexity of "smart" systems and how that complexity grows exponentially as you connect them together. It's just a rabbit hole you can never climb out of. Or, in the words of _Normal Accidents_, a book everyone should know well, tightly coupled systems with interactive complexity fail in a predictable way that you should expect. Add some production pressures (perhaps in the form of your wife needing the thermostat to raise right now) and you're sunk.