Comment by AlexandrB | Hacker News Reader

Comment by AlexandrB | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> In 5 years when all the crap is worked out and you eventually buy a system with extra security at your door or backyard, or a something to that effect I'd like you to come back and admit it.

I heard this same song and dance 5 years ago. The problems with the "IoT" market are foundational. Most IoT devices are not designed to be used for extended periods without internet access and a continuous stream of updates. The former means that, in general, they are only as reliable as your internet connection (including that crappy modem/router the ISP gave you). The latter means that unlike traditional home hardware, once you install "smart" devices you're at the mercy of the business plans of the vendor. So even if you get something set up that works acceptably, it will last 5 years tops (see Nest) before the vendor's priorities change.

Finally to address the "extra security" comment. Security from what? The developed world is objectively safer than ever, why would I invest in "solutions" to problems invented out of whole cloth? The paranoia of people installing cameras all over their own home (often cameras whose footage they have no real control over) astounds me. We're more mistrustful of our own neighbours than the companies that are actually exploiting our privacy and manipulating us psychologically for profit.

>Most IoT devices are not designed to be used for extended periods without internet access and a continuous stream of updates.

But you could design one with a manual fallback option. Doesn't seem foundational to me. Nothing about an IoT design prevents one from doing that.

>The latter means that unlike traditional home hardware, once you install "smart" devices you're at the mercy of the business plans of the vendor. So even if you get something set up that works acceptably, it will last 5 years tops (see Nest) before the vendor's priorities change.

Yes, that is the downside of dealing with any service oriented business, in any domain. But again, you can have a manual fallback option (as I think most devices do FWICT)

>Finally to address the "extra security" comment. Security from what?

I suppose it depends on what you consider security. For an intruder alert system, you'd need something that can transmit a notification to someone. An IoT device seems like a good option, but I guess you could also use a device that can send a text over a cellular network.

I personally have no use for anything IoT, but I think its premature to go completely in the other direction and say that IoT is completely useless. What we're seeing with so called "disruptive" technologies is that things get worse (or sometimes a lot worse), before they get better.

> But you could design one with a manual fallback option. Doesn't seem foundational to me. Nothing about an IoT design prevents one from doing that.

Certainly I could (or at least someone with the engineering skills could), but the actual IoT companies don't. My impression of IoT devices (do not want) is based on what actually exists, not on what could theoretically exist.

>Certainly I could (or at least someone with the engineering skills could), but the actual IoT companies don't.

That is incorrect. There are several IoT products with manual fallback options on the market. I don't even know why you're disagreeing to be honest. You don't like IoT devices, I got that part.

> There are several IoT products with manual fallback options on the market.

Name three.

Also, "manual fallback" is a cop-out. When I want manual operations, I don't go looking for home automation. The "smart" features should be available without Internet. There's nothing technically difficult about this, but it isn't being done because of abusive business practices.

If you don't want an internet enabled device, then you are looking in the wrong place. The I in IoT stands for internet.

This is the crazy thing. IoT is actually advertising with a requirement, not a feature. Since when has "needs internet access to function" become a selling point?

>Since when has "needs internet access to function" become a selling point?

That is a good question. I don't know. But I'd say it became a selling point after the internet became ubiquitous and reliable enough in the eyes of consumers. Otherwise people would be complaining about 'needs internet access to watch a movie/make a video call/play a game/push source code/order food/call a taxi/etc/etc/etc".

That’s the point here though isn’t it? I don’t want the internet involved with turning the lights on when I have to get up at night.

I don't want the internet involved either, so we agree on that. Can we also agree that some people want internet enabled devices?

Not all of us live in safe neighborhoods like yourself.

It's not even a matter of "safe". I live in a neighborhood that is seen as very safe. Yet, we had a burglary two houses down not too long ago. And they happen frequently enough to myself. I've had plenty stolen. Without a camera, there's ~0% chance of anyone being caught.

I ended up buying a camera for peace of mind and for checking in on my place to see who's entering my residence area. Sometimes it's genuinely helpful.

Why do you think you live in a very safe neighborhood? I guess perception can be a funny thing but I'm thinking this is the same as Mercedes-Benz owners saying their cars are above average reliability when the service records disprove it.

I'm just nervous about off-the-shelf "smart" cameras also sharing the feed with someone upstream who is not me

There used to be a subreddit full of unsecured webcam links. Sometimes you'd see babycams even, completely open to whoever crawled for the link.

have you caught any thieves yet?

If you're frequently having things stolen, you don't live in a "very safe" neighborhood. I've lived in working class neighborhoods most of my life, and the only thing I've ever had stolen from me was a bike that I left on my front porch when I was a kid. The only thing the people I know have had stolen is stuff like car stereos or GPS devices back before most people used their phones. Just small crime of opportunity stuff, no breaking into people's homes.

I've lived in a variety of areas across the west coast. In all of them, rural to dense city environments... things were stolen. I've had multiple bikes stolen, my car, my backpacks, my eye glasses (yes - that is weird), and more... And they were all in a variety of areas. I still classify many of those areas as "safe" and so do many reports but theft still happens.

Almost nowhere is "safe" from thieves. If you live in a "nice area" like any of the more expensive neighborhoods/cities in the bay area then you're very prone to burglary because go figure you likely have expensive stuff that's good for stealing. Unless you have really good defense mechanisms to detour/stop thieves (or just nothing worth stealing) then you're going to get stuff stolen.

Property crime isn't the same as violent crime.

> Without a camera, there's ~0% chance of anyone being caught.

If you're only interested in recording what happened (as evidence) an IP camera can run on PoE to a laptop or mini-pc on a UPS, and record for as long as you want, even in the case of a power outage if you include a UPS (an old laptop works well in this case - you can potentially just run the PoE switch/injector on the UPS and let the laptop run on its battery).

No internet connection required. No "service" to stop working. No "API" to become deprecated.

This misses the actual advantages that a managed service provides, like the fact you don't have to worry about the stuff you mentioned. Does your solution scale to multiple cameras? Will you get push notifications when movement is detected while you're on holiday? What if that very laptop is stolen? Would be ironic.

I'm not saying your solution is bad, my house has the same thing (with 4 cameras around the house), but most people don't want to spend time managing yet more stuff, and debugging their camera system if something goes wrong.

But then they can also steal the laptop or mini-pc that is recording. It's also a PITA to setup and manage yourself. I'd rather pay the $50/yr that I do and just have someone else do it. I'm done with the bradlys-as-a-service thing. It'd be another thing adding heat to my living environment as well.

It's been useful for other things like checking in on. Where/when packages are delivered, when the landlord showed up, when a neighbor came over to tell us something but we didn't hear them knock on the door, finding out my smoke alarm was going off for no apparent reason, etc.

If that’s your concern have it upload the video to a remote location you control.

They can also cut the copper/fiber/coax coming into your house. If the NVR/whatever recording your video isn't in a super obvious place it will take a thief longer to find that then it would be for them to clip your connection to the net.

With a camera, there's a ~0% chance of anyone getting caught.

Depends where you are. I would agree in most cities, but in a lot of rural areas, Fred is going to get thrown in jail.

You think fred isn't going to just loot the next town over?

I’m pretty sure once the person gets identified then it is not too long until the arrest. Small town sheriffs talk, a lot.

Seems like “victim preparation” to me. How about a deterrent?

My neighborhood has had thefts too. I assume my two dogs barking have been enough to keep them at bay. It wouldn’t surprise me if statistically this holds true elsewhere. Low hanging fruit and all.

Have you considered a motion sensor tied to a speaker that plays dogs barking/rustling?

Dogs quiet up as soon as you feed them some tasty treats.

We already have a couple fake cameras on the property as deterrents that were installed by the landlord. I just happened to install a real one because I wanted a little evidence collection since I've been a victim of theft more than once in the bay area.

Option 1: Two dogs barking and a doormat that reads “You better have a warrant”.

Thief thought bubble “this might hurt / don’t forget tasty treats”

Option 2: A half dozen visible cameras

Thief thought bubble “Good stuff inside / don’t forget hat and glasses”

The idea that the police will take your webcam still and nail a suspect is pure yarn. Have you filed a police report when you were robbed? All the police will do is take your statement, maybe send a forensics crew to dust for prints in a day or two, and the buck stops there unless they happen upon your stuff in an unrelated incident. No manhunt is being started because your laptop was stolen.

The best piece of mind isn't a webcam and paranoia of people you don't recognize in your neighborhood, its a list of your valuables and appropriate renters/homeowners insurance to replace whatever might have been stolen.

Consumer locks only keep the honest out.

I can buy the notion that smart devices are dumb for a litany of reasons. But the notion that security cameras are dumb, regardless of whether or not they're smart, is absurd. Most people use it to try to find/deter package thieves. Many people park their cars out front and want to be able to identify a license plate in case of a hit-and-run. I use security cameras to check on my pets and to make sure the dog walker isn't stealing anything. I also once found out my landlord was illegally entering my apartment.

You live in fantasy world if you think nothing bad will ever happen to you just because you have high regard for your neighbors.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com