How the world will change as computers spread into everyday objects
economist.com
economist.com
What I want is one smart device: a robot that can operate all my non-smart devices. The robot can set the thermostat, unlock the door, flip the light switches, do the laundry and the dishes, monitor the house while I'm away, etc. That's the goal we should be working towards. IoT should be seen as, at best, a stopgap solution. It's not a desirable end state.
You mind emailing me at wow.its.nothing@gmail.com if you could you like to talk about this more?
Up next is security cameras using MotionEyeOS[2] and Raspberry Pi Zero W's.
You really don't have to pay millions of dollars to automate your home. My thermostats use technology called Z-Wave for which there is a USB[3] adapter available on Amazon, for about $45 I turned 2 different Thermostats into Nest-like thermostats that I fully control myself, if my pi dies, the usb device still has them synched.
All in my house, all in my control and managed by yours truly.
[0]: https://www.openhab.org/docs/installation/openhabian.html#ra...
[1]: https://mycroft.ai/
[2]: https://github.com/ccrisan/motioneyeos
[3]: https://www.amazon.com/Aeotec-Z-Stick-Z-Wave-create-gateway/...
Final thought: If I ever get Mycroft setup, I'd essentially have a robot in my home running off a Raspberry Pi. He wouldn't move (wouldn't need him to) but he would do whatever I wish. For now openHAB has a UI for me.
Edit: Forgot to mention that openHAB is also scriptable, and even has a bit of IFTTT type of capacity internally.
My household recently became multi-generational and it's really great! Feels like this is what it's supposed to be like.
No manufacturer will do this because it limits their ability to engineer-in planned obsolescence, vendor lock-in, and recurring revenue "cloud" business models.
There are commercial and industrial-grade devices that do what I want, but they're priced for their market segment and, infuriatingly, their protocols are needlessly baroque (MODBUS, BACNET, et. al.) or proprietary.
Our multitude of small devices themselves can stay "dumb", but it'd be a huge missed opportunity to totally cut them off from the software world.
A robot turning knobs and pushing buttons as grandparent seems to suggest is a romantic vision that doesn't hold up well to the real world.
Sounds like what you need is a https://www.deviantart.com/plank-69/art/Mr-Handy-Advert-Fall...
This is the best they could come up with as an example for the "many benefits"? Tilt your head only slightly privacy-leaning and this looks like a terrifying dystopia. Of course the Orwellian nightmare won't come to "law abiding" middle and upper-class citizens, who will most be tracked as unwitting lab rats by mega tech firms intent on understanding every aspect of human life in order to monetize it, usually through ads and Chinese-style digital karma, but the marginalized groups--ethnic minorities, political dissidents, and the "mentally unstable" will be persecuted and hounded endlessly by digital means. With mass shootings all over the US, it's only a matter of time until they weaponize the already-built surveillance network to red-flag people. As usual, our own fear of each other is way out ahead, on the leading edge of technology.
Want their DNA? No problem. Want their interests? Sleeping schedule? Work schedule? If you got the money we got the stuff.
Future is looking really interesting.
I don't understand why this is an article. Its basically saying "Imagine if the Internet of Things.... wait for it.... had more Things!" Of course you'll see an increase in efficiency, and the balance of power will shift toward larger corporations capable of harnessing said efficiency. This has been happening for 15 years. This is not news to anyone.
That's the impression I had. Home automation hasn't gone very far, and seems to be more trouble than it's worth. Now you have to worry about your "cloud home animation provider" going out of business, or changing their business model, or just dropping support on your home devices. Someone faced with Google dropping support on something recently wrote "My house won't work any more". "Unauthorised Bread" by Cory Doctorow is close to reality now.
There's the Cameras Everywhere thing, with Ring and that crowd. That's the telescreen from 1984, privatized.
None of this stuff does any much. All sensing, no actuation. Power windows for houses, for example, are expensive and rare. Even HVAC systems for houses which have a controlled damper for outside air are rare. The robot vacuum cleaners still aren't good enough to just ignore and let them do their job.
Most of the ideas for the Internet of Things can be seen in the 1950s Whirlpool Kitchen of the Future. Today, you can really buy most of that stuff. Back then, though, Big Brother wasn't part of the package.
[1] https://www.inverse.com/article/12064-we-ve-finally-arrived-...
Maybe it is for the people who read Economist?
>The cheaper models in Tesla’s line-up have parts of their batteries disabled by the car’s software in order to limit their range. At the tap of a keyboard in Palo Alto, the firm was able to remove those restrictions and give drivers temporary access to the full power of their batteries.
has not been contemplated.
It plainly means that someone in Palo Alto can also add restrictions (possibly even stopping the car altogether) and that since everything is remote actuated possibly someone else might do the same (individually or per area, etc.).
It's trivial to not rely on cloud providers for anything. I can store mp3s (or mkvs, etc.) on a NAS and play them from a computer or a Pi. I can certainly flip switches to turn lights on or off in my house.
In fact, most "home automation" sounds a little absurd. If you can program it yourself and you like it, good for you. But to rely on a remote provider that may or may not work when you most need it, or who may "discontinue" devices you rely on, is irrational.
It seems most people are willing to give away control for the smallest gain in convenience. We should resist more.
That being said, the people who “should resist more” are the ones don’t find it “trivial” to not rely on cloud service providers. They grab IoT products like a Ring doorbell off the shelf and install it one and done.
Why does anyone need a Ring doorbell? Can't you just stand up and answer the door? I don't understand any of this (I do understand I'm in the wrong forum for saying so).
My parents bought a Ring (I am heavily against it for every reason you wrote, plus I can’t stand the idea of a company owning my family’s video footage, I asked them to let me set up some sort of CCTV system but they just want the easy way)and it provides them with a quick, cheap motion activated video feed of their home straight to their phones from anywhere in the world. This isn’t even a doorbell function, the thing can be configured to detect motion over a selection of distances and send you a notification straight to a live video feed.
Sure that can be manually set up but for a lot of people who aren’t too tech savvy, grabbing something like a Ring from bestbuy is quick and easy to get running. Maybe the issue could be helped if a someone sold something like an arduino based doorbell / cam, with easy to use software or an app like Ring that didn’t call back home.