
Kits Make Tinkerers’ Home-Automation Dreams Come True - fawce
http://www.wsj.com/articles/kits-make-tinkerers-home-automation-dreams-come-true-1444870383
======
eveningcoffee
I am pretty sure that people actually want network connected hardware instead
of Internet-connected hardware.

And perhaps they also want a way to access their hardware in their home
network in a secure and private way.

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
Yes, I have rejected most major commercial offerings out of hand because they
usually have/require some connection to an internet server. I have no desire
to include that sort of vulnerability/weak link.

~~~
gregmac
To me, it's just as big a deal that you're now at the whim of the provider.
Your equipment can suddenly stop working if:

* They go out of business or decide to drop the product line * Their servers go down (do you know if they're running a HA config, or merely a single server?) * They decide to make v2 of the product and stop updating/supporting v1

On top of this, your home internet connection can and will go down. Depending
on what exactly you're doing this may or may not be a big deal: for example,
not being able to remotely see your garage door status probably isn't
important. Not having your motion sensing lights or timed schedules work,
however, would be a pain.

There are many products from startups that are hurting themselves because of
this. I, like many geeks, love this kind of stuff, but like you, I won't
purchase or make my house rely on anything that has these risks, and I steer
friends and family away from these products as well.

Developers: At least make your internet connection optional and allow the gear
work without it. Even better, open source your server software: we can see how
secure it is, plus if you go out of business, I can at least run it myself.

~~~
CaptSpify
This is why I've been working with rpi/arduino stuff: I can build it myself.
Sure, it's more work, but the pre-built options all suck, as far as I've seen.

I used to always follow the newest automation releases, but I gave up, because
they were all closed-source, internet-required devices. Screw that.

------
MrQuincle
That's definitely the case. However, these things are remarkably hard to
explain to journalists. Our open source power outlet, the Crownstone, has nice
conversion rates when people find us on Kickstarter. It is a problem though
that journalists don't want to hear a story about all the things you can do
with kits like that. They want single use cases. They want simple stories to
tell. The end user does not want that! They like to get more product for their
money. I think the app market concept could only be invented by business savvy
tech people... It's our task to encourage kits and kit makers to keep doing
what they are doing! Back them up! :-)

------
irickt
Companies mentioned in the article:
[http://littlebits.cc/](http://littlebits.cc/)
[https://www.particle.io/](https://www.particle.io/)

------
DarkTree
"Jeremy Blum's home-automation system, which he calls Jarvis, can control
lights, curtains and music and can answer questions about anything using a
phone, voice commands or this command center."

Implementations like this kind of scare me. It is certainly cool to be 'able'
to automate these things, but should we? Are we going to use technology to
make our lives lazier, or better? No, they aren't mutually-exclusive, but I
can't help but think that making it so you don't have to leave your couch in
order to turn off the lights is a movement toward a worse lifestyle. Your
health has a much larger contribution to your standard of living than
convenience, and to me, this seems like trading off one for the other (in a
subtle way). However, maybe I will eventually be convinced of the net
benefits. Am I approaching this wrong?

~~~
TeMPOraL
I don't see how this affect one's exercise regimen in any way. The use case
probably isn't not getting off the couch to turn off the light, but voicing
the command as you leave the room. In case of light, it's just (aiming at)
more seamless experience.

For some reason many people have this picture of technology bringing forth the
Wall-E world. Consider however the following points:

\- People hate that vision with passion, which pretty much guarantees it won't
come to pass any time soon.

\- "Normals" today are absolutely _obsessed_ with fitness. Between spamming
everyone with Endomondo updates on Facebook and testing a new toy-pedometer-
watch, the primary use of Javris-like system in general population will
probably be dieting and exercise.

\- Convenience doesn't have to lead to laziness. It can enable one to do more,
faster and better. In a way, one could argue 200 years ago that the invention
of electric washing machine will turn people lazy and fat.

Ultimately, it will be up to us how much we eat and move. As our civilization
goes forward, those things will be more and more disconnected from the
limitations of reality. We can either learn to stay fit with computers, or
give up on future entirely right now and go back to building things by hand.

EDIT:

I'll also share a short anecdote. 8 years ago, I built myself a voice-
controlled system for changing music (Star Trek: TNG style, with computer
voice reacting to commands). Basically a microphone soldered together from
parts and hung on a wardrobe, + some Microsoft Speech API based software I
wrote for off-line command recognition and control over a WinAMP instance. It
wasn't that hard to get it working even though the music was on the
loudspeakers, with quite high a volume setting.

I could use it to change the music from my bed, or chair, or anywhere in the
room. Did it made me exercise less? No. I actually did it to stop myself
turning the computer screen on to change music while doing math exercises for
maturity exam. It helped me to keep focused, because the task suddenly didn't
require to do a context switch. Since that experience, it's how I see home
automation - as a way to reduce context switching and to streamline some
chores, not to rob you of meaningful activities.

