
How ‘Smart’ Do You Want Your Blender to Be? - bootload
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/magazine/just-how-smart-do-you-want-your-blender-to-be.html
======
compumike
The most prevalent domestic 'smart' devices (dishwashers? washing machines?
automatic transmissions? electric refrigeration?) were once-new concepts in
the last 100 years, but have become almost invisible today. They don't shout
"smart," and that's OK, but they all integrate a bit of control logic that
helps the user do something easier/better/cheaper/faster than was possible
before. That's how I define "smart" \-- I think the network-connected /
software aspect is more of an implementation detail.

I really don't want a smart blender or a smart fridge.

But a 'smart' thermostat? Might save energy (and money). A 'smart' sprinkler
or lighting control system? Might save water or energy (and money). A 'smart'
door lock? Might save time and effort getting keys copied or locks changed or
letting in guests while away. A 'smart' frying pan? Might cook a salmon fillet
to perfection every time and let me master new recipes the first time.

Does the reality of today's smart devices match the potential? Unclear.

But if 'smart' means something that will give me, the user, a superior value
-- defined very conventionally and rationally, such as saving time, saving
money, making something higher quality, or making something easier -- _and if
the superior value outweighs the added complexity and cost,_ then maybe I'll
take a look.

(Disclaimer: I make a "smart" frying pan but am not particularly in love with
the word "smart." It simply helps people cook easier/better/cheaper/faster.
[https://www.pantelligent.com/](https://www.pantelligent.com/) \- comments of
all kinds are welcome.)

~~~
sien
Network connected isn't just an implementation detail.

If it's on a network it has potential security problems and if the functions
rely on the network then it needs updates.

Phones commonly don't get security updates after 2-3 years. The idea that a
fridge will keep getting security updates for the lifetime of the fridge, say
20 years, is not realistic. Not to mention the problem that people often don't
configure devices correctly. Perhaps some here remember VCRs with the
perpetual flashing unset time.

The internet of things for companies and organisations that collect data and
have staff to handle them and replace them regularly is a big deal. The
internet of things in households is pretty dubious.

~~~
x5n1
You could always rent your fridge. It could be manufactured by the people who
run your grocery store. That's probably where the fridge is headed.

------
CM30
I don't want it to be smart. I don't want a 'smart' blender or a 'smart'
fridge or a 'smart' doorbell or whatever else you can think of. Most of this
internet of things stuff is a bunch of quasi solutions looking for an actual
problem.

I'd rather one that doesn't need replacing as often and works better as a
traditional device.

~~~
jws
I want my blender to be smart enough to soft start the motor and to notice
that it's stuck on an ice cube and not blow it's internal fuse. Fuse blowing =
Insufficiently Smart Blender. You can avoid this by oversizing electrical
components, but being smart is probably cheaper.

Smart doesn't have to mean complicated UI.

Smart appliances could also learn which ones are on the same circuit by
watching voltage fluctuation and coordinate current usage. You see this in a
primitive form at some older motels where the coffee maker is plugged into the
refrigerator. It knows to not run the compressor while heating water.

~~~
the_watcher
This isn't what "smart" refers to these days though. You're just describing a
higher quality product. Smart, today, equals connected and part of the
Internet of Things.

~~~
pessimizer
Agreed. If a blender that shuts off when jammed is "smart" then anything with
a circuit breaker is "smart," too.

------
khedoros
I want my fridge to keep my food cold and cost as little as possible. I want
my blender to chop food to a chosen consistency. I want my appliances in
general to perform their single function and nothing else.

In Home Depot the other day, I saw a $5000 smart refrigerator that was
mechanically similar to $2000 - $3000 fridges. I don't need a $2000
camera+information+entertainment system in my fridge. Maybe I'd like it if it
didn't add significant cost and provided a read-only API to monitor the
temperature sensors and energy use. Honestly, I don't see myself paying much
for smart devices or home automation, and I don't consider mandatory
connections to outside services to be a feature.

------
d_t_w
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the worst consumer product I have ever bought
in my life, the absolutely abject Samsung "Smart" TV:

[http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2414066](http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2414066)

Basically bricked after a hopeless remote update pushed by Samsung, Plex
stopped working six months ago, Skype appears to have been deleted but
mysteriously appears when my brother calls, nothing else works as advertised.

Replaced once when the panel failed (at great effort, their consumer support
was similarly terrible in Australia).

It is an absolute dog. Avoid, avoid, avoid.

~~~
clintonb
Ouch. I went through three LG Google TVs about three years ago. They all
seemed to have the same firmware issue (which LG refused to acknowledge),
resulting in the TV restarting every 5-10 minutes.

LG paid to have the first two repaired. The "repaired" devices stayed on...but
they no longer tuned channels. They gave me a TV that lacked the whole "tele-"
part! I returned the third one without going through the silly repair process,
and got a Sony Bravia. Never had a problem.

------
logicallee
Is this a trick question? Smart enough (along with the rest of my home) to
order the cheapest reliable courier to pick up a quantity of fresh vegetables
sufficient for the dietary profile that I need based on my height and weight
and dietary restrictions, to order the vegetables from my local grocer for the
courier to pick up, to let the courier into my apartment when they arrive and
put them in the fridge, and smart enough to get them out of the fridge and
make me a smoothie at the time that I've ordered on my smart phone, and then
go wash itself in my dishwasher. Why - how dumb do you want _your_ blender to
be? Just a spinning blade for you to leave in a grimy corner of your kitchen
or stowed away in a cupboard, never to be used?

of course, some of this functionality logically overlaps (why should the
blender put itself in my dishwasher rather than my dishwasher taking the
blender; is the blender ordering my groceries or is my fridge) but you get the
idea....

~~~
derefr
I think there are two seemingly-disjoint perspectives in these discussions,
mostly based on whether people have enough time and engage with these
appliances as part of a hobby; or whether they are strapped for time and
engage with them as necessities.

So, I think a clarifying assumption might help: _assume_ that you already have
a _person_ who acts in the role of the "glue" for your household—a
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majordomo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majordomo).
Assume that they then have further staff under them, to whom they can delegate
tasks—but that they also have the option of purchasing technology to automate
the same tasks. Under this assumption, all the tasks in your household _will
get done_ , "magically", by combining some degree of technology with some
degree of human effort.

The question that's really being asked in these discussions of "smart"
appliances is: where is the optimum ROI between "fully automated" and "fully
done manually by a paid human expert"? For any given task, how should the
majordomo best allocate your dollars between paying labor and buying "smarter"
equipment?

Automation usually lowers the total amount of human labor that must be
expended (both by the expert, and by you to earn the money to pay the expert),
but it also tends to lower the quality of the result—or "confine" the result
to certain strict output products—compared to the results the human expert
could achieve. How "smart" can we make a tool without taking away its
precision to achieve great results in expert human hands? How "dumb" must a
tool be to continue to allow for optimal results to be achieved, rather than
mere satisfactory ones? Etc.

------
beat
When I go to a garage sale, I can sometimes find a 30 year old blender that
still works just fine.

I want a "smart" blender that still functions perfectly well in 30 years. I do
_not_ want a blender that becomes unusable because software is no longer
supported, an API is no longer available, a proprietary connector is no longer
in use, etc.

~~~
douche
You want one of these[1]. I see them all over the place second-hand, and they
are damned near indestructible.

Almost like the Kitchen-Aid mixers, that reached the heights of perfection
somewhere in the 80s, and have declined and become cheaper and flimsier since.

[1] [https://s-media-cache-
ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ee/16/d3/ee16d37f1...](https://s-media-cache-
ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ee/16/d3/ee16d37f11db310c2833755ba34359e6.jpg)

~~~
beat
Oh, I have an excellent blender (a Breville). I was more expressing the
problem I see with poorly thought out "smart" added to machinery - systems
that will become unusable due to bit rot or connector conspiracy in far less
time than they otherwise should.

------
solitus
IoT is just manufacturers trying to apply the SAAS model to their product.
Sorry, but I don't want to have to change my thermostats every 2-3 years
because the company I bought from decided to break the service it uses cough
nest.

------
Animats
"Smart" devices now seem to come with Big Brother included. The Times gets
this; most of the "smart" is about the thing reporting what you're doing to
HQ, not providing the desired function.

First, the "smart" devices just reported if you were home. That was Nest. Then
they started listening to your every word. That was Echo. Then they started
watching you. That was the Samsung Smart TV.[1]

But it's so convenient. New Echo feature: "Alexa, tell Hacker News to read new
headlines”. Really.

[1] [http://www.cnet.com/how-to/samsung-smart-tv-
spying/](http://www.cnet.com/how-to/samsung-smart-tv-spying/)

------
delecti
"Smart" is only really a benefit for devices that I can reasonably want to do
something when I'm not there.

Smart blender? When could I possibly want to blend something when I'm not
physically near the blender?

Smart thermostat? I don't personally want one, but you can at least make the
case that adjusting your home's heating/cooling remotely is a value add.

Smart fridge? When is the last time you even changed a setting on your fridge?
I've lived in my current apartment for nearly 2 years and have never once even
touched any of the settings. How does adding intelligence to a passive device
provide any benefit whatsoever?

------
michaelbuddy
Hmm smart stuff. Make it so an oven can detect when something catches fire and
shut itself off or lower temp. Particularly a toaster oven. Those things are
dangerous, but they are so darn useful. When useful, popular and unsafe
collide, theres your 'smart' problem to solve. Internet connected, meh. I mean
it was cool when I saw my cousins BBQ thermometer notify his phone that the
food was done. That was nifty but an alarm that would detect when popcorn
burns in microwave means I'm safer from accidents or just arbitrary device
variables in operation. Think of the sawstop table saw.

------
jerluc
As most of the comments in this thread seem to be about "smart" home
technologies, I'm curious to hear what people think about the introduction of
"smart" things into civic and industrial environments (e.g. dumpster/public
trash sensors, Bluetooth beacons for indoor navigation, "smart" bus stops,
field sensors on farms, etc)?

~~~
clintonb
The civic applications you mention solve an obvious problem. The problem
solved by the hypothetical smart blender is not so obvious to most folks.

------
niftich
I want a smart combination conventional/convection/microwave oven that will
ensure that the food's internal temperature has reached desired amount. Remote
management of temperature would be a plus. It should know when it needs to
auto-clean itself, it should be child-proof and it should turn itself off it
left idle for too long.

I want a combination washer + dryer where I don't have to transload the
clothes into a different drum. Dirty clothes go in, clean, dry clothes come
out wrinkle-free.

I want a device which debones chicken thighs.

Some of these fit our current definition of 'smart', but some of them are just
devices which don't yet exist in the form I want them to take. Right now, our
drive to make things 'smart' is a cheap upsell, because it takes categories of
appliances that already exist in our homes and tries to add features whose
utility isn't always clear.

I want to see a re-imagining of how our homes (and restaurants) need to be
outfitted instead.

~~~
cmdrfred
> I want a device which debones chicken thighs.

Probably already exists, but not the scale you'd like.

Edit: I found it, and it's amazing. It can be had for a mere 45 million yen.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrjFWrv_IAw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrjFWrv_IAw)

------
TheOtherHobbes
Smart blender? No. Duh.

Smart robotic house, including a kitchen? A machine/system that does grocery
shopping, cooks for either or both of us if we don't feel like it - with the
option for remote advance notice - and washes up?

Likewise for laundry, ironing, towel folding, toiletries, and domestic chores
in general.

 _That_ could be a thing.

I'd pay money for the option to have breakfast appear on the counter a few
minutes after I tell the house I'm up, or dinner waiting for me/us when I get
in.

The big problem with IoT is that this kind of automation isn't practical yet.
We're getting little piecemeal micro-products that sort of nearly kind of do
something useful, but the big opportunity is automating the boring stuff in a
more comprehensive and ambitious way - and the technology for that just isn't
there today.

------
flashman
I follow @internetofshit on Twitter, who provides a running list and
commentary on items of this nature.

------
beloch
At present, I can't imagine ever _wanting_ a "smart" blender. I've got a
15-year old Vitamix that still powers through my daily smoothies with gusto. I
had to replace it's blade assembly, _once_. I can't imagine a smart blender
remaining functional for anywhere near that long.

However, I've also been hilariously wrong about tech before. For example, in
the late 90's I heard about wireless network research. I didn't get it. What's
so hard about plugging in a damned computer to ethernet? Now I have multiple
wifi devices and not one of them is a desktop computer.

The payoff for smart devices might be hard for us to imagine right now. The
risks, on the other hand, are readily apparent. For example, a smart
thermostat could be hacked into and your house's temperature set to something
undesirable. For example, if it's winter and you're in a cold climate, turning
the heat off completely while you're away could cause your pipes to burst.
It's therefore important that we keep security and reliability in mind when
making these devices, so that what we might gain isn't offset by a certain
loss in reliability. Continuing with the smart thermostat as an example, it
should probably not be possible to set it below 0 C unless you have physical
access to the device, and it should probably raise some very annoying warnings
even then.

It's also important that "smart" devices remain functional for a time period
comparable to their more traditional counterparts. We tolerate obscene
obsolescence rates in cell phones, mainly because their capabilities are
expanding so rapidly. People don't want to buy a new thermostat every couple
of years. In fact, most people would expect a thermostat to last a couple of
decades, even if it's "smart". That means designing them to last with
standards that will be supported for a long time.

In short, we might not see the upside to "smart" appliances just yet, but they
could materialize. It is, however, important to insist on "smart" appliances
that aren't too "dumb", nor should we accept appliances with short lives as a
result of being "smart".

------
WWKong
It would be really smart if it did the one thing it is supposed to do. That
goes for any appliance. Internet connected, high definition, VR toaster? No
thanks. $7 and puts out a good toast? Yes, please.

~~~
brokenmachine
The problem is that it seems to be cheaper to add internet crap to a bad
toaster than it is to make a good toaster.

On top of this, there's no guarantee nowadays that if you pay more there's any
more chance of getting a better quality product. It's just more money on
advertising and shiny aesthetics usually.

I would pay double for a toaster that is guaranteed to work for 5 years. It
must be possible, in the old days appliances lasted almost forever. It's just
heated bread, for god's sake. I have gone through four microwaves in the last
5 years, and I only use the microwave probably every third day.

------
acomjean
I always think of my microwave.

It has modes for defrost, popcorn and a bunch of other stuff I never ever use.
Its always at 100% power, I just punch in a time.

I like my devices generally dumb. Though I do appreciate that microwaves turn
off when you open the door (watching people open the office microwave while
still on).

------
King-Aaron
Out of coffee!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Bt0lkpV_U](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Bt0lkpV_U)

