Are we doing "smarthomes" wrong?

[skywake]

I was looking at this tweet from @LinusTech this arvo and it kinda got me thinking a bit. Has the tech industry kinda missed the boat a bit on what "smart" devices should be doing for us? The entire point of automation, and to a degree tech in general, should be to make things easier for us. As soon as you start using tech that's "flashy" while making the task more complex you're kinda defeating the point (unless of course the point is to sell smarthome gear which I guess IS the point but still)

 

Eg the example from the tweet. Saying a phrase to have a car door open, especially when car doors come with a remote already, is not something that makes the task easier. Doubly so when the voice assistant misunderstands you and does the wrong thing. I'd go further and say the same thing is true for most voice assistant commands. Unless you're issuing some command with some attribute (eg turn the lamp blue, play king gizzard in the kitchen) you're just doing an action that would be easier if it was replaced with a button or a switch. I'm pretty into home automation but the only smarthome command I ever issue to google is "turn off the family room TV" when someone has left the TV on in the family room

 

I think there should only be really one kind of home automation people should be thinking about. It should be some kind of event that I'm otherwise not directly aware of followed by some appropriate action to that event. Everything else is just adding complexity to otherwise simple tasks. A few examples of good automations, some of which I've done:

- fade on bedroom lights early on days when I set the alarm on my phone for a work day

- turn lights on/off when I leave/return home

- turn on fan if temperature outside exceeds 27C (then off when it cools down)

- announce over speakers when certain devices connect to the WiFi (eg relatives have come over)

- change light colours based on sensors (eg blue -> humidity, red -> temperature, green -> "cold and dry")

- turn on exhaust fan when bathroom gets humid etc

 

That sort of stuff, genuinely helpful little automations. That's the appeal of this kind of thing in my mind. The fact that we seem to only ever talk about it and companies only ever advertise smart home stuff as "hey google, turn on the lights"? I think it really does damage to the entire concept of smart home in the minds of a lot of people. Because people just think that it's not a hassle to just turn on the lights with a switch. Which is valid, because it's true, but it's not the appeal

 

/rant

[Alvin853]

I think voice activated lights are something many people recognize as being "sci-fi", so there's a big novelty factor, even though it doesn't make your life easier, it helps get users and manufacturers into the smart home concept. But I totally agree, smart home should not simply be replacing one action with another, it should use patterns to perform tasks automatically. For example I always put my phone on my nightstand when I go to bed. So I put an NFC tag on my nightstand and now whenever I put my phone down, the lights go out. I combined something I'm already doing anyway with a smart home action.

 

The other thing most people are doing wrong is: Smart home should not be cloud-controlled, and most voice assistants are. So your smart home turns into a dumb home as soon as you lose internet connection, or when the manufacturer decides to stop supporting your devices and shuts down the cloud service. 

[suedseefrucht]

50 minutes ago, skywake said:

what "smart" devices should be doing for us?

Usual home automation lost my interest very eary, simply because there will be a big company storing all the data about my home. If some bad guys get access to this information, they can tell, who is on vacation and plan robberies. And it's worth the effort, because you would get the data of a very big number of homes.

So if I build a home automation by myself, it's unique and very unattracktive for hackers, because it's just one home. And I know exactly, what happens to my data.
 

Also yes, we have to pick wisely, which things to automate and which not.
You will always have to think about a worst case scenario. There should always be a simple way to turn on the lights and the heating, in case the system fails.
And there are things, I wouldn't automate at all. Like opening doors to access the home.

So when there is an unexpected problem,I will still be safe.

[BuckGup]

This has been 100% feasible since late 80s. Someone I know has an entire Grafana dashboard for their home with automation based upon data collected in realtime for around $100 or less. I do agree with you though. People forget what they really want and add complexity ontop of automation as its taking something away or there is less work so you can add more. But that is a warped perception 

[crakddx]

That's a very interesting take that lightened my mind on this tppic. Thanks! And I do agree with you, and also would like to add that only a tiny amount of automation should be in someone's life, annd I believe it is better to do said thing yourself. I specifically feel like my generation has become more lazy and ignorant, and will continue to be.
Also, in your first ssentence how do you get the link to get to words? I know it's a website, but can you speciify please? Edited June 3, 2022 by Mr-G-Man

[Neroon]

I believe voice activation has plenty of uses. Sure pressing a button would be as fast, no disagreement there, but what if you are not always near the button? Would the solution be to have buttons all over the place?

 

My gf has the remote of our ceiling ventilator, she uses it much more often, with the result that I can't turn it on, also it's on her night stand, so if I want to turn on the light I have to grab it from her night stand first. Is it a big deal? Nope, hence it's not smart, but that doesn't mean buttons are just as easy or better.

 

Living room is probably the biggest one. Closing blinds, turning on lights etc. For everything I need to stand up. The idea is that no matter where I am, I can do that. Sure give me 3 remotes (kitchen, dinner table and couch) and I would do fine, but I wouldn't call that a better solution.

So if I have to go grab my remote, I might as well not use anything smart.

 

To be clear, nothing in my house is smart, I don't really like the current systems that support my language, nor do I really feel like making my current home smart, but I can absolutely see the advantage of voice activation.

[Arika]

if anything connects to the internet when it very clearly doesn't have to (lights, switches etc), then yes, you're doing a "smart home" wrong.

if you're relying on someone else's servers to keep your home "smart", you're doing it wrong.

if you have to pay a subscription for basic functionality just for the privileged of having an existing thing made "smart" then you're doing it wrong.

[Alan G]

This whole topic is pretty stupid IMO.  We moved into a condo in January after having lived in a house for 35 years.  I never saw a need for "smart" anything in the house other than a programmable thermostat to control heating and air conditioning.  The same thing with the condo.  We had to get some new appliances and bought a Bosch washer and dryer set that are WiFi enabled along with a new Cafe (GE brand) range that also has this feature.  There were some features with the range that could only be set up through WiFi which I did.  I now have an app on my phone that tells me when the oven is heated to the baking temperature.  I don't find this feature useful at all,  With the washer and dryer, I still have to manually put clothes, sheets, etc into it and add the laundry soap.  WiFi cannot do this for me at all.  Exactly why I need WiFi for those two appliances is a mystery to me.

 

I've been around the block for a lot of years.  I'm an adept user of computers and can program in several languages.  The Internet of Things is a gimmick that that increases the item's cost with no apparent benefits.

[ConfiXs]

IMO smart homes should be avoided at all costs, i dont trust companies to have microphones in my house at all times im already being tracked with my phone and whenever i use my computer having my lights spy on me is too much data theft

[Poinkachu]

Normal house :
Blackout = Troublesome

IoT house :
Internet down = Troublesome
Blackout = Also troublesome.

Me personally, I'd rather not add another breaking point to crucial stuffs unless it's really really needed.
Walking a bit to flick a light switch might help a bit in making me healthier anyway. I don't need any help to make myself more lazy. xD

Not saying IoT is totally useless, but yeah, for most stuffs... it is.

[ConfiXs]

34 minutes ago, Caroline said:

Smart homes are wrong.

 

Even if you don't care about corporations spying on you 24/7 smart products are just... bad. It's just overcomplicating things for the sake of it as an excuse to charge more for lower quality stuff that becomes obsolete after, what, 4 years? if you're lucky.

 

See, it's like those disposable LED light fixtures that are cheap and claim to be "better technology" yet whenever one of them dies you suddenly have to do a whole electrical job at your house rather than simply replacing a light bulb in 10 seconds, why do they do this? because fuck the user that's why.

 

Don't worry if you've ever used Google you're already profiled.

oh i already know i got a footprint lol i made sure i was on a watchlist when i bought a SBR

[Jtalk4456]

8 hours ago, skywake said:

That sort of stuff, genuinely helpful little automations. That's the appeal of this kind of thing in my mind. The fact that we seem to only ever talk about it and companies only ever advertise smart home stuff as "hey google, turn on the lights"? I think it really does damage to the entire concept of smart home in the minds of a lot of people. Because people just think that it's not a hassle to just turn on the lights with a switch. Which is valid, because it's true, but it's not the appeal

I think to really figure out what smart stuff is good or bad, you have to define the purpose. The purpose of home automation at it's core is convenience. The system does things so you don't need to. Setting lights to turn on in the morning and blinds open before your alarm starts going off to help you wake up. It's a LUXURY. It's not necessary, but it can be helpful. But like any luxury it comes at a cost, often to the environment due to unnecessary things being produced and eventually trashed. And in the case of IOT and tech in general, we have to consider the safety/privacy impact in a digital world. 

So when making a balance between the convenience and the potential downsides, I look for things with multiple uses as much as possible that won't impact the security of my home any more than just having a wifi network already does. I assume the possibility of a hack for every device and determine how detrimental that would be to me.
For example, I plan to have smart lights in my future home. It's not simply convenience, but I can set sensors and schedules to reduce my energy usage and make up for environmental impacts of more production. And if they got hacked, someone can potentially flicker my lights, oh no...

But turn that around to an IOT door lock. The convenience for me is minimal if not negative. I just wanna stick in a key and turn a knob, not pull out my phone and any other required steps. And if it gets hacked, my home is now not safe. That is not an option for me; I have 5 kids. I will never have anything smart locking my doors or windows, ever!

Going specific into the voice activation, I'm a bit undecided on this. Potentially, having your voice out there to be copied with software and used for bad things, yeah not good. But having said that, my voice is already out there because of so many other factors from google home to just using my cell phone, security cameras on buildings, etc. Voice stuff really depends on how good the recognition is and the locality of the commands. I haven't actually looked into this yet, but I want a system where voice activated commands are processed by a device/software locally then sent to a hub/ecosystem with the smart devices. I don't want the use of my voice to be limited to the internet working. If the internet is out, I want to still be able to use my LAN network to turn off lights or play music from my future plex server, etc.

2 hours ago, Caroline said:

Smart homes are wrong.

See, it's like those disposable LED light fixtures that are cheap and claim to be "better technology" yet whenever one of them dies you suddenly have to do a whole electrical job at your house rather than simply replacing a light bulb in 10 seconds, why do they do this? because fuck the user that's why.

There's also situations like this with disposable fixtures that are a terrible idea. I won't go so far as to say smart homes are inherently wrong, but as with all tech, it can be done responsibly or thoughtlessly. Some good old common sense and good security practice can prevent a lot of issues with smart devices. It's just a matter of weighing benefits and making it reasonable and safe

[Totallycasual]

I always thought by now we'd have home PC's that effectively control all of the home's smart functionality while also being a device that individuals within the home can run individual desktops all at once remotely on smaller much less powerful laptops/tablets. 

[Neroon]

8 hours ago, Alan G said:

With the washer and dryer, I still have to manually put clothes, sheets, etc into it and add the laundry soap.  WiFi cannot do this for me at all. 

But it does let you know when it's finished. Now this might not be relevant for you, but our washer and dryer are all the way upstairs, and if the TV is on, you don't hear them, so it would be useful.

Also you want to get your wash out asap when it's finished. So being able to remote start it so that it's ready when you get home, that's a big plus.

 

We have neither btw, and we would like to have it for sure.

 

I find that many of these additions are a hit and miss for people, some really like them, others give 0 f's.

[skywake]

9 hours ago, Alan G said:

This whole topic is pretty stupid IMO.  We moved into a condo in January after having lived in a house for 35 years.  I never saw a need for "smart" anything in the house other than a programmable thermostat to control heating and air conditioning.  [...]  With the washer and dryer, I still have to manually put clothes, sheets, etc into it and add the laundry soap.  WiFi cannot do this for me at all.  Exactly why I need WiFi for those two appliances is a mystery to me.

Honestly, I think this is kinda my point in a round about way. I mean a thermostat IS an automation and IMO probably the best kind of automation there is. You set it and it reads sensors (time/temp/humidity) to decide what it does (heat/cool). That's the gold standard of home automation right there. And there's a lot more you can do along those lines

 

For example, here in Perth Australia it gets pretty damn hot in the summer and "programmable thermostats" aren't really something that's that common. And there are usually degrees of actions that you'll do throughout a particularly hot day like turning on ceiling fans well before you turn on the aircon, closing blinds during the peak of the heat, opening the doors when the temp outside drops to lower than the inside temp late in the day etc. Doing it that way saves energy compared to just blasting the aircon all day. So a reasonable set of automations might be:

- Fans go on when the temp goes above a certain level (I've done this, for some fans)

- Set aircon to turn on when the doors are shut, people are home and the temp goes above some other threshold (I plan to do this)

- Turn the aircon off when the temp outside starts to drop or when someone opens the door for more than a couple of mins

- Have an RGB lamp that visually shows what the weather is like outside vs inside (I'm close to this but I don't have any inside temp sensors yet)

 

You know, extended thermostat kind of stuffs. Do I need some automation on the washer/dryer/fridge/dishwasher/oven? Probably not, there's not a lot I would think you'd need to automate there. Not saying there couldn't be for some people but I wouldn't see the need. For example I have seen an automation someone had on their dishwasher where it would change the colour of a light strip near it to indicate whether the dishes in it were clean or dirty as a prompt to stop people from putting dirty dishes into it without emptying it. So you can do stuff with some of these "smart appliances" but..... I would agree most of those kind of "smart" device features are not very useful. The useful stuff is often not the flashy stuff they put in the ads and on boxes. Really, this is quite literally the point I'm making  

 

6 hours ago, Jtalk4456 said:

I think to really figure out what smart stuff is good or bad, you have to define the purpose. The purpose of home automation at it's core is convenience. The system does things so you don't need to. Setting lights to turn on in the morning and blinds open before your alarm starts going off to help you wake up. It's a LUXURY. It's not necessary, but it can be helpful. But like any luxury it comes at a cost, often to the environment due to unnecessary things being produced and eventually trashed. And in the case of IOT and tech in general, we have to consider the safety/privacy impact in a digital world. 

I mean, of course it's a luxury. We're literally talking about creating a virtual butler for us. Do I need my bedroom lights to slowly fade on in the morning before my alarm goes of? Of course not, I did fine without it. But damn, it's a hell of a lot nicer than being woken up by some rude device shouting in your ear to shock you awake. I'd also argue waking up in that way makes me quite a bit more productive, a slowly fading on light doesn't interrupt your sleep in the same way an alarm does

 

In terms of the environmental impact? Again, I think it really depends on what you're doing. I think a lot of the more useful automations are built around more efficiently using resources. Really, the two biggest things you tend to have to manually juggle in a house would be keeping the climate comfortable and setting appropriate lighting. Then there are tertiary things like managing when to schedule things like watering, high draw devices, exhaust fans. Pretty much all of that stuff, to some degree, has an element of reducing consumption. So it's not necessarily a decision between environment and "luxury", it can be both

 

Kinda thinking about this now, I'm not so keen on automating things like dryers at all but there is something you could do along those lines. We get charged more for power we take off the grid than we do power we put back into the grid via solar. If you had your solar output tied into home assistant and a simple RGB strip you could visibly show when you were exporting power to the grid and to what degree. Maybe combine with the chance of rain and humidity. Red lamp? Use clothes line. Green lamp? Dryer. Blue lamp? Wait

[YellowJersey]

I have zero interest or desire to have a "smart home." Between the privacy issues, the closed-ecosystems, bugs, companies that could flick a switch and make your entire smart house non-functional (or go out of business and lead to the same result), and so on, I would 10/10 rather have a "dumb" home. Linus' adventures in smart homes has really turned me off of the whole notion, not that I was ever very keen on it before.

[Ydfhlx]

There are three "smart" (if they even count) things in my house. Printer, thermostat and lights on the driveway. Two of these things don't work and miraculously it's not the printer.

 

"Smart home" things are more expensive, and the time you save thanks to them has to be put into maintaining them, at least in my experience; so I don't really see a point.

[wseaton]

One problem is a lot of these devices are smart phone controlled.

 

What happens when you get a new Phone? Ive yet to see a backup and restore option. Running around and having to har reset all these devices when you get a new phone won't be fun.

 

Not a fan of having all devices voice activated. Annoying for a significant other taking a nap.

[Alvin853]

48 minutes ago, wseaton said:

One problem is a lot of these devices are smart phone controlled.

 

What happens when you get a new Phone? Ive yet to see a backup and restore option. Running around and having to har reset all these devices when you get a new phone won't be fun.

 

Not a fan of having all devices voice activated. Annoying for a significant other taking a nap.

The phone usually isn't the controller, you have some sort of hub or direct cloud connection, that's why you need an account for almost everything, because all the data is stored on a server somewhere, and you just log into your account again when you have a new phone. Of course that's part of the problem, you don't know who has access to the data on the server, and how long the manufacturers will keep the servers alive.

[Yoinkerman]

Remember they're also showing you neat things for the camera.  Not because voice commands are useful 

[Spindel]

Smart home is not the same as a voice controlled home.

 

The affection with voice controll is as far as I can see a north american/anglosphere thing.

 

EDIT since I pressed post button by misstake://

 

I do use voice controll when it makes sense, like listening to/dictating text while driving. But not for everything like it seems north americans do.

 

I have ”smart” home stuff, but I do use it to make stuff automatic so I don’t have to bother with them (and to be able to remote monitor my home). If I have to take an action to do anything with my ”smart” home there really is no difference saying something/pressing a button, specially when that button is on my smart phone/smart watch.

 

I repeat: voice controll is not the same as ”smart” home, it’s just a ”button”. 

[IPD]

OP:

 

Yes, because the idea is fundamentally flawed.  Nothing needs to be "smart".  I'm all for high-tech, but stuff like voice commands and having 200 devices in your home connected to your smartphone via "internet of things"--is a recipe for being exploited.

 

You can already program thermostats--without having them online.  You can open garage doors without having z-wave on everything.  You can also spend 5 seconds more to type a phrase into a search engine manually, rather than using voice commands and relying on wireta....err Alexa to give you the answer.

 

We are way beyond the point of diminishing returns.  We're now at the point of "lazy" and people who would rather create incredible vulnerabilities for themselves--rather than expend another .3 calories on physically turning on a switch.  Worse, not only does it create vulnerabilities for you--the current occupant; it also creates a decreased resale value when prospective buyers are left with navigating and deciphering a crapton of technology that they in all likelihood neither want nor need.

 

Think I'm joking?  Not a week passes here without someone asking about this or that tech thing left behind on their new domicile by the previous tenant.  Speakers in the ceiling.  Multi-room sound-systems.  Remnants of a projector setup.  etc.  Is it really worth the expense/hassle of setting up a "fixed" solution when you can just take a bluetooth boombox with you to the next room when you move around?  Do you really enjoy finding a 1970's intercom system in your new home?

 

p.s.

And don't even get me started on Ring sending your video feed to local law enforcement without your permission.

[Heliian]

On 6/3/2022 at 8:00 PM, Neroon said:

you don't hear them, so it would be useful

My washer displays the time it takes for a cycle.  The dryer is set for auto but takes less time than the washer.  I don't need more notifications from appliances. 

[Neroon]

Just now, Heliian said:

My washer displays the time it takes for a cycle.  The dryer is set for auto but takes less time than the washer.  I don't need more notifications from appliances. 

So that means you have to keep track of the time. It's not a big deal, I get it. But it's helpful for a lot of people. If you don't like it, don't use it.

[Heliian]

8 minutes ago, Neroon said:

So that means you have to keep track of the time. It's not a big deal, I get it. But it's helpful for a lot of people. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Like most "smart" tech, there are some use cases, especially with disabled people where even a simple task like going into another room to check on something is arduous.  It gives a lot of people independance and comfort.  

 

There is definitely a place today for home automation.  The goal is to reduce workload and be more efficient.  Automation is still best served in a commercial or industrial setting where it can keep costs down.  At home, it's an expensive luxury for the most part.