1) People don't understand and don't want to have to understand how WiFi, servers, clients, protocols, GUIDs, etc work so they can up a standalone system. Manufacturers create systems requiring internet connectivity so they can abstract away some of the complexity from the end users. Unfortunately, that means when stuff fails, it's totally opaque, as described in TFA. I mean, shit, most people couldn't wire a lamp correctly or change a tire [citation needed, but you get my point].
2) Rent seeking and data mining. Why let the customer pay for the lightbulb once and use it forever when you can make them pay for a monthly subscription and sell the usage data? And then you can force an upgrade when you deprecate the service before the light bulb burns out. Win/win!
Remember: when somebody says "internet of things" what you should hear is "billions on unpatched, unmaintained Linux devices sold by companies whose core competencies aren't securing computers racing each other to the bottom".
to be entirely honest I see the IOT part as a blessing and a curse.
I can see what potential benefits IOT devices could bring but the risks of all these outdated devices in my home scare the hell out of me. I know it sounds like paranoid talk but my whole life is digital these days.
Okay, but neither of those problems are actually an issue with smart homes as a concept, they're mostly issues with the way profit motive drives behavior in a capitalist system.
The first point is confusing because the majority of tools people use today they can't repair themselves. That's what happens as technology advances, you need specialists to understand each system.
If you look at things like earthships that are built to manage a lot more factors than a typical home, it becomes pretty clear how useful automating some of those systems and allowing them to share data could be.
If you had good open standards for the tech and were actually trying to make things that improved people's lives or saved energy rather than mine data or recurring revenue, you could make some cool shit.
Really the complaint should be about the way these products are developed and marketed, which is hardly unique to this sector.
1) People don't understand and don't want to have to understand how WiFi, servers, clients, protocols, GUIDs, etc work so they can up a standalone system. Manufacturers create systems requiring internet connectivity so they can abstract away some of the complexity from the end users. Unfortunately, that means when stuff fails, it's totally opaque, as described in TFA. I mean, shit, most people couldn't wire a lamp correctly or change a tire [citation needed, but you get my point].
2) Rent seeking and data mining. Why let the customer pay for the lightbulb once and use it forever when you can make them pay for a monthly subscription and sell the usage data? And then you can force an upgrade when you deprecate the service before the light bulb burns out. Win/win!
Remember: when somebody says "internet of things" what you should hear is "billions on unpatched, unmaintained Linux devices sold by companies whose core competencies aren't securing computers racing each other to the bottom".