Slashdot Mirror


Alphabet's Nest To Deliberately Brick Revolv Hubs

Nest, a Google-owned company, will deliberately break one of its own products come May 15. The company has announced plans to disable Revolv, a hub that allows customers to electronically control lights in their homes. Entrepreneur Arlo Gilbert raises some important questions: Google/Nest's decision raises an interesting question. When software and hardware are intertwined, does a warranty mean you stop supporting the hardware or does it mean that the manufacturer can intentionally disable it without consequence? Tony Fadell seems to believe the latter. Tony believes he has the right to reach into your home and pull the plug on your Nest products. [...] To be clear, they are not simply ceasing to support the product, rather they are advising customers that on May 15th a container of hummus will actually be infinitely more useful than the Revolv hub. Google is intentionally bricking hardware that I own. That's a pretty blatant "fuck you" to every person who trusted in them and bought their hardware. They didn't post this notice until long after Google had made the acquisition, so these are Google's words under Tony Fadell's direction. Revolv was acquired by Nest in 2014, and it is believed that all Nest wanted from the acquisition was talent and workforce. An older version of Revolv website reveals that its hub was marketed to have "free lifetime service subscription," "free monthly updates for additional device support," and "free future firmware updates to automatically activate new radios." James Grimmelmann, a professor of Law, tweeted, "I didn't realize that Revolv promised free lifetime service. That makes the shutdown a deceptive trade practice as well as an unfair one." Aaron Parecki, co-founder of IndieWebCamp, wrote, "Your friendly reminder that without open standards, you're not "buying" smarthome hardware, you're renting it."

48 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. Don't Be Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh, fuck it. Be evil and a jackass.

    1. Re:Don't Be Evil by Luthair · · Score: 5, Funny

      The nest CEO seems to think he's Steve Jobs though he's only getting the jackass part of the equation right.

    2. Re:Don't Be Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      That was Google. This is Alphabet. Rebranding is like wiping the slate clean, it frees you from all past commitments and promises.

    3. Re:Don't Be Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The nest CEO seems to think he's Steve Jobs though he's only getting the jackass part of the equation right.

      So essentially that makes him steve ballmer

    4. Re:Don't Be Evil by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remind me not to buy a Google self-driving car. Wow, dick move.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Don't Be Evil by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's time for a judge to rule a software license is meaningless and true ownership of a product with software in it is occuring.

      Then let the lawyers do their thing with that.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    6. Re:Don't Be Evil by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      More accurately, don't buy a self-driving car by a competitor of Google that Google will buy out.

      Unfortunately there aren't very many Google products that *didn't* originate elsewhere. There's search... but what else? It's not as if Glass or Voice or Maps actually started inside Google, much as they sometimes try to bury any pre-Google history.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    7. Re:Don't Be Evil by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not FUD, it's absolutely correct, and your post is wishful thinking, which is why the quote is correct.

      Your argument for 20 years is worthless, because **software isn't treated like that**. It doesn't matter how long you've been arguing it; software is not treated like other consumer products, no matter how much you think it should be. There's no signs that it'll ever be treated like other consumer products. You're just tilting at windmills.

      We FOSS people, unlike you apparently, actually live in the real world, and here in the real world where software *isn't* subject to the quality, safety, reliability, and doctrine of first sale terms that regular consumer products are, FOSS software is the only thing that makes sense if you actually want to have real control over your software instead of just renting it.

    8. Re:Don't Be Evil by johnnys · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All the "same laws" that apply to all other consumer products are pretty well useless. Read a cell phone contract or any so-called "warranty" carefully on any "consumer" product and you'll realize you have f-all rights. Manufacturers and vendors are continually chipping away at "consumer rights" with the willing assistance of their well-paid Congress, Senate and SCOTUS critters.

      Try to take a broken toaster back to any big box retailer and get your money back: Unless they really want your repeat business they will make you suffer in a long line to get a "reconditioned" replacement that won't last a week.

      The real advantage of F/OSS is that it gives you no warranty or promise of any kind, but that it DOES give you the capability of fixing it yourself and making the system do what YOU want. As long as your software is controlled by a vendor or any other third party that does NOT have your interests at heart, you remain at their mercy. And they will only act in their best interests, not yours.

      --
      Sometimes the "writing on the wall" is blood spatter...
    9. Re:Don't Be Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      > the rest of the time it just sits there slowly falling apart.

      Why not fix entropy instead?

    10. Re:Don't Be Evil by macs4all · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The nest CEO seems to think he's Steve Jobs though he's only getting the jackass part of the equation right.

      Name even ONE instance where Apple has reached-out and intentionally and permanently disabled an already-purchased piece of Apple hardware.

      Well? I'm waiting...

    11. Re:Don't Be Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Error 53.

    12. Re:Don't Be Evil by vtcodger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Gonna be interesting when the software -- bugs are the user's problem -- mentality collides with the automotive strict liability world. Presumably the entertainment components can work (or not work) like the crap we are used to. But if your autonomous car runs over a kid on a tricycle I think that software vendors are going to find themselves in a whole new legal world.

      Popcorn time ...

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    13. Re:Don't Be Evil by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How does this square with "Lifetime Updates"?

      I guess it depends on who's lifetime you're talking about...?

      The hardwares lifetime?

      Your lifetime?

      The external servers lifetime (that the unit is dependent upon)?

      Or the company's lifetime...which sounds like it was done away with in this case when Google bought them...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:Don't Be Evil by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's really disingenuous to say that people did this to themselves. After the repairs were complete, the phone worked perfectly fine, meaning that as far as they knew they had done the job correctly. What happened is that a later update came around and bricked the device if somebody had repaired it.

      But that's not even the worst part, the worst part was that Apple refused to unbrick the devices, and basically forced everybody to come to their repair shops. Why is that bad? Because right to repair is actually codified in US law, meaning it's illegal for a manufacturer to create countermeasures for you doing self repairs and/or going to third parties for repair.

      Furthermore, the whole argument in favor of that brick was absurd. Is somebody really supposed to steal your iphone, swap their own fake fingerprint sensor in it, and then put it back as if nothing happened? That sounds like a cheesy plot to a mission impossible movie.

    15. Re:Don't Be Evil by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's funny that you're crying FUD in a comment on an article where it is actually happening right now. If it actually happens, it's not FUD. If it really is FUD, there must be some practical workaround that doesn't involve replacement. Would you care to share your solution with the new brick owners?

    16. Re:Don't Be Evil by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was more like an xbox detecting that the dvd drive had been swapped, and triggering the DRM.

      Actually it was more like an xbox which had the dvd drive swapped a long time earlier and worked flawlessly without issue suddenly downloading an update and triggering the DRM.

      In any analogy it was what is generally known as A Dick Move (TM)

  2. Put Lifetime in quotes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've found that "lifetime" warranties are often for the product's lifetime, not the life of the owner.

    So a lifetime warranty on a dishwasher might be 10 years. Not sure how they get away with that, but I've seen it more than once.

    1. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by bondsbw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't it then deceptive to not advertise the quantity of time that is considered to be "lifetime"?

      Has anyone purchased this device within said quantity of time?

      Does the expiration of my dishwasher warranty allow the company to send a guy to my home to permanently disable it?

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    2. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I find lifetime warranties rather frightening... what if it's cheaper for the company to have me killed than to fix the product?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by zugmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nah, but like all the other stupid home automation products out there, it's got an unneeded "cloud" component. Kill that and suddenly the server you used to interface with to turn your lights on isn't there anymore. Hilarity ensues.

    4. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by GuB-42 · · Score: 4, Funny

      A crew of really small people then.

    5. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      Some countries actually have laws about products - fitness for use, merchantable quality and so on.

      But don't go to any of them or you might catch a dose of cormanism and end up marrying a gay.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I would imagine (hope?) that at the very least the "lifetime" period is specified in the fine print somewhere.

      From their FAQ:

      The Revolv Lifetime Subscription, which is included in the $299 you pay for the solution, enables GeoSense automation and remote updates that allows your Revolv to work together seamlessly (and continually update) with the products you already own; for the lifetime of the product.

      It would appear they have decided to euthanize the product an thus it has reached date end of its lifetime.

      The question, as I see it, is given the vague definition of lifetime in the FAQ, and absent any clearer one in the TOS that everyone reads in great detail too be sure they understand what they really are getting and not just click "Accept" does Google's EOL'ing of the Revolv constitute a breach of the promise of lifetime service? The products are still serviceable except for the lack of a server, so should there be a remedy for the people whose live once revolved around home automation but are now at a standstill due to Google's actions?

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    7. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by rgcombs9117 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's why I'm still using X-10 home automation products. Maybe not as "gee whiz" as all the IoT stuff, but no cloud component, no phoning home, just control signals sent through the house wiring (and wireless remotes sending signals locally to a receiver).

    8. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the UK the expected lifetime of a product is determined by courts. For something like a laptop computer, it's typically 5-6 years, for example. It depends on the cost of the product, how it was marketed, what a "reasonable person" (legal term) would expect etc.

      We actually have really great consumer laws covering this. If something breaks during a manufacturing/design defect within it's reasonable lifetime you can get a fix or partial refund. For example, if a laptop expected to last five years broke in year four due to a flawed cooling system you could get a 20% refund.

      I don't even know what exactly this thing is supposed to be, but it's some kind of home control system so courts would probably lump it in with stuff like light switches and consumer units. Reasonable lifespan of 10 years or more. This seems to be very much a design flaw (can be remotely bricked by discontinuation of the service) so you could probably take the vendor to Small Claims Court and win.

      It's the vendor that pays out, not the manufacturer. That's why Amazon had to partially refund that guy whose PS3 had the "other OS" feature remotely deleted by Sony.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not that I need it, but how well does X10 work?

      Simultaneously great and not great. I've been using X-10 components every single day since 1999, and 99.9% of the time, they Just Work. The other 0.1% of the time, I have to fiddle with it. Sometimes I can just retry a command. Other times, I have to change antennae positions because the radio environment in the neighborhood has changed. So X-10 works great, but it's always a little bit marginal. It doesn't take much to tip it over the edge into not working. And of course there's zero security of any kind, so if the neighbor kids knew what X-10 was, they could turn my lights off on me.

      Specifically, I wonder about the North American practice of wiring houses as two separate 110 volt "buses" 180 degrees out of phase. Doesn't that mean that an X10 controller on one "bus" can't talk to a device on the other "bus" unless a 220 volt device like a clothes drier or electric stove happens to be running?

      Correct, the two legs are generally inaccessible to each other. I have a receiver on each one, in consequence.

    10. Re:Put Lifetime in quotes by HexaByte · · Score: 3, Informative

      And yet I have Sears Craftsman tools that I bought 25 years ago, and return for a new one when it breaks. Some companies honor their lifetime warranties.

      --
      HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
  3. Google's battered customers by chihowa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google is intentionally bricking hardware that I own. That's a pretty blatant "fuck you" to every person who trusted in them and bought their hardware.

    How many times has Google said "fuck you" to people who trusted them and how many times have those people returned to Google for more? Who actually trusts Google anymore?

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    1. Re:Google's battered customers by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Funny

      Who actually trusts Google anymore?

      I'm not sure Maybe I should go to my usual source to find out.

      Waaaaiiiitttt....

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:Google's battered customers by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly this. I have no idea why anyone would buy anything that Google sells that isn't directly related their search business. And if Google buys someone that produces something you already own, you had better start looking for a replacement - when they discontinue something, they aren't content with simply ending sales and sending it to some legacy support contract like any other company - they want to burn the product down and piss on the ashes.

      And it's convenient the whole parent company rename, so they can do shit like this without tarnishing the 'Google' name on a wide scale.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    3. Re:Google's battered customers by GuB-42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People who bought Revolv hubs didn't buy a Google/Nest/Alphabet product.

  4. The ugly side of IoT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't control it you don't own it. This is the ugly side of IoT. I remember when the first NASes came out, it was great. You could, with a little firewall tweaking, have a hosted file server that you could access from anywhere. Cloud storage is the antithesis of this notion. Someone else takes care of it for you, but it's totally out of your control. They aren't your bits anymore and they could vanish at any time. The wife didn't believe me until Yahoo music shutdown and the albums purchased were just gone forever. If you can help it, always have something YOU control. Don't waste your hard earned money on some corporation's little experiment.

  5. im doing nothing of the sort, actually. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Firstly: to anyone who owns a nest and is counting their fleeting blessings that this will never happen to them, see you on the front page in a few years.

    now, for the rest the slashdotters. stop with the internet of things, synergy of disruptive technology, cloud based "AAS" marketing hootenany and put the cool-aid back. These companies have no vested interest in anything but their shareholders. when Sergei buys a new island, when Tim buys a new ultra-yacht, when Satya or Ballmer or Gates or whoever runs the redmond money choo choo these days buys a new public school system and turns it into a mandatory code camp you can be sure they dont care about you or any of the products you use. Kindle, Nest, Facebook, and Google all exist solely to capitalize on your inability to understand your role as the product of these services, not the consumer. putting it "in the cloud" or buying into a "sharing economy" or whatever some ginned up marketing thirty-something spun across her blog is just fancy buzz jargon for giving up freedom.

    You cant recall my books just because a publisher rubs you the wrong way, because they sit on my shelf after I buy them. You cant recall my email because some sender became non-commital about it, because it lives on my server now. And you can spin it all you want, but you cant do anything about the fact that I use a VPN and adblocker when I surf your "free" wireless. I dont get to experience your SRVFAIL redirection landing page because my DNS queries are my own. And until this cloud based abortion you call the future takes my rights and freedoms into consideration, I'll just exist as one more user you cant track, cant optimise, and wont target properly whos "experience" is "degraded" because I chose something besides serfdom on the internet I was promised would revolutionize the future youre slowly ruining.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  6. The Nature of Beast by transami · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is amazing to me how bad of a company Google actually is, and yet there is so little repercussion. But in retrospect it becomes increasingly clear. Google is just the next Microsoft. Due to the complexity of computers the entrenched OS player(s) simply has too much power to run rough shod over their customers, and there is nothing anyone can really do about it.

    --
    :T:R:A:N:S:
  7. WTF? by Larry_Dillon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It should only be OK to brick the devices if they refund the purchase price. Otherwise, it's theft.

    --
    Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
  8. That word doesn't mean what you think it does by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Lifetime" in a commercial sense is shorthand for "as long as we care to support the product" rather than "as long as the product works." The FTC, for example, lists 3 different interpretations of the term.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:That word doesn't mean what you think it does by ooloorie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Along with a statement of warranty, what we need now from companies trying to sell us IoT things is a legal document claiming that they will not sell the company for X number of years. If they do sell, then breech of contract!

      Who do you think is going to pay for that extended availability, other than the consumer? That means that instead of buying $200 Nest thermostats that may or may not work for a few years, everybody is now forced to pay $500 for the same hardware just so that the company accumulates enough reserves to live up to the support guarantees you want to impose. And for what? Because economic illiterates like you don't understand how the real world works? And, of course, that still doesn't protect you from bankruptcy, technological obsolescence, or key employees leaving.

      When you "buy" a $200 consumer device, you don't "buy" something in the sense of real estate. What you buy is maybe 20 months of prepaid service at $10/month. It's actually the same for most other things you buy: hammers, houses, cars, keyboards, computers, blenders, etc. That's why hardware gets depreciated. In fact, even with real estate, given taxes, you don't really "buy" it, you just pay a lot of points on a long term lease. Furthermore, when you buy a novel consumer device, there is always the risk that it won't work at all, or that it will last less long than you think. Again, caveat emptor.

      So, start living in the real world and stop proposing harmful fixes for things that aren't problems for most people.

  9. Autonomous cars... by Moof123 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wait till their short attention span runs out and your 8 year old Alphabet car gets bricked rather than maintained. We need less of this fly by night tech in critical and long term installations.

  10. Not clear on the technology by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Explain to me again why a home automation device that simply turns my lights on and off requires a company-owned server on the internet to operate?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Not clear on the technology by acoustix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Explain to me again why a home automation device that simply turns my lights on and off requires a company-owned server on the internet to operate?

      I ask this question all of the time. It's happening everywhere and nobody really seems concerned that they have no control over the product they purchased or that a 3rd party is controlling items in their homes/businesses, or that a 3rd party has access to their networks and data.

      IMO, that is exactly wrong with people today. Nobody cares about their own property, including their identity. They blindly follow the crowd to the cloud. All in the name of simplicity and coolness.

      --
      "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
  11. “Intentionally Bricked” by Aaden42 · · Score: 3, Informative

    TFA & other stuff I’ve read on this accuse them of taking an affirmative action to destroy the hardware, IE “intentionally bricked.” Reality is that they’re turning off servers that the hardware needs to function. Net effect to the consumer is the same, but the inflammatory language is inaccurate.

    If Google sent down a kill packet or firmware update that was intended to ruin a piece of hardware that would otherwise continue to function as-is if they hadn’t done so, that’s “intentionally bricked.” If they shutdown a server farm that consumers aren’t paying any on-going fees to make use of, that’s a different thing. Google has an obligation to not destroy something you bought, but they’re not obligated to keep providing you free server time.

    ”Google bricked my RSS reader when they shutdown Google Reader.”
    ”Google bricked my email client when they stopped giving email on Google Domains away for free.”
    ”Google bricked my IDE when they turned off Google Code.”
    ”Google LITERALLY killed me when they discontinued Google Health.”

    Basically what I’m trying to say is read the fine print and check your entitlement. You chose to pay money for a product that was dependent on someone else’s charity to keep working. You backed the wrong horse.

    If you can’t smash everything it needs to work with a hammer, you don’t own it.

    1. Re:“Intentionally Bricked” by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 5, Informative

      Basically what I’m trying to say is read the fine print and check your entitlement. You chose to pay money for a product that was dependent on someone else’s charity to keep working.

      The not-so-fine print at the time of purchase actually said "Free lifetime service subscription." That sure sounds like an a liability the parties would have had on their radar when valuing the acquisition. In fact, after the acquisition was complete, Nest reiterated the commitment: "For existing customers, the service will continue to be available and we will continue to offer customer support."

      Reasonable people thus might well view the ongoing service as something more along the lines of a contractual obligation rather than an "entitlement" or "charity."

  12. Re:Nest biggest problem is Google by Godai · · Score: 4, Informative

    You realize that was debunked, right?

    http://www.theverge.com/2015/1...

    I mean, it's great because it fits the assumed narrative, but there's actually no evidence to back up the claim.

    That doesn't apply to this Revolv thing though; I have no idea what the hell they're thinking here at all.

    --
    Wood Shavings!
    - Godai
  13. IoTOBSE by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Internet of Things Owned By Somebody Else.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  14. I've had X-10 home automation for over 35 years... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... and it still is working fine. There are no external dependencies required for my home automation system to continue working as it has done over those 35+ years.

    .
    The problem with home automation nowadays is that you have to rely on "the cloud" or some company to continue to support the product.

    As we are seeing with Revolv, such a reliance is a significant disadvantage.

  15. I have had X-10 since 1979. by jabberw0k · · Score: 3, Informative

    "In 1978, X10 products started to appear in RadioShack and Sears stores." (X-10 history). N.B. profanity does not help your case.

  16. Re:You're running Linux I presume? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 3, Informative

    No thanks. Did that for a decade and I go tired of running multiple OSs. I have nothing against Linux. I was even a system administrator for Linux for a few years looking after the servers for a government website. My preference for the desktop is the Mac and I've moved onto doing development for the iOS and Mac environment.

    That being said I do have a nice Synology NAS at home where I run my own file server, DNS, mail server, web server, and BitTorrent Sync client. It's also connected to the Internet via a VPN and all my computers on my home network use it as a proxy. I have my torrent client running on there. There are plenty of other options that can be added such as media servers. It's a really nice box and saves me from looking after another machine. All I had to do was install the drives, turn it on, and configure how I wanted the RAID set up. Yes, I paid for the convenience but I've had it 4 or 5 years and not had a problem with it, except my drives filling up.