Ask Slashdot: Can You Have A Smart Home That's Not 'In The Cloud'?

With the announcement of Google Home on Wednesday, one anonymous Slashdot reader asks a timely question about cloud-based "remote control" services that feed information on your activities into someone else's advertising system: In principle, this should not be the case, but it is in practice. So how hard is it, really, to do 'home automation' without sending all your data to Google, Samsung, or whoever -- just keep it to yourself and share only what you want to share?

How hard would it be, for instance, to hack a Nest thermostat so it talks to a home server rather than Google? Or is there something already out there that would do the same thing as a Nest but without 'the cloud' as part of the requirement? Yes, a standard programmable thermostat does 90% of what a Nest does, but there are certain things that it won't do like respond to your comings and goings at odd hours, or be remotely switchable to a different mode (VPN to your own server from your phone and deal with it locally, perhaps?) Fundamentally, is there a way to get the convenience and not expose my entire life and home to unknown actors who by definition (read the terms of service) do not have my best interest in mind?
Yesterday one tech company asked its readers, "What company do you trust most to always be listening inside your home?" The winner was "nobody", with 63% of the votes -- followed by Google with 16%, and Apple with 13%. (Microsoft scored just 3%, while Amazon scored 2%.) So share your alternatives in the comments. What's the best way to set up home automation without sending data into the cloud?

Comments

Some PI based projects

[tim.thawkins]

https://wolfpaulus.com/journal... https://jasperproject.github.i... Neither use Google Voice, and all processimng stays inside the PI, you can also buy RELAY boards that plug into the PI to support home automation. http://www.seeedstudio.com/dep... example above, but there are many others.

Yes, there is software that does just that -

[Anonymous Coward]

Karl Denninger, the guy who writes market-ticker, has done just that, and for the same reason subby has expressed.

His post expressing his reasons for rolling his own -

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231376

And where to get it - http://homedaemon.net

Runs on a Raspberry PI 2

Re:Yes, there is software that does just that -

[Anonymous Coward]

Similar setup here. Custom "IoT" devices, communicating using MQTT mainly (mosquitto as a broker). The downside is that it requires electronics knowledge, prorgramming knowledge and also too much free time (that's my main problem really).

Re:Yes, there is software that does just that -

[Nonesuch]

Similar setup here. Custom "IoT" devices, communicating using MQTT mainly (mosquitto as a broker). The downside is that it requires electronics knowledge, prorgramming knowledge and also too much free time (that's my main problem really).

Or if you don't want to get into soldering your own mains current devices and writing your own broker, there's Insteon and Z-Wave with both standalone and cloud-tethered control hubs. Neither Insteon nor Zwave sensors and load controls are directly internet linked, the devices don't phone home to the Internet and will run fine without cloud connectivity. Some of the management hubs are very much dependent on cloud services, but the more expensive ones can talk multiple automation protocols and will work fine without the Internet.

I was at ISC West earlier this year, the primary automation focus was on Z-Wave, with just about any type of sensor you can imagine being available in a Z-wave integrated package.

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

B-but can the cloud be very small; on your own server in your own home?

Re:No.

[ickleberry]

Only because the corps say so. The reason the corps say so is because there is no money in hardware. Any ould fool can get a few PCB's made and a few components slapped on. The money is in monthly fees and selling data to advertisers. There is no technical reason the server can't reside in your own home or be p2p based, these home automation companies are simply inserting their cloud service as a sort of parasitic middleman.

The trend in the tech industry for years is to unnecessarily drag some element of the service onto a "cloud" service for this reason. Not just in home automation. Part of the problem is that in this tech boom a lot of the guys who would have been writing open source software for decentralised home automation have been hired by the cloud companies

Depends on the devices

[Zocalo]

If they need to phone home for some reason (usually vendor provided data aggregation and presentation) then you are pretty much screwed. If you are more selective about your devices and choose wisely so that all the useful functionality you need can be provided without Internet access, then it's fairly easy if you know what you are doing:

1. Set up a dedicated LAN (wired and/or wireless, as required), with it's own IP range, SSID, etc.
2. Put all your "smart" devices on this LAN
3. Deny all outbound access from this LAN to any other network
4. Allow inbound access to this LAN from specific IPs within your main network only, or a VPN termination point (higher-end home routers that terminate open standard VPN protocols are great here, otherwise look into *Nix boxes or other appliances like some NAS appliances that can do so)
5. Access your data, reasonably sure that they are not phoning home

Depending on the device maker, you may also be able to selectively allow outbound access for firmware patching while still blocking all the other data farming, although you may need to do a little digging into the config and/or traffic capture to do this. Devices will often use the same domain for everything though, and all too often the same hostname, so you might need something capable of URL level filtering to get this working.

Of course, none of that does anything to really protect you from some of the abysmal security that many IoT type devices have on them; e.g. backdoors or other exploitable interfaces that are available over WLANs that enable you to access the device remotely and extract the pre-shared key for your WLAN (see above about putting all this stuff on a dedicated WLAN?), change configuration options, and so on. It's also worth noting that sites like Shodan will also let the bad actors geolocate devices that have known vulnerabilities to them so they can go for a far more targetted war-driving session than used to be the case where it was more of a "see what is out there, and maybe get lucky" exercise.

Re: Depends on the devices

[Anonymous Coward]

"Roll your own" is the only answer. I tried with off the shelf products with the result that everything either tries to phone home or forces you to phone out. One NAS system required using a web page on Seagate's site to create accounts. What. The. Fuck. If seagate goes under these devices will be useless. Sigh. So. Roll your own.

Re:Depends on the devices

[Rob Y.]

Is it really 'the cloud' that's the problem - or is it just that funding it all through advertising is the problem. If Google had all the data it currently has, but used it strictly for providing its services - and you paid for those services rather than letting Google place ads based on what it knows about you, would that be less of an issue?

Because the type of services we're talking about are certainly enhanced by the ability to search the internet - and do that as effectively as possible from any location. Not needed to turn your lights on and off, but... Of course, there's the issue of the info being in someone else's hands - and possibly subject to theft. Always a challenge.

Re: Depends on the devices

[LVSlushdat]

Lemme tell you, its NOT just iot stuff thats afflicted with requirements to use a company owned website to configure/program the device. I wanted a clock radio that was also able to play shoutcast and other streaming audio sources. I found one for a great price by Acoustic Research, I'd always thought they had good products and went ahead and bought the unit. The first one I bought I found out after going around with their tech support for a month or so, would NOT EVEN do what the product info/brochure stated it would. I raised a big stink and they wound up sending me a more expensive model, which *did* work correctly per their advertised specs.. Here's the bitch: To program the unit you had to go to a 3rd party website and select the stations you wanted to listen to, which then programmed the unit, after which you could select between those stations freely. Since you had to register to use the website, they had my email address and whaddaya know, a couple of years after I bought the damn thing, I get an email telling me that the programming website is going away.. So now, as long as the unit continues to work, I can listen to the already programmed stations, but cannot add/change them after the website goes away.. A few months after that email the fucking thing quit connecting to my wifi and became a brick.. FUCK YOU ACOUSTIC RESEARCH!

Re:Depends on the devices

[Kevin by the Beach]

I agree with this approach, the weakest link in this would be the opening that's necessary to get to your management access point. By using a VLAN you've eliminated most of the traditional access/compromise points. The real trick is to keep the configuration up to date.

I've toyed with the idea of setting up a console service that I can access externally, which would be the only allowed path to pull the web gui that most of these devices support. It would allow me to access the "remote" features, but not allow the simple device to be internet snoop-able. This would simplify my security to only needing to harden a single device.

I agree that packet filtered bi-directional proxy is the only "safe" access that simple devices deserve when allowed to venture outside the safety of their VLAN. Unfortunately it does become a one-off exercise to keep each device configuration current.

Partly Cloudy and Warm by the Beach

Re:Depends on the devices

[sumdumass]

When the government and it's stooges go around saying that the NSA phone spying is not violating anyone's civil rights because it is business records owned by the businesses, the data is the problem- period.

Re:Depends on the devices

[Nonesuch]

Many cloud-tethered products have no documentation for their protocols, no supported way to modify the firmware, and use public-key encryption to make it very difficult to "spoof" the cloud service so you can run them without talking to the vendor's proprietary server. Many vendors have realized that consumers will shop on price and ignore privacy. For example, Y-cam used to manufacture IP cameras, but based on feedback from customers now only offers a smart cloud-based security solutions, in both free and paid subscription versions

Is it really 'the cloud' that's the problem - or is it just that funding it all through advertising is the problem. If Google had all the data it currently has, but used it strictly for providing its services - and you paid for those services rather than letting Google place ads based on what it knows about you, would that be less of an issue?

Cloud based home automation and similar services would still be almost as much as an issue without the "privacy" concerns. For example, in 2014 Nest bought Revolv, a "smart home hub" maker whose product was entirely cloud-tethered. Then Google (owners of Nest) decided they didn't want to support Revolv, and so announced the End of all cloud services for Revolv customers, essentially bricking the revolv hub. So when you own a cloud-tethered device that doesn't have the option to run the essential services on your own hardware, you don't really "own" anything at all.

Regardless of business model, nearly all cloud-tethered products cheap out on protocols and update mechanisms and local components, with the concept that the smarts can be handled by the remote server so the hardware price is reduced. This is great for the vendor's ability to scale up, but not so great if they stop supporting your device, or if your connectivity to the Internet is intermittent, or if their are issues with their cloud service or cloud provider.

What gets really annoying is how many products are designed to be cloud-tethered with no provision to keep working when they can't reach the public internet.

Re: Depends on the devices

[Jane Q. Public]

Doesn't anybody remember that Cisco did this with their Linsys routers? In order to set up your own router, you had to do it via a webpage on Cicso's servers, and from what I understand, it also called home a lot when it didn't need to.

I doubt I have to say here: that's not what I want in a router.

I never did find out what became of that situation. All I know for sure is that I don't buy Linksys products now.

Re: Depends on the devices

[drinkypoo]

I never did find out what became of that situation. All I know for sure is that I don't buy Linksys products now.

It is still basically the situation. But you can load openwrt on them, because that's one of their features now. I have a WRT1200 and that's what I've done.

MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[Gaygirlie]

I can't say about using proprietary, premade devices like Nest, but if you're willing to use Arduinos/ESP8266/whatnot and do a bit of programming you can use an OpenWRT-based router to run an MQTT-broker, or you can use a separate device like e.g. a Raspberry Pi for that and then Arduino/ESP8266/whatever for toggling of relays or logging power-consumption or temperatures or whatever you want automated. You don't actually have to connect any of the stuff to the Internet at all, or you can use an MQTT-client over an SSH-tunnel, or write your own front-end using Apache2 and PHP or a billion different other ways if you want it reachable from the Internet, too -- you have full control over what can and what can't be done over the Internet or if any of it can be accessed from the Internet at all.

This is, however, obviously the hard, DIY way of doing it. If you want an easy plug-and-pray system I have no idea if there even exists anything that doesn't share your stuff with 3rd parties. I, not-so-surprisingly, am in favour of the hard way that doesn't share everything with random, greedy 3rd-parties.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[JaredOfEuropa]

You can mix & match with the right selection of components. I use the following, and I won't hesitate to recommend it:

- For generic Home Automation stuff, use Z-Wave: a non-open radio protocol that has proven to be pretty robust. Z-Wave devices form a mesh network so range generally isn't a problem. And with the latest version of the standard, some security has been added as well. There are tons of items out there: switches, dimmers, thermostats, locks, sensors, remotes, and so on, from many brands, in many ranges of prices and quality.

- You need a Z-Wave hub, and again you have several choices that do not require the cloud: Homeseer (reliable but you get nickle & dimed to death for addons, and it's less accessible to tinkering), Vera (pretty reliable, and best of all it is open to tinkering. You can write your own plugins for this hub and there is an active community of plugin developers), or OpenHAB + a Z-Wave stick (Open! But using it is still somewhat reminiscent of installing Linux in its early days). I am currently using a Vera hub

- Your hub needs to be able to address non Z-wave devices. Most hubs do this with plugins, allowing you to include these in your setup: WiFi-enabled thermostats, Philips Hue bulbs, Alarm systems, anything networked that has an API, really.

- For your DYI devices, use Arduino + a NRF24L01 radio module running the MySensors libraries. MySensors is an open DYI project using Arduinos, having them form a reliable mesh radio network (way better than WiFi), and you can build pretty much anything you can imagine with it, usig the libraries and a handful of lines of code. MySensors interfaces nicely with Vera, there's a plugin that will expose MySensors devices like switches and sensors as native Vera devices, allowing you to use them in scenes. For the MySensors gateway to be used with Vera, I recommend using an Ethernet Arduino for maximum reliability.

Oh, and for anything that needs to be somewhat reliable, avoid WiFi devices. WiFi is not a very good HA platform.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[ScentCone]

Yes. The z-wave/vera platform has been working very well for me. I'm enjoying all the third party tinkertoys.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[EETech1]

There's a ton of building automation stuff out there that will do exactly what you ask it to, and nothing more.

This one is open source for the controller code, and the desktop environment.

http://www.temcocontrols.com/p...

I've used many of these, and they work great! Flexible analog inputs and outputs can be configured for 0-10 VDC or 4-20 mA, and there's a terminal block for each input and output that provides power and ground connections for easy hookup.

Cheers!

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[EETech1]

Hate to reply to myself, but here's a better link

http://www.temcocontrols.com/p...

The other link is just remote I/O without a processor.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[afmstuff]

Thanks for posting this. I have considered the consumer solutions, and held off due the the ratio of $ investment to being tied to a quickly-changing and marketing-driven product that may have sketchy reliability. For instance, I know one person with ~$10k of Z-wave who has so many problems with it (drop outs, interference, major mesh problems requiring a complete re-programming of the system if a switch gets moved to a different location) that they are looking for bids to replace it with a better option. I'd rather use wired vs. wireless anyway, this is exactly what I have been looking for-- a professional level product that is much cheaper than all the 'new school' controllers getting hype right now. For reference I happen have a C1+, a beaglebone black, and a NI USB DAQ on this desk, so I certainly have some experience in controllers, automation, and system dev. But if I throw a few kilobucks at automating my home, I don't want to spend a bunch of unpaid time trying to keep it working. For example I had to reboot my C1+ 3 times yesterday just to keep my audio flowing over the network. Just imagine if your whole house was flaky like that... Thanks for the link.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[aaarrrgggh]

Universal Devices ISY series do a pretty good job; after setup I just let it get an internal NTP server and it is pretty happy. It can be a unified platform for Insteon, Sonos, Hue, etc., with a little bit of work. They charge for add-ons, but the simplicity is nice.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[mlts]

This is how IoT should be done across the board. I have pleaded with several IoT startups to go hub and spoke, just so they reduce their attack surface, but because it is cheap to just open up to cellular or Wi-Fi, they just open the device to the Internet, since it is so easy to go that route with commodity hardware, and yet again, I get told that "security has no ROI".

The only thing I wish there were a wireless protocol for, would be for block access. Something like a wireless iSCSI. This sounds stupid, but with Apple and other companies moving to just one port, having an external HDD that can pair with a computer, and read/write without requiring a Wi-Fi SSID or Wi-Fi Direct would be very useful.

Re:MQTT + OpenWRT-router/some other server

[EETech1]

No problem!
Check our their github page for lots of helpful interfacing scripts also.

These are very affordable, flexible, reliable controllers, and they program very easily.

They also have a zigbee radio, and very affordable sensors, thermostats and actuators available too.

The interface allows you to define what the signal means open/closed or on/off or fwd/rev etc so you can easily program the logic in real world terms.

It's worth it just for the ruggedized I/O, task scheduling, and process control abstractions.

What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[NotInHere]

Since this "smart" home stuff began to emerge, I've always wondered what the great thing about it was. I personally do not mind having to leave the chair to turn on the lights, or having to carry physical keys with me to unlock the door. Nor do I mind having a "dumb" fridge where I have to think of the stuff to buy myself.

As a proper slashdotter, I spend a big chunk of my time in front of a screen, so I'm no way non-digital. Still I don't see any benefits in a "smart" home.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[Anonymous Coward]

Next you'd have us getting up to change the channel ... blasphemy!

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[NotInHere]

Remote controls for TV devices make sense: Most times if you turn lights off/on you either enter a room or leave it, and for that you already have to get up. But when watching TV you most likely sit or lie, and want to change the channel. The only time where you want to turn on the lights and don't stand already is twice a day: once in the morning and once in the evening. But that I think I can live with.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[CaptainJeff]

You can control the heating/cooling temperature, on either pattern or exception. So, the system can learn that you're usually home around 5.30p and have your house at exactly the temp you like when you arrive. Or, you can tell it you're on the way home at 12n today and it will have the house ready for you early. Same thing with lights/etc. Even if you like to do those things yourself, computers are more efficient. In the temp example, say you told your home you need to stay out until 9.30p one night - the temp would hover at whatever is cheapest (no heating/cooling) until it needed to turn on in order to be ready for your later arrival time and then turn on - this has potential to be much more efficient and save you money.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[unrtst]

Remote controls for TV devices make sense: Most times if you turn lights off/on you either enter a room or leave it, ...

And, if you're one of those folks that does want to turn on/off lights while lounging around, there have been cheap and easy solutions for decades.
The clapper comes to mind. Certainly easy for that one use case.
X10 firecracker is another cheap and easy option. They used to have a starter kit with a couple lamp modules (plug a lamp into a tiny box, and plug that into wall), a device remote, and a firecracker computer interface module (that worked with Linux even way back then). You could dim or turn on/off all the lamp modules, or add on appliance modules and other stuff. The starter kit was very inexpensive, and none of it talked to the outside world. Looking at them now, it doesn't look like they've changed much at all.

That said, remote control lights is not, IMO, home automation.
It's the automation bit that gets tricky. AFAICT, that's still something that's simply a neat hobby to some. To those peoples families, it's either a huge PITA or, if it's working correctly, OK but nothing too special. Technology *should* blend into the background and let your day go more smoothly, but if that means spending an arm and a leg, and buying into some company and hoping they survive, and investing loads of your own hours getting it all working smoothly, and the benefit it just a slightly smoother day, sort of, for some people, sometimes... cost/benefit just isn't there.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[thinkwaitfast]

Same with me. I started building my own internet controlled devices in the 1990's, so I thought it would be a great idea to turn my house into something from star trek. About two devices into my project, I realize that it was all but useless, just novelty....and not even that clever.

To answer the top level question, yes. Easily.There was even a company(ies?) in the early 90's selling a host of controllers based on the x10 protocol

On ebay

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[thinkwaitfast]

Why would you want to change your tv channel from the internet? What's next, turning on and off a faucet over the internet? How about a device the monitors your pictures to make sure they are hanging level and sends status updates to your phone?

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[NineLineMan]

Still I don't see any benefits in a "smart" home.

You don't have to WANT one, but if you can't even imagine any benefits that's a little sad.

This week I've wanted:
A bathroom light that turns on at half brightness if it's the middle of the night.
Automatically power cycle a crappy router when the internet goes out.
A coffee ready-made when i got out of bed.
The ability to check if I closed the back door from the comfort of a warm bed.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[Etcetera]

How about a device the monitors your pictures to make sure they are hanging level and sends status updates to your phone?

You should Kickstarter that.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[Caedite Eos]

The coffee part would be amazing if it worked with "sleep for Android," or similar app.

I am looking forward to the future.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[jimbo]

Consider that others have actual use cases that doesn't apply or appeal to you.

I'm quadriplegic, I love being able to control everything from my phone.

Also enjoy little things such as switching on heating 30 min before I arrive home so it's nice and toasty when I arrive.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[thinkwaitfast]

I thought of that while typing it in. The sad thing is that I could do it with parts I have in my junk drawer in half an hour. I've seen so many kickstarter projects that are as easy asking for thousands of dollars.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[thegarbz]

You don't see any benefits because you think the "smart" home is about switching off the lights from your computer. As a proper slashdotter you should have more imagination as to what technology can do for you.

- Track power to help reduce costs.
- Track water usage.
- Track plant watering for ideal horticulture, or even automate your garden.
- The inherent selling point of the Nest is that it optimises your heating to save money, not that you can control the temperature from the PC.
- Connected security devices.
- Automatic controlling of your home to prevent pointless inefficiencies or improve comfort, or even security (lights come on at specific intervals).

And that's without even actually putting much thought into it. If you're idea of a smart home is moving the lightswitch to your mobile phone then you're doing it wrong, very very wrong.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[NotAPK]

"The ability to check if I closed the back door from the comfort of a warm bed."

An extension of this would be knowing that the doors are locked and secure. For no other reason than satisfying that irrational fear we all have, around two minutes after leaving a house: "did I lock the door?"

For that reason alone a lock monitor (not for mechanized remote access) to simply verify that the doors are closed and locked would be very attractive to many people.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[NotInHere]

- Track power to help reduce costs.
- Track water usage.

I never saw what the advantage in this was. I do know that a device requires power, because it is connected to the power network. I do know that electric stoves need more power than lightbulbs and that I shouldn't keep the stove on. Also I know that I should turn off lights everywhere when I leave a room. Everything else just feels like microoptimisation to me.

- Track plant watering for ideal horticulture, or even automate your garden.

This may be a point, but I still don't see why it should be connected to a touchscreen mounted to my frige. I also don't need to be waked by a TTS voice telling me how much the plants grew yesterday.

- Connected security devices.

One of the major techniques in how to make systems secure is by doing precisely the opposite: separation.

And I do not like to have my smartphone connected to my home so that if my smartphone is lost, I can't get into my own house anymore.

- Automatic controlling of your home to prevent pointless inefficiencies or improve comfort, or even security (lights come on at specific intervals).

Turning on lights at specific intervals might scare thieves off, but before long they'll find different techniques in order to find out where to steal stuff from.

The only real security advantage you may get is with alarm systems and cameras.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[Nonesuch]

Making home infrastructure smart has plenty of utility, beyond simple laziness.

A smart thermostat connected to other home automation can know when nobody is home, automatically switch to energy saving mode, and then be notified when a resident is heading home so it can enter recovery mode and be back to a comfortable temperature by the time you arrive. Same goes for water heating -- if nobody is around, water in the storage heater tank can be allowed to cool down, and then brought back up to temperature before it is needed.

Speaking of hot water, having my own "smart meter" and monitoring allowed me to detect when the water heater was failing (energy use increased significantly), long before it stopped working entirely. Keeping track of power consumption by the AC system and fan can tell you when a filter is clogged or if a pump or fan motor is failing. By monitoring water usage (flow rate), you can detect plumbing leaks as well as notice when a hose is left running.

A one-way-feed out from an alarm system can be useful. If an alarm is triggered in the basement or first floor while system is "Armed-Home", then all lights on only that floor are turned on at full brightness. If "Armed-Away", all lights on all floors go into full disco stroboscope mode, and outside lights start blinking slowly on and off in the traditional S-O-S pattern. You can literally have an air gap between your alarm and home automation by using a photodiode to read the alarm LED state if you want to be paranoid.

My next step is to install powered insulated window blinds that open on sunny winter days for passive heating, then close at night to keep the heat in, and a UV sensor that closes the blinds on really sunny days to reduce UV fading of my furnishings.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[aaarrrgggh]

For me, the main thing is having lighting scenes and sonos control automated: time-of-day, day-of-week, occupied/unoccupied, etc. I would like it to do a few more things, but mainly the focus is in setting moods transparently.

I was surprised that my wife missed it when the power line modem died, but it really grows on you.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[R3d M3rcury]

Most times if you turn lights off/on you either enter a room or leave it, and for that you already have to get up.

You need to talk to my roommate.

She's one of those people who falls asleep on the couch while watching TV. She gets home, has dinner, turns on the TV, lies down, and is out like a light 20 minutes later. She'll occasionally wake up, hit the rewind button on the DVR, and fall asleep before the DVR gets back to the beginning.

I usually come downstairs around 11:30PM and find her asleep on the couch with the TV on and the lights on. I'll turn off the lights and go to bed, leaving her in the dark with the TV on.

So hooking the lights to a motion detector or something like that would be worthwhile.

Personally, I'm horrible about turning lights off when I leave a room.

Comments like yours do make me think of the TV Remote, though. I'm old enough to remember the time before them and the general attitude about TV Remotes: "I'm not so lazy that I can't get up off the couch and change the channel!" The only reason to have a TV remote was if you were somehow an invalid. Hospitals had TV Remotes. Old people had TV Remotes. The young and virile had no business using a remote and using a remote was somehow a character flaw.

I see the same sort of attitude with Smart Homes: "I'm not so feeble-minded that I can't remember to turn off a light switch or carry my keys or make a list of things that I need at the grocery store." Not depending on a computer to keep track of these things shows independence and clarity-of-thought. Only the feeble-minded would need tools like these--people with alzheimers or ditzy blondes.

Personally, I have no problem with a Smart Home. I like the idea that something is worrying about my electric bill and turning off lights for me. I like the idea that I don't have to carry around hunks of metal in my pocket, which tend to do a number of my pockets over time or make it uncomfortable to sit. I like the idea that something is keeping track of what I eat and will order more peanut butter when I throw out the last jar.

But I'll agree that what I don't like is having some corporation that is tracking all of this and using that information in ways which I might not approve. I like Jif peanut butter. When I throw out the last jar, I don't need my house suddenly asking me if I wouldn't want to try Skippy for 25 cents cheaper. No? How about adding some Smucker's grape jelly--there's a two-for-one deal going on!

Just order another fucking jar of Jif and leave me the hell alone.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[SuricouRaven]

I found a little box module on ebay - it's just a board with four relays on, and a matching radio remote. A little wiring work to install it above my ceiling and I can now turn my lights on and off from bed.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[SuricouRaven]

The objective of home security is not to render your home burglarproof. The objective of homo security is to render your home marginally less appealing to burglars than the one next door.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[thegarbz]

Everything else just feels like microoptimisation to me.

You are absolutely right. But once macro optimisation is done what is left? Here's two relevant examples that happened to me. I track my power usage and have for the best part of 7 years. I identified degraded seals in the my refrigerator by looking at the trends one day. The over the years the fridge had spent more time with the compressor running than in the past. Likewise with my water use, by monitoring it I identified an underground water leak in the incoming pipe to the house, naturally after the water meter which is in the street. The fact that I could measure it but not see it may have caused a really nasty surprise on my bill. In fact the water utility recommend if you suddenly have an incredibly large bill to check your piping. But I only get a bill every 3 months.

And I live somewhere where the cost of electricity and the cost of water is very relevant. Especially the water since I can get a fine if I use more than xxx litres per day.

This may be a point, but I still don't see why it should be connected to a touchscreen mounted to my frige. I also don't need to be waked by a TTS voice telling me how much the plants grew yesterday.

Oh I wholeheartedly agree. IoT and the smarthome is nothing more than data gathering and central control. Any additional "value added" garbage is nothing but marketing quack. The fridge doesn't need an LCD. It would be nice though if it reported it's power, duty cycle, frost buildup, or anything else that would indicate that there's a problem that can save money if not ignored.

One of the major techniques in how to make systems secure is by doing precisely the opposite: separation.
And I do not like to have my smartphone connected to my home so that if my smartphone is lost, I can't get into my own house anymore.

I think you missunderstood. You're stuck in the concept of having a switch on your phone instead of the wall (or in this case a doorlock which is just utterly stupid). Again we're talking about data collection. Motion detecting cameras that send messages to your phone, or reed switches on the window. Police already put automated alarm response on the bottom of their list so to in terms of security I'm talking about a smart home telling you that you need to check something as things may not be right. Whip out the phone which just received an alarm, push a button to get a video feed, and call the police to report a breakin in progress (which they do respond to when you call them and give them details).

Turning on lights at specific intervals might scare thieves off, but before long they'll find different techniques in order to find out where to steal stuff from.

A deterrent isn't meant to be an all or nothing approach. Would a bike lock really stop someone with bolt cutters? This is the sliding scale of home security. The bottom of the scale is your entry light on a timer to turn on at 6pm every night. Quite a bit higher on the sliding scale is random lights turning on and off in the house every couple of minutes, maybe even add a radio or a TV. That may quite quickly deter a would-be thief. But for the dedicated thief you need:

The only real security advantage you may get is with alarm systems and cameras.

Aside from the abuse of the word "real" (no true Scotsman) I agree. But my question to you: what do you do with the data and the camera feed? The dumb home would go blaring and send an automated message to someone who isn't paid enough to care about it. The smart home would inform you that while you're exploring the streets of Paris that visitors are helping themselves to you TV (see earlier comment about calling the police at this point).

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[Gussington]

As a proper slashdotter, I spend a big chunk of my time in front of a screen, so I'm no way non-digital. Still I don't see any benefits in a "smart" home.

Me neither. I bought a Samsung SmartThings, played with it for an hour and couldn't even be bothered installing the sensors anywhere.
I can see some value in an outdoor camera facing the gate so that any unwanted visitors might at least get caught on camera should I need it, but even then I don't care that much to go out and get one.

Re: What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[dcw3]

Those lucky Europeans tend to have much more time off than us 'Mercans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[dcw3]

I installed one, but the wife refuses to us it that way, complaining that the cat will be cold when we're off to work. I tried explaining that the cat was born with a fur coat...no joy.

Re:What's the great thing about a "smart" home

[JThundley]

I have my computer turn on my towel warmer before I wake up and take my morning shower. It's nice and hot by the time I get out. Before I had this, I had 2 alarms set and I would end up waking up earlier, but not getting out of bed earlier. What a waste!

Market solution

[ATMAvatar]

Most devices you would need for a smart home (e.g., thermostats, locks, light switches, etc.) are relatively simple, so if you are *really* determined to have a smart home without watchers, why not start making the smart devices yourself? If you get a working model put together, I am sure you could easily start a successful kickstarter campaign and bootstrap a business with it. Win/win for everyone.

The problem with the entrenched players is that they all have a vested interest in making everything cloud-enabled. They want your data -- it is far more valuable than the profit they make from selling the devices, even if they don't sell it to others.

Try X-10-based technology

[davidwr]

It's been around for decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

X10

[chiefmojorising]

It's only been around since the '70s.

https://www.x10.com/x10-home-a...

Re:X10

[Nonesuch]

X10 is not up to the task because it is a one-way protocol. You can not verify that the commands you send to a device are received (or successfully executed) by the device. The best you can do is send the same command multiple times and hope that at least one of them got through. And if the commands are not idempotent (as in you need to send a sequence of commands that depend on the success of the previous command) then it becomes very unreliable.

Its nice for turning on the light in the room you are already in, but that's about it.

Correct. This is why X-10 has been almost universally retired, supplanted by Insteon. And most people just getting into HA today are going with one of the newer wireless-only protocols, usually Z-Wave (Smartthings, Wink, Vera, Securifii), sometimes Zigbee (Philips, GE) or WiFI.

What about X-10?

[gatkinso]

I thought that was all locally controlled.

Alternatives

[geoskd]

Or is there something already out there that would do the same thing as a Nest but without 'the cloud' as part of the requirement? Yes, a standard programmable thermostat does 90% of what a Nest does,

There is, the company is Connexus Controls . We provide HVAC control systems for new installations and retrofit. We provide remote access similar to the way the Nest and others do, but unlike the others, there is no centralized server, your data stays in your home, and the system will function perfectly fine with or without network access. We will provide access to our control API for anyone that wants to tinker with the system, opening up a whole world of opportunity.

Interesting problem...

[kbonin]

As a developer of custom hardware and software, I'd LOVE to make products in this space. However:
1) Most people are trained to look for cheapest prices for devices, which are (for the most part) made in third-world sweatshops.
2) To provide a competitive price, you have to manufacture in volume in third-world sweatshops.
3) Due to lack of functioning IP protections in third-world countries, manufacturing there means instantly creating many competitors you cant compete with.
4) If you're willing to give up most of the world markets, you can still only compete against imports by spending lots on lawyers for ITC import games.

In their defense, "cloud" components provide a way to monetize the product in a manner somewhat resistant to third-world knockoffs and late shift runs to your competitors, as well as provide a user-friendly front end that you can tune without requiring the customers to update software, which is always a nightmare. That said, there is NO moral defense against the wholesale "all your data belongs to us, we can sell anything to anyone as long as we anonymize (sic) it" games that are played today. That said, for most modern corporations there are no such thing as morals.

I'm not aware of realistic ways to bring such products to market that are price competitive AND can provide sufficient income stream to recover initial investments, cover ongoing operating costs for a small team, and turn even a modest profit. Not in this world.

Re:Interesting problem...

[thinkwaitfast]

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html...

Re:Interesting problem...

[kbonin]

IP is the biggest problem in being to operate even a small scale business without running a loss. UL (, CE) and FCC are relatively modest engineering and financial hurdles, they just require consideration during design and paying certification labs. For a simple product that's under $100k, been there many times, actually kind of fun (other than writing the check.) The problem is if you're making something really simple like an outlet or dimmer, it has to compete against the $10 Chinese devices with X10 or ZigBee support, and it costs YOU that much to have it made there and shipped here, so how do you make any money? You can't with such lower end devices. If you do manage to innovate sufficiently to charge $20, then thanks to IP knock-offs can appear here for $11 before your prototypes arrive you hoped to get certified. Meanwhile the knock-offs with fake UL, CE, and FCC stamps start appearing at WallMart, and when you try and get them to sell yours they inform you they already have a cheaper supplier. Who is a shell company owned by the company you contracted to make yours.

Re:Interesting problem...

[Areyoukiddingme]

If you do manage to innovate sufficiently to charge $20, then thanks to IP knock-offs can appear here for $11 before your prototypes arrive you hoped to get certified. Meanwhile the knock-offs with fake UL, CE, and FCC stamps start appearing at WallMart, and when you try and get them to sell yours they inform you they already have a cheaper supplier. Who is a shell company owned by the company you contracted to make yours.

I have half a dozen product ideas of the same order of magnitude as you're describing, and the 20 years of professional coding experience to pull off at least the software side. Theoretically I have the necessary hardware education, but I lack the experience. Acquiring the necessary hardware experience is an uphill battle and a big big disincentive to pursuing it is exactly what you describe. If I go to all that work, learn what I need to know, and launch a successful Kickstarter that exceeds the scale of what can be done by hand in my basement, what then? I have to outsource assembly, and my market gets eaten before I get started.

Valve seems to have found the solution. The Steam Controller is manufactured in the US. By robots. They built a massively automated production line. It works, if you have the capital. Given that 30% of the cash in the entire US economy is held by 5 companies, the capital-intensive solution is likely forever beyond the grasp of small business. So it goes with end-stage capitalism.

And my own notion of non-cloud home automation lies dormant since I got laid off in 2010 and lost touch with my former coworker, the electrical engineer who was doing the circuit designs. (I've been using X-10 since 1998, and wanted something better.)

DIY shouldn't be hard

[i.r.id10t]

A duct tape and bailing wire DIY shouldn't be too hard. Tricky part will be a smooth consistent niceness.

Quick google shows X10 to be alive and well, with RF or wired access to the devices. A webserver-with-API-to-X10-controller bridge device shouldn't be too hard to do with a Pi or similar acting as the bridge hardware, so that can get you on your local network - a quick google shows you should check the Pi and a project called Heyu. Rent a Linode or similar VPS for internet based control if you can't get a static method of addressing your home network when you are away or if your service provider blocks the ports you want to use

HomeSeer

[Anonymous Coward]

HomeSeer, which is closed-source and has a price tag, but it does not use the cloud. All processing happens on a PC of your choosing (or a prebuilt box you can get from them). Easily the best choice for non-programmer types.

Re:HomeSeer

[PhantomHarlock]

I second Homeseer as the local server of choice that will work with a variety of PLC (power line carrier devices) such as Insteon products (more modern X-10 equivalent) and security systems, thermostats. etc.

It's extremely powerful as you can do pretty much anything with the scripting language, or just stay within the confines of the UI and make some very flexible ladder logic and timed events.

To access the system remotely, open a port on your firewall for it and use a dynamic DNS service to make sure you have consistent access to it. That's all.

I ran a Homeseer setup with Insteon light switches and outlets about 10 years ago and even then it was pretty neat. Haven't gotten back into it lately, just hasn't been a priority for me.

Also it looks like Insteon themselves have started to make UI control for mobile devices, don't know if it talks to a central server but I imagine it does because aunt prudence isn't gonna know anything about port forwarding.

Re:You simply don't have home automation..

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a difference between being connected to the internet and being dependent on a 3rd party's servers for your home automation to operate. The latter is the concern here.

Re: No.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have lights, hi Rez cameras, facial recognition, doors, locks, spa control, garage and alarm system. NONE of that is in the cloud and I control it directly with my phone, get alerts etc. There are plenty of options.

Start with products from a control company

[Anonymous Coward]

Google, Apple, MS, and others have the mindshare to bring concepts like "smart homes" to the masses, but home control isn't their end game.

Alternately, look at a company like Lutron that has been doing whole home automation and integration products for decades. They don't care about your data, they aren't interested in profiling you ... they just want to sell you the best control products possible, full stop.

Of course, they may also not cater to your need for conspicuous technology. Then again, conspicuous tech gets dated pretty quickly. Do you really want to change out all of the lighting controls, shades, hvac, etc with the same frequency that you update your smartphone, or even your computer?

DIY

[chaeron]

I ran into this exact quandry when my home thermostat died late last year. Didn't want Nest/Google nor anyone else getting my data. Furthermore, I'm rural so broadband is expensive and sometimes flakey, so that was another reason to want a local-net-only solution, but there were no good ones I could find.

So I just built my own smart thermostat based on a Raspberry Pi: https://github.com/chaeron/thermostat

Since then, I've added battery-powered remote sensors (temp, humidity, pressure, water detection, etc.) to monitor key areas in and outside of the house. These were based on Arduinos (to keep power usage low) and the open source MySensors framework (https://www.mysensors.org/)

Fun project, works great, no security issues or cloud crap. ;-)

More recently I've built on that experience and am working on a dirt bike telemetry project which is based on an Arduino Mega with a GPS module, 9-axis motion sensor, hall effect sensors (for wheel spin/RPM detection) and more. The device captures real time info about the location and movement of the bike (eg. pitch, lean angle, etc.) and then can be used to overlay gauges and a moving 3D bike model over top of headcam footage captured during a ride.

Re:DIY

[silas_moeckel]

Mysensors is a nice framework they only recently added any security to it and it's optional, not that I'm to worried about somebody faking sensor data. I would not trust it for primary alarm sensors. Not to worried about somebody knowing when one of my LED light strips gets turned on or turning it off remotely.

If it is in the cloud, it is not smart.

[mbone]

If it is in the cloud, it is not smart. Having your house report everything you do to people you don't know with interests you don't share may or may not provide useful features, but it is definitely not smart.

depends on what you mean

[ooloorie]

For something like thermostats, fire alarms, and cameras, some off-site access is an essential part of their functionality. For others (switches, etc.), it's a convenience. There are plenty of high-end for business use that don't use the cloud, but they are going to cost you: dedicated data lines, secure off-site facility, off-site server hardware, maintenance staff, backup, etc. Cloud integration is just something that turns an expensive high-end product into a cheap mass market product. But if you're willing to spend the money, or the time to roll your own, you can get the hardware and have a setup that's completely under your control. For rolling your own, you can get home control software that runs on Windows, and open source libraries for Linux, for the major commercial systems.

None of the consumer grade wireless stuff really works all that reliably yet anyway. Some of the WiFi stuff works reasonably well (cameras, thermostats) and is useful. X10, ZWave, and Zigbee are nice enough for turning on a few lights, but I wouldn't trust them with anything more. WeMo is just crap.

Radio Thermostat

[Megane]

I know that the thermostats at http://www.radiothermostat.com... can be configured to disable the cloud function (or I guess you could change its URL to a home server), and they have a JSON-based web interface that a custom home server could use.

Re: No.

[PopeRatzo]

I have lights, hi Rez cameras, facial recognition, doors, locks, spa control, garage and alarm system.

:Are you a James Bond supervillain?

Sensors are not the complicated part

[iamacat]

Taking a break from tinkering with Raspberry Pi + breadboard + sensor kit to post this. Would not be that hard to control the wires a thermostat is connected to with GPIO. The question is just how smart and safe your solution is going to be. Value of cloud is machine learning based not just on your home, but all homes, and human follow up to enhance the software when there is a trend with no automated solution. Non-networked solution will never be as good, and thus will not be a consumer product.

DIY or GTFO

[corychristison]

In my opinion the only way to avoid the big companies collecting your information is DIY.

At most on the outside you should ever need is a Dynamic DNS provider, and there are dozens of those you can use and script to send your outside accessible IP (assuming you don't have static address[es]).

A lot of this is actually fairly simple programming with basic IO sensors. You could build a thermostat like a Nest with a PiZero, a basic thermal sensor, a couple of relays and some of your own time. Sure, it won't look pretty, but it doesn't have to if you're using your smart phone to control it anyway. A basic web interface that is Mobile friendly isn't all that hard.

I'm sure there is already an open source project that does this with a full breakdown of how to do it to save you some time.

And a quick google search away I found this http://www.stuff.tv/features/how-build-homemade-nest-thermostat

Vera

[Space]

I have a Vera Lite. It can be entirely functional without a connection to the internet. I have door locks and a thermostat which talk on the Z-Wave protocol. When one of the doors is locked using the button on the outside the Vera changes to an "Away" preset.

Re:No.

[ShanghaiBill]

B-but can the cloud be very small; on your own server in your own home?

Not unless you want to spend a lot of money, and hundreds of hours of your own time.

Look, the economics of this is simple: By producing data that can be monitized, the cloud companies can reduce the up-front price. Most people go with the cheapest option. This reduces costs even more, since NRE can be spread over more units. It would be very difficult for a non-cloud company to compete with that. People that care about their privacy, and are willing to pay extra to protect it, are a niche market.

My home automation system uses an Amazon Echo and a Samsung SmartThings hub. The Echo is cloud based. I would prefer a non-cloud solution, but to be honest, I would not be willing to pay much more for it. I don't really care that much if Amazon knows what time I turn off the lights.

Re:No.

[johanw]

Removing spying background services on an open system like Android is easy: either don't install the Google stuff (or remove it), or disable it selectively:

1. Root the phone (it is YOUR phone, you're the boss).
2. Install a service manager like https://play.google.com/store/...
3. Open it, go to system, open Google Play Services.
4. Disable AdvertisingIdNotificationService, AdvertisingIdService, AnalyticsIntendService, AnalyticsService and AnalyticsUploadIntendService.

Now open Google Settings and see that your device does not have an advertising ID anymore. The above method kills most, however some apps collect their own data and don't let it go via Google so watch out what you install.

Yes; It just takes more work

[Digicrat]

It's not as shiny and takes more work than using the big name solutions (ie: Nest/Google), but the options are out there.

The RadioThermostat works over your choice of WiFi, Z-Wave, or Zigbee (pick up to 2 protocols). The cloud service is easy to setup and includes a convenient app, but the API is fully documented and compatible with a number of open source home automation servers. You can easily disable the cloud service if desired, or reconfigure it to point to a server of your choosing (local or remote).

I'd say it'll be another year or two for the various open source home automation servers to mature to the point that they'll be as convenient to setup as the commercial systems. For now, unfortunately, it's still very much a developers-only world of roll your own solutions, unless you happen to be using the same devices that are supported by a single software package.

I currently have a Z-Wave lights, RadioThermostat, a discontinued system providing leak and motion detectors over a custom serial protocol, TI SensorTags, RF blinds and LED lighting that I plan on controlling via my home server. The hardest part I'm finding is actually controlling the RF devices, while I've given up on the ebay LED light strip controllers and am working on custom Arduino-based controllers there.

Eventually I want to add a Smart lock to my front door to give me keyless entry, but I've yet to find a smart lock that I feel is both secure and not dependent on a third-party server literally holding your (master encryption) keys hostage so you can't freely create your own digital keys at will (looking at you, Kevo).

Why would you hack a Nest

[thinkwaitfast]

when you can build your own for hundreds less with less effort? Do you have money to waste?

Look into open protocols and free software

[klapaucjusz]

You need to be looking into open protocols, and implement them using free and open source software:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedin...

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

You think that the savings are passed on to the customers? That's cute. And I suppose you're expecting to get a pony for your next birthday as well.

There are no savings from doing that provided to the customer, that's money that goes to pad the balance sheets of the company selling the devices even as it significantly reduces safety and security.

Re: No.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's bullshit. Speech recognition was at like 97% or so for years before people had always on connections. And it gets even easier if you're dealing with commands and have people using fixed commands. Sort of like what Google does with OK Google. If you add House Activate or something similar before the command, then the system just has to see if what you said matches a known command.

The only thing that's at all tricky about it is setting it up so that it doesn't activate in response to the TV or radio.

Control4

[SirDrinksAlot]

You have to pay a monthly fee to get the Control 4 system into the cloud. It's apparently a very popular system probably because they setup a very strong dealer network and require the dealers to do any changes or modifications - it's basically a closed system to the home owner so its really stupid. Want to add a new zone or piece of equipment? Gotta get it from a dealer.

Yes it's easy, with the right hardware.

[silas_moeckel]

Pick the right controller to start, Vera is a good starting place and Openhab is more than happy to control it later on. Neither of those need internet access to work. My HA system has little to no internet access. I VPN in from phones to run it remotely and use a bit of custom code for geofencing. Now parts of the system have internet access my alarm panel use it as backup to talk to the monitoring company. Openhab is allowed to talk to weather and some other bits via my proxy. My garage door remote works fine without internet access because the local API works. Same goes for some wifi based wink stuff with my HA system IP bits all having their own vlan.

As to hardware I've tried a nest it did nothing my $22 new (it was a realy good deal) off ebay zwave thermostats do (besides look cooler) that I actualy use. There are a ton of way overpriced ha solutions all with there own ecosystem. Zwave gear pretty much just works and does not expect to talk to the outside world I've got 100+ devices around a large home (mostly AC dimmers and relays) with a smattering of sensors for occupancy the also do temp and several other bits. A hardwired alarm to do the actual alarm stuff and keep my insurance guy happy. CCTV is all internal and encrypted at rest via public keys (it can write but it can not read).

Design wise it's important to keep to only one devices realy should be talking to the world, thats the one thing that needs to keep getting updates. For me thats openhab.

DIY Nest

[llamalad]

I built a smart thermostat about 12-15 years ago.

It's really not that hard.

Get an RCS TR-16 thermostat.

Hook it up to a PC (or, today, a raspberry pi).

Read the specs on the protocol and write a small daemon to listen for requests and take appropriate action based on them. For good measure, add sanity-checking of request parameters (don't allow it be set to cool below, say, 65, or heat above 72).

Use netcat or telnet to talk to the port it listens on.

It's really not difficult at all.

These days it'd make sense to build yourself a simple gui for your phone/tablet.

Re: No.

[Etcetera]

That's bullshit. Speech recognition was at like 97% or so for years before people had always on connections. And it gets even easier if you're dealing with commands and have people using fixed commands. Sort of like what Google does with OK Google. If you add House Activate or something similar before the command, then the system just has to see if what you said matches a known command.

The only thing that's at all tricky about it is setting it up so that it doesn't activate in response to the TV or radio.

^This. Mod parent up. Natural language parsing and speech recognition has been improving for years, and even Apple has finally allowed "offline recognition" options for their base system.

Going to the cloud makes it *easier*, since it vastly increases the number of samples and allows them to not care about processing resources at all and be generally shit programmers unless their project eats up too much of the internal balance sheet.

We all have computers far more powerful than are necessary to do this in our pockets. Add a desktop system to act as a central unit (not an unreasonable requirement) and to offload any particularly difficult recognition task to and it's entirely possible to have it all work internally.

CastleOS Maybe?

[erktrek]

Another big issue is responsiveness of rules/triggering/devices.

I have a smartthings hub and sometimes simple motion triggers or routines fail and usually it's due to some sort of network issue. If I lose internet connectivity then a lot of my smart things become dumb things. To be fair things seem to be improving albeit slowly but I am still tied to Samsung and whatever they want to do with their services - it looks like they are more focused on TVs and Refrigerator hubs at the moment. I have no confidence that they or any provider will keep things going through the lifetime of a particular product - Revolv anyone? At least the IOT devices themselves are relatively transferrable.

Have been looking at CastleOS as a possible alternative. Not sure where they stand with Zigbee integration - my devices are a mixture of Z-wave/Wifi/Zigbee

Also they are windows ?10? based so there is the whole potential spying thing there too but at least the operation is not cloud reliant.

E.

Re: No.

[Anonymous Coward]

You couldn't be more right!.

I remember dictation working really well on a windows 98 computer using dragon naturally speaking without any internet more than 15 years ago.

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you don't observe that. What you observe is that newer items with more power come out for about the same price as they used to. Texas Instruments is a good example, the price points don't change, but the capabilities have gotten a bit better over the years. But, you're still looking at the same price.

In markets where there's a bit more competition you'll see that the companies will occasionally be forced to reduce prices in order to compete, which lasts until they buy out the competition and put an end to it.

They're not passing savings onto the customer and I've rarely, if ever, seen products be reduced in price because they're starting to spy on the customer. They're certainly not passing on the money that they're making on an ongoing basis otherwise eventually these devices would pay for themselves.

The sheer mental gymnastics necessary to make your point valid is mind boggling. Mostly because the savings aren't passed onto the consumer, they're kept as corporate profits.

Given up.

[Sqreater]

I've given up trying to figure out who is listening to what, when, and what they are doing with it. I've gone "dumb home." I use a double-pole single-throw knife switch like they have in the old Frankenstein movie to turn my burner on and off. The crackle of electricity and the smell of ozone is very invigorating in the morning (and I get to yell "It's aliiiive" for the neighbors). I don't think Google has figured out a way to monetize it yet, but I hear they are working on it.

63%

[flacco]

> The winner was "nobody", with 63% of the votes

How this isn't near 100% is completely baffling to me.

DIY libraries?

[GNious]

Incidentally, when I got into IoT and "that stuff", the first thing I did was starting to write my own software to control lights. So far only made it to a generic library, with a reference implementation etc, partly because all the smart-home equipment is too expensive ... and companies don't always share (local) APIs .... and I'm lazy ... but at least I got it pushed to Github.

But really, only buy stuff that has a local API (i.e. can be accessed directly via (W)LAN), so you're not 100% dependent on cloud-stuff.

Homematic

[mseeger]

I use a Homematic CCU2. It works perfectly without any cloud.

Home Server

[PPH]

I haven't kept track, but ISPs used to shit bricks if you tried to run a home server (without paying for a business class connection). Their (somewhat legitimate) reasoning was that home servers were more likely to be hacked and used for things like anonymous e-mail relays for spam. But most botnets work just fine with any Windows desktop OS, so that reasoning is no longer valid. Still, with everyone trying to sell cloud services, rolling your own will still meet some resistance.

Most home automation/security systems and services are subsidized by the reselling of your data once it hits the cloud. So if you try to run your own private service, be prepared to pay the full (unsubsidized) price for your hardware.

Re:Home Server

[Nonesuch]

I haven't kept track, but ISPs used to shit bricks if you tried to run a home server (without paying for a business class connection). Their (somewhat legitimate) reasoning was that home servers were more likely to be hacked and used for things like anonymous e-mail relays for spam.

For the most part, American ISPs have backed down from this, and block inbound only for TCP/25 and the high-risk Windows ports. A few block port 80.

For just accessing your home network for the purpose of automation, there are plenty of workarounds to get past ISP blocking, they really don't care if you run a "server" that is only ever accessed by two iPhones, one for you and one for your SO.

Re:Home Server

[SuricouRaven]

That was never the reason. That was the excuse.

The reason was that small businesses would use cheap consumer internet service, and the ISPs wanted commercial users to pay the greater rates for a business service. They put a 'no commercial use' clause in the contract, but it's difficult to enforce, so they just crippled the home service just enough that businesses couldn't easily use it.

It's just price discrimination - a little underhanded, but a perfectly legitimate business tool. It's equivalent to, for example, Microsoft disabling domain features in Windows home edition to make sure businesses pay the higher price that businesses can afford rather than simply using the OEM windows that almost every PC and laptop comes with.

Re:You simply don't have home automation..

[sumdumass]

I'm curious if some of these devices actually have the processing power to locally do the things they are trying to do. Maybe costs cutting has led to underpowered hardware.

I'm wondering if anyone knows for sure.

Re:No.

[mlts]

It could be done. The embedded boards are not expensive, and one can get a Raspberry Pi Zero or an Arduino for pretty cheap, and build from there. Someone who wants to spin their own boards and even make their own ASIC is doable. If one wants as small a physical size as possible, it may take about $500,000 to fab an ARM SoC ASIC with a decent CPU, but it isn't impossible. We had X10 offering some form of home automation for decades now, and it never needed a cloud.

The trick is to use a hub and spoke arrangement, with 1-2 redundant, hardened hubs, then devices that communicate with those. This reduces the attack surface to needing to be physically near the LAN, or compromising the hardened hub, and with VMs or containers, one can separate functionality like firewalling from device management and software updating to ensure better defense in depth.

Security of IoT devices is a solved problem. Consoles come to mind as something that has had years of attacks from all sides, without a single breach, and a console is pretty much a computer. It is just getting device makers to actually bake security in, as opposed to strapping in on later on.

Re: No.

[ShanghaiBill]

Do you find the Echo/SmartThings combination effective?

No. There are a lot of problems and incompatibilities with various IoT devices. "Google Home" will supposedly have a built-in Z-Wave hub, so it will not need a separate bridge like the Amazon Echo does. You might want to wait a few months for it to be released. But Google Home is designed to mostly work with Nest devices (which are way over-priced) so I am not sure how well it will work with third party devices.

Home automation is still in the "early adopter" phase. So you should go ahead if you want some toys to play with, but not if you are looking for something that will actually save you time and money. Something that your mom would use is still a few years away.

Watson Coding and Memory

[TommyFelix]

Easy. It will be just like eureka/s.m.a.r.t. I think Watson became public but if not. You can study and easily replicate it with few thousand dollars of memory. Or mimicking preexisting programs to private/triple encripted local lan

Re:You simply don't have home automation..

[aix tom]

Of course you CAN do automation without the internet. You can even do automation without any "real" computers.

Heck, an old friend did some pretty cool stuff in the late 70s basically with electromechanical relays when he completely rewired his flat. Basically all lights, thermostats, radiator valves, electrical sun-blinds, etc... where wired directly into one central cabinet. And instead of normal light switches beside the doors he had 1-3 panels of 12 little sci-fi looking push buttons that even lighted up.

So in the filing cabinet he cold "re-program" each of the little buttons to activate something or other pretty quickly. Add a few timers, and light sensors, and aside from "being controlled it from some place far away" it pretty much did everything all those new-fangled solutions can do.

Yes you can

[Lumpy]

I install them professionally. You buy AMX or Crestron, and have it installed and programmed. BOOM non cloud based home automation that works fantastically.

This has been the case for well over 30 years now, and most rich people have been enjoying it.

Non cloud based reliable stuff has existed for a long time now.... Dirt cheap home automation for poor people? That is a new thing from the recent decade. and "cloud" is how you extract money from those poor people unwilling to spend $20K on their home automation system,

Re:Depends on the devices (yes & no) & PRO

[lpq]

I've constantly tried maintaining requirements for my SW to work from behind
a proxy. Game manufacturers are probably the worst, but a huge hit in privacy -- I like the idea of a "smart home", -- but I want to control it from my home computer --- not a "smart phone". As near as I could tell, most of the home automation products will only work / can only be operated from one of their apps that you can get for various smartphones. None of them that I looked at had any way to record, control or analyze the info at home.

Even a stupid company that provided a smart plug to measure electrical usage had to be directly on the outside net (or "think that it was using NAT") to contact the manufacturer's website, then to monitor your data, you had to pay monthly service fees for various levels of access to your own usage data.

The state of smart "anything" (including the mandatory smart-electric meter required by my area-monopoly-electric provider (PG&E/CA/US) sucks. My electric usage rates went up by about 20% when they installed their new meter, but they won't allow me real-time access to the output to verify usage data -- I am only allowed website summary data some amount of time later.

Before they installed that, I looked for a smart meter that would allow me a serial line tap on getting data, that would also give integrity guarantees.

Basically, it came down to any device that allowed me real-time access to verify actual usage data, was not approved for use on their electrical network.

So now, they can monitor my usage, supposedly down to the their profiled-device database, but I'm not allowed to verify the meter's accuracy when their previous meter had supposedly been 20% inaccurate for decades?

Similar problems and constraints seem to apply to other "smart-enabled" (meaning externally monitor-able by a 3rd party) devices. The presumption and requirement that I have a smart-phone is becoming increasingly annoying -- including constant prompts from Google, Amazon, Steam, etc to secure my account with my SMS-enabled smartphone. Only google had an optional verification step (at one point, dunnow about now), that allowed them to call you at a POT and listen some numbers and type them into a website, but
that option is not available for all of their services and is not available at all for many other companies' services.

How long will you live in your house?

[ukoda]

It varies from country to country but my guess is most homes are about 30 years old. Every service in them usually is working on the orginal services because they use simple mechanical principles that are timeless. The doors are on hinges, the lighting has mechanical switches, the water has mechanical valves etc. They are all maintainable and still working 30 years later. How many electronic devices do you own that are 30 years old and if they break can they be fixed. How much of the tech you own today can be expected to be working and maintainable in 30 years? How many of the cloud services do you expect be operation for 30 years?

At one time I worked for a home automation company doing an advance full home automation system aimed at new home builds. It used a local Linux server running on an embedded platform with no moving parts so could be expected to have a long maintenance free standalone life. I did worry about the longer term if it failed. The point become more relevant as that system, installed in a huge mansion, is not easy to understand from a service POV and the company that developed it is history now.

I want to do some home automation in my current home. I have the hardware/software/financial skills and resources to DIY it but what about when I sell my home? I don't want to support it, and indeed my current home is quite new and I am not, so anything I install could be around after I die. Putting in home automation now may actually reduce the resale value as it is a 'risk' for a buyer.

My thoughts are:
- No cloud solutions, who knows when they will go out of business. The intelligence in the system must be standalone and local.
- Use mature standards e.g. Cat 5 cables with RJ45 connections to interconnect remote modules back to a central point.
- Put electronic modules in accessible places. This and the above cabling make it possible to replace the whole electronics with a new generation in future if needed.
- There needs to be more mature and open standards, like X10, So it has a long term future.

I will do home automation but very cautiously and piecemeal with the above point in mind.

Re:How long will you live in your house?

[SuricouRaven]

My house is thirty years old. There's a constant slow drip of water down the side due to a failed washer in the cold water tank ballcock. The washer can't be replaced because the valve after thirty years is a sculpture of copper oxide and is sure to crumble to dust on any attempt to access the washer, so even the simple mechanical things do fail. That's why plumbers do house calls.

One day it will be replaced, but there are certain family conflicts currently preventing it. That strange quirk of usually-male psychology which considers calling an expert to be an admission of one's own inadequacy.

Re:No.

[nickersonm]

The newer Samsung phones self-disable when rooted, unfortunately. I can't find a good replacement for my Note2 that has wireless charging.

Re:You simply don't have home automation..

[Garble Snarky]

I was under the impression that Amazon and Google voice recognition was always done on their servers?

Re:You simply don't have home automation..

[Garble Snarky]

Does "some place far away" include sitting on your couch, and using a remote control?

Mycroft

[fyngyrz]

Mycroft just released (Python, version unspecified) code they say you can run on your Raspberry Pi; Mycroft is an Alexa-like system, differences being it's open, the s/w is free so you can build your own, and the hardware is pretty open too.

There is cloud STT (Speech-To-Text) going on, but they're interested in local STT according to an email they sent around to those of us on their mailing list. My GPS (ca. 2013) does non-cloud general STT, so there's working code out there.

Speaking as an owner of both an Echo and an Echo Dot, I'm very hopeful that Mycroft will join them, perhaps even replace them.

Echo's huge drawback is that it doesn't have a local operating mode via LAN ports, nor local STT and TTS. Not to mention the absurd requirement that you put up an SSL server just to make the simplest possible function work.

Re:Mycroft

[frootcakeuk]

just found this too. looks interesting.

http://hackaday.com/2015/07/25... seems the guy has hacked it to be controlled locally.

Re:Mycroft

[fyngyrz]

Local control works, but (absurdly) requires a secure server as well as cloud-based comms with Amazon because that's the only way the Echo can understand what you told it.

All it really needs -- if they'd just get after it -- is a couple ip/ports open on the Echo so that one would send text to your computer when you spoke to the Echo, and one would receive text to be spoken from your computer. Then a single command that initiates that sequence, one you'd program in using the app. Imagine it was "custom" then you'd have this:

o You say: "Alexa, custom set the fishtank aeration to 40%"
o Alexa cloud-decodes that using STT, sends the text string out to IP:port on your computer
o Your computer parses the text, does what is required, whatever that is
o Your computer sends "aeration set to forty percent" to IP:port on Echo
o Echo says that

Notice the complete lack of a secure server requirement, and complete lack of having to set up a skill with/at Amazon using such a mechanism.

THAT would enable you to actually work with AI. As it stands, what you have to do is provide some canned strings to Amazon that they look over to see if what you said matches any of them, and if it does, it does a canned thing in response. There's no AI involved at all, really, it's just compare-and-do-preplanned-response.

It also allows your computer to send an asynch message to Echo for speaking that requires no precursor; for instance, when your computer finishes compiling a c program, you might have something in a makefile like:

echosay "compile of $(PROGRAMNAME) complete"

This is why MyCroft is much more interesting to me than Echo, even though I own an Echo and an Echo Dot. I want to integrate this capability with my home. I'm not interested in endlessly integrating services I have to pay for or expose my information to. I understand Amazon wants to monetize this above all else; that's fine. But that's also why I am more interested in MyCroft. They can want me to hand them my info and patronage; but that doesn't mean I have to.

Re: No.

[R3d M3rcury]

Natural language parsing and speech recognition has been improving for years, and even Apple has finally allowed "offline recognition" options for their base system.

Just to go on the Apple theme, Apple had "Speakable Items" in OS 9 and OS X for many years which worked very well.

Running Home Control Assistant

[LamaBrew]

A few years ago I started a switch from X-10 to Insteon and evaluated some of the systems mentioned in other posts. I settled on Home Control Assistant http://www.hcatech.com/ as it lets me control everything locally but allows remote access if I want; the client app on my phone knows what to use based on what network it's on. The price if very reasonable and support has been great, and it's really well documented.

It does need a Windows PC to run on but I had one destined for the recycle bucket that works fine.

Seeing how well this works there is absolutely no reason for "cloud" in home control - if you can set up a PC and install software on it. For some people that is a barrier to use.

I do however have some Honeywell thermostats as for the money they do a good job versus the alternatives that existed. Their web app is easy for everyone in the house to use. I figure someday someone might figure out good local control for them or I'll replace eventually replace them. But it's tough to argue with something that is low cost (compared to things like Nest) and just works.

Re:No.

[SuricouRaven]

It can be done cheaply, but that's only if you don't include the time to set it up as part of the price. Home automation without a prepackaged cloud solution is going to mean getting in there with a soldering iron and at least a bit of scripting.

Go old-skool/Please Specify

[hughbar]

This is hardly worth asking, as is, for example: http://misterhouse.sourceforge...

Digging deeper, it depends:

• How much automation and how sophisticated?
• Do you want remote control via app, via SMS or no remote control?
• There isn't a 'cloud', there are several, including a server that you spin up and own
• Do you want X10 (ugh, but well-known), Wifi or Bluetooth to communicate or get locked into something proprietary?
• What's your skill level for software and/or electronics?
• Do you want it to hook up with Echo/Nest and other cloudy components?

So the rest of the misunderstanding in this question is to do with clear-ish requirements and specification. If you want it to hook up with Amazon or Google stuff, you're probably heading for the (one of the) 'commercial clouds' and some lock-in, for example. Personally I'm an anti-lock-in, anti-proprietary-cloud nazi, I do not feel that Amazon, Google and Microsoft are my friends and have my best interests at heart.

Re: No.

[dcw3]

no you don't.

Your post rings of maternal basement dweller

That's because mom uses it to keep him down there.

Re:No.

[shawn2772]

The newer Samsung phones self-disable when rooted, unfortunately. I can't find a good replacement for my Note2 that has wireless charging.

The Nexus 6 has wireless charging, and has an unlocked bootloader.

Local voice recognition doesn't work as well

[Shirley Marquez]

At the current state of the art at least, cloud based voice recognition simply works better than anything you can implement on an affordable local system. There are two reasons.

One is that the cloud system can devote massive amounts of resources intermittently when you need them to recognize a voice command, but give those resources to other people when you do not. Current day voice recognition systems really aren't very intelligent; they work by comparing massive amounts of data with the recorded voice data, and by doing recognition of words in the context of the surrounding words rather than one at a time.

The other is that the cloud system can massively crowdsource the problem of training the system. They can use the experience of their millions of users to make it work better. A locally based voice recognition system cannot match that.

We can make inexpensive local systems that can recognize a small number of sentences. We can make expensive ones like Dragon NaturallySpeaking that need the computing power of a decent PC or Mac and a couple of gigabytes of RAM to work decently, and even with all of that it doesn't work as well as the cloud-based personal assistants that are now ubiquitous. For example, Alexa can process voice requests to play any artist on Spotify, from a library of over 35 million songs and tens of thousands of artists, and usually gets it right. Nothing you could run on your home entertainment system could come close; even Dragon wouldn't be much help because you need a specialized database of performer names to make that application work well.

WTF is "home automation"

[RockDoctor]

I get home, I put the heating on if I think I need it. Heating is a luxury, and I've spent enough time living in accommodations without heating - frost on the inside of the window is nothing new to wake up to. Hot water is produced when I turn the tap on (and stops being produced when I turn the tap off). The washing machine handles it's task perfectly well once I've put a load in - which is not TTBOMK planned to be automated. Oh, and the heating system actually has an anti-frost feature to protect the water pipes while I'm away in winter. Or spring, or autumn.

Explain to me again what I'll gain - which I consider to be of value - from this "home automation" concept.

Re:No.

[Wycliffe]

Look, the economics of this is simple: By producing data that can be monitized, the cloud companies can reduce the up-front price. Most people go with the cheapest option. This reduces costs even more, since NRE can be spread over more units. It would be very difficult for a non-cloud company to compete with that. People that care about their privacy, and are willing to pay extra to protect it, are a niche market.

I think the solution is probably to do what the amazon fire does and charge a premium for ad-free. The monitization really doesn't produce a huge amount of money. Even facebook, one of the kings of data mining and selling ads, only makes like $1/month/user. It should be relatively simple for someone like nest to sell a $200 box that replaces the "cloud" for people that want local control.