Slashdot Mirror


Don't Pirate Or We'll Mess With Your Connected Thermostats, Warns East Coast ISP (engadget.com)

Internet service provider Armstrong Zoom has roughly a million subscribers in the Northeastern part of the U.S. and is keen to punish those it believes are using file-sharing services. According to Engadget, "the ISP's response to allegedly naughty customers is bandwidth throttling, which is when an ISP intentionally slows down your internet service based on what you're doing online. Armstrong Zoom's warning letter openly threatens its suspected file-sharing customers about its ability to use or control their webcams and connected thermostats." From the report: The East Coast company stated: "Please be advised that this may affect other services which you may have connected to your internet service, such as the ability to control your thermostat remotely or video monitoring services." All U.S. states served by Armstrong Zoom will be experiencing temperatures around or under freezing over the weekend and into the near future. Bandwidth throttling for customers in those areas who have connected thermostats could mean the difference between sickness and health, or even life and death. Seems like an extreme punishment for any allegedly downloaded Game of Thrones cam rips.

252 comments

  1. dont mess with my thermostat by FudRucker · · Score: 4, Funny

    or i will take an axe to your series of pipes

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just report them to the authorities.
      This threat is no different from "It is a nice house you have here, would be unfortunate if something were to happen to it."

      It is illegal as fuck for them to make a statement like this.

      They aren't law enforcement. If they have a problem with someones possibly illegal online activities they should report it and let a court determine if the action was a copyright violation or not.
      Taking the law in your own hands isn't generally accepted.

    2. Re: dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Net neutrality must be a factor

    3. Re: dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Learn how to read. The way I read the letter is that they won't fuck with your shit at all. You'll just loose the ability to connect to and control it remotely. Meaning just like in 2000, 1990, 1980, 1970, etc. Big deal you can't warm the house remotely. It's a fucking thermostat. Set it to 65 and it will keep the house at 65 all day and night, 365 days a year. If you're letting your house get to below freezing you're stupid as fuck anyway. It's a great way to freeze and burst your pipes.

    4. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it's true, ISPs are mafias... just like cable companies and telcos, isn't that nice?

    5. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh my god, it's "series of TUBES", not pipes! Get it right!

    6. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by serutan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that ISPs shouldn't act as copyright cops, judges and juries, but this one isn't threatening to mess with anybody's thermostat. They're just threatening to throttle bandwidth, which realistically could affect the operation of net-enabled devices if say a bit torrent client is hogging the connection.

    7. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by slack_justyb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They aren't law enforcement. If they have a problem with someones possibly illegal online activities they should report it and let a court determine if the action was a copyright violation or not.

      No you see lacking an FCC ruling we have to use FTC guidance on the matter (see 740 F.3d 623 [2014]). ISPs have the right under FTC rules to secure their network by any means. If they feel a copyright violation "might" happen, they have a right to secure their network and the FTC gives them any means to do that. Now you have recourse in court if you can show that they blocked your "service" and it's important that FTC meaning of "service" means that ISPs can do everything except cut you completely off, without serving you notice. So pretty much as long as you can ping 8.8.8.8 and you're doing something that gives the ISPs a reasonable cause to fear your traffic. They can do whatever the hell they like since the FCC was granted authority over "traffic" in PL104-104 sec 509 and the FCC has indicated that they're not going to stand behind you on this topic.

      To anyone thinking they'd like to try their hand in court, by all means, have at it. Let me know how it went, but I can assure you it's not going to go the way you think it should.

      This threat is no different from "It is a nice house you have here, would be unfortunate if something were to happen to it."

      Yes it is different. A house is physical and network traffic isn't. That's like the big point of why Congress really needs to fucking act on that whole NN thing. Judges don't see IP packets are things that belong to you, and until someone with law making ability says that packets on someone else's network are yours, they aren't yours, the end.

    8. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect some factions would be insistent that potential contact with 127.0.0.1 is sufficient reason to fear your traffic.

    9. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      It's a variety of various vesicles.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    10. Re: dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      As rule without first taking winterizing steps you should not allow a residential building to go below 55 indoors.

    11. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by cstacy · · Score: 1

      No you see lacking an FCC ruling we have to use FTC guidance [...]

      I can assure you it's not going to go the way you think it should.

      The last time I heard someone say that, it went exactly the way I thought it would. And you're not the last Jedi!

    12. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      It seems they watched Big Bang Theory where Sheldon messed with Leonard's thermostat.

      And it also seems they want to go to jail.

    13. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by pslytely+psycho · · Score: 2

      Hmmm, I can't find any tubes.
      Tore my internet apart, found a bunch of wires, antennas, electrical doohickeys, NSA cameras, a hidden microphone.....but no tubes.

      However, tore apart my 1959 Marshall amp and....
      TUBES! lots of tubes! So the internet must be composed of old guitar amps!

      --
      Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
    14. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but this one isn't threatening to mess with anybody's thermostat.

      Yes, that is why I changed my post from what I originally wrote but never posted.

      If they had directly threatened to hack the thermostat it would have been a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
      That is a federal crime that could land them time in jail.
      Instead they went for the roundabout way of "It might give you 'problems' with this or that" mafia-style.

    15. Re: dont mess with my thermostat by nowwith25percentmore · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of the "hope a robot doesn't burn you ****ing house down" thing. https://youtu.be/zkv-_LqTeQA

    16. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

      That's a nice sentiment, however it's also no different than Verizon/Comcast/AT&T saying, "That's a nice video. You wana keep watching, it will cost you"...
      Local law enforcement has no idea how to deal with this. If it crosses county lines, then locals can't touch. Normally, this would fall under the FBI, but Humpty-Trumpty has eviscerated the organisations moral and the GOP is calling to "drain the swamp" of Federal law enforcement. They don't need any more lobbying money trying stop Federal 3 letter organizations.
      Nope, this is the new form of "capitalism" that Trump brought to NY real estate. Blocking it is what he defines as those "pesky job killing regulations".

    17. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by slashrio · · Score: 2

      ..its ability to use or control their webcams and connected thermostats.

      They didn't say they are able to control the webcam or thermostats.
      They merely explain that bandwidth measures they take against p2p sharing may affect other services used over the internet.
      There is no threat there.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    18. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by stigmerger · · Score: 1

      It'd be a shame if sumppn was to happen to ya termastat deh, while you was streaming sumppn.

    19. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it seems like a sensational clickbait title was written and you didn't bother to read the summary.

    20. Re:dont mess with my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I'm reading is "The consequences of piracy can affect your internet-connected appliances". They are not obligated to provide a service just because you stupidly hooked it up to something.

  2. Hyperbole much? by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bandwidth throttling for customers in those areas who have connected thermostats could mean the difference between sickness and health, or even life and death.

    If you are needing to adjust your thermostat using the network, that means you aren't at home to do it manually. You are not where the thermostat controls the temperature. I.e., if you freeze to death because you didn't walk across the room to turn the thermostat up, it ain't the ISPs fault.

    Yeah, maybe death of your pet fish if you aren't home to turn it up and the tank gets too cold, but "difference between ... life and death" is not something you usually hear with reference to fish.

    Or are people facing death from the cold really so lazy that they'd rather freeze than walk across the room?

    1. Re:Hyperbole much? by FudRucker · · Score: 1, Insightful

      what about the elderly and disabled, people unable to get up and walk, i taken my mother in as a house guest because i dont want to see her in a nursing home, she is 86 years old and in a wheelchair, she could not get to the thermostat if her life depended on it,

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:Hyperbole much? by darthsilun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If the ISP messes with your thermostat it is their fault. If they do it in the middle of the night when you're asleep, it's their fault. If they do it when you're away and your pipes freeze and flood your house, it's their fault.

      They have no business messing with your thermostat. They aren't the police, or the FBI. It's not their job to enforce the law.

      And if I had the misfortune to be a customer, you can bet I'd be shopping for another ISP right about now.

    3. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Meet my grandmother.

      She doesn't even know where her thermostat is anymore. She finds it too confusing with too many buttons.
      She only controls it from her 10" tablet, with a big screen.

      If you take away her internet, not only can she no longer control her tablet, she cannot Skype me for help, nor can she VOIP 911 in an emergency.

      Yes, for many, Internet is a public utility the same as Water, Gas, and Electricity.

    4. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So you have your house configured so that slow internet kills your mom?

    5. Re:Hyperbole much? by sunking2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Granny should have thought of that before she pirated The Girlfriend Experience.

    6. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh believe me, we've all already met your grandmother.

    7. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nest has set minimum and maximum thresholds that kick in to counter extreme temperatures. Itâ(TM)s a non-issue. Besides, the world existed just fine before the year 2000.

    8. Re:Hyperbole much? by FrankHaynes · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, maybe death of your pet fish if you aren't home to turn it up and the tank gets too cold

      When I was a little kid and my older brother went away to Boy Scout camp for the weekend, leaving me in care of his fish tank, I felt sorry for the fish having to swim around in such cold water. So I turned the tank heater all the way up so that they would be warm.

      He was not the least bit happy when he came home to a bunch of dead exotic fish floating on the surface with their eyeballs popped out.

      I am not qualified to be an ISP, either.

      --
      slashdot: A failed experiment.
    9. Re:Hyperbole much? by Xenx · · Score: 5, Informative

      They aren't touching the thermostat. They're throttling the internet speed in response to copyright infringement notices. Their terms of use and related documentation likely covers what can happen in regards to copyright infringement. If you don't like that practice, that is a different argument.. one that I would likely side with you on. However, it's up to the customer to understand the policies and what it entails. The ISP isn't targeting smart thermostats or the like, it's only warning the customer of possible issues if their connection is throttled.

    10. Re:Hyperbole much? by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They're not "messing with your thermostat." They're messing with your internet connection, which you've connected your thermostat to.

      If lack of internet connectivity is going to cause your house to flood, or your granny to die, then you probably need to re-evaluate how you're using these devices.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    11. Re:Hyperbole much? by Nutria · · Score: 1

      That's why we had a plain old non-intelligent thermostat installed in our house. K.I.S.S.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    12. Re:Hyperbole much? by gravewax · · Score: 1

      they are not interfering with your thermostat at all, they are simply stating pirates may be bandwidth throttled (nothing new or exciting), difference is they point out some of the potential unintended consequences should your bandwidth be throttled.

    13. Re:Hyperbole much? by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the ISP messes with your thermostat it is their fault.

      Stand still and think for a minute. If an ISP throttles or shuts off your internet connection for any reason, what effect will that have on your internet-controlled thermostat?

      1. 1. It will turn the temperature setting down.
      2. 2. It will turn the temperature setting up.
      3. 3. It will turn your furnace off completely.
      4. 4. You will not be able to change your temperature setting using the external internet, but can still operate it on the local internal network, and otherwise nothing is different including the manual controls.

      The correct answer is "4". The setting you had in place before the network interruption takes place will continue.

      Answers 1-3 are all what could be considered "messing with your thermostat", but only if the ISP actually makes the changes to the settings and not the stupid thermostat changes how it works when it loses a network connection. "Turn all heat off unless there is a constant network connection to some server in China" is a stupid and dangerous operating mode, and you need to blame the thermostat maker for that, not the ISP.

      For the person whose grandmother cannot operate a thermostat unless it is internet connected, then I suggest you get her a locally controlled thermostat instead of relying on the external internet. It is quite possible that the external internet will fail during a severe weather event and she'll be dead even if the ISP had nothing to do with it. Even just a local power failure could take out the wireless access point that the thermostat connects to, as well as the internet modem. This is not a case of the ISP turning something into a "matter of life or death", it's a case of poor planning on how to deal with common modes of failure resulting in a "matter of life or death."

    14. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your granny that can't work out a few buttons is somehow a master of the internet and downloading pirated content?

    15. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's the perfect crime

    16. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      life and death" is not something you usually hear with reference to fish.

      It is if you have one! And it still begs the question:

      Will the aquarium crack when the water freezes?

    17. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stay young, ignorant, and arrogant forever. #MAGA

    18. Re:Hyperbole much? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What kind of internet-connected thermostat needs a lot of bandwidth anyway? These things should be able to run on a 300bps modem.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    19. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nevemimd that, they should have their shit slapped for the arrogant, over-reaching 'threat'. Also you're a dick and need your shit slapped too.

    20. Re:Hyperbole much? by Obfuscant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      i taken my mother in as a house guest

      Then it is YOUR responsibility to manage the thermostat, and if you set it at a level where she will freeze to death it will be your responsbility, not the ISPs. If you leave her alone in the house and set it so she will freeze, and then depend on being able to get in from the external internet to turn it back up so she doesn't (ha ha granny, feel how cold it is? where's my inheritance? Put me back in the will. Ok, now you get heat again!) then don't blame the ISP when your plot is foiled by a network outage.

      Maybe just leave the thermostat set at a livable temperature and you won't have to worry about network failures from any source or reason.

    21. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you have a 1st world problem like a 2nd home in a location that freezes. A connected thermostat could be the difference between your pipes not freezing and coming back to your 2nd house with a major flood and super high water bill

    22. Re:Hyperbole much? by FrankHaynes · · Score: 1

      No doubt the ISP was referring to customers' server-like nodes on their home networks, such as home automation stuff (which is possibly against their TOS anyway).

      They did not threaten to turn off your furnace during the dead of winter.

      --
      slashdot: A failed experiment.
    23. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem would be typical thermostats that have a manual heat and cool setting. If the thermostat is in the cooling setting the heat will never kick on when the temp gets to the point that granny would freeze to death.

      Though if granny is so handy caped/incapacitated that she can't flip the switch, how does she take care of feeding herself, and other bodily functions? Sounds like she needs to be in a nursing home, or have live in family or room mate to take care of her.

      Back on the "smart thermostat" one would home a smart thermostat would have high and low thresholds to automatically switch between heat and cooling that would function without a connection to the cloud. If the only thing the thermostat lets you do is micromanage the temperature then what the hell is the point of spending all that money on it? Non connected electronic thermostats have had features like this for decades.

    24. Re:Hyperbole much? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Or her wifi password has been compromised.

    25. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      To add on to this, if granny is wheel chair bound. Why haven't you relocated her thermostat to a point she can reach in the chair? All it takes is a couple feet of thermostat wire, lower the thermostat a few feet on the wall, fish the wire from the old height to the new height, splice the wires, push into wall spackle/paint over old hole and install the thermostat at the lower height. This is something anyone with basic DIY skills should be able to do in an hour or so.

    26. Re:Hyperbole much? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      If the thermostat is in the cooling setting

      And just whose fault is it that the thermostat is set to "cool" in the middle of winter? I don't know anyplace on the planet where things change so fast that you have to cool one day and then heat to keep from freezing to death the next. And if you live in such a place, you better have a thermostat that can switch by itself.

      Sounds like she needs to be in a nursing home, or have live in family or room mate to take care of her.

      I think setting the thermostat so it maintains a livable temperature is something the host would do when taking granny in as a houseguest. At least I think that would be a reasonable task.

      If the only thing the thermostat lets you do is micromanage the temperature then what the hell is the point of spending all that money on it?

      There are valid use cases. You travel on sudden notice and want to turn the temp down to 60F for the week while you are gone, and turn it back up to 69F when you get close to home so you'll walk into a warm house. Or you want to reset it back to a normal temperature when your kids play with it. Or your wife turns it all the way down during a hot flash. None of those uses would result in anyone freezing to death because it couldn't be operated remotely. Even the wife can figure out eventually to turn the heat back up if she was able to turn it down.

    27. Re:Hyperbole much? by MattskEE · · Score: 1

      Uhhhhh did you read their actual statement, which is in the summary and copied below? They do not make any threat regarding interfering with your equipment. They merely mention that services you can access remotely over the internet will not work remotely if your internet is throttled due to piracy. They will still work locally.

      Please be advised that this may affect other services which you may have connected to your internet service, such as the ability to control your thermostat remotely or video monitoring services.

    28. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is most of these connected thermostats won't operate on the LAN only. They keep a constant connection out to the cloud. Your phone connects to that cloud server to manage the thermostat even if the thermostat and phone are on the same network segment. This is how most IoT devices work, otherwise people would have to manage port forwards, dynamic dns forwarders, or get a static IP so the phone could directly connect while out of the home. The typical person these are aimed at have no clue about that kind of stuff. "features" like this also let the vendors upsell on services(typical of IoT security cameras with "cloud dvrs") upsell you on the storage space, or decide your thermostat is outdated and not allow it to connect to the cloud server any longer forcing you to upgrade.

    29. Re:Hyperbole much? by sheramil · · Score: 4, Funny

      One that's been taken over by a botnet and is too busy mining Dogecoins to adjust the temperature.

    30. Re:Hyperbole much? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

      Yea well, if you buy a dumb 'smart' thermostat that allows a temperature extreme like this then that is your fault.

      At this point, with the current state of 'the internet of things', just having anything critical on the internet like this is your fault.

      - Choose wisely

    31. Re:Hyperbole much? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      They're throttling the internet speed in response to copyright infringement notices.

      And we know that copyright infringement notices have never been wrong. Let's see...I seem to recall a news story about copyright infringement from earlier today:

      https://gizmodo.com/man-s-yout...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    32. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regardless, they are making THREATS regarding interfering with your equipment...

      President Kim makes a lot of threats. I ignore him, too.

    33. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Fucking morons the isp should be regulated as a utility not a puppet for the mpaa and riaa and not writing the laws in this country by legally bribing the assholes in DC. My 83 old mother was harassed by Comcast on behalf of the mpaa for torrenting movies and tv shows. Impossible for her to do this she can't even use email it is too complicated for her. So how many others are wrongly accused by incompetent isp s what happens to the rights of citizens in this country we are headed to a corrupt government running a police / security state if we do not stand up soon.

    34. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if they don't have a monopoly where I live it is AT&T assholes or no service

    35. Re:Hyperbole much? by Xenx · · Score: 1

      I didn't feel like doing the work to figure it out. But decided, why not. Apparently the Nest learning thermostat only requires 50MB/week. Assuming the labeling is correct, and that my math is accurate, that puts it at about 700bps. However, that assume it's constant communication. I would imagine it's polling and the actual requirements would be a bit higher during communication. If it's polling every 15min, that would be about 600kbps? This is all assumption, but the requirements are still damn small. The issue would come down to what else is on the network and just how slow they're being throttled.

    36. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a lot of renting or living with mom and dad, never owning and maintaining a house millenials who are utterly clueless about how heat is maintained in a house in this thread. If you can't connect to a thermostat remotely no problem. No person on the planet has ever died from that. The first ones will be the 20 or 30 year old millenials who don't know what a thermostat is.

    37. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are an idiot. Termostat sure? Move then splice? Stay. Are you a woman?

    38. Re:Hyperbole much? by geekmux · · Score: 1

      If the ISP messes with your thermostat it is their fault. If they do it in the middle of the night when you're asleep, it's their fault. If they do it when you're away and your pipes freeze and flood your house, it's their fault.

      They have no business messing with your thermostat. They aren't the police, or the FBI. It's not their job to enforce the law.

      And if I had the misfortune to be a customer, you can bet I'd be shopping for another ISP right about now.

      Please re-read that clusterfuck of a summary to help avoid misinterpretation. They are NOT controlling or messing with your thermostat. They are merely stating that bandwidth throttling may interfere with an owners ability to remotely control their own thermostat.

      And quite honesty, if a homeowner has spent the money to buy and install a smart thermostat and yet fail to have it programmed to automatically avoid the ridiculous speculations of freezing pipes or freezing humans, then they are stupid enough to deserve said catastrophes.

    39. Re:Hyperbole much? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Regardless, they are making THREATS regarding interfering with your equipment, essentially saying that they will HACK you.

      No, they are not doing that. You just failed your English comprehension final.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    40. Re:Hyperbole much? by supremebob · · Score: 1

      It sounds like you should have kept the old 1960's era dial turn thermostat for grammy, so she actually knew how to use the damn thing without relying on a tablet.

    41. Re: Hyperbole much? by kenh · · Score: 1

      What about the elderly? Are you setious? So you think an ISP, throttling your internet connection (which runs from the San connector on your router to their year-end equipment) somehow will prevent a an elderly customer, sitting in their living room, trying to control the temperature in the thermostat on their wal!? How? Because the app on their iPhone reaches out over the phones cellular connection, passes they the UPS network, into their home, and then as a Wi-Fi signal to their thermostat? That sounds a litt!e rube Goldberg to me.

      More likely the app communicates with the thermostat as a peer on the internal Wi-Fi connection they share, never touching the public internet.

      And let's not forget, this warning explains the implications clearly, it won't be a surprise to anyone.

      --
      Ken
    42. Re:Hyperbole much? by Xenx · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying their policy for copyright infringement is right or wrong. But, it is their policy. I know how few choices most people have for internet provider in the US. Saying "go with another provider" isn't really a good solution for a lot of people. However, the copyright infringement policies that ISPs introduce is to protect their asses. DMCA holds the ISP accountable if they don't at least attempt to prevent the activity. It doesn't make the situation right, it just is.

    43. Re: Hyperbole much? by kenh · · Score: 1

      For crying out loud, the isp isn't adjusting anyone's thermostat, they may make it harder for customers to REMOTELY adjust their thermostat.

      Just another completely click-baity /. Headline.

      --
      Ken
    44. Re: Hyperbole much? by kenh · · Score: 1

      You also have to be pirating content from your remote, unoccupied, 2nd home.

      --
      Ken
    45. Re:Hyperbole much? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      The U.S. averages 640 people freezing to death per year already.

      Even a 1% increase would be 6 more people frozen to death.

      Humans are really bad dealing with high impact, low probability problems.

      This is one of those cases.

      I wouldn't have a thermostat that ran over the internet personally.

      And I wouldn't use an internet service that said they might mess with thermostats.

      And if they did, and someone dies, I would want them to go to jail for murder.

      Because they are doing it out of pure malice.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    46. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really that stupid? What an insipid, moronic, worthless ass you are. Mummy should've drowned you at birth and called you a miscarriage.

    47. Re:Hyperbole much? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      However, it's up to the customer to understand the policies and what it entails

      Really? Cause I doubt anyone on /. is conversant with every aspect of the EULAs they use. Hell, have you even read the /. terms of use?

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    48. Re:Hyperbole much? by Xenx · · Score: 1

      It's still up to the customer to understand the policies. If they don't want to, then it's on them when something happens. Ignorance is not a defense.

    49. Re:Hyperbole much? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      And I wouldn't use an internet service that said they might mess with thermostats.

      Any ISP that tells you that termination of your internet service would NOT affect your ability to remotely control your internet-controlled thermostat would be LYING TO YOU.

      You wouldn't use an ISP that is honest enough to tell you up-front that termination of your service would affect how you use IoT devices?

      Well, isn't it nice that this ISP did not tell anyone they would mess with anyone's thermostats, huh?

      And if they did, and someone dies, I would want them to go to jail for murder.

      If you've created an environment where an internet outage results in someone dying, then that's YOUR fault for being stupid enough to do that. You need to reconsider how you use the internet in that case.

      Because they are doing it out of pure malice.

      They're forcing you to turn your thermostat down so people freeze to death just to punish you for disobeying their TOS? You're looney.

    50. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should probably use the WiFi instead of the internet to control the thermostat from that distance.

    51. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our thermostat has a mercury switch in it, attached to a heat sensitive spring. It will survive an EMP event.

    52. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey- that kid that I have locked in my basement who I leave at home when I go away on long trips may not appreciate your cruelty. He would like it if I turn the heat on remotely when I am away and it gets too cold for him to survive down there.

      * Lawyers: I don't actually have a kid locked in my basement. This is what we call sarcasm.

    53. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I don't know anyplace on the planet where things change so fast that you have to cool one day and then heat to keep from freezing to death the next. "

      You don't live in the great state of Missouri, do you?

    54. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slow internet is not the same as intentionally messing with connected thermostats. I can't wait for the lawsuits to start, they can't be out of business soon enough!

    55. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has your brain gone obfuscant? If a top floor apartment looses it's heat, freezes pipes and leak, it can easily cause an electrical fire. Electrical fires are often caused by water from frozen/thawed pipes. This might be the first time an ISP is criminally responsible for death however. They can't be in jail soon enough for me.

    56. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What is it with you retards and millennials? You know we're in our 20s and 30s, right? We know how a thermostat works.

      Fucking idiots like you though? God knows what frothing-at-the-mouth pundits you watch to get this kind of opinion of grown adults. Stop watching fox. Stop reading infowars.

      Good Christ you're an embarrassment.

    57. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except the headline is BS and the warning only mentions slow internet. It says anything connected to the internet may be affected and uses thermostat as an example.

      They did not threaten anything at all. Most ISPs do this and just don't tell you.

    58. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... No person on the planet has ever died from that. ...

      Prove it.

    59. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your mistake is thinking the internet-connected thermostats are sensibly designed.

      Shutting off internet to them can make them do strange things, as many are poorly designed.

      https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/14/nest_foul_up/ as an example of the lousy engineering in these devices.

    60. Re:Hyperbole much? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      It's quite clear that you lack the ability to read or comprehend. They aren't messing with the fucking thermostats. They are saying that if they throttle you, there might not be enough bandwidth left over to remotely operate your thermostat. This article is FUCKING CLICK BAIT. So sick of this shit. I predict by 2019 I won't be reading Slashdot anymore.

    61. Re: Hyperbole much? by Malc · · Score: 1

      They also lived in places with fireplaces and chimneys, didnâ(TM)t have to worry about pipes freezing and bursting behind the walls or in the ceiling, and maybe even had a smaller volume/area to keep warm or doors and walls that isolated separate areas unlike modern open plan living spaces.

    62. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nor can she VOIP 911 in an emergency.

      Have you ever heard of a landline? Or, you know, normal VOICE calls over GSM?

    63. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about the situation where the internet is being used by a vulnerable customer to signal for assistance?
      What about where it is being used to monitor an elderly relative to ensure they haven't fallen / died?
      What about the people who rely on internet cameras/security devices?
      People who have heart monitor/drug delivery/other medical devices....?

      And ALL the replies I have seen so far assume the person IS pirating... Even the courts in the USA (who are often represented here as technologically illiterate) seem to realise that an IP address is NOT a pointer to an individual.

    64. Re:Hyperbole much? by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Dude, seriously. Go read it again. It is a friggin' reminder that people use their internet connections PASSIVELY, and they should consider what they stand to lose if they lose their internet connection.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    65. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am guessing the 50MB/week includes software updates. Otherwise that is pretty extreme. Without software update it should really be less than 300 bytes per hour.

    66. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3 is probably the option the thermostat company chooses to protect themselves from copyright infringement, just a form of DRM.

    67. Re:Hyperbole much? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Yes, depending on your internet to that extent isn't smart. However, intentionally screwing with it this way is a horrible thing to do. "Nice internet connection you have here. Be a shame if something happened to it."

    68. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need the internet to make a REMOTE CONTROL FOR A THERMOSTAT. What the hell is wrong with people?

    69. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mothers pets dies due to a electronic thermostat failing. Nearly burnt down the place.

      So, no hyperbole here. Just intentional spite enabled by the powers that be and their corporate overlords.

    70. Re: Hyperbole much? by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      ... No person on the planet has ever died from that. ...

      Prove it.

      I'll take a stab at it. Here is a list of those who have died from it:

      Here are all the documents showing those who have died from it:

    71. Re:Hyperbole much? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

      They aren't touching the thermostat. They're throttling the internet speed in response to copyright infringement notices. Their terms of use and related documentation likely covers what can happen in regards to copyright infringement. If you don't like that practice, that is a different argument.. one that I would likely side with you on. However, it's up to the customer to understand the policies and what it entails. The ISP isn't targeting smart thermostats or the like, it's only warning the customer of possible issues if their connection is throttled.

      While I agree with you, what happens if the infringement claims turn out to be false and as a result of the ISP acting on them someone suffers real harm? The ISP is already aware that their actions could cause the harm, and the were negligent in not ensuring the claims of infringement were valid before taking action. I'm sure their TOS would have them disclaim any liability but it would be interesting to see if it would hold up in court.They should let the copyright owner take action and not get in the middle absent a court order.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    72. Re: Hyperbole much? by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      Stop flirting

    73. Re:Hyperbole much? by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? I've been to so many places that are hot during the day (when they sun is radiating on you), and VERY cold at night (when the sun is radiating on the other side of the planet). Unless you're a flat earther, then I don't know how to explain it for that scenario.

    74. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do not make any threat regarding interfering with your equipment. They merely mention that services you can access remotely over the internet will not work remotely if your internet is throttled due to piracy.

      Yes, and they also know perfectly well that there aren't any thermostats out there that will actually misbehave with lost internet connection.
      So they bring it up to scare people who doesn't know better. That is pretty damn sketchy.

      They also have no way of knowing what licensing deals I have or what exceptions to copyright law that applies to me so they can't make the judgement of what I do is copyright infringement or not.

      They should leave law enforcement to the courts. If they take it into their own hands they should expect that other people will do it too.

    75. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assume such ISP interference with home temperature control. The first ol' granny who freezes-2-death == total legal destruction of that ISP. Financial catastrophe for company + hard jail time for owners . Sometime bitch-shysters do good! Count on it.

    76. Re:Hyperbole much? by 31eq · · Score: 1

      Somebody should really invent a thermostat that cuts in automatically when the temperature goes below a certain level.

    77. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      has anyone read my eula ? It states that whoever/whatever internetsite gathers/collects information about me will be fined 1 million dollars !!!! Per each incursion ofcourse.

    78. Re:Hyperbole much? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      Much infection. Such abuse. Wow.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    79. Re:Hyperbole much? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Saying "the Nest learning thermostat only requires 50MB/week" shows a clear lack of knowledge about how much data this actually represents.

      52428800 bytes divided by 7 days, divided by 24 hours, divided by 60 minutes, divided by 60 seconds equals 86 bytes per second. For something like a thermostat, that is EXTREMELY WASTEFUL. Temperature fits in a single byte, but let's make it two bytes just for the fun of it. Let's say it also takes two bytes for the humidity and another two bytes for atmospheric pressure, just for the fun of it. Even if you add another 8 bytes for a 64-bit thermostat ID, that's only 14 bytes per second. What the fuck would be in those extra 72 bytes?

      Kids these days.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    80. Re: Hyperbole much? by easyTree · · Score: 1

      we are headed to a corrupt government running a police / security state if we do not stand up soon.

      Thanks for posting a snippet from your twenty-year-old diary entry.

    81. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You truly are an asshole and should shut up

    82. Re: Hyperbole much? by marka63 · · Score: 1

      There are places on the planet where you freeze at night sub zero C and overheat during the day. They are usually called deserts.

    83. Re:Hyperbole much? by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      You need at least 40 bytes in the packet header.

    84. Re:Hyperbole much? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      That's still 32 bytes leftover and with a completely unrealistic specification of a thermostat with a 16-bit temperature, 16-bit humidity and 16-bit atmospheric pressure at a useless one update per second.

      I would consider one communication/update/packet per minute extreme for such a use case, which would be around 2.25MB of data per month.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    85. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hyperbole or not - make your 'cloud thermostat' a 'local' thermostat. Temperature is local, people are local, the AC/heater is local. Why must 'cloud thermostats' obey other masters in the cloud? I hope they aren't that dumb they don't have a failsafe mode when the network connection is lost.

      Your live *should* not depend upon the health of one internet link.

    86. Re: Hyperbole much? by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      There's an app for that.

    87. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it is: "Use the internet connection we are providing to you in accordance with our policies, or we will restrict the internet connection, as we have a right to do according to the contract you signed with us."

      Don't like their policies, get another ISP. They aren't fucking with anything they don't have a right to fuck with.

    88. Re: Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thermostats donâ(TM)t need much bandwidth, so they canâ(TM)t possibly be referring to mere throttling.

    89. Re:Hyperbole much? by Xenx · · Score: 1

      I cover it in another response, and other likely brought it up. DMCA leaves the ISPs responsible for the customer's copyright infringements if they don't take steps to prevent the activity. They have to do something, or risk legal threat. You may not like the system, but you still have to play by it.

    90. Re:Hyperbole much? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      I cover it in another response, and other likely brought it up. DMCA leaves the ISPs responsible for the customer's copyright infringements if they don't take steps to prevent the activity. They have to do something, or risk legal threat. You may not like the system, but you still have to play by it.

      They are caught in the middle. I would simply tell them they are cut off and avoid any issues that may occur from keeping them but messing with they connection. IANAL, but acting in response to the DCMA may not protect them from the results of what they chose to do. It may just be safer to end the contractual relationship.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    91. Re: Hyperbole much? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      They are usually called deserts.

      Thank God there are no deserts in the northeastern US where this ISP is.

      Those who live in such places either boil during the day, freeze to death at night, live in buildings with enough thermal mass that the inside temps don't change much, or have a thermostat that knows how to cool when it is hot and heat when it is cold -- like I said.

    92. Re:Hyperbole much? by Xenx · · Score: 1

      I'm also not a lawyer. I do work for a small rural telecom, so I've read a fair bit.. but my grasp on all of it is still rudimentary. For the ISP, sure it'd be the safest to just cut them off outright. However, the requirement of the DMCA is that the ISP has a policy and enforces it. The wording isn't the most specific.

  3. Dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a dupe post.

    1. Re:Dupe by Megane · · Score: 2

      Don't pirate or we'll post more dupes on Slashdot!

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  4. Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All Armstrong Zoom customers cancel/switch your ISP. In a few months they'll either change their attitude or go bye bye. Concast customers should do the same.

    1. Re: Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And switch to who? Nice fucking suggestion asshole. Do you know how many choices I have for an ISP? Two. One is hughesnet which is a no go cuz of latency and the second is Comcast.

      So yea nice fucking try.

    2. Re: Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And switch to who? Nice fucking suggestion asshole. Do you know how many choices I have for an ISP? Two. One is hughesnet which is a no go cuz of latency and the second is Comcast.

      So yea nice fucking try.

      Wow. Angry much? You can't make your point without being vulgar and resorting to ad hominem? You might want to consider some anger management counseling.

    3. Re: Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to consider licking my balls while I cum on your face.

    4. Re: Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It must be excessively small to accomplish that.

    5. Re: Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you point the shaft upwards, the semen ejaculates in a parabolic trajectory so the size of the penis is irrelevant.

      Here, let me show you...

    6. Re: Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a woman or a faggot. Either way, gtfo.

    7. Re: Easy... by kenh · · Score: 1

      Neither of which is Armstong Zoom, so what is your problem?

      --
      Ken
  5. This is why we need bet neutrality by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've said it before, and i will say it again: Your internet provider is a conduit on which multiple services rely. It cannot and should not, by law, be used to control or limit access, or police content either of it's own accord or upon request of external parties.


    Of course, personally, I am strongly against connecting any devices (other than computers) in my home to the outside facing network, but that's beside the point.

    1. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      exactly right on, the ISP's could wield too much power with this, net neutrality is a must otherwise there will be an abuse of power when they start extra judicially start doing what they think is right regardless of the consequences, and if some ISP gets their equipment vandalized because of it then i wont care because i will have a good idea why it happened

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 2

      I don't think Net Neutrality in any way banned ISPs from canceling your service for infringement.

    3. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you now?

      https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11537635&cid=55816265

      I'd like to believe you just have multiple accounts, and not just blatantly copying and pasting...

    4. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      As ISPs *have* terminated services with people who have pirated and other illegal activities you're correct.

    5. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by Nutria · · Score: 2

      Or... you could develop the skill of reading beyond the scare tactic hype (by both the ISP and Engadget) and understand that both sides are pumping out nothing but FUD.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    6. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought NN was about double charging not deep packet inspection and packet manipulation?

      Honestly Obama fucked up. The idea was sound. But instead of making it a law they pretzeled the existing laws. Then the next admin came in and undid it. Not exactly a rule of law is it?

      If it was important he should have worked with congress and fixed it. Instead he was too busy grandstanding. Much like the DNC continues to do til today. Instead of getting the best for their constituents they are busy telling them what is best and then doing what the DNC tells them to do. I have seen the donation lists. The RNC is no better. The DNC is paying lip service then doing *nothing*. All the while getting mega fucking rich off it.

      Personally I would never hook anything like that in my house up to the internet. That is just waiting for some dude to figure out how to hack it and turn it into a botnet. My thermostat is an old fashioned coil with a plastic handle on it and a bit of mercury. I might buy a digital one. But only to get the hour timing bits. Put it on the net? Not going to happen.

    7. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Damn! I just got caught. Oh snap!

    8. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by omnichad · · Score: 2

      ISPs don't want to cancel your service for infringement. It's a monetary loss to them. They do want to cancel your service if you're a high-bandwidth user.

    9. Re: This is why we need bet neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd care otherwise..? No, your a snowflake that will take your porn 1 but at a time if you had too.. again stfu.

    10. Re: This is why we need bet neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All your neighbors also want your service disconnected. That stuff on your huge array of hard driver, that you'd never have enough time to even use? Talk to a therapist about your hoarding problem.

    11. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1

      I'm also pretty confident Net Neutrality had nothing to do with usage caps.

    12. Re:This is why we need bet neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When your argument is "I need net neutrality to break the law." you might want to take a step back.

  6. Hooray! (dupe) by ls671 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hooray! I remember reading the exact same story on /. a few days ago.

    Let me google it, "connected thermostat site:slashdot.org". Here we go:

    https://yro.slashdot.org/story...

    Maybe editor should do the same and Google it before posting dupes ;-)

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:Hooray! (dupe) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He had no idea. His bandwidth was throttled and the article just posted today. What is a week of download time in bps?

    2. Re:Hooray! (dupe) by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So conflicted right now. On the one side if I don't pirate I have heating in my house. On the other side if I pirate I may no longer have to endure dupes!

  7. I checked into it... by Kenja · · Score: 1

    and it turns out a thermostat is cheaper than the stuff people are pirating, so I'm guessing they'll opt for the former.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  8. Cool story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What kind of moron rely on the internet, for their heating.
    If they don't have a physical control panel they can use without the internet, they deserve it.

    1. Re:Cool story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of moron rely on the internet, for their heating. If they don't have a physical control panel they can use without the internet, they deserve it.

      What kind of moron assumes there isn't a physical control panel? Ever heard of Nest? Or Honeywell?

      I have mine programmed to turn down to 64F after at 10PM. In the winter time, when I'm out late, it's nice to be able to turn up the heat remotely so that the house is warm when I walk in the door.

      There are "wifi thermostats" that don't need a connection to $BrandHQ in order to manage remotely; I settled for the Honeywell though because I couldn't find one of those when I was ready to buy and I didn't care to wait.

    2. Re: Cool story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard core bitcoin miners?

    3. Re: Cool story by kenh · · Score: 1

      So you need an internet connection to control your heater? If true, you are a moron... I'm sorry, that's just stupid. What if your ISP goes down during a snowstorm?

      --
      Ken
    4. Re: Cool story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ISP's never have outages. If they did, surely it would be the fault of their competitors! ./troll

  9. Alarmist, much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Remotely" means outside of your home network. If you're freezing to death at home because you can't control your remote thermostat, then you've got larger problems... like connecting to your own wifi or walking over to the damn thing. They're saying they'll embargo network services to the outside world, not that they'll brick your damn router.

  10. Lol. You are all funny by sunking2 · · Score: 2

    They aren't messing with anything other than saying if you pirate we'll nuke your internet so you won't be able to use all the internet things you like to use. All of this is likely covered in the TOS.

    1. Re:Lol. You are all funny by I'm+just+joshin · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Stupid clickbait.

    2. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Luthair · · Score: 1

      What if Ford said they'd remotely disable your car if you went over the speed limit?

    3. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for buying the Tesla 3. Please invest $5,000 in SpaceX and ensure a notarized receipt is sent to Tesla Motors or we might be forced to update your vehicle with a 40% horsepower downgrade. It's in the Terms and Conditions you implicitly agreed to by purchasing a Tesla product.

    4. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Ford can trivially disable itself without any help from the remote, even while it's parked, which probably safer than while it's moving.

    5. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly the point. They're acting like government, and government don't like competition.

    6. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't messing with anything other than saying if you pirate we'll nuke your internet so you won't be able to use all the internet things you like to use. All of this is likely covered in the TOS.

      No. If they just said that it would all be fine.

      The problem is when they start naming examples.
      There is a difference between saying "You should buy an insurance from us just in case something happens" and "You should buy an insurance from us just in case someone lights your house on fire"

      It is pretty clear that this is meant as a threat.
      They also claim that they are going to take action of their own instead of reporting a possible crime and let the court decide if the person is guilty.
      This is a message from an organization that clearly thinks that they operate beside the law.

    7. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read some time ago about some kind of control to disable cars if the owner has debt, something like the control that disables or record user's activities including photos from rent to own computers.

    8. Re:Lol. You are all funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Threats to punish illegal filesharing incite the same reliable knee jerk reaction here on Slashdot that calls for more gun control produce among the NRA crowd. Comically farfetched scenarios are proposed as examples of why that would be a really irresponsible thing to do.

  11. Their Internet Policy Are Ridiculous....!! by ELCouz · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Their Internet Policy Are Ridiculous....!! by omnichad · · Score: 2

      Pretty bad. If grandma forwards a stupid email to more than 10 people she could be cut off. If you ask them to install an Ethernet card, they can't guarantee they won't lose all your data on your computer. They may change your provided email address without notice. They poison DNS lookup failures. Tiny 200GB data cap on their lowest tier. Hijacking HTTP requests when near your bandwidth limit.

    2. Re:Their Internet Policy Are Ridiculous....!! by ELCouz · · Score: 1

      Agree...the reviews aren't lying ... this company makes Comcast services looks good!

  12. Thanks, Ajit. by malditaenvidia · · Score: 1

    I bet you think your IoT buzzword is great now, motherfuckers.

    1. Re:Thanks, Ajit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing to do with the FCC you stupid asshole.

  13. I must be missing something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they are just threatening to throttle, and not cut off, how much bandwidth does a thermostat need? And for that matter, who changes the thermostat settings all that frequently? Seems to me this is just a little bit of a scare tactic on the thermostat issue. Security video, yeah, I can see throttling affecting that, but I guess I am just missing something in how this internet enabled thermostat works and why they need to be changed, apparently, so frequently.

    1. Re:I must be missing something by greenwow · · Score: 2

      I've helped four members of our management setup nest thermostats and security cameras. Three of them have around 750 kbps DSL (supposed to be up to 1.5 Mbps, but Frontier around here sucks), and the cameras worked just fine. Even the spec page:

      https://nest.com/support/article/Are-there-any-issues-with-streaming-Nest-Cam-over-a-mobile-Wi-Fi-hotspot

      Says "It requires 200kb/s (0.2Mbps) of bandwidth on average, but can reach up to as much as 500kb/s" The thermostat should be a tiny fraction of that.

  14. How much bandwidth are they thinking.... by mark-t · · Score: 2

    ... that an internet connected device like a thermostat is going to need that they think throttling internet speeds is actually going to make any kind of difference for it?

    In practice temperatures change slowly enough that even getting a single packet every half hour would probably be adequate for keeping a temperature entirely livable.

    1. Re:How much bandwidth are they thinking.... by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Both sides (Engadget and the ISP) are doing nothing but spreading the FUD thick and wide.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    2. Re:How much bandwidth are they thinking.... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      In practice temperatures change slowly enough that even getting a single packet every half hour would probably be adequate for keeping a temperature entirely livable.

      I don't have an internet-connected thermostat because I see no need for it. However, I do have a "thermostat". The job of a thermostat is to turn heating devices (or cooling devices) on and off in a way that it maintains the temperature that it is instructed to maintain.

      As the outside temperature goes down, the heat flux increases outwards and the heating devices need to remain on longer to keep the same temperature. (I.e., pump heat INTO the house so it balances the heat flow going out.)

      At the point where the outside temperature is so low that the heating device needs to be on 100% of the time to keep up with the outflow, not even turning the temperature setting up will fix the problem. If your furnace is on 100% of the time to keep your internal temperature at 62F with an outside temperature of -10F, then no amount of changing the thermostat setting will get it warmer than that. You cannot get more than 100% out of your furnace, unlike the warp drives that Scotty could get to produce 110% (or nuclear reactors that can produce 110% by exceeding safety limits).

      In other words, you need 0 packets per hour to "keep up with" changing temperatures. That's the job of the thermostat itself. You only need "packets per hour" (and few of those) if you want to change the settings, and again, if your furnace already cannot keep up with the demand for heat then no amount of changing the settings will solve that problem.

      The only use for an internet thermostat is so you can modify the settings from outside the house so you can turn the heat down when you know you can't make it home, or turn it up to warm things up as you are on your way home. Or, in the very extreme case where penny-wise but pound-foolish planning has you turning your thermostat off (thus no heat at all) and needing to turn it back on when a cold snap threatens to freeze all the pipes. That's your fault, because you should have just set the thermostat at 60F, say, so it will be off until the outside temps get cold enough to be a problem, but the furnace will be off otherwise. I spent the entire last summer with a thermostat set at 65F and I paid no heating bills because the furnace never came on, and yet when the temps dropped late this fall the furnace popped on just like it should to keep the house above 64F.

      If the you've set the temperature on your thermostat so the inside of the house is "livable", then the thermostat will keep it that way unless 1) it is broken and cannot do its job anyway, or 2) you're exceeding the heating capacity of your furnace and the thermostat won't be able to succeed it doing its job anyway. Note that neither failure mode has anything to do with a throttled internet connection.

      This is a nonsense article, meant to scare people and create fear over a failure of "net neutrality" by the ISP. Poppycock. The ISP was correct to warn user who face potential loss of service for violation of TOS that their IoT things may not be controllable when their service goes away, but that doesn't mean the ISP is "messing with" anything.

    3. Re:How much bandwidth are they thinking.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't dispute what you are saying, but I was pointing out that even in the hypothetical use-case where a thermostat is actually going to need constant internet connectivity in order to simply operate as intended, throttling internet connectivity is highly unlikely to impact the practical operation of such a device because temperature changes are quite far from instantaneous, and so its bandwidth needs are generally going to be too low for any such throttling to make a perceptible difference. I would think even at worst, just getting one packet every 30 minutes would be enough to keep any area entirely liveable.

    4. Re:How much bandwidth are they thinking.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get paid for such "deep thoughts" don't you?
      I want my money back. Your answer is obvious, trite and stupid.
      Thanks for playing. You too should demand your money back from whatever diploma mill spawned your sorry ass.

  15. 3/4g For the win? by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 1

    Ummm. This is nothing a Cradlepoint and a 4G USB modem can't Fix...

  16. I've got this great idea by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You wouldn't have to worry about your ability to turn it up remotely if you didn't turn it down to start with before you left home.

    It's a pretty well know fact that it takes [i]more[/i] energy to change the temperature in a home than to maintain a set temperature. If you're only in the house every other season that's one thing, but it's these people who insist on micromanaging their heating and cooling on an hourly basis who are missing the point.

    And as for those people who are worried about pipes freezing -- they shouldn't be turning their furnace completely off to start with. Leave the thermostat at 50 degrees at least. Leave the cabinets open to allow the pipes better circulation with the warm air in the house (it's not like you're home anyway to be bothered by those doors), get pipe warmers and just hook them up and leave them plugged in. Heck. I bet you could set up a smarthome system that would turn them on and off for you using local temperature sensors (no internet needed). But instead, you buy a three hundred dollar thermostat and pay for internet service for an empty house for months you're not there, and you call this "saving money".

    1. Re:I've got this great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      SeaFox writes
      > It's a pretty well known fact that it takes [i]more[/i] energy to change the temperature in a home than to maintain a set temperature.

      Not according to Max Sherman, a "senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory overseeing research for residential energy efficiency." According to http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sc-cons-1113-karpspend-20141107-column.html:

      "Another common refrain is that it's cheaper to keep your home at a constant temperature, even when you're not home. 'Almost never true,' Sherman said, noting again that homes with heat pumps can be an exception. 'If the system is running less, it means it's using less energy.'"

    2. Re:I've got this great idea by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      It's a pretty well know fact that it takes [i]more[/i] energy to change the temperature in a home than to maintain a set temperature.

      Wait, what? It's a pretty well-known fact that the rate of thermal transfer is based on the difference in temperatures between the hot and cold objects. If you permit your house to cool down while you're gone, and then warm it up in time for you to get there, you will definitely save energy as compared to keeping it hot the whole time.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:I've got this great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol, yeah. Maybe the OP lives in the post-fact parts of the world where the word is meaningless.

    4. Re:I've got this great idea by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Wait, what? It's a pretty well-known fact that the rate of thermal transfer is based on the difference in temperatures between the hot and cold objects. If you permit your house to cool down while you're gone, and then warm it up in time for you to get there, you will definitely save energy as compared to keeping it hot the whole time.

      Depends on technology. If heat is from electricity or combustion then yes there will be a slight reduction in consumption by turning down stat for a significant percentage of a day.

      If on the other hand you have a heat pump the most energy efficient configuration is to set a temperature and leave it be for multiple reasons. The most salient being resistive heating is much less efficient than any possible gains from temporarily reducing temperature.

    5. Re:I've got this great idea by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If on the other hand you have a heat pump the most energy efficient configuration is to set a temperature and leave it be for multiple reasons. The most salient being resistive heating is much less efficient than any possible gains from temporarily reducing temperature.

      The difference is not between heat pump and heater. The difference is between well-insulated and not, unless it's so cold that a heat pump won't actually work.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:I've got this great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If on the other hand you have a heat pump the most energy efficient configuration is to set a temperature and leave it be for multiple reasons. The most salient being resistive heating is much less efficient than any possible gains from temporarily reducing temperature.

      That assumes that the heat pump is running at full capacity all the time.

      Even with a heat pump you can save energy by turning it off when you aren't at home as long as you turn it back on early enough for it to bring the home back to the temperature you want when you get home without having to resort to resistive heating.

    7. Re:I've got this great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with everything you say. However I would add this.

      Get a thermostat with a schedule timer. Also turn it down slightly in the winter and slightly up in the summer.

      In my area I do 68 in the winter. I keep it 73-75 in the summer. Then I use the zone timer to change things up a bit. In the winter I keep it steady. In the summer I lower it to 70 at midnight until 5am. I am taking advantage of the cooler weather during the night to expel heat. Usually does not turn back on until about 11am. I experimented with it for a few months to get it to do that. Probably shaved 15-20 bucks off my summer bill.

      Next best thing to do? Get R14 insulation or higher in as many places in your house that you can. It is good for both heat and cold.

    8. Re:I've got this great idea by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      The difference is not between heat pump and heater. The difference is between well-insulated and not, unless it's so cold that a heat pump won't actually work.

      The difference is whenever a heat pump reaches balance point it turns into a paper weight. When you turn up the stat after lowering it to "save energy" what ends up happening the heat pump spends more time burning expensive electricity not just to heat the air but to heat all of the solid things in the building which were allowed to cool off and are now absorbing heat.

      If you just set a temp and leave it be the heat pump stands a better chance of spending more of it's time doing it's job as a heat pump rather than an electric heater. The few percentage points of thermal energy saved does not hold a candle to the amount of energy wasted by switching on aux heat to satisfy stat.

    9. Re:I've got this great idea by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      That assumes that the heat pump is running at full capacity all the time.

      It assumes no such thing. Capacity of a heat pump is relative to temperature differential.

      When a stat sees a significant differential in commanded temp vs actual temp or when it takes too long it will command next stage/aux heat even if the heat pump is capable of eventually "catching up".

      Even with a heat pump you can save energy by turning it off when you aren't at home as long as you turn it back on early enough for it to bring the home back to the temperature you want when you get home without having to resort to resistive heating.

      This is a best case fantasy unmoored from reality.

    10. Re:I've got this great idea by j-beda · · Score: 1

      The difference is not between heat pump and heater. The difference is between well-insulated and not, unless it's so cold that a heat pump won't actually work.

      The difference is whenever a heat pump reaches balance point it turns into a paper weight. When you turn up the stat after lowering it to "save energy" what ends up happening the heat pump spends more time burning expensive electricity not just to heat the air but to heat all of the solid things in the building which were allowed to cool off and are now absorbing heat.

      If you just set a temp and leave it be the heat pump stands a better chance of spending more of it's time doing it's job as a heat pump rather than an electric heater. The few percentage points of thermal energy saved does not hold a candle to the amount of energy wasted by switching on aux heat to satisfy stat.

      I don't think you understand the physics of heat transfer and/or the accounting of energy. Your language seems to differentiate heating the air and heating the interior objects with the idea that somehow that is an important distinction. I am not sure of the best way to address this type of inaccuracy in your physical model of heat energy transfer - I know it feels like keeping something at a given temperature is greatly different than heating it up and cooing it down again, but it really is not.

      To maintain a box at a any temperature requires that the heat energy being lost from that box is equal to the heat energy added to that box. Heat energy is ALWAYS flowing out of the box. The rate of heat energy loss increases as the temperature inside the box increases (we are assuming that outside the box is at some low constant temperature). Thus, for a given amount of time, it takes more heat energy to maintain a high temperature than to maintain a low temperature inside the box. This is true, even if there is a large thermal mass inside the box - the only important thing is the rate that the heat energy is being lost, and this is purely a function of the thermal insulation on the outside of the box, and the temperature difference between the inside and the outside. If the box is filled with lots of stuff with high thermal mass, the temperature inside the box will fall slower than if the box is filled only with air, but the rate of heat energy loss will be the same. Lowering the set temperature for a short amount of time and then later increasing it will require less heat energy input then keeping it at the higher temperature all the time.

      The majority of heating system have only two states - "heat" and "off", and the thermostat controls the temperature in the box by turning the heating system off when the inside of the box gets too hot, and switching to "heat" when it gets too cold. When the thermostat is set to a lower temperature, the heating system simply runs for a smaller fraction of the time compared to when the thermostat is set to a higher temperature.

      It is true that when you turn the thermostat from a low temperature to a high temperature, the heating system will run constantly until the interior temperature is raised to the high temperature, so for this amount of time the system will "consume" more energy than a system that was being maintained at the constant higher temperature. But the opposite is also true, that when you turn the thermostat from a high temperature to a low temperature, the heating system will not run AT ALL until the interior temperature falls to the low temperature.

      If you simply turn off the heating system for 20 minutes, and then immediately turn it back on again, it will take x amount of minutes to heat back up to the starting temperature. The amount of energy used by the heating system over those x minutes will be less than the amount of energy that would have been used to maintain the box at the starting temperature over the full (20 + x) minutes, because the amount of energy that pours out through the sides of the box during the full (20 + x) minutes is les

  17. I installed the thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I know which wires to twist together to make the heat come on. Damn, I'm a human thermostat, no internet required.

  18. Falmpalm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Armstrong has a very solid reputation in the NE Ohio area. They invested well into the area and as a result all of their speeds are fast. I always brag about how much better we have it than areas that have companies like Comcast, TW, etc. Then they pull a dumb... dumb... move like this... Facepalm...

  19. Make The Threat Hurt by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

    Don't bother with the thermostat threat. Go right for where it hurts. Point out that PornHub will buffer like crazy.

  20. I Wish Slashdot Editors Would Pirate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and have their bandwidth reduced so there'd be less dupes.

  21. Oh no they won't! by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    Everyone knows only the man of the house touches the thermostat

    1. Re:Oh no they won't! by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

      A real man knows how to replace the thermostat with one that no one can mess with, then enables the child lock feature.

    2. Re:Oh no they won't! by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Honeywell makes great thermostats. Both mechanical and electronic.

    3. Re:Oh no they won't! by andrewbaldwin · · Score: 1

      One place I worked at was in a converted factory building. The air-con and heating zones were very sensitive to change (ie the new open plan office wasn't really a good idea for what was a compartmented building previously).

      The building manager was forever trying to balance the system and put up notices in big letters "PLEASE DON'T ALTER THE THERMOSTAT SETTINGS" but to no avail as people still fiddled with them to get their desk area comfortable and ignoring the effect on others [who subsequently came along and tinkered with the settings.... you get the idea].

      One weekend he went in and reset the thermostats to the known stable setting then disconnected the control wheel on the front from the mechanism (basically a curled bimetallic strip and spring).

      He then sent out an e-mail telling people that the system was adjusted and they could set the thermostats as they wished [which because of the carefully chosen words was not a lie].

      Result: no effective change to the heating system but suddenly everyone was happy. Seems the illusion of tinkering and control was enough to convince people that they were comfortable :)

  22. Internet service provider Armstrong Zoom os by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

    A POS of a company if this is true. They are praying on the ignorance of any customer unforunately forced to use them as an ISP. This Company is poison and extremely unethical to scare their customers that do not understand current tech!

    Just my 2 cents ;)

    1. Re:Internet service provider Armstrong Zoom os by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      They are praying on the ignorance of any customer unforunately forced to use them as an ISP. This Company is poison and extremely unethical to scare their customers that do not understand current tech!

      I see you didn't read the letter that the summary linked to. Here's the relevant part, copied by hand since the link was an image:

      Please be advised that this may affect other services which you may have connected to your internet service, such as the ability to control your thermostat remotely or video monitoring services.

      This is a pretty straight-forward statement that if they turn your internet off due to TOS violations (and this letter is pretty clear that this is not the first contact about the problem) it will impact other stuff you use the internet for. How is this "praying" [SIC] on fear or unethical? It's a statement of fact, and technically quite accurate. If you don't have internet no more, you also don't get to control your internet-controlled stuff remotely neither no more, and any remote video monitoring you used to be able to do won't work neither no more, either, too.

      If they just put you on the lowest service tier, that will affect your use of these things, too, especially video monitoring. "Affect the use of" doesn't mean "we're going to fuck with your thermostat so you die" or even "we're going to take control of your cameras and broadcast the video to everyone on the internet". It means the change will affect YOUR use of those devices remotely.

      If you have set your thermostat so everyone in your house dies from the cold, then that is YOUR fault. I advise you not to do it.

      Fuck, is this what /. has devolved to?

    2. Re:Internet service provider Armstrong Zoom os by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this is more along the lines of 'people aren't really, truly aware of how much stuff is 'internet.'

      I've sent service techs to people's houses when they swear up and down that despite their bandwidth being maxed out for days, 'nobody is using the internet.'

      "Say, there's junior, sitting on the couch, streaming Netflix on an iPad. That's using four or five mb/s right there." "THAT'S NOT INTERNET, HE'S WATCHING TV! DON'T YOU TRY TO TELL ME THAT WATCHING TV USES INTERNET!"

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  23. A: Because it breaks the flow of a message by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

    Q: Why is starting a comment in the Subject: line incredibly annoying?

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  24. You guys are being stupid by mveloso · · Score: 1

    When your connection gets throttled it throttles everything. That also might affect your VoIP service and everything else connected to your internet.

  25. If bandwidth throttling breaks your thermostat... by greenwow · · Score: 1

    you're doing something wrong. But seriously, I worked on environmental control systems in the early 80s that used 56k dedicated lines. Even then, bandwidth wasn't a problem.

  26. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  27. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  28. IoT Bad by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

    An excellent argument (as if we needed another) of why the "Internet of Things" is and was a terrible idea. Because even if the ISP never carries out such a threat, any network failure could just as easily cripple everybody's Echos and Nests. My computer and smartphones connect to the Internet; my fridge, stove, thermostat and other appliances don't need to.

    And never will.

    1. Re:IoT Bad by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      An excellent argument (as if we needed another) of why the "Internet of Things" is and was a terrible idea.

      It is not a generic argument against IoT devices, only stupidly programmed life-critical devices. If your IoT thermostat does the sensible thing of "maintain current settings" when losing internet connectivity, then losing internet connectivity won't result in anyone freezing to death. Only if your IoT thermostat dumps all settings and reverts to "off" when it cannot communicate with a remote server would it be an excellent argument against IoT.

      any network failure could just as easily cripple everybody's Echos and Nests.

      Echos require internet to send your audio back for voice recognition, and if a failing Echo could cost a life, then you should reconsider how you are using the Echo. The company that makes the Nest would be liable for any damages if they programmed the device so negligently that an internet outage caused a death, but only after you justified creating a life-critical situation based on that device.

    2. Re:IoT Bad by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

      A couple of years ago, an Amazon Echo user had programmed all of his light switches to be voice-controlled. He regretted that about 2AM one night when he lost internet connectivity and all the lights turned on and the Echo devices started sounding an alarm tone. I don't have an Echo; I even refused one when Amazon offered me a free one for being a good customer. (When I refused the Echo, they offered the equivalent in Amazon credit, which I was delighted to accept.) So I can't really speak to whether that story was true, or somewhat exaggerated.

      Regardless, I don't need to have every device in my house to be controllable from my smartphone.

  29. Re:Net neutrality anyone? by Obfuscant · · Score: 0
    This has nothing to do with NN. Disconnecting someone for a violation of terms of service means ALL the packets stop, no matter from what source. Putting someone on a low rate internet connection (insufficient to continue pirating effectively) means ALL the packets slow down, no matter from what source.

    Stop trying to paint this as an NN issue when it is clearly not.

  30. Bandwidth required to adjust a Thermostat? by ardmhacha · · Score: 1

    "Bandwidth throttling for customers in those areas who have connected thermostats could mean the difference between sickness and health, or even life and death."

    Complete bullshit, how much bandwidth is required to adjust a thermostat?

    1. Re:Bandwidth required to adjust a Thermostat? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Its not how little bandwidth a thermostat needs, its how much the speed can be further reduced.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Bandwidth required to adjust a Thermostat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Complete bullshit, how much bandwidth is required to adjust a thermostat?

      None, but my "smart home" thermostat uses up a shitload of bandwidth playing pop-up video ads. :-P

    3. Re:Bandwidth required to adjust a Thermostat? by fox171171 · · Score: 1

      A remote thermostat should not require anything more than a few bits of data when you send it a command, or if it needs to send you a notification of a problem. Most of the bits required ought to be for secure authentication. Throttling should not be an issue. Strangling would be a more accurate term if it couldn't work.

  31. Use a quality VPN by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    and don't have anything online that can be seen by any other network.
    Keep your home and its needed networks away from the open internet.
    Use the ISP internet with a VPN.
    Find other ways to secure the CCTV so CCTV keeps working.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  32. Is this the news for nerds site ? by RedK · · Score: 1

    Because quite a bunch of you have no idea what a Thermostat is, or why it's even "Internet enabled" to begin with if you think is even remotely close to being an issue. How can you call yourselves nerds and not even have a smidgen of a clue of how a Thermostat operates and what it is used for ?

    The heck do Internet thermostats even have to do with this story ? ISP throttles you if they catch you infringing copyright. That's it. That doesn't impact your Thermostat at all.

    Even my freaking Grand mother knows what a Thermostat is and how it operates.

    --
    "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
    Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    1. Re: Is this the news for nerds site ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the reason the story is posted in this way is because the ISP itself mentioned it in the threat. But yeah, it is pretty stupid. If you commit copyright infringement you lose your internet access, period.

      Explicitly saying you will also lose access to your internet connected thermostat is very redundant and should be obvious to anyone who has one and if not, they shouldn't be using it in the first place.

  33. The ISP is not the Police by WindowsStar · · Score: 1

    I said this about Google Post the other day; about them policing the internet and blocking pirating searches and I will say it again here. This ISP is not the police they provide a service how someone uses it is up to them. If they break the law it is up to the authorities to punish them NOT the ISP. I will use and example. This is like buying a car and the dealership says they are not going to fix your engine under warranty because you are using the car to transport cocaine. It is not the dealerships responsibility to enforce laws. It is not the ISP's responsibility to enforce laws. The other take I see here is they are threating their customers a good lawyer could sue them and win for threating to kill them. Just saying!

    1. Re: The ISP is not the Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think youâ(TM)re in ignorant idiot shitfucker. Just sayin!

    2. Re:The ISP is not the Police by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      >> This is like buying a car and the dealership says they are not going to fix your engine under warranty because you are using the car to...

      Then don;t ever buy a Tesla.
      http://mashable.com/2016/02/03...
      https://www.reddit.com/r/tesla...

    3. Re:The ISP is not the Police by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 2

      ISPs want to be a monopoly with the protections of a common carrier public utility, but also want to be able to control content. You can't have it both ways.

      If they want to control and police your content, then they should be the ones liable when they let illegal content through.

    4. Re:The ISP is not the Police by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      If they break the law it is up to the authorities to punish them NOT the ISP.

      The ISP is not enforcing any law. They are deciding not to sell someone a service that they have reason to believe (due to complaints from other people) is being used outside the terms of service. Laws are irrelevant. This is also after multiple attempts at contact with the customer have failed to get a response.

      If your automobile warranty had a clause that it became invalid if the vehicle is used for illegal purposes, then the dealership is within their rights for refusing to honor the warranty when the illegal use is detected. Just like insurance companies are within their rights not to pay out when the terms of the insurance are not met.

      The other take I see here is they are threating their customers a good lawyer could sue them and win for threating to kill them. Just saying!

      Just saying bullshit is what. You'd need a really good lawyer to win such a lawsuit, and a really greedy one to take your money for trying. And a really stupid judge not to throw the suit out in the first 30 seconds of it being on his desk. Where's the threat to kill anyone?

    5. Re:The ISP is not the Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first link is about refusing service to a rude customer. That's not about bad service after the sale. The second is mostly hypothetical opinions by Reddit users, and not a an actual statement from Tesla or anyone else about voiding warranty. But it's reasonable to not honor a warranty if the end user intentionally caused the damage.

      You just seem like an anti-Tesla troll.

    6. Re:The ISP is not the Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go ahead and sue a big business with more money and better lawyers you can ever hope to afford. Your family will surely enjoy living in cardboard boxes.

  34. Pet fish should be fine by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    If you have species that are that sensitive to the cold, not to mention the gradual change given the heavy moderation of all the water in a fish tank, you'll have an automatic heater in there.

    But yes, any "internet connected" thermostat should still have a minimum allowed temperature (mine is 55F) that you can program in, and the worst case is that it is a bit chilly when you get home and turn it up manually.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re: Pet fish should be fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hay, what if my fish tank's heater has an internet connected thermostat?

  35. Throttling vs charging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I'm paying $50 for 50Mbps service and they throttle me to 1Mbps, do I owe them more than $1?

  36. all it will take is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    one lawyer or rich guy to be wrongfully throttled and this isp will have a new owner^h^h^h^h^hmaster

  37. Good Old Land Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No worries here.
    My thermostat is hard wired to my land line.

  38. Woah woah woah... isn't this illegal? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Isn't even threatening to do that illegal? This is vigilante justice from the ISP and they're not even the injured party here even in the cases where they are actually right that it's piracy and not just a World of Warcraft patch or a work VPN.

  39. Build your own.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is why I refused to buy a smart thermostat and instead, built my own based on a Raspberry Pi with a TFT touch screen.

    Didn't want Nest/Google nor anyone else "managing" my HVAC data, thank you very much.

    Seems like I made the right choice, eh?

    Details here: https://github.com/chaeron/thermostat

  40. Re:If bandwidth throttling breaks your thermostat. by dysmal · · Score: 1

    Back then, loading a web page didn't take 3 minutes (literally) on a 56k connection like it does now. Remember that all of these "smart" devices today are also busy harvesting all sorts of personal goodies unlike your environmental control systems.

  41. This is Click Bait by airfishey · · Score: 1

    This is a 100% click bait article, and I'm disappointed in you Slashdot. (1) Smart thermostats need very little bandwidth at all to operate remotely (e.g. via a smartphone or web page). It's not like your smart thermostat is constantly streaming videos or downloading updates (although the occasional update does happen). The ISP clearly said that they will throttle your bandwidth if they think you are engaging in illegal pirate activity. So it might take 1 minute instead of 5 seconds to adjust the temperature remotely, even if you are throttled. (2) Most smart thermostats (definitely the Nest) have a set points where you define a minimum temperature that it will not go below. Even if you have no internet connection, your thermostat will ensure that you maintain a minimum, safe temperature level. (3) If you're home, you can still manually adjust the temperature by walking over the the thermostat and turning the dial.

  42. ISPs Common Carrier? by AbrasiveCat · · Score: 1

    Looks like at least this ISP no longer wants to be a common carrier and it does want to be responsible for all data on its lines. Looks like a trap to me.

  43. Media trolling/whoring for attention can be deadly by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    What happens when there is a real story about something important and people dismiss it as more senseless noise by know nothing trolls?

    I suspect the answer is probably nothing...

  44. ISP shut off my Internet service for non-payment by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    And now I can't turn on my furnace from my mobile phone... itttt'ssss cccooolllddd in here. I can't get up to turn it on because the floor is covered with ice after pipes froze and burst after the power company also shut off my power for non-payment. I fall down every time I try to stand.

    To make matters worse my phone will only let me dial 911 and the Internet does not work. I tried calling 911 and explained to them not having Internet access is an emergency but the rude person on the other end says I'll be arrested if I call back.

    Please help me.

  45. Anonymous Coward said this before and says again.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you pirate we will let your house burn down!
    We will make sure your house is burgled!
    We will let your dear old Mother or Grandmother freeze to death!

    So there!
    I wonder if the CEO of Armstrong Zoom has a network connected thermostat, webcams or CCTV surveillance/alarm system?

  46. What they will do if snowstorm tear off the wires? by Vitus+Wagner · · Score: 1

    People that buy thermostat, which depends on external server for proper operation deserve to be frozen to death.

    What they'll do if not the evil will of ISP, but natural force would cut them off internet?
    For instance if snowstorm would uproot couple of poles and break the wires?

    (Really the electricity would also be cut, so you'll need to keep a gasoline generator in the basement if your heating depend on electricity).

  47. So if you bought into the "internet of things"... by Miles_O'Toole · · Score: 1

    ...you're getting exactly what you deserve.P

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
  48. Pete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and repeat are in a boat...

  49. HaHaHa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have fun with that

  50. Bring it on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a threat, mister. How's your family? I see your kid goes to a nice school. Shame about the road he's got to cross. Accidents happened. Just sayin'.

  51. Why I don't Use an IoT Thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please allow me to explain again why I REFUSE to use any "cloud connected" IoT devices. It either works on the local lan, not connected to the internet, or I refuse to even power that junk. Period.

    My thermistat is dumb, and is going to stay dumb until I can fix it in a way that doesn't try to lock me in to some cloud service.

    Why? This article is fucking why. That is not all, but its enough.

  52. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  53. Class Action for Murder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anyone dies because they don't have heat the 'clever' manager who approved this propaganda may be tried with murder.

  54. extra-judicial thread of damage to life and prop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really?

    So they said they would do it. What happens if they "kill grandma"? What happens when the pipes in the basement bust, and a third of the value of the home is lost to water damage? They have some level of culpability, right? And in this they just established a minimum level of premeditation.

    Have they heard of swatting? You know people die from that right? What happens when someone decides to thermostat-swat using the internet company? The person at the house might not be doing any of the stuff, their system can be hacked without their knowledge.
    Yet the ISP can kill grandma by freezing her to death in her sleep.
    Yet the ISP can destroy the home with water damage from burst frozen pipes.

    This sounds profoundly foolish. That ISP better pray that it never (ever ever) has a hand in an event like these. They will discover a level of very very bad publicity and punitive damages they have to payout that will be existential.

    Due process. Rule of Law. Welcome to America.

  55. electric company is your isp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    then maybe you worry!

  56. Just wait, it'll get worse by biggaijin · · Score: 1

    Once the Internet of Things takes off, we will be even more vulnerable to this sort of threat from our ISPs: Don't be bad or we'll turn off your refrigerator and make all your food spoil. What about that 200 pounds of venison in your freezer, eh?

  57. What Idiot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there a single person that has an inkling of how the Internet works that has any device in their home that is controllable via a third-party? If so, they're a moron and deserve what they get. The only people to feel sorry for are those that don't understand what they're buying. People who understand the Internet are waiting for IOT devices that are controlled on the LAN by the owner with no possibility of remote access (unless the owner knows how to set up a VPN or SSH access). No third parties.

  58. Personal responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A really GOOD reason to disconnect from the IoT, yes?

  59. If you connect.... by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

    your thermostat to the net you're a friggin' retard. Pure and simple.

  60. If you mess with my thermostate by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    I'll blow a hole into your skull. Because to do so, you have to break into my home.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  61. there's fault, but look around a little further by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bandwidth throttling for customers in those areas who have connected thermostats could mean the difference between sickness and health, or even life and death.

    I can't be the only one who sees some weight of liability in the court of the thermostat designer who made their system unnecessarily dependent on the availability of internet access.

  62. This is deplorable by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

    We're talking about people who are paying their bills who may be violating copyright.

    Cutting off someone's heat or AC could in extreme cases lead to death and in lesser cases could actually lead to property damage. I do worry that my pipes might freeze every time the temperature dips below zero (Fahrenheit).

    Fortunately I can pay my bills so I'm not too familiar with the process but I do know that my local utility just can't shut you off for missing one or even 2 bills (maybe after three). I'm not going to test the system but I am blessed in many ways and can pay the bills. What if I couldn't? Would homelessness be the next logical step?

    At least where I live they're not going to make you freeze to death even if you don't pay your bill on time. So what if I pirated the last season of Breaking Bad? (that was in fact the last thing I torrented).

    Walter White wants his paycheck and if you don't come up with the money you're gonna freeze to death!!

  63. Programmable Thermostats need Backup Thermostats! by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just don't trust ANY programmable thermostat, never mind the Internet-connected ones which are vulnerable to hacking and stuff like this.

    Up here in Ottawa, Canada - which is damned cold at the moment, -25C but cools things as fast as if it was -40C with the wind chill - any heating system outage could do serious damage to your home.

    You're not worried just about frozen pipes. I've personally seen the water in the bowl of a toilet freeze, split the bowl, and cause the tank to fall over. The fill valve in the toilet then helpfully tried to keep the tank full... tens of thousands of dollars in damage, and, to add insult to injury, a huge water bill.

    It could be an asshole ISP, North Korean hackers, or it could be a pair of weak AA batteries while you're away on vacation, but the more complicated something is, the more prone it is to failure. Even a top-quality Honeywell Commercial can't turn on the heat if it's got dead batteries.

    When you install a programmable thermostat, keep the old one!

    Most central heating systems have thermostat terminals labeled R and W (or W1). When R is connected to W, the furnace will go through its startup rituals and produce heat. As soon as you disconnect them, the furnace will start its shutdown rituals.

    Startup/shutdown may take a few seconds before the furnace appears to do anything. Any relatively modern (since 1990 or so) gas or oil furnace will do things like start the drafting fan (blows air up the chimney) and heat the igniters before it turns on the fuel, and once it has the fuel burning, it will wait until the heat exchanger is warm before it turns on the blower that moves the warm air into your home. Likewise, shutdown may take a few seconds, usually with the main blower running until the heat exchanger has given up all its heat.

    Mount the old mechanical thermostat someplace where it will ensure the house never gets below about 15C. Connect its R and W (W1) terminals in parallel with the R and W terminals on your new thermostat, so that they work as an OR gate (two switches in parallel).

    That way, even if the programmable - or those silly/dangerous Nest things - fails, the old-school mechanical thermostat will click the heat on.

    Keep the old thermostat set to a lower temperature than the house should ever normally reach and it won't interfere with the energy-savings provided by the programmable thermostat.

    When you're connecting the old thermostat as a failsafe, don't assume that the colors on the wiring mean anything - not all R terminals are connected to the red wire, and not all W terminals are connected to the white wire!

    The G and the Y terminals control other functions in your furnace, no need to touch them.

    R - transformer common, 24V AC
    W - call for heat (W1, W2, etc. are for multistage furnaces - use W1)
    Y - call for air conditioning - leave it alone
    G - call for fan (the fan will start automatically when the furnace is heating or cooling, connecting R-G will cause the fan to run continuously for air flow)

    Other terminals can be Googled.

    Do the wiring carefully, using proper thermostat/doorbell wire. Put a sticker on your furnace to remind you of where you mounted the backup thermostat. If you're in the least bit unsure of what I'm describing, call a licensed HVAC contractor.

    A final warning is that while this COULD be done with baseboards and other line-operated electric heat, it would require suitable thermostats and a licensed electrician to do it - burning your house down to save a flood is counterproductive.

    This is a great way to recycle an old mercury-filled thermostat; you've changed it from hazardous waste into a safety device.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  64. Ahhhh Power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Power is one of the most recurrent themes in human history: Sooner or later it falls into the hands of someone who will abuse it. In this case it was even sooner than expected.
     

  65. Judge Zoom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Armstrong Zoom wants to be judge, jury, executioner, awesome, must be nice to live in a non-democratic country. In the United States of America, companies can not be a court system. Turn off the client or let them continue, but kill someone, company is out of business & mgmt. should be killed since locking them up in jail is not good enough.

  66. Who uses an internet thermostat anyway? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    No, seriously? A time clock covers pretty much all usage cases, if you're in the house every night. Otherwise, you use the "frost protect" setting and put any temperature sensitive plants in one room with a plant-appropriate setting.

    Internet connected thermostat - what a fucking stupid idea. Regardless of the apparently abysmally implemented security.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"