IoT: Internet of Things

Cross-geposted von: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/51412229

Hey guys,

I don't know if you'd count vacuum robots as smart home as well, but I guess this might be interesting: Vorwerk, owner of Neato Robotics, has closed down the cloud features for Neato Botvacs - three years earlier than they promised to.

A petition is going strong against it.

I'd be happy if you could sign and share. Even if you are not affected today, it could be a strong sign for other vendors as well...

https://www.openpetition.org/us/petition/online/vorwerk-need-to-stop-destroying-working-hardware-keep-neato-robotics-cloud-alive

Obviously unwise consumers with an under-developed sense of privacy and security are happy to buy any and all kinds of smart appliances. Marketing works wonders on people -- esp. these people who see only the benefits and have a huge blind spot on the anti-feature realities.

So I am left wondering: do I need to cancel ALL smart appliances? The reason to even ask is that the market and demand for non-smart appliances is shrinking. So our choices will increasingly approach a buy a smart-appliance or nothing dichotomy. Televisions are likely already there. Before we reach that dichotomy on large appliances, the non-smart appliances will just be a bad deal because of lack of competition.

Obviously there is a possibility to buy a wi-fi dishwasher then either disable it or not give it a means of connection. But then there is a risk of sacrificing functionality. Not just upgrades but a risk that the appliance is IoT-dependent out of the box.

ATM, I think the only sensible approach is to simply cancel all smart appliances and only buy non-smart appliances. Is there a quick and easy way to separate the cloud-dependent smart appliances from the non-cloud-dependent smart appliances?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/47171718

The guy could not use “Convection Roast” mode in his oven unless he connects to wi-fi and registers personal data. Apparently because this was a cook mode that was added after the oven was marketed.

Sure, it is useful to be able to get new features and upgrades after the thing is produced. But because of that, it’s as if they are making the store version deliberately excessively basic in order to twist people’s arms to run their proprietary closed-source spyware.

I was originally going to tag this as [a/d] (for asshole design), but opted to call it crappy design because upgradability is still a good thing. What’s crappy is the fact that:

• it’s not FOSS
• GE’s server is needlessly in the loop for everything
• ppl must register on GE’s platform and give copious personal info which is then certain to be abused

To avoid both c/d and a/d, I would insist:

• the app must be FOSS
• the app and appliance both must have no cloud dependency and talk to each other in an off-grid LAN-only scenario
• upgrades must be fetchable over Tor without registration, and side-loadable; users must be able to connect over Tor from a public cafe/library to fetch upgrades

• Team upload.
• debian/control: Update URL to use team's git
• New upstream version 2.28.5
• debian/libmbedcrypto7.symbols: Fix symbols for lintian

Most of the stuff I can find either is a general news story or reads like advertising copy.

Debian IoT Packaging team ... because the universal OS can power the Internet of Things

Any feedback is welcome? or any attempts to align to meta-openembedded ?

May this list be refreshed from 2018 to 2023 ?