/cyber/ - Cyberpunk & Science Fiction

Having my house automated and on some kind of timer would I think give me better living habits. For example of the lights came on and coffee brewed automatically at a certain time, maybe I would actually get up. Or things like playing music in the evening, it'd be nice but I never do it. But if the house did it on its own, maybe I'd accept it.

One unfortunate thing is houses seem the same as they were 50 years ago.. layouts, materials. Something like facial recognition could feel out of place and tacked on to a home rather than feeling integrated into it

i was typing some insults and explanations but when i read your post multiple times i realizedi should go with 0/10 troll elsewhere, asshole.

>>39802

Yeah, I get that. I have a fairly "Blank Canvas" type house so the stuff won't look too out of place.

>>39803

what

I'm not trolling, I've already ordered the lights

>>39802

That could actually work, nice idea.

I've played around with setting a schedule and timers on my computer to tell me when to do things like that but it never works because I get lazy.

But if it was done for you I think it would work. It'd be like living with someone who had a regular schedule and some of it rubs off on you (or living with your parents that wake you up after too long and make you breakfast)

>>39800

The closest thing I ever did to that was to try and make it so my house had like a central computing system. So I have a bunch of screens hooked up to my computer with long cables at various parts of my apartment and I made a script to handle display switching so that I can go to any of those stations and press something to switch the display over there.

>>39800

>I'm making a chatbot too

I tried doing this but only got as far as making it print out an ascii art picture of my waifu who would respond to a few pre-canned phrases.

>>39825

lol anon, you made me think of a future where humans are bettered by becoming submissive to their AIs. Telling us when to get up (and forcing us to by turning on the lights/radio and locking us out of turning them off until a set time), automatically paying bills out of our paycheck so we dont have a chance to blow it on booze, rendering our car keys inoperable if it knows we've been drinking. Kind of a different dystopia than "the AIs are attacking!"

>>39829

>Thats basically the Background story of wall-e

>it would be cool for a time

>Implying there arent going to be anti-IA movements who cause maythem mostly because human will be too dependent to do anything by theselves

>Implying that the main IA wich checks on everything from a governement supercomputer wont goes rouge because rasons (lets face it, the IA can get hacked to kill soo we stop being dependent, or some programing error take place, it can decide that humanity its a plage, Or even worse some dumbass asshole order it to kill the resistance movement, then everyones revolt because of the brutal killing And the IA keep following its order… AND when the guy tries to back off the order the IA see it as a menace to the order killing everyone who could backoff that order)

>of course implying that the governementits going to be that lazy to let a super IA control everything

>>39800

No, nor will I. At absolute most, I'll set up a surveillance system saving to a NAS.

>switch dies

>house dies

>can't get in the door

>internet goes down

>can't turn on lights

>can't turn on heat

Here's an entire twatter filled with reasons not to buy into the "smart" fad.

https://twitter.com/internetofshit?lang=en

There is no internet of things.

It's just other peoples computers in your house.

>>39800

>install wifi coffee maker

>it broadcasts my wifi password to everyone

>get rfid keyless entry

>pricey as fuck

>my door is now hackable by anyone

I turned on my coffee machine's timer, that's about the extent of the automation I'm willing to go to.

>>40105

At least you can get yours to work.

I had free power socket in my wall-closet, so I installed red LED string inside, and use it as my night light. I think it looks pretty nice: https://my.mixtape.moe/enlsxh.jpg

Doesn't bother me when I sleep, and helps not to step on something if log in when it's dark.

Now I want to make it computer-controllable, as reaching inside of closet for a swith is pain in the ass, but I don't want to use wireless solutions because of muh security, and because air is already so polluted with radio noise my laptop wifi has trouble connecting to my router.

How to put control wires there nicely is a problem. I don't really want to just drop them on the floor - closet's rolling doors will chew them up, and cleaning the room is already pain in the ass without stuff in the way.

Someone suggested using Power-Line Communications (lan over powerline or whatever), and using ethernet to control the switch, so I now thiking about it. Overall I like the idea, but what to use on the recieving end - something analogous to RPi seems like overkill, but I don't know anything simpler that has ethernet support on board.

>>40124

I'm not going to lie, while that looks cool it also looks kind of spooky.

>>40137

It does, but I got used to it pretty quickly.

it looks cute-pink in daylight

>>40144

sounds comfy

The old piss-pot who owned my house before me thought he was a handyman and installed remote controls for all the lights and ceiling fans, which has proven to be a wretched embuggerment, since the remotes keep getting lost or going flat, and the manual switches have been disconnected.

So always make sure your gadgets have manual controls in case of breakdown.

I once stayed at a really swank hotel called The establishment, and all the aircon and lighting, and the radio could be controlled from a touchscreen on the bedhead, which kept me occupied for ages, trying out all the preprogrammed lighting schemes: subtle, indirect, mood, spot, flood, etc.

A weather station with a digital link to inside would be a thing. You can also get those TV antennas that you can turn by remote. And those armoured roller shutters for your windows. And a camera and intercom for the front door.

There was a thread on /tech/ about this awhile back that went nowhere so might as well try to keep it going here.

For lighting I've found what I consider to be the best solution and will be implementing it shortly. Once I see how well it works I'll probably make a guide detailing it. It's by using cheap RGB LED bulbs that have an IR remote, they're less than $5 and work incredibly well.

>>39852

>Here's an entire twatter filled with reasons not to buy into the "smart" fad.

Agree completely, to me an ideal system is designed to be used primarily offline and redundant. Just because corporations want to spy on consumers with "smart" tech there's no reason to not benefit from it.

And I never understood the appeal to having coffee being made automatically in the morning, asides for the aroma.

>>40395

>And I never understood the appeal to having coffee being made automatically in the morning, asides for the aroma.

Really? Having to wake-up at 6 but setting the coffee maker to 5:50 was a life-saver for in high-school. I wanted every fucking minute of sleep.

It's the waiting for coffee that killed me, even if it was just 5 minutes.

You're weird.

>>40395

It varies for people I guess, I remember when the smell of breakfast being made would wake my fatass up.

Coffee in the morning (or when you wake up) is useless. Drink some milk or juice instead. Or plain water.

Air filters (masks) are /cyber/, but are water filters /cyber/ or just 3-rd world?

>>39800

I would really like a cooking bot that could make at least 15-20 recipes

I suck at cooking, take out its not always good and frozen food its bad, shitty and expensive as fuck

As for vacuums I would like to have a roomba army controlled by the house AI so they know how to clean effectively and don't get lost/stuck

The tricky part would be building a system that unloads the dirt off the machines and dust the filters, mostly because the roomba design its already a bitch for humans to handle

Some chinese roomba knockoffs have the dust bin+filter on the top with a handle for easy removal, I could use a sort of "station" where the robotic vacuum can park itself while a simple robot arm removes the bin and tosses the content into a trash bag.

pneumatic beer delivery system.

If you live in a cold area or by a lake you could just keep it in a metal box outside instead of a fridge.

>>40484

Come on, it's called Internet of Things, not local network of things.

IoT devices are powered by buzzwords. Proprietary© protocols, SaaS® in the Cloud™, wrapped in DRM.

They don't work without internet because they can't download jquery.js or login into Twitter to authenticate you.

And because those things are designed by https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cc8jl8JWoAA7rb7.jpg there are no fail safety, no manual controls. There are no keylock http://cdn3.volusion.com/rhlgu.jacnm/v/vspfiles/photos/ERA-ilock-FX3-2.jpg

Of course, you can do house automatisation properly, but it means paying lots of brouzouf and/or doing everything yourself from scratch and basic components. Consumer grade IoT you can buy on the market is overpriced crap, and more of a fasion statement than anything useful.

>>40484

>hurr durr imma talk shit to a systems engineer

No. Actually, I don't even own a router, just an old firewall that can handle routing if I really need it to. I just NAT and set up rules when I need something complex on my servers, and my desktop sits behind an even cheaper firewall box that's on a gigabit switch with the server firewall, with uplink going to the modem (like it matters what port I use, lol). Dropped a gigabit switch behind my modem and nagged my ISP for two dynamic IPs - it's amazing what you can get away with if you're condescending enough to those poor fucks doing T1 support in India.

All of that said, nearly all IoT currently requires internet connectivity, since they tie in some sort of cloud component for tracking. Smart lights and thermostats are notorious for this, look at Nest for example. Hence my examples.

>>40494

Great, now there are two ways for someone to get into your place instead of one. How is this better?

>>40495

>How is this better?

I didn't say it was.

>>40496

It's worse. For fuck's sake, it uses 4 AA batteries! Am I the only one that sees what's wrong with the design mentality here?

>>40497

>>insert batteries

trade security for convenience

>>remove batteries or let them run dry

vice versa

>>40495

>No. LAN is not an argument, because I don't use it

Please reflect.

>nearly all IoT currently requires internet connectivity, since they tie in some sort of cloud component for tracking

Even if your statement (the relative "nearly all") would be checkable (thus able to receive the label "true"), that still doesn't mean IoT stuff wouldn't work without internet, it just wouldn't be able to phone home.

I didn't try to be condescending, just rational (maybe some reflection needed on your side)O. On this website, pointing a flaw on someone's perspective or comment is instantly interpreted as a personal attack. You're part of that group, congratulations…

>>40509

oh man, I said: please reflect. Making you reflect on your own post, not trying to bash on mine.

When will you figure out I'm not trying to be hostile?

So again, lets analyze these replies, since

> I sincerely don't understand what you're trying to get at

This ^ (imo) should already be a major reason not to reply in the way you did

First, you pose that IoT is only used through WAN, because like you said: internet goes down cant turn on lights & heat. (leaving out electricity etc. since you are focusing on my "lan" usage)

Keeping it short, I replied with: ever thought about LAN.

You passed the ball back by telling me your merits & with explaining your personal situation, which is totally unrelated (if you ask me). Whilst backing up your statement with the relative argument that "nearly all" IoT require internet connectivity. Backing that up by saying data tracking for companies.

My interpretation is, next to the irrelevant part:

> I say BLACK!

then

> I say mostly black

Then, I posed that your argument couldn't be confirmed, as the argument you posed was relative (the "most" appliances phoning home part). But still, you tried to back up THAT argument by saying phoning home is why "most" would be internet only. I agree with you that phoning home can be considered popular and there is a fair chance that it's happening with most proprietary devices, but that doesn't rule out that the devices wouldn't work without internet, as phoning home is something which can be delayed. Plus the user experience would be severely limited, and why would any company want to do that?

Even after these logical opposing arguments, you come back. But not with logic at first… First you make a personal attack, "asking" me if I'm trying to use LAN as a buzzword. Then, you compare this situation we have with the old guy / bright young lad story, where I can't figure the ties out (except for your level of irritation, relating back to the "no idea what you're trying to get at") (I hope you'll elaborate on this one). And while the confusion shown isn't enough, you go back to the point where we already went into, almost like the previous statement would empower the one that's coming…

I like the last part, because the second paragraph made me realize that we are talking about two different things (if I'm right). I think you're talking about single devices being connected by a bunch of different companies. That's not what I am or was referring to. My definition of automation is you're house governed by one single processor, controlled by some remote control (phone, actual remote, panels in the wall). The hardware giving the shit needed: IR, RS232, UTP, wifi builtin & the automation hardware/software making use of it. And I know for a fact that these pieces of automation processors have LAN & WAN possibilities, and that they don't need to be connected to an external network to function. The authentication is all offline.

And with your single connected devices (making it clear with referring to a "smart toilet getting hacked by a skiddie" (which I'm pretty sure will be covered by insurance) & your statement about authentication, is the difference between our points of view pretty clear.

Hoping you understand now that this is not an attack, but merely trying to get the bottom on top. Which actually went pretty well, if you ask me.

>>40523

>Keeping it short, I replied with: ever thought about LAN.

Yeah, I have. But that kills "telemetry" and authentication, and as such, the only IoT gear that doesn't use it is things like "smart chopsticks" that tether to your BotnetPhone via bluetooth.

>explaining your personal situation

So you'd understand that I'm not some clueless hack.

>wall of text that would make Trump cum buckets as literary mexicans give up their dreams of entering the US

3 paragraphs of whining about my posts later and not actually presenting any information, you start throwing out actual ideas about home automation. Great! You'll be building it yourself, since IoT trends are clearly defined right now. Not that building your own smart thermostat wouldn't be awesome, but anything dependent on connectivity (especially the way you're describing it) is still going to be rendered useless the instant your core switch or your AP dies.

And while putting down your mountain dew and walking a few steps to adjust the temperature manually is super hard, I've managed thus far.

>>40530

Knx, rti, savant, control4

Check out ise 2016 if you want to know more

Don't use anything too complicated - shit jams all the time. If it needs power, have a dynamo with crank somewhere to power it up manually on the go.

>>40523

holy shit are you retarded or what?

IoT is pure cancer. Maybe one day there will be secure FOSS solutions but right now it's one big scam and i doubt it will ever be anything else.

if you weren't too stupid to read what people wrote in this thread and all over the internet then you would know this, but so far you haven't reacted to ANY argument given so far.

please stop wasting people's time by forcing them to scroll more.

Given a thought to security?

You could install security fog.

Back that up with one of these nasty Inferno Sound Barriers and the burglars will be blind, disoriented, and ripe for your Murder Castle, or maybe white slavery if they're cute.

http://soniclat.com/page3.html