Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OnHub

on.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 641 posts

Re: OnHub

#351

Post by ultimape »

astrocyte wrote: post #321

My biggest issue with this is that Google wants to inject a piece of hardware into my home that acts as the gateway to my data. A device through which all : > Incoming data runs through > Internal data runs through > Outgoing data runs through And then wants to be vague about what data they will be pumping to their back-end for analytics/data mining. I have had a long standing proposal for home automation and I'm cur…

I personally think the real answer is not to have a central device, but to spread it out into a peer2peer 'fog'.

There's been some movement in industrial applications via stuff like https://twitter.com/FilamentHQ which leverages hardware accelerated ECC and telehash, using blockchain based DNS systems and other decentralized methods of command and control.

I think a similar direction needs to be taken for consumer hardware and data. The cloud needs to become just another peer.

I've been working with a bunch of interesting ideas on trying to get a distributed IoT network setup using programmable blockchains and Eris industries stack as part of an internship with them.

Re: OnHub

#352

Post by tormeh »

ljk wrote: post #342
astrocyte wrote: post #321

My biggest issue with this is that Google wants to inject a piece of hardware into my home that acts as the gateway to my data. A device through which all : > Incoming data runs through > Internal data runs through > Outgoing data runs through And then wants to be vague about what data they will be pumping to their back-end for analytics/data mining. I have had a long standing proposal for home automation and I'm cur…

agree with everything you said, but > Whose interested? shouldn't that be "who's"?

Could be an attempt at making a funny combination of "whose interests" and "who's interested"

Re: OnHub

#353

Post by keehun »

astrocyte wrote: post #321

My biggest issue with this is that Google wants to inject a piece of hardware into my home that acts as the gateway to my data. A device through which all : > Incoming data runs through > Internal data runs through > Outgoing data runs through And then wants to be vague about what data they will be pumping to their back-end for analytics/data mining. I have had a long standing proposal for home automation and I'm cur…

This is exactly why I found the Google branding a bit weird. The smart guys over there surely must know that a lot of us would be suspicious of this device. Why didn't they brand it under Nest, or a new Google subsidiary that would take the initial suspicion-edge off? I think it's a good router at a decent price, but no way I'm putting that inside my house!

Re: OnHub

#354

Post by chm »

skj wrote: post #300
chm wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt they added a Google account requirement to improve ad targeting. You might be right but it's really hard for me to agree with you. It could be optional, but it appears not to be.

I believe the post was not disputing the existence of the requirement, but the idea that it was to improve ad targeting.

I understand, and I still think an ad company has every interest to improve its ad targeting. What is so controversial about that?

Re: OnHub

#355

Post by ultimape »

derefr wrote: post #84
astrocyte wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As a side note, I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. It really has the look and feel of Nest products with the LEDs and the speaker aesthetic. Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product." It pretty much is... it's their way of sneaking the 'home automation' core/aggregation box into people's homes masked as a wireless router (for now). I'm sure the capability you mention will come headin…

> home automation' core/aggregation box Deeper than that, even. It seems like this is intended as a local-network cloudlet[1] substrate. Launch an app on your phone that needs a companion frontend server instance to talk to? One gets launched "in the cloud"—specifically, in a virtual cloud owned by the app author. But where is that instance, physically? Usually a provider like AWS... but with a cloudlet peering arran…

I've been toying with terminology to deal with the idea of a decentralized p2p cloud. Calling it a 'virtual cloud' seems off, and 'fog' has been co-opted by other kinds of tech. Any thoughts on what would be a good terminology for this?

Re: OnHub

#356

Post by Itaxpica »

astrocyte wrote: post #321

My biggest issue with this is that Google wants to inject a piece of hardware into my home that acts as the gateway to my data. A device through which all : > Incoming data runs through > Internal data runs through > Outgoing data runs through And then wants to be vague about what data they will be pumping to their back-end for analytics/data mining. I have had a long standing proposal for home automation and I'm cur…

Vague? It seems to me like they're pretty clear about exactly what data they're collecting and why, and how to disable that collection: https://support.google.com/onhub/answer/6279845

Re: OnHub

#357

Post by ocdtrekkie »

magicalist wrote: post #283
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their privacy policy seems open ended enough to indicate otherwise. Using this router allows Google to collect a HECK of a lot of data about your Internet usage.

No it doesn't? https://support.google.com/onhub/answer/6279845

That IS a lot of data!

Re: OnHub

#358

Post by dragonwriter »

keehun wrote: post #353
astrocyte wrote: post #321

My biggest issue with this is that Google wants to inject a piece of hardware into my home that acts as the gateway to my data. A device through which all : > Incoming data runs through > Internal data runs through > Outgoing data runs through And then wants to be vague about what data they will be pumping to their back-end for analytics/data mining. I have had a long standing proposal for home automation and I'm cur…

This is exactly why I found the Google branding a bit weird. The smart guys over there surely must know that a lot of us would be suspicious of this device. Why didn't they brand it under Nest, or a new Google subsidiary that would take the initial suspicion-edge off? I think it's a good router at a decent price, but no way I'm putting that inside my house!

> The smart guys over there surely must know that a lot of us would be suspicious of this device. Why didn't they brand it under Nest, or a new Google subsidiary that would take the initial suspicion-edge off?

Why? Most consumers aren't in the ultra-suspicious-because-it-says-Google camp, and most of those who are in that camp are likely to take using a different branding for a project from the same ultimate corporate parent as evidence that not only is the project trying to violate privacy, its also trying to be extra sneaky about it.

Re: OnHub

#359

Post by wnevets »

busterarm wrote: post #333
wnevets wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smartphones have a very different upgrade cycle than a SOHO router. Customers have been trained to upgrade their phone every two years by the cell phone carriers.

Given the substantial drop-off in build quality that I've seen over the years since the first G routers until maybe _very_ recently, I'm not so sure about this statement. I've got v1-4 WRT54Gs that are still going strong while I've seen several dozen newer routers shit themselves over the years. Also, why do we NEED to upgrade phones every 2 years?

>Given the substantial drop-off in build quality that I've seen over the years since the first G routers until maybe _very_ recently, I'm not so sure about this statement.

This is just another reason for more competition from a company like google.

The only reason most people know their router exist is because they have to turn it off and on when their wifi gets slow or it dies. Its not a status symbol like an iphone for example.

>Also, why do we NEED to upgrade phones every 2 years?

Because everyone wants the new hotness. Can you imagine trying to use the first iphone in 2015?

Re: OnHub

#360

Post by ocdtrekkie »

spdustin wrote: post #237
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are decent solutions to this already. INSTEON works great. It's got dual-band connectivity (wired and wireless) and you can either use a cloud hub if you want, or control it locally with a computer.

I can't tell you how many Insteon switches I've replaced in anger because they start flashing, stop responding to button presses, start beeping - one didn't even stop when I pulled the air gap switch. I'm well versed in their tech and in electrical systems, and everything was installed correctly, in some cases with fresh neutral wires pulled through direct from the neutral buss bar in the service panel, just to avoid…

I have heard these stories (and am wary), but I have yet to have a single INSTEON device fail on me so far. X-10 was completely unusable for me.
Post reply on HN