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

381–390 of 641 posts

Re: OnHub

#381

Post by yc1010 »

Itaxpica wrote: post #356
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

"Please note that some features may not function with certain privacy settings turned off, and some information (such as the association of your Google Account to your OnHub) is stored by Google even if all privacy controls are turned off"

I am sticking with my Asus AC66U which has more features and is also cheaper than this Google device http://amzn.com/B008ABOJKS

Re: OnHub

#382

Post by raldi »

DaFranker wrote: post #329
raldi wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you could -- just drop off a file someplace visible.

> read access

If you have their tax returns, you can mail them a letter, or often even phone or email them.

Re: OnHub

#383

Post by vmateixeira »

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

I like the "for example.." present in most sentences.

Re: OnHub

#384

Post by pbhjpbhj »

rtkwe wrote: post #227
blixt wrote: post #190

I wonder if these will be capable of lending spare (encrypted) bandwidth to anonymous mobile devices. I.e., can Google Fi[1] users benefit from Wi-Fi when walking past a house that has an OnHub running? [1] https://fi.google.com/about/

Every time a company has tried to do open wifi sharing there's been a lot of kickback. Mostly because it's opt out instead of opt in but that's put a big damper on anyone doing similar things.

I think BT in the UK (one of the main ISPs) do this:

>"When you buy any BT broadband package you receive unlimited FREE access to BT Wi-fi, the UK's largest wi-fi network, plus millions of Fon hotspots overseas. Simply use the BT broadband email address and password you were given when you joined us.

>"To get the FREE service you'll share a small, separate and secure portion of your home broadband connection with other members of the BT Wi-fi community. This is what creates the millions of hotspots you can use out and about." (http://www.btwifi.com/help/login-with-bt/help-broadband-cust...) //

In other words "you can't buy a BT broadband package without giving your router to be used as part of our wi-fi network". Marketing, probably most users don't realise they're part of the "wi-fi network"?

Re: OnHub

#385

Post by josteink »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #375
josteink wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about, eh, you know... Web based? No need for this platform-specific bullshit. Last I heard Google was pretty good at creating good web applications.

Is that what you really want? A wifi AP that can be configured from the web? Because THAT's how you get hacked.

> Is that what you really want? A wifi AP that can be configured from the web?

Uh. Yes. In fact anything else is a deal-breaker to me and I regularly buy $300+ routers.

> Because THAT's how you get hacked.

If the router admin-interface is a POS written by the same rails-developers who leave delete operations on GET links, sure. I don't though, and I think the OpenWRT developers would take offence at such a blanket-statement like that.

But let's take your statement at face value: Web-based interfaces are inherently unsafe. Should we shut down all web-applications then? Should web shut the entire web down? That's the logical end of your extreme line of thought after all.

Re: OnHub

#386

Post by mbreese »

dragonwriter wrote: post #104
adriancooney wrote: post #3

Very interesting. From looking at the specs, it looks like they're packaging a server and marketing it as a router. The configuration app is a very nice touch, routers have always a pain to configure. I'd love to stick this in my apartment (even though I can only receive a maximum of 10mb/s). 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…

> Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product. Alphabet has been announced, but AFAIK the actual corporate transition hasn't yet occurred.

Not to mention Alphabet is a holding company and won't have any products. It will all be done through the subsidiary companies (e.g. the new Google).

Re: OnHub

#387

Post by JonahBraun »

vinceguidry wrote: post #370

The wireless radios in routers deteriorate and should be replaced every two years. The ones on your device deteriorates too, but not as quickly because it's not constantly in use like a router's. I will not be buying one of these as I consider these to be infrastructure and infrastructure should be built to industry standards so that it's easily maintained by swapping components. The privacy concerns bug me, but what…

> The wireless radios in routers deteriorate

Citation needed. What exactly do you think is deteriorating here? It's not like the antenna is oxidizing from use…

Re: OnHub

#388

Post by loudmax »

kuschku wrote: post #332
ejdyksen wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has a 3rd radio that monitors the channels you aren't currently using to see if any of them are better. The first two radios in the device can't switch without dropping connections, so they can't go hunting for new channels once the AP is turned on. My Airport Extreme chooses channels automatically at boot time, then never again. This is fine for my house though, because my neighbors are reasonably far away. At wo…

Which is a standard feature in a lot of other routers, too, like the Fritz!Box 7490. http://en.avm.de/products/fritzbox/fritzbox-7490/ Google is doing nothing special here.

That Fritz!Box 7490 is US $320 on Amazon. OnHub is $200. I doubt many the sub $100 routers most people get do that sort of thing. So maybe nothing special but that is quite a high end router you're comparing it to.

Re: OnHub

#389

Post by astrocyte »

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'm glad that people found this to be a point of significance. I've worked in the commercial networking hardware industry for some years and shelved several consumer ideas due to a lack of interest in security/privacy.

I have watched over many years as this 'cloud' software bonanza has eclipsed the tech industry. It went away from its original intent a long time ago and now is used as the holy-grail method of :

> ensuring (rent) is always paid for service(s) people should OWN

> vacuuming up and selling people's data.

I have several projects on my plate. However, I have a solid one for securing people's data when it comes to the IoT movement (in hardware)... It revolves around the same hardware/technology that the industry uses to scrape and funnel your data except the home user will now have it at their disposal as well.

Users should have 100% control of their data. If someone wants to 'monetize' it or use it to 'improve' their platform, the user should be rightfully paid for the opportunity to do so.

Disruption? Yeah, I think it's time. The foolishness has gotten far too long in the tooth.

.. And the backwards thing about it is: there are simple and straight forward ways to secure data (in hardware). It's only because everyone in the industry wants to ship your data all over the place and data-mine the snot out of it that things are as insecure as they are.

The very (loop-hole) or (door) that is used to funnel/mine/monetize/cloudify data is the very one used as an attack vector. Complicating the crap out of things at that point defeats the whole purpose.... Get rid of the door all together and the home is the least of all places where you should be exposing yourself.

Re: OnHub

#390

Post by busterarm »

wnevets wrote: post #359
busterarm wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

No, but I can imagine comfortably using a 4S.

The 6 is going to have even longer usability.

Post reply on HN