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

The Internet of Way Too Many Things

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–266 of 266 posts

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#261

Post by webXL »

JupiterMoon wrote: post #259
webXL wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps coming home hours earlier from work and/or calling a neighbor would increase their odds of survival. I find it odd that people are questioning the value of this life and death information while there are plenty of frivolous IOT devices.

Because CO kills surprisingly quickly -- unless your commute is in the order of a couple of minutes you'd be too late. Also you don't send a person into a house with a CO leak so asking you neighbour to retrieve your cat would be placing them in danger. My point is that the smoke alarm and the CO alarm should be exactly what they are simple alarms that allow occupants to escape in an emergency. Adding IOT capabilitie…

You're being awfully pedantic. Have the neighbor shut your gas off. Have your landlord alert the neighbors. What if you just left for work? I can find a bunch of scenarios where the information can be useful, whereas you seem determined to argue that only the occupants (who might just be kids burning toast) should have this information.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#262

Post by cbr »

zck wrote: post #203
cbr wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh. We still know about people who didn't survive. Survivorship bias is when you are only seeing the successes.

The claim showing survivorship bias is from this comment ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10181767 ): > ...if my siblings an I were brought up just fine in the 80's without being in a "smart onesie", I'm sure we can do just as fine today. There's no one here to say "I died because my parents didn't realize I stopped breathing". Yes, one can look at statistics, and see how many deaths would be prevented by this…

Well, you'd know if your siblings died, but you're right, there's some survivorship bias in the "and I" portion.

The main issues, though, are very small sample sizes and the difficulty of knowing if people really were "just fine" compared to what they would have been otherwise.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#263

Post by meowface »

Duhck wrote: post #248
meowface wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twist seems like a pretty clever idea, especially by integrating it all into the lightbulb. Can anyone think of potential downsides to this approach? Other than the audio probably not being of very good quality compared to a serious speaker system.

We've used a really high quality audio driver and have some future products that'll help round out the system (aka subwoofers). For reference here is the data sheet of speaker we use: http://www.baysidenet.tv/catalog/pdf/Peerless/30n18al04-04.p... We also have a half a dozen other products designed to fit into this form factor, all of which provide a superior lighting experience to what is available on the market tod…

I'm sure it's good, but I don't think you'll win the audiophiles over.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#264

Post by JupiterMoon »

webXL wrote: post #261
JupiterMoon wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because CO kills surprisingly quickly -- unless your commute is in the order of a couple of minutes you'd be too late. Also you don't send a person into a house with a CO leak so asking you neighbour to retrieve your cat would be placing them in danger. My point is that the smoke alarm and the CO alarm should be exactly what they are simple alarms that allow occupants to escape in an emergency. Adding IOT capabilitie…

You're being awfully pedantic. Have the neighbor shut your gas off. Have your landlord alert the neighbors. What if you just left for work? I can find a bunch of scenarios where the information can be useful, whereas you seem determined to argue that only the occupants (who might just be kids burning toast) should have this information.

The information is intended to allow the occupants to escape safely if required. In the case of a CO alarm no one should enter the premises until qualified engineers have made it safe. The the case of a smoke alarm the occupants are the only ones that can safely decide if it is a false alarm -- if there is a fire no one should enter the premises until the fire has been dealt with by qualified personal. What you are suggesting would mean adding a general purpose computer to essential safety equipment. Anything that adds complications and could affect the main function of the safety equipment would need to be considered very carefully.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#265

Post by webXL »

JupiterMoon wrote: post #264
webXL wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being awfully pedantic. Have the neighbor shut your gas off. Have your landlord alert the neighbors. What if you just left for work? I can find a bunch of scenarios where the information can be useful, whereas you seem determined to argue that only the occupants (who might just be kids burning toast) should have this information.

The information is intended to allow the occupants to escape safely if required. In the case of a CO alarm no one should enter the premises until qualified engineers have made it safe. The the case of a smoke alarm the occupants are the only ones that can safely decide if it is a false alarm -- if there is a fire no one should enter the premises until the fire has been dealt with by qualified personal. What you are s…

I never suggested that unqualified personnel should enter an unsafe environment or people add anything to essential safety equipment. The Leeo just listens for alarms and lets you decide what to do with the information. It does not affect the operation of the safety equipment whatsoever.

In the case of CO2, is it better to have qualified personnel attempt to arrive at 6pm after you get home from work and hear the alarm, or sometime closer to when the leak occurred and you were alerted on your smart phone? (I don't think emergency responders are twiddling their thumbs in the evening or there's light traffic)

In the case of fire, is it better to call the personnel before the retired lady down the street notices the flames and smoke while your at work??

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#266

Post by JupiterMoon »

webXL wrote: post #265
JupiterMoon wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The information is intended to allow the occupants to escape safely if required. In the case of a CO alarm no one should enter the premises until qualified engineers have made it safe. The the case of a smoke alarm the occupants are the only ones that can safely decide if it is a false alarm -- if there is a fire no one should enter the premises until the fire has been dealt with by qualified personal. What you are s…

I never suggested that unqualified personnel should enter an unsafe environment or people add anything to essential safety equipment. The Leeo just listens for alarms and lets you decide what to do with the information. It does not affect the operation of the safety equipment whatsoever. In the case of CO2, is it better to have qualified personnel attempt to arrive at 6pm after you get home from work and hear the ala…

What is the Leeo?
Post reply on HN