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

More awful IoT stuff

mjg59.dreamwidth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 245 posts

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#181

Post by CaptSpify »

antoniuschan99 wrote: post #143
CaptSpify wrote: post #66

I just blogged about this yesterday. In short: > The line in the sand for me is: network vs cloud-based systems. I want things to be network connected, but I want it for my own network only. I want to be able to control my coffee pot, but only from home. If I choose to expose this over the internet, great! It's up to me to make sure it's secure. I don't want anyone making that decision for me. I also want it to be up…

What do you think of this. I'm producing it: https://www.facebook.com/kokonautweathersensors/ It's not using my network, but it's hackable enough that you can use it on your own network if you know how to flash it yourself.

Is it open source? that looks pretty rad. Are they available to purchase? Any plans for other devices?

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#182

Post by m12k »

I feel that the people who are now talking about IoT are the same people who were totally into 'semantic web' back in the day. And it's pretty much the same kind of story: "Wouldn't it be neat if all these systems could interoperate?" and again the answer is "Yes, but not neat enough justify the cost and hassle of actually making it happen".

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#183

Post by pikewood »

tzs wrote: post #139
beamatronic wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want a simple device like this: 1. It plugs into the wall 2. You can plug an appliance of some sort into it 3. The device has a USB interface 4. The device has a WiFi interface 5. When I plug in the device with the USB interface, it looks like a serial device 6. The device has a very simple protocol that you can use to set it up, over the serial interface 7. You can optionally have the device join a WiFi network, a…

If you are OK with building it yourself, you could do this with an ESP8266, a USB to serial cable, a solid state relay, a power brick, and some miscellaneous things like a power cord and a socket (and ideally some case to put all this in for safety). The ESP8266 is a micro controller with built in WiFi and network stack and a serial interface, and several digital I/O pins you can use to interface to other things. Var…

Anyone have recommendations for a relay that could handle 20A but would work with the ESP8266's 3.3V?

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#184

Post by CaptSpify »

api wrote: post #174
CaptSpify wrote: post #66

I just blogged about this yesterday. In short: > The line in the sand for me is: network vs cloud-based systems. I want things to be network connected, but I want it for my own network only. I want to be able to control my coffee pot, but only from home. If I choose to expose this over the internet, great! It's up to me to make sure it's secure. I don't want anyone making that decision for me. I also want it to be up…

We're working toward some IoT developer products designed to allow global p2p connectivity for IoT devices over networks the user can control: https://www.zerotier.com/ ZeroTier already runs fine on embedded Linux, which is a large subset of IoT, and we've researched a lightweight port to FreeRTOS.

Interesting. So this would be something you set up on an existing device?

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#185

Post by tunap »

FussyZeus wrote: post #78
tunap wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree, the demand & the means exist. However, the intent of retail providers is anything but enabling simple, automated controls. Everything is about grabbing the data cash bag and, as an afterthought, let's personalize your experience. I have been pondering this and the only conclusion I can come up with is the market controllers(more than mere "forces") have much to gain by selling the perception instead…

I suppose but it still seems like a copout (not on you of course, on them) to play the brand lock-in game. You don't need a centralized server to personalize and operating those servers, even on something like AWS, costs money. Why not put that on the consumer instead? Many consumers I know would prefer the roll-your-own solution and it saves the manufacturer money.

Thanks for your manners, but it is probably a copout on my part. I have the wherewithal(-money) to build something like this in my own home but I believe most of these controls are over-engineered progress for progress' sake... for anything less than a few thousand square foot structures. All I really need is a programmable thermostat, a couple timer plugs & my 'routine'. As always, YMMV.

As for the providers, I have to admit, a service economy cannot sustain itself using only transactional relations. In order to ensure future revenues, a contracted service agreement &/or proprietary walled garden approach is the only sustainable model they have come up with. I am a 'break-fix' geezer stuck in my ways and don't subject my clients to lock-in, but my widely varying income from month to month can make affording life difficult at times.

edit: +&/or proprietary walled garden approach

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#186

Post by jbpetersen »

m12k wrote: post #182

I feel that the people who are now talking about IoT are the same people who were totally into 'semantic web' back in the day. And it's pretty much the same kind of story: "Wouldn't it be neat if all these systems could interoperate?" and again the answer is "Yes, but not neat enough justify the cost and hassle of actually making it happen".

I think we're due for a proper realization of the semantic web in the next couple years. Things seem about at the point where the cost and hassle can be overcome without a significant financial motivation to do so.

Maybe in another decade or so IoT will make sense other than as something fun to experiment with.

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#187

Post by gh02t »

hueving wrote: post #157
gh02t wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't even need to make it yourself, Itead sells the Sonoff for $4.85 + S&H. It's an ESP8266 connected to a relay, with integrated AC-DC power supply and a properly designed, physically isolated PCB. Two caveats are that it doesn't directly have a USB plug. The serial header is exposed and you can reprogram the device with your own firmware to make it report whatever you like, but you do need a USB-Serial cable and m…

This is exactly what I've been looking for. Where can I pick up some cheap adapters to get an outlet on one end and male plug on the other?

You can use something like a two-prong lamp extension cable, I have one similar to these:

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/USA-Canada-2-Prong-Male-to-Fe...

Or just cut and splice the regular power cord, that's what I did with a room fan. The Sonoff has thick plastic covers for the terminals with little teeth to hold the wires in place as it's meant to be put directly in line with a power cable. Note that the relay inside is claimed rated for 10A, so I wouldn't power appliances with it. It also only switches the hot and neutral lines, so if you need a 3-pin connection you have to splice it to the line and neutral while keeping the ground line connected.

It goes without saying however that you should be extremely careful and only splice wires like this if you know what you're doing. Don't damage cable insulation while stripping, wire things up to the right connectors, don't leave exposed wires, use the correct wire gauges for your load, etc. Mains electricity is dangerous, yo.

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#188

Post by ianlevesque »

api wrote: post #175
Domenic_S wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently this is kind of a hard thing to handle. I battle with this and PS4 Remote Play -- about 80% of the time, RP will give up looking on my local network and go out to the internet to find my PS4... which is right here on the same network. If I cancel it and retry a few times it always ends up seeing it but man what a pain.

We've been using the term "endpoint hostile" to describe how networks are typically deployed, especially with IPv4. "Endpoint hostile" networks are designed with a single use case in mind: accessing remote servers, usually via HTTP/HTTPS. Other use cases are prohibited or broken. Here are some of the characteristics that would label a network as endpoint hostile: - "Device isolation," which prohibits local LAN device…

This is exactly why the use of a remote server exists in so many IoT devices. Widely deployed home APs, even in USA, come with device isolation on by default or even not disableable.

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#189

Post by imtringued »

mcphage wrote: post #13
bedhead wrote: post #2

@internetofshit is a great follow and pretty quickly illustrates just how absurd the IoT rush has become. Solutions in search of problems.

> Solutions in search of problems. Solutions in search of money before the market wises up to how crap these products are.

a bit off topic. Why can't somebody sell a reasonably priced Thunderbolt 3 eGPU enclosure. Oh right intel's certification process takes several months... All in the name of quality assurance yet most thunderbolt 3 products feel subpar considering their price.

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#190

Post by gh02t »

extrapickles wrote: post #172
hueving wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what I've been looking for. Where can I pick up some cheap adapters to get an outlet on one end and male plug on the other?

Get a power strip and a electrical enclosure from the hardware store or you can get a replacement appliance cord+wall outlet+electrical box. Also get a outlet wiring tester to make sure you wired it correctly (eg: didn't get hot/neutral/ground mixed up) Make sure to put a 10A fuse in series, use wire rated for 10A and pass the ground wire through.

To add to this, the whole board pops out of the protective plastic enclosure with minimal effort and is pretty compact, so if you wanna build your own enclosure it's pretty easy.
Post reply on HN