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

The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

kickstarter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 41 posts

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#21

Post by lawwantsin17 »

aaron695 wrote: post #17

> The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded Most dangrous perhaps. This is an absolutely great idea. An actual use for IoT that makes sense. But it is very unsafe. If could be put away and accidentally ignited, or have been knocked over. If you can't see how useful it is, then you are quite short-sighted. But the reason it's so great is people haven't designed non IoT versions because of the extreme danger.

How is using your phone to light something on fire a great idea? It leaves a huge security problem in it's wake.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#22

Post by unlinked_dll »

I don't know what's more surprising, that they need 30 grand to get a prototype out the door (I feel like this could be done with off-the-shelf parts way cheaper than that, starting fires electrically is something every undergrad EE should be well versed in) or that they say they've spent five years working on it.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#24

Post by Nasrudith »

The real punchline is that it has a /reminder/ to blow out the candle. If they were remotely concerned about safety it would involve local timers which reliably extinguish it even if it lost power and the battery died. That would still have "cat knocked it over onto flammables" risks but it would actually be less dangerous than conventional candles.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#25

Post by aaron695 »

lawwantsin17 wrote: post #21
aaron695 wrote: post #17

> The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded Most dangrous perhaps. This is an absolutely great idea. An actual use for IoT that makes sense. But it is very unsafe. If could be put away and accidentally ignited, or have been knocked over. If you can't see how useful it is, then you are quite short-sighted. But the reason it's so great is people haven't designed non IoT versions because of the extreme danger.

How is using your phone to light something on fire a great idea? It leaves a huge security problem in it's wake.

If you can solve the issue of accident fires, there are no huge security issues. It would not be any different to a normal light.

I can not see a time where a 'hacker' could light it and cause a fire but it not have the issue of accidental fire.

Skipping that, it an amazing product. Candles are for some reason important to human beings. This would sell well and it's what people want, and I think make lives a little better, actually tying abstract technology to something real.

I have no idea how you can mitigate the fire risk, if you could though you'd probably save lives given current candle deaths, but I think it's not possible.... Certainly in it's current form it will kill people through accidents.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#26

Post by owenmarshall »

joshlittle wrote: post #11

Would the Underwriters Laboratory even certify this nonsense?

“App enabled” ovens, if you read the manual, come in one of two flavors:

* Bluetooth only, no WiFi, to mandate proximity

* Manual activation steps required, like turning the knob to a “remote enable” setting, so you have to validate that nothing that’ll catch fire is in the oven.

A big reason this was done was because the UL has a real distaste for combining fire with not being present to watch the fire - and that’s in a closed space by an appliance that is purpose built for that.

So yeah, no. Absolutely not.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#27

Post by sunnydayddr »

aaron695 wrote: post #25
lawwantsin17 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is using your phone to light something on fire a great idea? It leaves a huge security problem in it's wake.

If you can solve the issue of accident fires, there are no huge security issues. It would not be any different to a normal light. I can not see a time where a 'hacker' could light it and cause a fire but it not have the issue of accidental fire. Skipping that, it an amazing product. Candles are for some reason important to human beings. This would sell well and it's what people want, and I think make lives a little b…

What is the use case for lighting a candle remotely? This seems a lot worse than a candle with a physical ignition button on it.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#28

Post by aaron695 »

sunnydayddr wrote: post #27
aaron695 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can solve the issue of accident fires, there are no huge security issues. It would not be any different to a normal light. I can not see a time where a 'hacker' could light it and cause a fire but it not have the issue of accidental fire. Skipping that, it an amazing product. Candles are for some reason important to human beings. This would sell well and it's what people want, and I think make lives a little b…

What is the use case for lighting a candle remotely? This seems a lot worse than a candle with a physical ignition button on it.

You walk home and get 10 candles going, and in places you can't reach.

I think the use case is incredibly obvious.

Exactly the same as lighting! And smells too if you want.

Being IoT it is also safer than candles once you solve the lighting it safely without being able to see it issue. If a cat physically knocks it over it can warn you, normal candles don't.

You could argue it'll make candles more common and cause more fires, but that's a different issue.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#29

Post by flukus »

lawwantsin17 wrote: post #20
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #13

Is it really the world's worst though? I mean the candle can still be lit with a match after the company closes down right?

It's a remote incendiary device. That anyone can just buy and use to burn down any structure with no barrier to entry. That's the point. Why are people so obtuse?

If you want to burn down a structure then a molotov cocktail is a lower barrier to entry and requires less access than this candle would. And if you have the access necessary the a remote control kids toy plus some fuel would be almost as easy. At best this gives some plausible deniability.

If a lot of people really wanted to start fires I think we'd see more fires.

Re: The worlds worst IoT idea is almost fully funded

#30

Post by bryanrasmussen »

lawwantsin17 wrote: post #20
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #13

Is it really the world's worst though? I mean the candle can still be lit with a match after the company closes down right?

It's a remote incendiary device. That anyone can just buy and use to burn down any structure with no barrier to entry. That's the point. Why are people so obtuse?

Why are people so obtuse? Good question, but it's sort of like asking why are people so polite - they just are I guess.
Post reply on HN