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

Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 416 posts

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#321

Post by matheusmoreira »

srmarm wrote: post #243
caymanjim wrote: post #140

I have a semi-related anecdote about surprises from devices. I use a CPAP. After a year, I went back to the doctor for a followup, and was asked to bring the SD card so they could review the data it collects. The device records the times and duration of use, various settings, and some metrics on breathing (apnea events, etc). I knew it recorded this stuff on an SD card. I brought the card to the appointment, but the…

It's a shame how much great technology will go to waste because businesses work against our best interests and pull shit like this.

Yeah. It's infuriating. It's like we can't trust them not to fuck us over. The technology is good for us but at some point someone somewhere came along and corrupted it with all these "features" that exist solely to serve their business interests.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#322

Post by spookthesunset »

jt2190 wrote: post #235
caymanjim wrote: post #140

I have a semi-related anecdote about surprises from devices. I use a CPAP. After a year, I went back to the doctor for a followup, and was asked to bring the SD card so they could review the data it collects. The device records the times and duration of use, various settings, and some metrics on breathing (apnea events, etc). I knew it recorded this stuff on an SD card. I brought the card to the appointment, but the…

> no one is monitoring diet, exercise, drug use, cigarette consumption, or other risky behaviors, and threatening to withhold treatment for non-compliance). While an employer-sponsored health plan does not “withhold treatment” per se, they definitely draw a line around what they’ll pay for. Part of the physician’s (or more typically the hospital’s or physician group’s) reimbursement is contingent on whether the patie…

> Even though you have a high-deductible plan, you’re still involving your health insurance provider in the transaction

Depends. If you are planning to use that amount as part of your deductible, then insurance has a stake in it. If you don't ping your insurance at all, then insurance should have zero say over it at all.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#323

Post by lotsofpulp »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #317
horsawlarway wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My best understanding is that if patients use insurance to pay for the device/visits, payment to the Drs office is predicated on the patient following the prescribed treatment. In our case, we actually bought the cpap out of pocket. But because this is unusual (It cost us about 800 dollars) the doctor we went to pays a company that does treatment monitoring. This company is paid based on the number of patients that a…

> maximizing insurance based revenue That seems to be the state of US healthcare unfortunately. What used to be an ethical doctor-pactient relationship has turned into a doctor-insurance-patient monstrosity. Doctors actually have limited autonomy. They can't always do what's best for the patient, only what the insurance company agrees with.

The patient and doctor are free to negotiate a deal that avoids third parties such as the insurance company.

The patient chooses to hire an insurance company (better labeled a "managed care organization") to manage their care, because they do not know what they are buying, or how much it should cost.

>They can't always do what's best for the patient, only what the insurance company agrees with.

Because that is what the patient can afford.

Note that when the previous commenter states this:

> everything to do with maximizing insurance based revenue.

They are referring to requirements frequently set forth by the government or their employer. Some of them are called "star ratings", and the government goes to managed care organizations (who also sell health insurance), and task them with implementing standards of care and star ratings and a very complex system that determines who gets paid how much and who is incentivized to do what.

It is very naive and counterproductive to label insurers as the bad guy because "insurers maximizing revenue", because it lets go of the real issue, which is that

A) healthcare is hard, and measuring results even harder B) supply of healthcare is low relative to demand C) the limited supply of healthcare has to be allocated in some manner

It is a very complicated subject, that involves many players, incentives, opportunities for corruption, people with good intentions, and no easy answers.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#324

Post by matheusmoreira »

Aerroon wrote: post #242
caymanjim wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like data. I would like to review all the metrics my medical device collects. I'd welcome an app to make it even easier to view. That's all pro-consumer. That can be done by storing data on SD cards; via a USB connection; via built-in Bluetooth or WiFi. It's an easily-solved problem, and with modern wireless networking, something that the average consumer can navigate without much trouble. Even for the most tech-un…

> At least the thing doesn't have a microphone on it too... How do you know? If they're doing tracking where tracking isn't necessary and don't disclose the full extent of tracking under some penalty for lying, then maybe the machine does have a microphone in it? How would you know without taking it apart? It's not like the doctor or device manufacturer are trustworthy on the privacy front.

> It's not like the doctor [...] are trustworthy on the privacy front.

That perception worries me. Medical information is confidential, it's the only reason doctors are trusted with such data. If this fundamental principle is corrupted, then nobody in healthcare can be trusted.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#325

Post by matheusmoreira »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #302
caymanjim wrote: post #140

I have a semi-related anecdote about surprises from devices. I use a CPAP. After a year, I went back to the doctor for a followup, and was asked to bring the SD card so they could review the data it collects. The device records the times and duration of use, various settings, and some metrics on breathing (apnea events, etc). I knew it recorded this stuff on an SD card. I brought the card to the appointment, but the…

Imagine a future employer bringing up how many times you snored last night.

Imagine your car refusing to start because you didn't get your required CPAP sleep last night.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#326

Post by dylan604 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #297
dylan604 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people would ultimately be charged higher premiums if they did hand this data over. Ins: In the last week, you've purchased 3 packages of Oreos, 2 cans of Crisco, 3lbs of 73% ground beef, no vegetables, lots of stuff with high sugar content, high salt content, and very little actual nutritional value. Therefore, we rank you in a high risk category (since you are clearly over 21 years old) based on the fact you a…

But the people for whom it would lower premiums would hand over the data, which results in the same thing. A health insurance company could offer me a $50 discount for a monthly blood test showing my sugar/cholesterol, and I would do it. Why should I pay for someone else’s cheese/alcohol/butter/sugar/bacon consumption. I assume the reason it is not currently implemented yet is because the cost of monthly blood tests…

>But the people for whom it would lower premiums would hand over the data,

Progressive Auto has their Snapshot devices which provides them your driving habits. People signed up for it not realizing that their premiums could actually go up because they're a shitty driver even though they are "really good drivers". Once the word gets out that insurance premiums are going up because of this, there will be lots of screaming into the void on the internet.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#327

Post by dylan604 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #319
piva00 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A health insurance company could offer me a $50 discount for a monthly blood test showing my sugar/cholesterol, and I would do it. Why should I pay for someone else’s cheese/alcohol/butter/sugar/bacon consumption. Because... You would be saving peanuts while someone else would have to pay much more (and sometimes drop their insurance completely) and that's a much worse result for society than you paying some 50 buc…

How do you know that I would save peanuts while someone else has to pay disproportionately more? I already get a decent chunk of change ($700) just for annual preventative physical, flu shot, dental exam, blood test, and eye exam, which are all free. There is a spectrum. ACA excluded tobacco users' risk from using tobacco, but left alcohol and sugar and saturated fats in? Why subsidize the latter 3 and not tobacco? S…

>How do you know that I would save peanuts while someone else has to pay disproportionately more?

The point is, no insurance is just going to say you pay next to nothing because of... Instead, they will say you are in the lowest risk category, and here's your rate.

>Why subsidize the latter 3 and not tobacco?

Big Tobacco was sued and lost in court, so they are easy to "pick on". Nobody has sued Big Sugar. We've already seen what strict rules on alcohol does to the country, and doubtful anyone is ready to do that again.

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#329

Post by lotsofpulp »

dylan604 wrote: post #326
lotsofpulp wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the people for whom it would lower premiums would hand over the data, which results in the same thing. A health insurance company could offer me a $50 discount for a monthly blood test showing my sugar/cholesterol, and I would do it. Why should I pay for someone else’s cheese/alcohol/butter/sugar/bacon consumption. I assume the reason it is not currently implemented yet is because the cost of monthly blood tests…

>But the people for whom it would lower premiums would hand over the data, Progressive Auto has their Snapshot devices which provides them your driving habits. People signed up for it not realizing that their premiums could actually go up because they're a shitty driver even though they are "really good drivers". Once the word gets out that insurance premiums are going up because of this, there will be lots of scream…

I am not sure what the point is. If some people's premiums go up, then others' premiums would go down. Those people would choose to stick with the Snapshot device (assuming they felt the discount in premium was sufficient).

Re: Our fridge just emailed us to say we opened its door too many times

#330

Post by thomastjeffery »

increscent wrote: post #267
codesections wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 3. Most people would prefer not to have it, but due to a free market failure, the ungimmicked product just isn't available any more? No, I'd go with (4) people would prefer not to have it, but companies know that they can monitize the data they collect[0] and thus are willing to offer a discount that's large enough to get people (who may or may not know about the data collection) to buy the smart™ version. [0]: htt…

Would it be possible to create a business where you: * Buy the cheap hardware at wholesale prices * Strip the surveillance tech and/or re-flash the firmware * Sell the "dumb" product for the same price as the "smart" one In this case, the "smart" vendor would likely lose money if they're selling below cost. So the only difficulty would be a legal one... I'm not sure if it's legal to buy a product, modify it, and then…

This would be the same action as installing Linux on a PS3 or editing the firmware on a John Deere tractor.

It's both practically unfeasable for the average consumer, and a legal risk for whoever manages to do it.

Post reply on HN