Have said all along: The only "smart" way to use anything euphemistically called "smart" -- is to ban them from your household. Seriously, why would anyone who is technically savvy want an Internet-connected computer running software whose source code you have no way to examine (or have someone else examine)? How can anyone trust such a setup? Why would anyone have a computer they do not trust?
Someone might acknowledge they have a limited amount of time in their lives to worry about such things and life involves trust to one degree or another.
Maybe they believe the incentives involved result in the risk of something actually terrible happening being relatively low.
The same reason I don't worry about auditing the engineering that went into my toaster or microwave. Or car.
> they have a limited amount of time in their lives
That's a good rationale for hiring a cleaner or eating at a restaurant. But I honestly haven't seen a smart device actually saving you a significant amount of time. Even a perfectly functioning vacuum robot only relieves you of vacuuming the floor. You still have to do all the other chores that are involved in keeping your place clean and tidy.
> and life involves trust to one degree or another.
Indeed it does, but trust includes deciding who you can trust. Why would you specifically trust a tech company not to collect data about you?
> The same reason I don't worry about auditing the engineering that went into my toaster or microwave. Or car.
Incentives of toaster and car companies are roughly aligned with yours: The companies have no interest in setting your house on fire or causing a car crash. Meanwhile, incentives of smart device makers are strongly disaligned with yours: They you want to keep privacy, they want as much data about you as they can get.
> That's a good rationale for hiring a cleaner or eating at a restaurant. But I honestly haven't seen a smart device actually saving you a significant amount of time. Even a perfectly functioning vacuum robot only relieves you of vacuuming the floor. You still have to do all the other chores that are involved in keeping your place clean and tidy.
I completely agree with this. In practice I've never owned one that did anything to improve my life.
> Indeed it does, but trust includes deciding who you can trust. Why would you specifically trust a tech company not to collect data about you?
> Incentives of toaster and car companies are roughly aligned with yours: The companies have no interest in setting your house on fire or causing a car crash. Meanwhile, incentives of smart device makers are strongly disaligned with yours: They you want to keep privacy, they want as much data about you as they can get.
I don't think it is that black and white. A random fly-by-night company certainly does have the incentive to vacuum up as much data about you as possible. Other companies do, to some degree or another, have a reputation to consider.
For example, I do believe Amazon is interested in learning about my house. However, I do believe they are also incentivized to not sell it to the highest bidder on the open market. I think reasonable people may disagree.
See also AWS. I trust AWS not to use my interactions with them to pry into my data to sell me ads. This trust seems to so far not be violated.
That is only some amount of "smart" devices. Lots of them work just fine offline and use standards that you can use with any gateway you like, e.g. home assistant.
If you believe anything any CEO is saying regarding privacy or really anything short of that their intent is to aggressively violate your privacy any chance they get than you are naive as hell and I have zero sympathy for you.
No one is mapping the inside of my house or recording my speech or sending video of my living space to the police because I mop my floors and have a normal doorbell and I click a button when I want to hear music. If you are too lazy to do those things then you get what you deserve.
7 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 29.9 ms ] threadMaybe they believe the incentives involved result in the risk of something actually terrible happening being relatively low.
The same reason I don't worry about auditing the engineering that went into my toaster or microwave. Or car.
That's a good rationale for hiring a cleaner or eating at a restaurant. But I honestly haven't seen a smart device actually saving you a significant amount of time. Even a perfectly functioning vacuum robot only relieves you of vacuuming the floor. You still have to do all the other chores that are involved in keeping your place clean and tidy.
> and life involves trust to one degree or another.
Indeed it does, but trust includes deciding who you can trust. Why would you specifically trust a tech company not to collect data about you?
> The same reason I don't worry about auditing the engineering that went into my toaster or microwave. Or car.
Incentives of toaster and car companies are roughly aligned with yours: The companies have no interest in setting your house on fire or causing a car crash. Meanwhile, incentives of smart device makers are strongly disaligned with yours: They you want to keep privacy, they want as much data about you as they can get.
I completely agree with this. In practice I've never owned one that did anything to improve my life.
> Indeed it does, but trust includes deciding who you can trust. Why would you specifically trust a tech company not to collect data about you?
> Incentives of toaster and car companies are roughly aligned with yours: The companies have no interest in setting your house on fire or causing a car crash. Meanwhile, incentives of smart device makers are strongly disaligned with yours: They you want to keep privacy, they want as much data about you as they can get.
I don't think it is that black and white. A random fly-by-night company certainly does have the incentive to vacuum up as much data about you as possible. Other companies do, to some degree or another, have a reputation to consider.
For example, I do believe Amazon is interested in learning about my house. However, I do believe they are also incentivized to not sell it to the highest bidder on the open market. I think reasonable people may disagree.
See also AWS. I trust AWS not to use my interactions with them to pry into my data to sell me ads. This trust seems to so far not be violated.
No one is mapping the inside of my house or recording my speech or sending video of my living space to the police because I mop my floors and have a normal doorbell and I click a button when I want to hear music. If you are too lazy to do those things then you get what you deserve.