[rglullis]

It also (literally) opens up your home for many ideas and possibilities for attackers. Not just for the "haxxor" types, but the far more sneaky, sweet-talking ones.

It should not trigger just your imagination, but your paranoia.

[mewpmewp2]

Yes of course, but for example you already have your phone, laptops and computers with many things built in them. If you are ok with those, then it should be possible to build those smart devices with similar security and potential for attack.

[rglullis]

> If you are ok with those

I'm not. My phone, laptop and computers all run software that I get to install down to the OS (Linux, /e/OS), and I would never install something like the ChatGPT app on my phone.

> it should be possible to build those smart devices with similar security

It should be possible, but they are not. Don't forget: the "S" in IoT stands for "Security".

In any case, this is not even what I am talking about. What I am talking about is the "attack" being done by corporations into your house. It pains me to hear that people are willing to give so much of their privacy in the name of "convenience" and don't even show any slight concern over the thought of having so much data going to Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and (now) OpenAI.

If you went to someone's home and they told you "by the way, my home is full of microphones and video cameras which are always on and used to power my digital assistant", how would you feel?

[mewpmewp2]

> by the way, my home is full of microphones and video cameras which are always on and used to power my digital assistant

Everyone are already walking around with smart phones that are perfectly able to do all of that.

> I'm not. My phone, laptop and computers all run software that I get to install down to the OS (Linux, /e/OS), and I would never install something like the ChatGPT app on my phone.

Fine if you do that.

> What I am talking about is the "attack" being done by corporations into your house. It pains me to hear that people are willing to give so much of their privacy in the name of "convenience" and don't even show any slight concern over the thought of having so much data going to Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and (now) OpenAI.

I personally am not concerned about this, although I understand how people can be. I don't want to go my whole life avoiding things, concerned about what is being done with my data, and then I die. I have long dated option calls really out of money in all those companies (except OpenAI of course), in case one of them gets a massive data advantage and happens to discover singularity from this, so I would benefit from it anyway. Before that happens, they just use it to optimise ads for you, and I prefer optimised ads over random ads. Otherwise I'll do my best to block them, but if they get through, I prefer something I might actually be interested in and that might help me.

I prefer to see inventions and technology. At certain point humans will be outlived by technology anyway, and that's bound to happen. New inventions and tech are what is exciting and why I like living, seeing those things coming together.

[rglullis]

> Everyone are already walking around with smart phones that are perfectly able to do all of that.

Being able to do it is not the same as actually doing it.

The rest of your argument, sorry but I can not respond without feeling angry. It just feels like the rationalizations of a selfish, too-clever-by-half neomaniac.

[mewpmewp2]

> Being able to do it is not the same as actually doing it.

You could have smart devices similarly only react or go to active mode when you press a button on your watch etc.

> The rest of your argument, sorry but I can not respond without feeling angry. It just feels like the rationalizations of a selfish, too-clever-by-half neomaniac.

Okay, I agree that your words can describe me well, but what do you think the end game for humans or tech is? Why do we exist here? Are we just here to reproduce over and over again with no change? And if there's always change, aren't you curious what will happen in the future?

[rglullis]

Why did you go from one extreme (all new things are super exciting and should be desirable by anyone) to another (we are here to reproduce over and over again with no change) like this is a binary option?

"Tech" is a means, not an end. What problems are we solving with this tech, and what problems are we creating with the introduction of new technology? These are the only questions that I have when talking about technology, and I really don't see much sense in trying to turn into an existential question.

> aren't you curious what will happen in the future?

Not really, no. When facing a moral dilemma, I look to the past to see what mistakes can be avoided. I try to live in the present and take things as they are. I might look at the "current instant" to see where things are headed and if there are new opportunities being presented, but "the future" is something so out of reach and so out of control that I really give as little thought as possible.

[arter4]

Not OP but, regardless of why we exist here, change is not always good.

Change simply means that something becomes something else. It isn't inherently good.

For example, now I walk with both legs, but if a car hits me, I might stay on a wheelchair for some time, which is change, but not a welcome one. Before you say "this is a strawman argument", think about technologies like "cloud seeding", which are supposed to enforce specific weather conditions by spraying certain substances in the air (not clear on the details). This sounds like a cool idea, but is it, when some studies suggest this is dangerous for the environment? Shouldn't we (as humans) think about the effects before embracing change?

So, to me, change can be good or bad (or, often, a combination). If the goal of human life was change, it should probably be "change for good". Which is complicated - what is good and what is bad? Who gets to decide? Can I know in advance? What if something is eventually to be bad, can we get back? But that's how life is, no matter the end goal: complicated.

[arter4]

Yes but while you can install Linux on your own, or even build your own computer if you're interested, you don't get to build a fridge or its operating system, and you most likely don't even have a valid way to see how it's configured (you may be able to hack it somehow, but it would probably void any warranty).

So...

do you upgrade your fridge OS? Maybe, maybe not. What happens if you do and an upgrade fails?

does it talk to the Internet? If it has to (by design), then all bets are off. You could try to mirror traffic and take a packet capture, but a fridge OS could easily use HTTPS over a "smart.myfridge.com" domain and you wouldn't know what's going on.

How does it even authenticate to whatever remote server they have? If it uses tokens or client certificates, what happens when they expire?

I'm a sysadmin, I know things fail. Even laptops and phones. But, while I can see valid use cases for laptops and phones, I still fail to see the actual appeal of most "smart home" appliances, outside of security systems. And I don't want to have nightmares about my fridge certificate expiration or not being able to turn your light on because my fiber connection went down.

[mewpmewp2]

> Yes but while you can install Linux on your own, or even build your own computer if you're interested, you don't get to build a fridge or its operating system, and you most likely don't even have a valid way to see how it's configured (you may be able to hack it somehow, but it would probably void any warranty).

You could install open sourced things to that fridge. E.g. the fridge could either come with sensors immediately available or just have convenient mounts to place your own cameras.

Maybe the fridge could have a simple linux box, raspberry PI or whatever set up. There could be a market where you can flexibly pick how immediately available solution you want or if you want to put in everything yourself and control, depending on how concerned you are about privacy and how technical you are.

If you want to have full control, you can just do that.

> do you upgrade your fridge OS? Maybe, maybe not. What happens if you do and an upgrade fails?

Most smart home devices in my experience update through a mobile app connected to your WiFi.

> What happens if you do and an upgrade fails

Fridge itself would still work, just the picture taking and ai guidance wouldn't.

> How does it even authenticate to whatever remote server they have? If it uses tokens or client certificates, what happens when they expire?

Through mobile app can update, reset everything.

> And I don't want to have nightmares about my fridge certificate expiration or not being able to turn your light on because my fiber connection went down.

These basic things like light and other base features you make sure can work even if smart software fails.

[arter4]

>These basic things like light and other base features you make sure can work even if smart software fails.

Even ignoring the potential privacy concerns, you're assuming too much in terms of reliability.

When an AWS region went down a couple of years ago, a lot of smart fridges and lights didn't work properly (https://financialpost.com/technology/personal-tech/pitfalls-...).

[mewpmewp2]

That sounds like a problem with the developers of smart fridges. You just have to be able to use it without any connectivity as a baseline.

[thfuran]

It is possible, but it mostly doesn't happen. And even when it does, "similar security and potential for attack" means needing regular security updates, which they tend not to receive.