Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Bosch I presume?

This is one of few places where I’d like to sprinkle a little more government overreach in just the right way - to prevent manufacturers from walling clearly essential behaviour behind an app. That’s far too gray of a line for governments to handle, but I can dream.






I would settle for something like - "any network functionality in consumer devices must be open sourced and user modifiable"

It is probably too high a bar for most manufacturers, so they will not likely include such functionality.


These days I would prefer it say that the documentation for communication protocols and for any computer control interface or network functionality must supplied and destination any addresses configurable by the user.

Yes, I'd be fine as long as there's a clear documentation and that I can control it within my local network even if the company's servers are down

> That’s far too gray of a line for governments to handle, but I can dream.

I know that GDPR doesn't get much love, but I think that it shows that we (well, not we, because I'm in the US, but the EU) can meaningfully legislate issues involving intent and essential function. IA (obviously) NAL, but I see no reason that "those portions of the essential functionality of a device that do not inherently require the use of internet connectivity must be available without internet connectivity," or even the weaker "a device that is not usable without internet connectivity must be clearly signposted as such or be subject to free return at manufacturer expense for [some period of time]," wouldn't be a meaningful and enforcable law.


> Bosch I presume? > I would bet on that too. I have an older 300 series that is not WiFi and app enabled. It works great. I was suggesting "dumb" device models to someone and it was damned difficult to find which SKUs had misfeatures and which didn't. Same model, possibly same SKU (there are #s for different retailers), but two years newer had "smart" features.

Like a sugar/fat/healthy label on food: enforce a clear sign on the package about each functionality that is too smart to be usable easily.

Needs some defining to get right (unanbiguous, useful, concise), but might be easier to realise than forbidding things.


Government overreach is the reason for this - no need to ask for more. If you believe in climate change, you will feel happy to 'save the world' by ceding control of your personal data and resources to the government.

The idea is that every resource is is monitored, the electric company's smart meters will report everyone's usage. This will then allow for fine grained control over your 'misuse', with carbon credits (taxes/fines) altering behaviour. 'Smart' everything is technocratic control.

Smart = spy.


This seems like a stretch. Why is the drive behind IoT not simple advertising opportunity?

You should look into technocracy. This is a long-standing plan.



Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: