I wonder if it would be possible to figure out which pins are connected to what on the device's board and just flash the thing completely with ESPHome and write a custom yaml config for it, rather than adapting the existing vendor firmware.
It's certainly possible. Tracing the MCUs IO lines to LEDs/buttons/relays etc on a PCB is usually pretty straightforward.
I have just finished doing this and writing replacement firmware for the Aqara E1 series of Zigbee switches, after getting fed up with them not supporting basic Zigbee binding functionality.
Amazing. I have the Aqara Z1s and it has the SI labs MG24 chip. Ive always wanted to reflash it because I believe it supports thread at a hardware level.
It would be really easy. I'm not sure why the author has gone through so much effort to hide what filter this is, but I'm assuming J2 is the blower power output and J3 is touchpad controls.
I've done exactly this on my own air filter, and it's about 200 lines of config. The hardest part is mapping binary outputs to a percentage:
On top of that, it looks like it would be relatively easy to spoof the cloud server and make the device believe that there is a firmware update available to then feed it esphome, a bit like the switchbota hack.
You get more heat out of using a given quantity of gas to generate electricity which is used to to power a heat pump than you do by burning the gas directly for heat, even when considering generation and transmission losses etc.
Given that even during a time of low output from renewables we still only rely on 53% gas for electricity generation it's still much more beneficial environmentally to use a heat pump.
The monetary cost is another story though, and I agree we do need to work on weaning ourselves off gas.
In areas with moderate outdoor temperatures. Anywhere that the heatpump is going through defrost cycles, that statement is likely false because the COP is likely 1 or less when that starts happening.
Then on the generation side, its worse if the NG generation isn't a modern combined cycle plant. which also tends to nix places with a lot of renewable generation because the NG plants are just peaker gas turbines with much lower efficiency than plants designed for continuous use. So, its all situational, but at the same time if one has the choice for cheap NG using that as a second stage and setting the crossover heatpump temperature at the cost/BTU intersection between the heatpump and NG second stage is a rough approximation of the enviromental costs as well as the actual cost.
> In areas with moderate outdoor temperatures. Anywhere that the heatpump is going through defrost cycles, that statement is likely false because the COP is likely 1 or less when that starts happening.
While heating, That isn't even a particularly efficient unit (EER 9), and not all all unusual for r410 (which is basically banned for new sales in the USA since jan 1st)
But it has a 150W pan heater, but I don't think that is its primary defrost mode, at least its not going to be at 50k btu at those temperatures unless its also really dry. The pan heater is probably to just assure that the coil melt water doesn't build up in the base pan.
For most of the forced air systemms in the USA, the deforst mode is as I mentioned triggered via outdoor coil temp/runtimes and somewhere below an ambient of ~30F, which will be a coil temp of ~20F. The exact algorithm changes from AC unit to unit, but you get say 20 mins of heating, and then it will flip to 5 mins of AC while not running the oudoor fan, where an electric (or maybe gas) furance will heat the indoor air after it flows over the indoor coil which is cooling the air. So its a double wammy, its taking 5+ mins of operation back at an even higher wattage.
AKA the COP goes negative for 5 minuites... Which will pull the SEER numbers down pretty hard, and that unit actually has pretty poor numbers for being variable speed compressors/etc.(edit: should be SCOP, since SEER(2) is just the ac side, that unit looks to be optimized for heating. Either way, depending on which efficienty spec you pay attention to, the 'problem' tends to be that the SCOP/HSPF/etc numbers are calculated using 'moderate' temp data, so below freezing temps are a minority of the calculation)
I poked around a bit looking for the install/service guide for that unit but didn't find one detailing the defrost algorithm.
Not your parent. We had a Fujitsu AOU15RLS3 installed ~10 years ago. 25.3 SEER apparently, EER 13.9. Also r410A. We mainly got it for AC in summer but we'll take the heating of course. Pretty cold winters here.
Minimum Outdoor Temperature for Heating: -5°F
Yeah that's about as cold as it's right now actually. During the day!
We'll definitely use the propane fireplace in winter, especially when the power goes out, which has happened more frequently in recent years, as "proper winter" has given way to more freeze / thaw type stuff with ice storms.
A heat pump can be well over 100% efficient based on the energy input for equivalent resistive / chemical heating. E.g. your heat pump could use 100w of electricity to move 400w worth of heat (if generated resistively) from the outside to inside.
There have been multiple studies done that show that current generation heat pumps are quite a bit more efficient for a given volume of gas to burn it in an electrical generation plant and use a heat pump than it is to burn it in the house / building.
I see, but it's still mostly a theory unless we count in all small nuances. Like for a place where winters are really frosty heat-pump usually can't help enough (my own experience), and it seems they come with resistive heating built-in nowadays. Which may change the picture. Also, I'm not a specialist, but my guess is that delivery (or how they call it in the industry) of electricity can be priced in potentially wide range.
Yup, that was all accounted for in what I read (well over a year ago, can't find the link...sorry). It was also for a northern climate country (possibly the UK, maybe Norway, memory is failing me here), so it was not "best case" for heat pumps. They took into account losses from generation, transmission, number of days so cold that it is acting as close to a resistive heater (100-120% efficiency), etc. It was pretty comprehensive.
It was from a "what is the best way to lower our use of fossil fuels" perspective, and acknowledged that switching out all boiler systems for heat pumps would be a high cost, but it wasn't really a study on the economics of it. Just a resource usage perspective.
It's a shame that some sites are abusing this potentially useful feature to try and increase engagement on their site.
The correct (IMO) way to use this is to request permission after a user initiates it. E.g. clicking a button somewhere in the UI that says "Enable notifications" whilst being in some context where it makes sense to potentially want to enable them.
This is how the web share API works. Calling `navigator.share()` without user interaction will fail as it requires "transient activation"[2]
Firefox requires both that the user initiates the action that enables the push, and that the user then accepts to receive the notifications in a dialog from the browser itself.
That question is quite old. Nowadays nobody have that kind of problem.
yesn't social engineering and people not understanding anything about technology are a thing, I had to disable notifications for an older person before
but at least no one who potentially is on HN should have that problem ;=)
Any browser feature that allows sites to pop up any sort of dialog will be used to harass people, usually for ads. That might as well be a law of the internet.
I don't think customers not caring is a valid reason to not do this. Compromised IoT devices don't only cause harm to their owners, but also external networks and the internet as a whole.
A compromised doorbell, or lightbulb etc can be used as part of a botnet to perform DDoS attacks or other nasty activities.
An analogy is like saying we shouldn't work on reducing the pollution emmitted by motor vehicles because the users of these vehicles don't care about how much pollution they cause and would buy them regardless. It's the negative externalities that we need to consider.
I haven't thought through the externality argument very much. If I do I will come back and respond. I'm sure there are people more thoughtful than me who have said something about it.
Something to keep in mind though, government regulation itself is an externality.
A few years ago it seemed everyone in London used Uber the whole time to get around. It was pretty cheap and convenient.
Nowadays very few people I know seem to use Uber (and the equivalents) on even an occasional basis. It's a lot more expensive than it used to be and you just can't rely on it any more.
I tried to get one last month for the first time in ages (from a not particularly out-of-way location) and no driver was around to accept my booking. It took over an hour of trying and I eventually managed to get a Bolt. It was a painful experience.
In a way it's a good thing - I don't think it's sustainable to have everyone be driven around in private. vehicles in European cities, especially when there's often very good public transit available. There was a point when Uber usage was simply a lazy habit for people. Although I accept that for some people and situations it is the best option (disabled, lots of luggage etc)
> In a way it's a good thing - I don't think it's sustainable to have everyone be driven around in private
I know people who haven't bought a car because they just use Uber. It was an incredible advancement, but all these services will regress to the mean. In London, TfL, their regulator and competitor, is definitely not a fan, which must be expensive, and having to provide essentially full time jobs to their drivers (who signed up with no such guarantees) is always going to raise internal expenses through the roof.
The person who suffers is the customer, who has to look elsewhere. The one positive is that at least Uber has forced local competition to join the 21st century with app payments, driver photos, location tracking, app payments, etc.
I would argue it’s not regression, that it’s normalization. ZIRP is on pause and things need to be profitable right now, I don’t see this as a bad thing in any way.
If the business model doesn’t work, it shouldn’t have money thrown at it.
How is it to societies benefit if someone doesn't buy a car? It could be if someone drives less, but if they replace a car with a car driven by another person, it seems to be even worse.
Society doesn't have that car taking up space on the side of a public road all day, for one thing. Less parking, narrower roads, smaller parking lots, things are closer together, things are more walkable, we burn less fossil fuel, people get more exercise, people are healthier, people are happier/more productive.
I think the main benefit is that someone who doesn't own a car isn't particularly inclined to fight for more spending on car-dependent infrastructure. They'll probably be more likely to support more public transit, because using a car feels expensive.
Yeah, definitely. Right now most are still in the "can't imagine not having a car, and want to make sure that that car can take them everywhere" state of mind. If more people walked/could walk, maybe we'd prioritize making places actually nice to walk, instead of super uncomfortable, right next to loud speeding cars.
I was looking at our local zoning laws, and it doesn't look like you're allowed to make a non-car-dependent mixed-use development, thanks to density restrictions and parking requirements. Hopefully as sentiment changes, we can change more of those zoning laws.
That's how a society set up for mostly taxis could be better. But if we get to include the benefits of walkable societies and redoing all existing infrastructure in our arguments, surely going to mass transit is better still? And, unlike repaving all the roads to be narrower, it's something that can be added on top of existing infrastructure.
Yeah, no argument, I'd love more light rail/streetcars. If people are less dependent on personal cars, they'll be more willing to develop toward that pattern with mass transit/small bike/pedestrian roads/etc.
If you don't buy a car you don't need parking space and more likely to use public transport (most beneficial), allows better urban planning. And if everyone buys cars manufacturing is more damaging to the environment
If the same number of car miles are being taken then it is a wash on the manufacturing side, but you are totally correct that car parking is a terrible waste of space. Of course the biggest blight is the roads themselves and car sharing does little to help that. In fact it may be even worse as the drivers have to make the trip between the fares that wouldn’t exist with privately owned and parked vehicles.
> Of course the biggest blight is the roads themselves and car sharing does little to help that
I did not mention car sharing. I can understand taxis but totally don't get people using car sharing, seems like the worst of public transport and cars. You don't own it, who knows who used it and how (in privacy) and you still have to, well, do the driving yourself?
Taxis are better than carsh also because they help offboard people from being used to having to drive so they are more OK using public transport too generally leading to better urban planning
> If the same number of car miles are being taken then it is a wash on the manufacturing side
Not if some cars do 90% of total miles and others do 10% but still have to be manufactured due to higher demand
Car sharing is great. Sometimes you need to go somewhere for a couple hours and hiring a driver becomes very expensive. Or you need to transport something.
And I hate to break it to you but whatever you are imagining happened in these shared cars, the city bus has seen worse. Far worse. And you still get on those so, maybe not a big deal at all.
Idk where you live but all buses I have seen have no expectation of privacy, a bunch of people sitting inside, a driver and usually cameras. If you do... things... you must be insane and also cops meet you at the next stop.
If you live in suburban wasteland with crappy transportation then sure you need a car and I am sorry if you have to share one. But here in the city carsh is pointless. Taxi/bus/rail is for people who can do something better with their time than operate machinery.
It is interesting to me that you think that stops some people, or that an overly adventurous encounter is the worst thing to happen to a seat.
You may also genuinely be near a nicer and better maintained metro. Car sharing tends to be be much cleaner than the buses I've been on and biking about the same speed.
Also, here in the city, what bus is going to take you to your door the one time a year you need to move a piece of furniture? I've got some electronics to recycle - you're going to suggest the bus?
Oh but maybe thats the piece you are missing; car sharing is great because I can use a car the few times a year I need one without a hassle. Its not for just getting around, got feet for that.
In the city public transport gets me within 2-3 minutes of walking to the destination... if you need to minimize "walking" at all costs sure you'd hate transport but if I don't see why you would do that, unless you are disabled
Regarding car sharing: The whole the point is that I don’t have to own, maintain and insure it myself. For some people it just doesn’t make sense given how little they drive and car sharing enables them to do that once every blue moon trip without everything else that comes with a car.
The things you mention are not the reason people prefer cars over transit. I think people prefer cars because of the point-to-point transport, the lack of stops unrelated to them, and the lack of a set schedule. All those apply to both private and shared cars.
How is it to society's benefit if someone doesn't buy a [MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING MACHINE]? It could be if someone [IMAGES MAGNETIC RESONANCE] less, but if they replace a [MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING MACHINE] with a [MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING MACHINE] [OPERATED] by another person, it seems to be even worse.
I didn't know people needed an MRI twice a day to be able to work, or to use an MRI to enjoy a concert or a dinner out. If people need that many MRIs, maybe everyone should get their own!
Taxis are generally more efficient vehicles for town driving; e.g. a Prius. When people own their own car they have to make it work for everything they need it for, so it might be a diesel or petrol car, or larger, or anything else. Replacing that multi-use car with a Prius that's running on electric for half the journey is a good idea.
Having a car means you travel more. If enough people don't have cars, it strengthens local economies and smaller businesses instead of everyone driving to Walmart at the edge of town.
I can imagine this working fine in a world of families where one person works and the other stays at home, as there's time to walk to the shops once a day for different things, to avoid carrying a week's worth of shopping by hand.
In a world where both have to have full-time jobs, it's harder to see how this would work. And I grew up in a time where we still had a local butcher and baker (candlesticks were sadly out of fashion), and the way we did it was a) live really close to them, and b) not get everything for the week on the same shop.
It doesn't have to be specialist shops like butchers and bakers. I have three grocery stores within a 10-minute walk that all manage to sell everything I need, from shampoo to fresh produce.
Buying a week's worth of groceries of any kind is very weird to me. The only place where I have ever bought that much is at Costco, and only because they force you to buy in huge quantities (except for electronics and standard sized individual bottles of wine and liquor). I cancelled my membership when I realized how much of a hassle it is to spend my weekend time going out there and waiting in long checkout lines vs just stopping by my local grocery store on the way back from work twice a week.
I had the same experience. It used to be quite convenient, but not anymore. A few weeks ago I tried to get from Shoreditch to Canary Wharf during a normal workday. Used both Bolt and Uber, took half an hour to get a car while both promised pickup within 3 minutes...
I was never a huge Uber fan but would use them occasionally, especially when I needed to take a trip that did not start or end in zone 1. These days? I ended up nuking the app from my phone because the service had become useless. Back to black cabs (and tube/bus) for me.
Last time I was in London I had the worst time with Uber--I could always get a car, but they could never find me then they'd call me and it was always a mess trying to find one another. I eventually just switched to using the black cabs and that worked a lot better
edit: you should leave it alone, though. People only move from mad because they misunderstood the joke to even madder for you not making the joke easier to get. They won't relax if you keep digging.
Once again, please stop insinuating things that are a. untrue and b. you cannot possibly verify (were you in the uber rides with me?) just because of your preconceived notions and biases that you'd like to be true.
Looking at rest of his comments in this thread, I think it's pretty clear that while he's half-joking, he does seriously believe that I'm somehow turning people into "racists".
I'm not sure why you're so keen on "proving" that I'm "turning" people into racists. You have a fixed conclusion that you have already made, and are grasping at straws to reach that conclusion. Really bringing down the conversation for everybody here.
For what it's worth, I mostly just stare out the window in taxis/uber drives.
Your words could be misinterpreted as meaning that the journey with you talking to the driver is what makes them racist, and so I made a joke referring to that.
Solar is pretty popular in the UK. Panels have reduced in cost per watt and energy bills have increased so much that it makes it worthwhile for many homes and businesses.
We do get the occasional sunny day contrary to popular belief, but even on cloudy days it's possible to generate a decent amount of energy.
We also have very long days in summer which can make for a decent amount of kWh/day (although the opposite is true in winter)
reply