Smart gadgets’ failure to commit to software support could be illegal, FTC warns

"When we don’t own what we buy, everything becomes disposable..."

See full article...

 

[mephits]

This is a strong argument for increasing pressure on manufacturers to support cross-platform protocols like Matter and open-source platforms like Home Assistant. Along with legally-binding requirements for minimum time limits, right-to-repair, and transparency pertaining to support and maintenance, of course.

 

[qchronod]

This is why I'm slowly working my way through all the things in my house and either reverting them back down to dumb devices or looking at replacing them with something that is already Open Source or at least well supported by OSS.

 

[TroubleMan]

“When we don’t own what we buy, everything becomes disposable, and we get stuck in a loop where products keep dying and we keep buying," he said.

Well, that's the point. That's EXACTLY where all of the industries want to go.

 

[foadmin]

Fascinating. Just last night we watched "Buy Now..." on Netflix.

 

[msadesign]

Ms. Harding is one of my favorite Ars contributors. It would be good to see more from her.

 

[ERIFNOMI]

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath.

 

[UserIDAlreadyInUse]

“Oh yes, well as soon as I bought the device I went straight online to find it, yesterday afternoon. You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to it, had you? I mean like actually publishing it or anything.’
“But the support date was legally on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to your company's cellar to find it.”
“That’s the support department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the support date, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in a Notepad file on a 386SX laptop buried in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard. I'd ask if you ever thought of going into advertising, but that already appears to be where the bulk of your budget has gone. It certainly wasn't towards quality control.”

 

[tom_streeter]

I’m sure the Trump administration is going to be all over making sure people get value for what they pay for.

That’s what the Trump brand means, tight?

 

[Celery Man]

Smart gadgets’ failure to commit to software support could be illegal,​

… for the next month and a half.

 

[Celery Man]

But why do you need a smart light switch in the first place? I mean, if you are not there, you don't need the light.

My dumb light switches date back to the '70s.

You can automate a smart light switch, turn it on using voice commands from the couch, turn it on when you’re away, etc.

Same reason you’d get any smart device. The advantage of a smart switch is you can use any kind of bulb, which ends up being cheaper over the long run than replacing smart bulbs.

 

[ERIFNOMI]

Many people are irrational about this. They get mad when their $20 smart light switch doesn't last 10 years while simultaneously replacing their $1200 cell phone every two years just to get a new battery. Then if you build a $100 smart light switch which will last the ten years, no one buys it.

It's not irrational. If supporting a "smart light" makes it prohibitively expensive, then it's the wrong solution. Running a sever so your customers can use their fucking lightbulb is insane, but it's also nowhere near one-hundred-bucks-a-bulb insane.

Open standards and local control is the answer. You don't need to run a server so people can use their lightbulbs. Let them worry about that. Zigbee, zwave, and matter via thread, BT, and/or WiFi means you just sell the bulb and let the buyer worry about controlling it. If you want to sell a controller as well, more power to you, but that doesn't require congoing server costs either. And by complying with a standard, the owner of the bulb can decide to use it with their Apple TV or Google Nest Hub or whatever instead. No going costs. You build a lightbulb with a 2 cent microcontroller in it, maybe release some firmware updates to it if you're feeling really crazy, and that's it.

 

[Celery Man]

“Hey Google, turn on the living room lights.”

Voice command -> send to Google for processing -> send to light bulb manufacturer’s API -> authenticate your account -> API pushes command to my local device.

Which is utterly insane. It should be the Local Area Network of Things, not the Internet of Things.

But you can’t lock people in and get that sweet sweet usage data by making decisions that are best for the consumer.

 

[ERIFNOMI]

But why do you need a smart light switch in the first place? I mean, if you are not there, you don't need the light.

My dumb light switches date back to the '70s.

Are you actually asking, or is this a bad faith rhetorical question? The comparison to a dumb switch suggests the latter.

 

[ERIFNOMI]

“Hey Google, turn on the living room lights.”

Voice command -> send to Google for processing -> send to light bulb manufacturer’s API -> authenticate your account -> API pushes command to my local device.

Which is utterly insane. It should be the Local Area Network of Things, not the Internet of Things.

But you can’t lock people in and get that sweet sweet usage data by making decisions that are best for the consumer.

The middle steps are not necessary.

https://developers.home.google.com/local-home

 

[bugabuga]

I really wish we'd have "keys to the kingdom" clause for software-dependent devices. "When support for the device expires, manufacturer has to release all information on how to update/control the device, including passwords/signing certificates for firmware/software packages and specs or fully untether device from remote systems". So there'd be a chance for people to make custom firmware if manufacturer doesn't want to make it autonomous. This would also incentivize manufacturer to have longer support (or users will do wonderful things with devices without showering them with money).

It doesn't matter if we can get "repair score" as in the world where everything's repairability is 1 or 2 you don't really have a choice.

 

[Steve-D]

The middle steps are not necessary.

https://developers.home.google.com/local-home

..until Google changes its mind.

 

[The Lurker Beneath]

You can automate a smart light switch, turn it on using voice commands from the couch, turn it on when you’re away, etc.

Same reason you’d get any smart device. The advantage of a smart switch is you can use any kind of bulb, which ends up being cheaper over the long run than replacing smart bulbs.

Ah, but our bulbs are not smart either! We have Aerobic(TM) lights that maximise health and fitness by making you get up off the couch when you want to turn them on or off.

 

[Steve-D]

Apart from all of the "collect as much consumer data as you can and sell it" motivation, the other driving force is pushing the "subscription model" (because that's what everyone is doing) without thinking through the ongoing costs associated with maintaining the related services.
The pitch: "Look...we'll have a steady stream of x.xx dollars/month indefinitely!"
1 year later: "So we only have x thousand subscribers and we're losing our shirts...shut it down."

 

[Celery Man]

Way too complicated. I have a better solution. Get off the couch, walk 5 steps, turn the switch on. It hasn’t failed once in decades .

In my opinion, the only smart devices worth the hassle are security cameras.

What if I’m away on vacation, but I’d like my lights to come on in the evening and go off later that night? I could leave them on the whole time I’m gone, but then it becomes obvious I’m not actually home, and I’d be burning electricity for no reason.

What if I’m out, was planning to be home before dark, won’t make it home by then, and don’t want my pets to sit in the dark?

Your argument could apply to any technology. Why use indoor plumbing when it’s just a quick walk to the outhouse?

 

[poltroon]

Many people are irrational about this. They get mad when their $20 smart light switch doesn't last 10 years while simultaneously replacing their $1200 cell phone every two years just to get a new battery. Then if you build a $100 smart light switch which will last the ten years, no one buys it.

When choosing that $20 smart light switch, you have a right to know that you will have to replace it in 5 years either DIY or by hiring the $300 electrician so that you can make the right choice for you about its features.

You also might choose a different brand based on its promised support or because it is user-supportable.

Or you might choose a light switch with a simple remote, or simply to go with a regular mechanical switch for that room.

Even 10 years is really very short and fairly inconvenient for obsolesence in a light switch.

 

[Celery Man]

All computers and smart devices require constant updates, always, in perpetuity. There are no exceptions to this, for any smart product. If you believe otherwise, you're delusional. They also need to be replaced relatively frequently. If you're going to use smart devices, the absolute most important thing is security. It comes before anything and everything else.

Hardware has baked in security flaws that nobody is aware of, not even the manufacturer. They are discovered after the fact by either the manufacturer, third party security organizations, or bad actors. Some can be mitigated with firmware updates and many cannot. Once your device becomes compromised, you put the entire Internet at risk.

Open source is just that...open source. This means that is by nature completely insecure. Everybody, including bad actors can exploit any and all vulnerabilities at will. And if the source of the open source stops developing it? I'm supposed to trust John Q. Public to continue that support unregulated? Pass.

There's no increased security by having it local, either. Unless your home is completely air-gapped and not connected to the Internet in any way, shape, or form you are just as vulnerable as any other setup in the world. If you produce a product, it must receive constant security updates for the life of that product to be considered a relatively safe consumer product. Once that life is up, the product MUST be discarded.

See: botnets comprised of old routers and webcams that no longer receive security updates (or had updates that were never installed by the user).

 

[chaos215bar2]

All computers and smart devices require constant updates, always, in perpetuity. There are no exceptions to this, for any smart product. If you believe otherwise, you're delusional. They also need to be replaced relatively frequently. If you're going to use smart devices, the absolute most important thing is security. It comes before anything and everything else.

No one's hacked my 10 year old Z-Wave network yet. And if they did, all they'd be able to do would be mess with my lights for a little while until I fixed the problem, either by upgrading the controller, or going outside and having some strong words with whoever decided to sit in their car messing with me for no reason.

Not everything is security critical. On the other hand, there's a reason I don't own a smart lock or use any "smart" security devices.

A well built, standards-compliant light switch should easy last 20+ years and be just fine in the vast majority of cases without updates. These are also simple enough devices that it should actually be practical to secure them fairly well for the long term if a company cares enough to do so and doesn't try to tack on a bunch of extra functionality, like code to phone home to a remote server.

I don't think the cost argument is entirely convincing either. Philips manages to sell some pretty high end products in their Hue line (which, astoundingly, actually receive fairly regular firmware updates). Do the same thing, but build the bulbs/switches to a fully open standard (no proprietary Zigbee protocols) and sell a nice controller to go with the system, and people would buy it.

 

[42Kodiak42]

No one says you have to replace them.

I'm just saying that expecting $20 light switches to last long term is similar to expecting clothes bought at H&M to last long term. It's not going to happen, both products are disposable.

They shouldn't be. A durable dumb light switch costs the end consumer $1. A smart light switch company isn't saving money by skimping on those components.

And if you skimp on the computer-hardware, a smart light switch becomes a fire-hazard before it becomes a disposable wear-out component in terms of quality unless you go out of your way to use components that aren't shelf stable on a computer.

This goes for most smart appliances. Durable moving parts are such a solved problem for these things that you need to go out of your way to make them disposable. The computer, in the absence of substantial processing loads, is even harder to give an expiration date. And the software does such simple tasks that the only updates it needs are long-tail support to provide bugfixes so it works as initially promised, that smart-light-switch isn't getting expanding feature sets to justify a subscription.

The only legitimate reason why a $20 smart light switch wouldn't last 10+ years is if a smart light switch cannot be produced for $20 in the first place. If it can't, you're not finding a 'disposable smart light switch' that costs $20 because "cheaper parts wear out faster"

 

[killerhurtalot]

Don't worry companies and corporations!

This will never happen under trump presidency.

 

[Don Reba]

“When we don’t own what we buy, everything becomes disposable, and we get stuck in a loop where products keep dying and we keep buying," he said.

I am sure this is labelled a "virtuous cycle" in the MBAs' presentations.

 

[chaos215bar2]

I can make this very simple. If replacing light switches bothers you, DON'T BUY SMART SWITCHES. Stick with big chunks of copper which will will last 250 years.

Do you legitimately not want your technology products to last more than a few years?

We're at the point where incremental improvements for something like a smart switch or lightbulb are pretty minimal, and if anything are more on the back end with cost saving integrating controllers, high color accuracy RGBWW LEDs, etc. into smaller packages, so everyone can replicate the quality of something like a Hue bulb with minimal expense. The only one who wins when everything is disposable is the company trying to sell you a replacement every few years.

Plus, you really don't want to be messing with large gauge solid core wiring of the kind used in your walls every few years. Metal fatigue becomes a very real problem.

 

[jonsmirl]

They shouldn't be. A durable dumb light switch costs the end consumer $1. A smart light switch company isn't saving money by skimping on those components.

And if you skimp on the computer-hardware, a smart light switch becomes a fire-hazard before it becomes a disposable wear-out component in terms of quality unless you go out of your way to use components that aren't shelf stable on a computer.

This goes for most smart appliances. Durable moving parts are such a solved problem for these things that you need to go out of your way to make them disposable. The computer, in the absence of substantial processing loads, is even harder to give an expiration date. And the software does such simple tasks that the only updates it needs are long-tail support to provide bugfixes so it works as initially promised, that smart-light-switch isn't getting expanding feature sets to justify a subscription.

The only legitimate reason why a $20 smart light switch wouldn't last 10+ years is if a smart light switch cannot be produced for $20 in the first place. If it can't, you're not finding a 'disposable smart light switch' that costs $20 because "cheaper parts wear out faster"

You have a misunderstanding of how electronics work. Electronic parts have no moving pieces but they still die. If you open a smart light switch and compare what is inside to the insides of a dumb one, you will discover that there is nothing in common between the two devices, they are completely different technologies. A dumb light switch is just a chunk of metal. The only way it can die is via metal fatigue or corrosion. Smart light switches have hundreds of ways they can die.

 

[Fatesrider]

But why do you need a smart light switch in the first place? I mean, if you are not there, you don't need the light.

My dumb light switches date back to the '70s.

While that's my modus operandi, people like the often dubious convenience of "smart devices". They want the automation. And if the shit works, great.

Personally, once smartphones came with flashlights, I didn't need any more smart devices. But that's me, and my needs are not great. Others want something for THEIR lifestyles, even if it adds several orders of magnitude more complexity to something as basic as a light switch.

Their choice. And their choices should come with the standard consumer protections and guarantees that dumb devices have. Since their choices are far more complicated, so will be the guarantees. Throwing a smart device on the market without support, without needed updates, without meaningful warranties is just pissing on their responsibilities as manufacturers, and should be banned from selling anything until they commit to standing behind their product longer than a mayfly's adult lifetime.

And besides, if we require them to stand behind the pieces of shit they sell to at least fulfilling a minimum warranty period, MAYBE they'll improve the quality so they don't stink as badly as they do now.

Like mine, your light switch, has been tested and has passed minimum safety standards and comes with a warranty. Most smart devices don't and are often obsolete before you even lay down the credit card for one. And even if fly by night operators will switch company names and e-mail more often than people washed their hands during the pandemic, the pressure is on for them to put more effort into what they make, or exit the market completely and scam some other market.

Even if this warning impacts me NOT AT ALL, I don't see that as a bad thing. Product reliability is part of the FTC's mandate. Forcing manufacturers to state and uphold their warranties is good for everyone, even those who don't use the affected class of products.

 

[ERIFNOMI]

All computers and smart devices require constant updates, always, in perpetuity. There are no exceptions to this, for any smart product. If you believe otherwise, you're delusional. They also need to be replaced relatively frequently. If you're going to use smart devices, the absolute most important thing is security. It comes before anything and everything else.

Hardware has baked in security flaws that nobody is aware of, not even the manufacturer. They are discovered after the fact by either the manufacturer, third party security organizations, or bad actors. Some can be mitigated with firmware updates and many cannot. Once your device becomes compromised, you put the entire Internet at risk.

Open source is just that...open source. This means that is by nature completely insecure. Everybody, including bad actors can exploit any and all vulnerabilities at will. And if the source of the open source stops developing it? I'm supposed to trust John Q. Public to continue that support unregulated? Pass.

There's no increased security by having it local, either. Unless your home is completely air-gapped and not connected to the Internet in any way, shape, or form you are just as vulnerable as any other setup in the world. If you produce a product, it must receive constant security updates for the life of that product to be considered a relatively safe consumer product. Once that life is up, the product MUST be discarded.

I was going to give you a reasonable reply until I saw "open source is completely insecure by its nature."

Nice bait.

 

[MMarsh]

You have a misunderstanding of how electronics work. Electronic parts have no moving pieces but they still die. If you open a smart light switch and compare what is inside to the insides of a dumb one, you will discover that there is nothing in common between the two devices, they are completely different technologies. A dumb light switch is just a chunk of metal. The only way it can die is via metal fatigue or corrosion. Smart light switches have hundreds of ways they can die.

Do you design electronics?

In my experience, it's much harder to design something that dies after a certain amount of time than it is to design something that lasts more or less indefinitely.

If I want it to work for 20+ years without a problem, I just make really conservative assumptions about operating currents, surges, ESD, reverse polarity connection, etc. and specify high quality components throughout. I have tons of stuff from the '80s and '90s, designed on this philosophy, and still in service.

If I want it to die within 7 seconds, that's even easier.

If I want it to survive a one-year warranty period and then reliably kick the bucket within two to five years, that's hard. I'd have to model the thing's edge conditions well enough to know exactly what's likely to kill it, and then find components that bring the BOM cost down by enough to make the boss happy, without being so marginal as to incur ESD or thermal damage in shipping or to kill us on DOA warranty claims. (Needless to say, I don't actually do this....)

Since we're talking here about consumer products that'll see AC power, I need to get the thing listed by the likes of UL, CSA, Intertek, or TUV. Which takes months and costs a five-figure sum, and locks me in to a specific supply chain with dozens of critical components called out by manufacturer item number.

The only way in which cutting corners to make a short-lived product is beneficial to my company is if I don't expect the product line to be around for long enough to come back and bite my company in the ass. In that case, we can enjoy the revenue until the essential stuff on the cULus listing report goes obsolete, then cancel the product line and cut off support. Or maybe I make it for a year, sell it for two years, then give away all the remaining overstock as warranty replacements for the stuff that died, and tell whomever's left "tough luck, it's discontinued". In all other scenarios, I make more money over a longer term and with less work if I make a good quality long-lived product in the first place.