• AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    A more legit use case is checking status. Is the coffee ready?

    While I really don’t want to compliment Samsung, my “smart” range has a config to disable/enable remote operation. I can see when it’s on, what temp it is, when the oven is up to cooking temperature and when the timer goes off, I get notifications but assuming no holes or bugs it cannot be controlled remotely.

    You might ask why they would ever allow “enable” but that’s a different question. They probably feel they have to because the “smart” feature costs way too much money for notifications and statuses.

    • Soggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      A more legit use case is checking status. Is the coffee ready?

      Isn’t that the story of the first webcam?

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        The problem is there are easy and well understood ways to prevent that are easier and cheaper, yet manufacturers decide not to use that.

        We have several local-only network protocols for exactly this. For residential use, notably Zigbee, z-wave, or Thread, and all of them have much cheaper radios than WiFi. The key benefit here is local only, no direct internet connection.

        The only problem is you need a hub and historically not everyone is ready to set one up. However now that Apple, Amazon,and Google are building them into their devices, tens (hundreds?) of millions of people are already set on that