On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out > of business or switches to incompatible products.I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting their data and business to The Cloud)! Either they don't seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will magically rescue/protect them from this... :< Would you buy a $70 light bulb if it required the continued operation/availability of a remote server for you to use it? :<
Cloud? IoT? How to start
Started by ●March 23, 2017
Reply by ●March 26, 20172017-03-26
Reply by ●March 26, 20172017-03-26
On 3/26/2017 2:31 AM, George Neuner wrote:> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 10:39:50 -0700, Don Y > <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: > >> On 3/24/2017 8:03 PM, George Neuner wrote: >>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:29:59 -0700, Don Y >>> <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Does your automobile *need* a radio? heater? etc.? >>> >>> Many cars *do* need the radio ... to perform ignition key/fob code >>> verification. Pull the stereo in the new car and see if it still >>> starts 8-). >> >> I'm not sure *where* the hardware and software functionality for >> the fob-related features resides (haven't purchased a workshop manual, >> yet; I've been forbidden from tinkering with it until the warranty >> expires! :> ). > > Nothing per se to do with "wireless" fobs. > > Many vehicles that have coded ignition *keys* cannot be started if > their radio is damaged or removed. Most auto manufacturers now have > some kind of ignition lockout system - but some of them place the > circuitry in the stereo system. GM and Honda in particular are well > known for this, but they aren't the only ones.Then you'd expect the radio replacement/service procedure (including replacing a blown radio fuse) to indicate that the car won't start with a blown radio fuse, right? (as that would be comparable to removing the radio). I see no google hits pertaining to radios, their fuses or "trouble starting".
Reply by ●March 26, 20172017-03-26
In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid says...> > On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: > > Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out > > of business or switches to incompatible products. > > I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort > of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting > their data and business to The Cloud)! Either they don't > seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will > magically rescue/protect them from this... :<Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over substance, or soundbites or marketing hype. Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix anything. -- Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/LogicCell/> Logic Gates Education <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/pi/> Raspberry Pi Add-ons <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font <http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate
Reply by ●March 26, 20172017-03-26
On 3/26/2017 4:46 AM, Paul wrote:> In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid > says... >> >> On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >>> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out >>> of business or switches to incompatible products. >> >> I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort >> of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting >> their data and business to The Cloud)! Either they don't >> seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will >> magically rescue/protect them from this... :< > > Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the > mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over > substance, or soundbites or marketing hype. > > Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix > anything.I think Manglement is just being opportunistic: hoping/wanting someone to make *their* problem(s) go away. Easier to buy in to something and LATER blame that something for not being what it *should* have been than to actually tackle the (THEIR) problem themselves! "I trusted <them> ... and <they> let me down (implicit in this is that it is not *my* fault... I should be absolved even from my poor assessment of their trustworthiness!)"
Reply by ●March 26, 20172017-03-26
On 3/26/2017 1:29 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:> On 26/03/17 19:31, Don Y wrote: >> On 3/26/2017 4:46 AM, Paul wrote: >>> In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid >>> says... >>>> >>>> On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>>> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out >>>>> of business or switches to incompatible products. >>>> >>>> I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort >>>> of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting >>>> their data and business to The Cloud)! Either they don't >>>> seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will >>>> magically rescue/protect them from this... :< >>> >>> Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the >>> mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over >>> substance, or soundbites or marketing hype. >>> >>> Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix >>> anything. >> >> I think Manglement is just being opportunistic: hoping/wanting >> someone to make *their* problem(s) go away. Easier to buy in to >> something and LATER blame that something for not being what it >> *should* have been than to actually tackle the (THEIR) problem >> themselves! >> >> "I trusted <them> ... and <they> let me down (implicit in >> this is that it is not *my* fault... I should be absolved >> even from my poor assessment of their trustworthiness!)" > > Half right. > > They change jobs every 2 years, which means...That's not true of all. E.g., folks who own their own businesses. I noticed that they genuinely wanted *me* to assume the responsibility (and risk!) for projects that they couldn't wrap their heads around. They really wanted to be able to walk away thinking the problem was "off their desk". Of course, as it was their money (typically), they ALSO wanted a successful outcome! But, what they wanted more (in the short-term) was NOT to have to worry about it. A colleague once pointedly asked me, "don't you want your clients to succeed?". And, was chagrined when I replied, "Sure! If they are pursuing a realistic goal. I don't want that success to come on *my* back (because they underestimate the cost, time, complexity, problems, etc.). *I* don't want to be responsible for making a success of something that is inherently a dog..." Best advice to give someone new to the business is to know when to walk away from what *appears* to be a "lucrative" job (lots of billable time) but that you can't envision a successful result. [I've known lots of contractors/consultants who've lined their pockets with failed projects: "I told you about my HOURLY RATE..." And, why I much prefered fixed cost projects (because I could see a defined goal at the onset and know it could be met -- freeing me to move on to something else with a "win" in my column!)]> If it worked, they say "look what I started/finished". > If it fails, they say "I was handed a crock", or "the > other guy turned it into a crock".
Reply by ●March 26, 20172017-03-26
On 2017-03-26, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> wrote:> > Many vehicles that have coded ignition *keys* cannot be started if > their radio is damaged or removed. Most auto manufacturers now have > some kind of ignition lockout system - but some of them place the > circuitry in the stereo system. GM and Honda in particular are well > known for this, but they aren't the only ones. >And what on earth happens if you need to get to the hospital in a hurry or if there's an accident out in the middle of nowhere that leaves the vehicle (sort of) drivable but damages the radio ? Perhaps everyone should switch to driving a Lada or in the US, whatever the el-cheapo car is/was (Yugo?). :-) On the plus side, you wouldn't have to worry about remote hacking of your vehicle. :-) Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Reply by ●March 27, 20172017-03-27
Il 26/03/2017 08:49, Tom Gardner ha scritto:> On 25/03/17 20:20, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote: >> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul >> <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says... >>>> >>>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud. My >>>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise >>>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want. >>>> >>>> I want to start from a real simple application. >>>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to >>>> control by >>>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet. >>>> >>> >>> Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about >>> security first >> >> Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the >> remote control features :-) > > Today's heavily advertised "solution looking for a problem": > https://ring.com/Just a curiosity. The video doorbell connects to home WiFi network. Of course you need to select the SSID and write a password to make a WiFi connection. The setup guide says this process is done using a smart device (smartphone), after pushing a button in the doorbell to put it in Setup mode. How does it work? How the smartphone sends the WiFi configuration to the doorbell that isn't connected to Internet yet (because it isn't configured yet)? Does it use a local connection (Bluetooth, NFC, ...), even if it isn't explicit?
Reply by ●March 27, 20172017-03-27
On 27/03/17 01:22, Simon Clubley wrote:> On 2017-03-26, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> wrote: >> >> Many vehicles that have coded ignition *keys* cannot be started if >> their radio is damaged or removed. Most auto manufacturers now have >> some kind of ignition lockout system - but some of them place the >> circuitry in the stereo system. GM and Honda in particular are well >> known for this, but they aren't the only ones. >> > > And what on earth happens if you need to get to the hospital in a > hurry or if there's an accident out in the middle of nowhere that > leaves the vehicle (sort of) drivable but damages the radio ?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/16/tesla-driver-stranded-desert-smartphone-app-failure/
Reply by ●March 27, 20172017-03-27
On 2017-03-27, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:> On 27/03/17 01:22, Simon Clubley wrote: >> On 2017-03-26, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>> Many vehicles that have coded ignition *keys* cannot be started if >>> their radio is damaged or removed. Most auto manufacturers now have >>> some kind of ignition lockout system - but some of them place the >>> circuitry in the stereo system. GM and Honda in particular are well >>> known for this, but they aren't the only ones. >>> >> >> And what on earth happens if you need to get to the hospital in a >> hurry or if there's an accident out in the middle of nowhere that >> leaves the vehicle (sort of) drivable but damages the radio ? > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/16/tesla-driver-stranded-desert-smartphone-app-failure/ >Unbelievable. :-( That's a failure on so many levels, starting with Tesla for designing such a fragile system without any obvious backups and ending with the driver who never thought of this. In fairness to the driver however, depending on how it was explained to him, he may never have fully realised the implications of not having connectivity to the remote servers until he found out the hard way. Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Reply by ●March 27, 20172017-03-27
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:45:09 -0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:>On 2017-03-27, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >> On 27/03/17 01:22, Simon Clubley wrote: >>> On 2017-03-26, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> Many vehicles that have coded ignition *keys* cannot be started if >>>> their radio is damaged or removed. Most auto manufacturers now have >>>> some kind of ignition lockout system - but some of them place the >>>> circuitry in the stereo system. GM and Honda in particular are well >>>> known for this, but they aren't the only ones. >>>> >>> >>> And what on earth happens if you need to get to the hospital in a >>> hurry or if there's an accident out in the middle of nowhere that >>> leaves the vehicle (sort of) drivable but damages the radio ? >> >> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/16/tesla-driver-stranded-desert-smartphone-app-failure/ >> > >Unbelievable. :-( > >That's a failure on so many levels, starting with Tesla for designing >such a fragile system without any obvious backups and ending with the >driver who never thought of this.But this *was* the backup system. The primary system was the key fob. This let you drive you car in most cases even if you forgot to actually take you car keys with you. It's not so easy a problem to fix either - they used network connectivity to check if your phone was still valid to unlock your car. If they didn't (say the phone would also authenticate to the car in pure Bluetooth mode), someone could just steal your phone, turn off WiFi and the 3G/4G connection, and go nick your Tesla (of course that's not any different than actually stealing your car keys, except that grabbing a cell phone is practically much easier, since they're so often out in the open, while keys tend to spend most of their time in pockets and such). Which is not to say there aren't ways to fix this, but none are completely straight-forward. This is also a simple and straight-forward extension of a preceding technology, which just makes that problem worse (it's just like what we've already been doing, but with this little bit added). For example, OnStar's long standing ability to unlock your car for you (you've bean able to call them if you locked the keys in the car since 1996). Being able to do that from a phone app is a pretty trivial enhancement, and being able to also *start* the car remotely is another trivial enhancement (remote start by itself dates back decades). Nor are either of those are uncommon - my Nissan will do both - although I've never then tried to get into my car and drive away without my key fob. I'll have to try that sometime, although I suspect it would work - I *know* you can drive the car without the fob after getting it unlocked and started in the conventional manner (it does beep at you and display "no key" if you do). Which then lead to similar failure mode. For example, what if you left your keys on the sunroof (certainly close enough to make the door and starter sensors happy), unlocked the car, started it, and then drove off into Death Valley, stopping (and turning off the car) half way across to admire the scenery. Again, you'd be stuck (assuming the keys had actually blown off the roof). Tesla's failure was in not realizing that a backup system might become the primary system, because users are creative like that. That error has bitten many designers - "we don't have to actually monitor X, because the emergency limit sensor will shut it down when it goes too far", "we don't have to handle the gun safely, the safety is on", "I don't have to check the coolant level every day, because the backup cooling system will kick in if the primary system runs low", "I can take safety #1 and #2 off, because safety #3 is still there".
