Not in my Home!!!

[Edwin Santos]

That's only true if I wanted to cross the street. There needs to be something on the other side of the street I'm interested in. If I'm being pushed across a street I didn't want to cross don't be shocked I'm not all that happy about it.

-Tom

I took the example to assume there is something on the other side of the street that would be valuable to you otherwise the whole example makes no sense.

Another fear vs. caution example I once heard goes something like this: Fear is when the person is totally (or predominantly) focused on pain avoidance. Caution would be where the person is equally focused on risks and benefits and they weigh them against each other in their analysis of the situation.
Using this logic, in the street example, the person in fear is so consumed with not getting hurt, the benefits of crossing the street are no longer visible to them (or maybe they convince themselves that those benefits don't exist).
Sometimes I also think of the person who might be so mistrustful of banks and financial markets that they stash their savings in cash under their mattress, without regard for the long term opportunity cost of foregoing interest, growth, or devaluing effects of inflation.

So relating it back to the original post, technology offers the ability for a person to improve their life in countless ways, albeit with some risks. There are those that will forego all or most of the benefits to avoid all or most of the risks. Admittedly it's a balancing act and a personal decision. I'm not trying to imply anyone is right or wrong. But I do find the psychology around the subject of technology to be really interesting.
Edwin

[Carlos Alvarez]

I took the example to assume there is something on the other side of the street that would be valuable to you otherwise the whole example makes no sense.

Another fear vs. caution example I once heard goes something like this: Fear is when the person is totally (or predominantly) focused on pain avoidance. Caution would be where the person is equally focused on risks and benefits and they weigh them against each other in their analysis of the situation.
Using this logic, in the street example, the person in fear is so consumed with not getting hurt, the benefits of crossing the street are no longer visible to them (or maybe they convince themselves that those benefits don't exist).
Sometimes I also think of the person who might be so mistrustful of banks and financial markets that they stash their savings in cash under their mattress, without regard for the long term opportunity cost of foregoing interest, growth, or devaluing effects of inflation.

So relating it back to the original post, technology offers the ability for a person to improve their life in countless ways, albeit with some risks. There are those that will forego all or most of the benefits to avoid all or most of the risks. Admittedly it's a balancing act and a personal decision. I'm not trying to imply anyone is right or wrong. But I do find the psychology around the subject of technology to be really interesting.
Edwin

FUD: Fear, uncertainty, doubt

As a species we would be far ahead of where we are now if it didn't rule most people. And yes, unfortunately pain avoidance at almost any cost usually beats logic and seeking advancement. The risks with most IoT devices and services is near-zero, but people act as if you're basically leaving all the doors and windows open. But then think nothing of the fact that the common door locks and garage doors are easily "hacked" physically.

[Mark Blatter]

FUD: Fear, uncertainty, doubt

As a species we would be far ahead of where we are now if it didn't rule most people. And yes, unfortunately pain avoidance at almost any cost usually beats logic and seeking advancement. The risks with most IoT devices and services is near-zero, but people act as if you're basically leaving all the doors and windows open. But then think nothing of the fact that the common door locks and garage doors are easily "hacked" physically.

Of course my doors and windows can be physically hacked, or broken into. I can be robbed at gun point, I can be shot. That doesn't mean I don't go out, it also doesn't mean I leave my doors / windows unlocked so there is no deterrent.

I use computers, cell phones, all sorts of tech on a daily basis. I use passwords on my systems to provide the best protection I reasonably can provide. For me, personally, there is little that is attractive about Alexa, Siri and all the rest. When the day comes that I cannot get off my behind and type my needs, I will likely just sit on the floor and die.

I didn't start texting until I had a reason to do so, for work. Today I text quite often, as a good way to communicate with my wife and kids. It isn't about fear of tech that drives me, it about seeing no need to have these items in my home. When / if the time comes that I see the need, I will get one.

A good example of the decisions I make is credit vs debit cards. I do not have a debit card and never will. My son who has one and uses it all the time, has had his account tapped 3 - 4 times. He just shakes it off and calls the bank, then they do their thing and he gets reimbursed. Me, I would rather not have funds taken directly from my bank accounts, plus I make more money off my credit cards. Many factors come into play in making decisions, seldom are they driven by fear. I see all of the AI stuff and internet linked things like thermostats, garage doors, etc. as little reward and more risk. Call me an old fuddy, but I have my thermostat set and it runs. I don't need to adjust it when I am not at the house.

[Chris Parks]

Texting is a good technology, I have never sent one but any deaf person can now use a phone. I had a deaf cousin and I regret he did not live long enough to see texting as his life would have been so much better.

[Curt Harms]

I should add that Alexa/Google devices have no place in our home; they simply don't do anything useful. I have "hey Siri" turned off on the phone, but use it on my Watch. It only activates if you specifically raise the Watch to your face.

For someone to install a surveillance device legally would require a court order. If you install it yourself that inconvenience is removed. It's a risk/benefit analysis for everone.

[Carlos Alvarez]

I find it amazing that it needs to be said, but "I don't find these things useful" is very different from "I won't have this in my house because (list of unfounded fears)."

There's also the matter of "need." Sure, nobody NEEDS a smart thermostat. Just like nobody needs a microwave, a TV, a radio, or really most of the things in your house. A toaster isn't necessary; it just makes a task easier and more convenient. Same as any smart tech device. Nobody needs either. But choosing to leverage one technology while acting a proud Luddite to another is silly. The amish would laugh at your need for a toaster, microwave, and TV.

[Edwin Santos]

Has anyone reading this thread ever been hacked through an IoT device (Alexa, Echo, thermostat, smart switch, smart door lock, TV, etc)? Or anyone you personally know?

I'm not talking about a compromised credit card or identity theft, I'm just talking about hacking of smart devices.

I ask because I truly wonder whether it's more of a theoretical risk than a real one. I have yet to find a person who's been hacked through one of these devices. I know several people whose homes have been broken into or cars stolen but no victims yet of smart device hacking. If you or someone you know has been a victim, please share.

Edwin

[Carlos Alvarez]

I work in IT, mostly routing, switching and related security. It's REALLY rare to even hear of random devices being hacked at all, much less then used against the owner. You are more likely to die in your bathtub today. What does happen is that the mainstream media hypes something up and fearful people run with it as it were reality. They will find one guy who had one unsecured device get hacked, then trot that out as the norm with no statistics and no details. I've done several interviews with a couple of local stations on IT topics and hacking; they always try to get me to make it sound worse than it is. Nope, I want to educate people on reality, not create fear.

Oh yeah, and debit cars...ugh, I preach this all the time. From a security aspect, a debit card is a huge, dumb risk. I have heard of so many issues, both directly from friends and professionally. Aside from that, they don't generally have any sort of rewards or kickbacks. These days you should be taking a kickback from EVERY purchase by choosing the right credit cards. The appliances and high end blinds in my home were all "free" from points. I just cashed in a bunch of Amazon rewards for some Incra and Kreg goodies for the shop. We get several thousand dollars in kickbacks every year from various cards.

[Jim Koepke]

I find it amazing that it needs to be said, but "I don't find these things useful" is very different from "I won't have this in my house because (list of unfounded fears)."

There's also the matter of "need." Sure, nobody NEEDS a smart thermostat. Just like nobody needs a microwave, a TV, a radio, or really most of the things in your house. A toaster isn't necessary; it just makes a task easier and more convenient. Same as any smart tech device. Nobody needs either. But choosing to leverage one technology while acting a proud Luddite to another is silly. The amish would laugh at your need for a toaster, microwave, and TV.

Carlos, my original post started with these devices not appealing to me:

These home helpers have not appealed to me, now they seem even more treacherous:

It would be nice to have a device in the living room to start the car for me. But then we would have to get a new car that would connect to the device.

Maybe something that could take down a shopping list and put it in my cell phone. Then we would have to get cell phones.

At times one of the modern 'smart phones' seems like it would be useful. The problem is we do not have service where we live. It is about a mile from the home where we can get service good enough to make a call. We usually do not get off of our property more than a couple times a week. We canceled our cell phones. We were paying ~$60+ a month for very little use. We are not luddites, we are practical.

If a reason arises to change my perception of how useful one of these devices can actually be, then it is likely my lack of enthusiasm for them will also change.

jtk

[Carlos Alvarez]

So you don't find devices that don't work to be useful? I'm shocked. Obviously you know you're different from most in that, right? I'm in a very marginal coverage area myself, but not without coverage.

I start my car with my phone or watch. I also don't need a box in the living room to do it for me.

[Jim Koepke]

We get several thousand dollars in kickbacks every year from various cards.

Remember the old adage, "there is no such thing as a free lunch."

The kickbacks on credit cards come not only from the fees imposed on vendors who accept the various cards, they are also from the interest payed by those who do not pay down their balance every month. Vendors have their prices set to include credit card 'processing fees.' My experience in 'negotiating prices' is most successful when mentioning my payment will be in cash or by check. One of the businesses we frequent offers a 5% discount for payment by cash or check. Many gas stations give up to 10¢ a gallon discount for cash. When one thinks about it, with a 30 gallon tank being pretty big for most cars, that is only $3 saved. Even if it is only $1 for a smaller car taking 10 gallons, it adds up. When it is $20 or $30 knocked off the purchase of a few items in a local business, it is a good feeling.

To me, the best kickback is from not using the plastic. Of course, if there is no discount for cash, then save the cash and use the card.

Currently we are not carrying any debt and we plan on staying that way for a while.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

Alexa plays CNN for my wife all day long. She loves it.

[Jim Koepke]

So you don't find devices that don't work to be useful? I'm shocked. Obviously you know you're different from most in that, right? I'm in a very marginal coverage area myself, but not without coverage.

Surely you did not mean this to come out as it could be construed:

It surprises me to learn that most find devices that don't work to be useful. For that alone, it makes me proud to be different from the masses.

My situation is pretty much the same as everyone in my neighborhood and for miles around. Many in this area have landlines without hardwired phones in order to set up a WiFi network for using their cell phones. We also have landlines for high speed DSL internet service.

jtk

[Carlos Alvarez]

Alexa plays CNN

Finally, the first post actually pointing out why these devices are horrible and should be kept out of your home.

[Carlos Alvarez]

Surely you did not mean this to come out as it could be construed:

It surprises me to learn that most find devices that don't work to be useful. For that alone, it makes me proud to be different from the masses.

My situation is pretty much the same as everyone in my neighborhood and for miles around. Many in this area have landlines without hardwired phones in order to set up a WiFi network for using their cell phones. We also have landlines for high speed DSL internet service.

jtk

I realize my grammar in that post, sorry. My point was that you are one of a very small number of people who can't use these, because you live in a place where they don't work. That's like saying shoes aren't useful if you have no feet.