Home automation with Raspberry Pi, Node and React
viktorkirilov.me
viktorkirilov.me
https://github.com/home-assistant/home-assistant
They also have a full Pi distro named Hassbian:
In 10 lines of code, you can have your own private Voice AI at home!
There is also the 4-Mic Dev Kit [2] which might be broadly available by the look of it.
Or you could consider one of Acousticmagic's [3] solutions.
[1] https://developer.amazon.com/alexa-voice-service/dev-kits/am...
[2] https://developer.amazon.com/alexa-voice-service/dev-kits/co...
I'm using it to control my Z-Wave network at home. The number of other plugins that Home Assistant supports is really impressive (https://home-assistant.io/components/).
YouTube video showing a user installing Homebridge in 30 seconds on Hass.io https://youtu.be/A_LmQ5OlofY?t=61
Similarly the dial above adjusts the domestic hot water temperature, while the system is running. Again, you rarely need to change it once its set to a temperature you are happy with.
Maybe I'm not understanding how this boiler works?
Ad 1: the gist is that it takes less fuel to heat a liter of water from 30 to 31 degrees, than it does to heat it from 60 to 61 degrees.
Ad 2: with a lower temperature, it becomes easier to control your overshoot. Actually this is related to 1, but what you want in the end is to have a system that runs at as low a temperature as possible, all of the time.
Water hardness here is high, around 20 degrees, so your mileage may vary.
Anyone who lives in a northern climate might disagree with that.
I definitely wouldn't trust a smart fridge, lock, thermostat, etc...
For example which scenario is more common:
-A smart thermostat mistakenly turns off your heat in the dead of winter while you are on vacation causing your pipes to burst.
-A smart thermostat lets you know that the heat is not working in the dead of winter while you are on vacation because the furnace died which allows you to fix the problem before your pipes burst.
I don't know the answer to that, but I am not sure why we should assume the first scenario is more common without any real evidence.
I disagree with your use of the word mistakenly here. With IoT we need to worry about intentional remote attacks. This is not a mistake.
If we are not dealing with a malicious attacks then I would suspect that the second problem (system failure) is more likely.
There are several
1: Look what I can do. If it is easy enough expect some kids (think 13 years old) doing it and laughing at the possible chaos they have caused.
2: lets rain chaos on those evil [insert any other country that you are at war with]. If I were to do this I'd change things so the average temperature was about right, but the heat and cooling would take turns changing the temperature by half a degree. Most people won't even notice right away, but their utility bill will be more than their monthly income and on a national scale the country is forced to dip into energy reserves.
> What is the likelihood of that actually happening?
1: Very high. For any individual kid it is low, and like for an individual thermostat, but if you are the exception it doesn't matter that only 10 people were hit worldwide, what matters is you have to replace all your plumbing
2: somewhat unlikely, but if anyone can pull it off they can cause a lot of problems for the target country.
I am not saying that your example aren't possible. I am saying it is a game of odds. I have no reason to believe the odds of a catastrophic failure are increased by the introduction of a smart appliance to a greater extent than other catastrophic failures are decreased by said appliance.
You could also hack all the smart thermostats at once and cause annoying brownouts due to crazy simultaneous demand happening all at once. You can also cause peaker plants to go on and off at an annoying unpredictable frequencies by making these spikes short.
But to be honest, I doubt anyone will do this, since most vital infrastructure is relatively easy to sabotage and nobody has done it. A group of 100 organized assholes could do horrible damage to the US power grid today by going out to the middle of nowhere and blowing up a bunch of high voltage power transmission towers.
See also recent ransomware attacks - it's hard to believe this is something else that some individuals trying to piss off the planet (and make some money on the side).
See also PoC of a Philips Hue attack (with added fun of it spreading through ZigBee mesh): https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/10/iot_worm_can_hack_p.... If people do that for fun (er, for Science!) to smart lightbulbs, you can bet someone will do it to a smart thermostat.
Probably comparable to the likelihood of an IP camera [0,1] being used as a botnet.
[0] https://www.wired.com/2016/12/botnet-broke-internet-isnt-goi...
[1] http://www.darkreading.com/iot/move-over-mirai-persirai-now-...
1) Access and control: I'd argue the likelihood here is comparable between IoT cameras and IoT thermostats.
2) Malicious application: You're correct that botnets favor no visible change in the host's functionality. However, there are ransomware applications of disrupting a home's physical systems that I submit should be considered before dismissing the idea out of hand. Coupled with problem #1, I think it could be an issue. Five years from now, we'll see where things stand.
While it might seem an extreme example, in many parts of the world when AC or heat fails, it can be a really big deal, especially for the very young and very old. A great example is the 1995 Chicago heatwave, which killed ~800 people. If IoT thermostats become more widespread and tightly coupled to the actual heating systems, it's not unreasonable to think they could become an attractive target. Even ignoring the incidents of deaths, the inconvenience alone of losing AC or heat can be substantial in many climates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Chicago_heat_wave
Without a source I personally wouldn't feel comfortable assuming that "money or power" alone account for a vast majority of these attacks. I don't think it's an unreasonable hypothesis that some are the result of plain nastiness, stupidity, or doing it simply because they can.
Heat is one of the largest causes of weather based fatalities in the US.
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/hazstats.shtml
Similarly, just google "AC failure Texas" - it's a very real problem in hot climates.
Just like frogs.
I'd rather have the IoT device just be a sensor while the thermostat itself is more or less as dumb/reliable as possible. As you suggest, there are still failure modes but at least the thermostat isn't adding to them any more than necessary.