My building has replaced our keys with an app
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
That said, I built up an ideology that any automation added should never replace physical items. All automation should have physical kill switches. Any occupants of the home should have appropriate access to things that you would normally give them physical access to.
I implemented walking lights successfully in my old house by replacing switches and doing some neat presence detection (near-field and general) tricks. That mode could be turned off at the front of the house, and frankly I found myself using it because it'd get old sometimes, and other times you really do want all the lights on.
My garage door opener was another. With near 100% accuracy my garage door would open when I was coming down my alley way. It never false opened though, even if I stopped at the grocery store in front of my house. It sometimes failed to open and I actually had to push a button in my car.
Another note, not mentioned here from my skimming, is to never rely on cloud devices. Anything worth doing is worth doing off-line. If your home automation and security can be killed by chopping fiber or coax, then you have neither reliable automation or security. There's infinite options for off-line applications and liquidated DC servers are stupidly cheap to purchase.
Last, if you're going to do home automation, make sure you start by building it on a separate network from your browsing network (preferably air gapped) - especially if you intend on using WiFi devices. They will crowd and slow down your network. Vary your solutions. Put some on LoRa, some on WiFi, some on Ethernet, some on ZWave, etc...
It is funny people can't envision things breaking...
(And before you ask, the light was in a corridor but there was no door to the bedroom. The switch was stuck on because it was broken not because it overlooked the bed -- it did not)
This is what enraged me about the Therac-25 design which ended up killing people. There's a whole report to read on the design, failure and follow up but to paraphrase the designers eliminated the physical locking mechanism and had this attitude that "oh it's electronic so it won't wear out and fail".
Software errors killing people with excessive radiation doses.
If you want recent one, 737 MAX, killed way more than Therac-25. Although it was as much fault of software as suits around it wanting to save a penny on training, because if pilots knew about how it exactly worked they could've circumvented it
To the credit of systems engineers, I can't think of a recent high profile fatal accident that could be reasonably blamed primarily on software, but that's not so much because software is infallible, but because systems are designed to fail safe.
It’s related to why memes exist.
Or perhaps this failure settle the argument about whether or not physical lockouts were necessary and due to regulations you can no longer rely solely on software?
And it would have been entirely fine if there was electronic safeguards put between code and rest of the device, just like some stop lights have it (if control board sends green signal to both directions it fails out and doesn't allow that). Defense in depth and all that
https://engineered.network/causality/episode-39-therac-25/
Each episode focuses on a root cause analysis of a major engineering disaster. Presented in a dry but engaging way - he's a good presenter, but none of the "Radio Lab" style nonsense.
By comparison the Clap switch is so simple that if it is quite at least you can sleep at night
From the lights turning off? A ten year old?
What I gain from this is trying to move us away from comments that serve no purpose other than copy-editing each other and discouraging people from posting unless they can be confident in their adherence to the unwritten HN style guides. Which many people never can be, for various reasons.
If they had said that as part of a comment that overall served a different purpose I wouldn't have said anything. But it added nothing to this discussion except reinforcing the atmosphere that comments must be finely tuned to be taken seriously.
I don't think I've ever been in a "pitch black" hotel room. I'd bet there was light enough for him to start seeing just fine after five minutes.
The ghost stories, sure. But then he's scarred for life more by the ghost stories rather than by the lights turning off...
Pretty sure that was just being used as an example to underscore a broader point. No need to nitpick.
I call this the grandma test. Can grandma come over to my place and still operate everything she needs without a CompSci degree.
It is definitely possible to have a very smart home but still have physical fallbacks that cater for most visitors.
Turns out "Mmmmffmghfff!" is not a valid Alexa command.
Also a bad idea to have a voice activated door during torrential rain. (Which is a silly example. But even so.)
It's not even a UI problem. No one is going to be happy if the power goes off and they can't get in or out.
Or the lock fails open and everyone can get in and out.
Though not always cheap to operate, depending on your electricity costs.
I agree that liquidated equipment is great for these purposes (both servers, thin clients and small form factor office computers), but do a rough estimation of not just purchase cost but also yearly electricity cost. Some stuff is great, some stuff is being liquidated because of uneconomical TCO compared to newer equipment.
Few modern ones (on Intel side, AMD seems to be terrible with idle power usage) are not too bad but get something old and you'd be seeing 100W+ constant usage
Ah, the ideal of progressive enhancements. We know how that ended for HTML and JavaScript.
I agree with you but long term I believe that's going to be a losing game (except basic safety access akin to fire stairs today).
Just have everything talk (via MQTT or whatever) to local hub (that could double down as internet router, or whatever else) running a container with queue server.
Then you can just spin up second "app" (another container) with local controller, or connect that queue to vendor's cloud and their own app. Or have failover between one and other. Hell, integrate the two where you have one place to add all of your rules, but what is possible to do locally would be done.
The vendor could charge monthly for their cloud toys but not have to run all automation in the cloud (cost savings) and the user would get a box that can be configured from anywhere, but do vast majority of tasks locally and not be dependent on internet for basics.
I solved opening the garage door when leaving by a much simpler approach: “Alexa, I’m leaving”(regex for various phrases) along with an Aqara button if I was on the phone.
For arrival of my car only, and not triggering when I would walk nearby (park and beach 1 block in either direction), I had home assistant dialed in to notice the Bluetooth connection to my cars audio by its ID from within the app etc. along with the proximity and whether I was moving towards or away. Away would close and towards would of course open. This was particularly tricky but as you explain always failsafes in place: garage door opener in car and for the opening mechanism was set to close in 2 mins but reset if there was motion in the garage. If I was marked away and there was motion in the garage it would close and also sound an audible alarm.
None of those of course would have been possible without NodeRed. It’s so much fun to use.
NodeRed is great. I don't use it but if you don't want to spend a ton of time writing rote automation in code it's a dope option (and that's an absolutely fair take to have imo).
They work beautifully with Hue bulbs and HomeKit, as well as offline without WiFi. It also avoids the situation of people disabling smart bulbs by using the physical switch.
my new house has all zigbee enabled stuff. I had zero say in it. I will use them for awhile. But I know eventually I am going to get extremely angry at them and will just go buy a pile of eaton and ge light toggle switches and basically not worry about it again. Also someone in this thread suggested a separate network. Good idea. Guess I am going to be buying a decent router at some point.
Surely you aren't also expecting to use the same lightbulbs for 70 years? Of course most of the Zigbee stuff won't last 70 years, but it isn't fundamentally all that different from light bulbs and other household appliances not tending to be able to handle regular use for 70 years. Especially lately with most 'smart' light bulbs being in the same form factor as 'dumb' ones.
As for switches, it's a digital system, if the switch breaks you are carrying a device capable of fulfilling the same function in your pocket (and potentially even wearing such a device on your wrist).
If the service/app is still around. And your IoT system? Is it compatible with the latest ver of android or iPhone? Many of these companies come and go very quickly. Pretty much as soon as the VC funding runs out, or they want to go play with 'their newest stack'. Then you get to spend another 200 bucks for a new 'hub' so the app can work again. Then hope the new hub can interpolate with the old gear. Else you get to update that too.
Home IoT gets one thing very wrong and it is why many do not want it. Timeframes are measured in 1-3 years instead of 1-3 decades. I know what timeframes I expect different parts of my system to work in. Short timeframes for toggle switches feels wrong. Because I can spend 3 bucks and have a switch that lasts decades with nearly zero upkeep and little to no ongoing monetary cost.
Also support is kind of random. Take for example Linus tech tips. He went full on into home automation. Yet even being a decent name in tech, the company that sold him his switches could not give him the right thing. He has a good chunk of his switches that may or may not do what he needs. Firmware update would fix it. But to do that he has to buy random update stations that may or may not come with the firmware. That is 1 toggle switch with a motion sensor. Stack all of that together and you get random 'well this bit does not work right'. I really do not want random when I walk into a room if the light will turn on and stay on. Then do what it says on the tin and turn off when I leave. If Linus can not get these companies to do the right thing what hope do I have?
Home automation for me is in that uncanny valley of frustration and magical. I used to write industrial ones. My timeframe of 'it has to work for a long time' is very jaded by that.
I can see you and I are optimizing for different results. I am optimizing for 'do not have to mess with it again or as little as possible' and you are optimizing for 'check out what my house does'. Both are worthy goals.
My 'service/app' is an open source program (Home Assistant and Zigbee2MQTT, although previously I have used NodeRed instead to provide the browser based control panel), the hub is an old server with a usb dongle with open source firmware. While there is an app available, there doesn't have to be one as there is also a browser based interface (which doesn't have to be exposed to the internet). The bulbs are a mix of various cheap brands off Amazon which are popular enough to have good support.
Sure, I have the benefit that as a techy I can handle (and to an extent enjoy) maintaining this, but that's mostly a matter of proper packaging, as it isn't a particularly complex thing to set up and is pretty close to zero maintenance.
But this is directly against the easiest line of profit so no, vendors will not stop going in that direction even if it makes no sense to most people.
Which is why online enabled devices are popular and why companies cater for them.
If they could sell large numbers of offline versions at a markup, they would.
"Here is a box, we just run a container on it with your stuff, you can configure it in cloud as usual but all the stuff is run locally. Pay us monthly for convenience of setting it from cloud and software updates but don't worry, if we get out of business It Will Still Just Work".
A technology that ~85% of people possess[1] can be mandatory to live in a building? Feels discriminatory and it seems like a bad opinion from one lawyer.
1 = https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/computer...
The surveillance dystopia we are racing towards is only criticized if the facial recognition cameras spying on our every move work slightly worse on black people.
In this case, a phone is a device that is known to, at minimum, track your location, and now the landlord wants to run their code on it that you have only their word to trust is not nefarious, and can log every entry and exit to your apartment.
What % of the population own such a device is utterly irrelevant to whether its use should be mandatory to obtain shelter.
Increasingly, yes. I have joked for a while now that in the future, the only prosecutable crime will be bigotry. I see less and less consideration of civil principles like speech and privacy.
Discrimination is one of the evils that the courts have interest, capacity, and power to deal with -- and a history of dealing with.
"Surveillance dystopia"? Not so much.
Constructing fairly absurd strawmen like this really hurts your ability to convince others.
https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/sciencepolicy/blog/racial-di...
https://theswaddle.com/how-facial-recognition-ai-reinforces-...
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/how-is-face-rec...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facial-recognition-systems-raci...
https://www.csis.org/blogs/technology-policy-blog/problem-bi...
https://www.cnet.com/science/why-facial-recognitions-racial-...
https://theconversation.com/ai-technologies-like-police-faci...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/19/federal...
https://exposure.org.uk/2021/09/why-facial-recognition-tech-...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/04/racist-fa...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/technology/facial-recogni...
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2021/01/ban-...
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/24/882683463/the-computer-got-it...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2019/12/19/facial-recogn...
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/07/defun...
But in the interest of accuracy, "only" was hyperbole - there is some criticism on non-discriminatory grounds. It's just overshadowed by concerns on whether the hell we are building will be racist.
Lets be heckin' real here too. Because we both know, the same people ignoring racism are the ones usually bootlicking and supporting or denying creeping fascism so...
And yes i can cherry pick articles going back decades warning of surveillance and how tech is driving us towards dystopia. It was my god damn policy debate case 20 yrs ago and its not receded for anyone actually at the table.
But hey, unexamined biases could be an alt name for this site.
Seriously, if you take discussions of surveillance and then derail the conversation to discuss folks discussing race and tech, how do you not realize youre literally self-actualizing what youre whining about? Da fuq was the point of this derailement other than yet another place for certain folks to yet again subtley whine about woke-ism? Eh?
Which data backs up your point?
Or god forbid I want to step outside my house without my phone. I need a phone in my pocket just to take my dog for a walk? Hard pass; I'd never want to live in a place like this.
They replaced the washing machines in the complex I live at recently. The doors don't open unless the app tells it to. One time I forgot to add a sock and had already closed the door. I hadn't paid or selected any options or even paired my phone yet. But the door was locked and I had no choice but to pay in order to get my clothes back. I had to just handwash my sock
Just more bs technology meant to keep houseless folks from accessing services.
[1] https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/200499059/csu_tk_ict_pre...
Hence why I can see stuff like this insidiously making its way around these parts in a few years' time.
https://www.hzscr.cz/clanek/zamykani-vchodovych-dveri-bytovy...
As for apps, haven't seen it anywhere, we use chip keys, but almost always there is also standard key lock available.
Also I'm sure a court would be quite sympathetic if the app fails and you can't access the apartment your paying rent for..
1. costs me hundreds of dollars to replace if it breaks
2. goes through its whole battery in a day or two
3. is rendered inoperable while wearing heavy winter gloves
4. will inevitably force me to agree to giving away PII for free before granting me its services
I'll stick with the metal key, thanks.
And what if you _don't_ agree? You have a contract signed for your apartment. Can you not access that apartment if you don't agree to the additional terms?
Additionally, the staircases were fobbed to get back in, which meant immediately after getting into the staircase, I had no way of getting back onto my floor. They pretty quickly propped all the doors open, at least, but still seems pretty awful from a trade-off perspective as a tenant. I'm sure it makes the management of keys in general a billion times easier for the building, though.
The digital keys do save a huge amount of trivial resets and lock outs that are otherwise dealt with via manual labor.
Seems like it should be mandatory that the doors have either a physical backup (key) or several days of stored power.
Very large apartment blocks.
I'd never choose to buy an apartment in one of these.
I didn't know what a "condo" was until recently. I've heard that word on american TV shows but I never knew what it meant.
Okay, I listed examples in London, Japan and California that clearly indicate that apartments can be purchased.
Pretty sure it grew as something like, "apartment" != "apartment building", where the second is read as "(adjective) (noun)" instead of as a compound noun, and just describes the physical layout of the whole building, while just "apartment" is describing the individual units and has an implied rent-not-buy.
"Apartments" says urban sprawl, poor people and minorities, "condos" says the opposite. The first says "there goes the neighborhood" and the other implies luxury housing that raises property values.
In cities, "apartments" is generally used for rental and owned apartments.
I've worked on some audits that included pretty featureful BMS, and no joke, some of those systems could have given real "mission impossible" capabilities to an intruder.
Disable alarms? Disable cameras? Unlock doors? All possible through a web control panel that looked like it belonged in the early 2000's with hard coded, undocumented accounts.
Or is it not so much because IPv6 is inherently more secure, but rather because its support is still pretty bad outside of the main computers ?
Or because random house appliances are not a particularly interesting target ?
The so-called smart devices doesn't follow the standard security protocols anywhere close to computers and mobile devices.
Is it? Don't most consumer routers come with a firewall configured to block incoming IPv6 connections?
This is in the context that those ISPs are boasting 90%+ IPv6 coverage, which makes up for tens of millions of residential customers !
Or you can put the electronic lock in the frame of the door, as an electromagnet or an electronic strike [2].
The door to a residence, personal office or hotel room might only need to open 10x per day and so can be battery powered - but the main entrance to an office building might open 1000x per day, so wired power is the right choice there.
[1] https://doorentrydirect.com/srs-460mm-door-loop-with-cable-p... [2] https://doorentrydirect.com/alpro-al151-inwardly-opening-ele...
The main entrance had the only networked badge system. What it'd do is when you entered the building it'd write an update list to your fob. When you then open any of the non-networked locks they'd grab the update list from your fob. This way things like revoking access to fobs or adding new fobs to the system would get to all the doors pretty quickly without them needing to be connected to wifi or whatnot.
Of course this also makes it feasible for the locks to run on batteries for a long time. The next trick the locks did was when you unlock a non-networked door it'd write its battery state to your fob. When next operating a networked lock it'd pass the battery state along to the main database. Hey presto you're getting low battery alerts, and there's still no always-on network slurping battery life.
In case of a power outage the reception people could let people in the main door, and all the other locks in the building would keep working as they always have.
This will most likely be sorted out for this use case but Im generally concerned with this rushed innovation, there’s no fallback to a basic method.
Common doors, like to a lobby or a gym can possibly fail to let you inside if there is a power failure but you will never be trapped inside. Those systems are almost always paired with a FOB so you aren't locked out and often times there's a guarantee of a property manager that is on call for emergencies.
If I did not want to use the app, I would instead claim that the TOS of the app itself is an addendum to the lease and refuse to consent to the terms of the app. The building management would then need to figure out a way to get you into the your apartment without agreeing to the app terms.
I am surprised the attorney consulted for the article did not bring up this issue. I also would not expect to receive a lease renewal in this situation.
Meaning - if that "means" is a smartphone - then (unless the lease you signed says otherwise), the landlord is obligated to provide you with a smartphone (along with a fully paid contract).
Otherwise it's a lockout, which under NYC tenant law constitutes over harassment. Period, end of story.
I’m not sure a phone contract would be needed, especially if the building has WiFi.
The main point is that if landlords want to go this route -- they must provide means of egress, without any additional costs imposed upon the tenant (unless agreed to otherwise in the lease).
This idea that they can just decide to require that you go out and buy smartphone (or to run their app on your phone) in order to gain entry to your apartment -- again, unless you've agreed to a lease that says otherwise -- is (despite what both the lawyer and the columnist in the original article) just nonsense, in any jurisdiction (such as NYC) with a reasonably healthy suite of tenant protect law on the books.
I wonder the same thing about work. If my job wants me to use some software can they require me to agree to the ToS? What happens if I don't want to?
It was always my understanding that I signed as a representative of the company, not personally.
The idea was that you'd have a fancy app that would let you "register" guests and the doormen would receive notifications about this with information about the guests (privacy concerns anyone?!).
In practice all of the following happened:
- Nobody used the app. I believe that nobody in that building even knows _how_ to use the app, including staff. My landlord had no idea, the doormen had no idea, etc. What ended up happening is that the concierge desk got a "blessed" landline phone and anyone who knew that phone number was implicitly "authorised" to allow them to let anyone in. Some doormen didn't even bother and just let anyone in who looked like they wanted to enter.
- Unannounced visitors had absolutely no way to make themselves known to you if they didn't have another way to contact you (e.g. technicians showing up). This actually happened to me once with a delivery driver who somehow didn't get my phone number, and got stuck in "doorman limbo" until I realised that something was off and went downstairs to ask the doorman if he'd seen anyone, and found the poor guy hanging out in the lobby.
- On the off chance that somebody would have figured out how to use the app, it's likely it wouldn't have worked because I don't think any of the workflows of anyone there involved looking at whatever/wherever the app was supposed to do its thing.
This is just the most recent example of this kind of crap for me. Sometime earlier I had an experience with a similar building in Oslo, where I ended up being the only person who could get into the building during a power outage because I absolutely insisted on having a physical key for the front door.
Internet connected "things" just suck.
I know that the restaurant's concerns are not necessarily your concerns, but unlike many other industries, neighbourhood casual dining is competitive enough that the savings probably get passed on to you.
They had no paper menus.
I had to use another patron's phone to get the menu to order. Nonsense.
The whole back-and-forth of this, asking the server to try to find a paper menu, etc took almost 20 minutes, and left me as a customer immensely frustrated with the business and despite that it is a very unique spot, I haven't been back since.
It is also super nice if you just there to get quick food and beer and don’t have time to browse menu and expect “dining experience”.
Smart locks with no physical key, QR code based menus, etc - none of this should become a norm.
I bought an electric keyboard a few months ago. Despite having no screen, and being otherwise a super simple electronic device, it still takes about 15 seconds to boot up and become playable after I turn it on.
My new computer monitor is a 48" OLED panel. It has some "smart adaptive dimming" to prevent burn-in where the monitor dims if it hasn't seen enough pixels change color in the last few minutes. It slowly dims while I'm actively sitting in front of my computer programming, and I need to wiggle bright window around the screen to get my monitor to turn back on properly. I filed a couple support requests to the manufacturer, and they confirmed the behaviour is impossible to disable.
It's half the price of 32" Aorus with IPS panel. Guess I dodged the bullet by not buying it.
I've been quietly wondering how hard it would be to reverse engineer the firmware to change the dimming timeout to u32::MAX or something. Either that or write a script to flash a bright overlay window for a few frames every minute or so to keep the monitor awake.
They were baffled by this and resorted to giving me a physical menu. I also emailed their corporate division and explained the problem and said that the whole procedure of ordering through an app is uncomfortable and makes me not want to come back.
Came back this year on a visit and lo and behold - no mention of any apps. Just physical menus and waiters taking orders. Seems like I wasn't the only one who gave them this feedback ...
Not that I'm fully against apps for restaurant chains and such. Some of them are nice and practical.
A table full of people fucking around on their phones (and of course the establishment in question needs you to sign up for an account and fill out a profile before you can pay your bill) or the bullshit and mental hoops some people will jump throught to scam their friends out of a few dollars when deciding how to split a bill.
Regarding "scam their friends": 99% of the time it's not about "scamming": Cashiers ask people for which items they want to pay and mistakes happen because people sometimes remember things wrong. Once everyone paid there are still some few unaccounted items for the table due to those honest mistakes.
The person who ordered the caviar, lobster and cocktails ALWAYS suggests just splitting the bill evenly. The person who just got a starter and a glass of water then has to be the "cheap" one and push back (and they probably ordered like that because they didnt want to spend $200 on dinner).
Eventually we just stopped inviting the guy who orders a $500 bottle of wine for "the table" aka themselves then insists on splitting the bill evenly.
Source? All i've seen has been CMSes/SaaS platform which definetely shouldn't require a dev to update.
I've walked out of few places because they failed to present a proper hard menu. Seen few people struggling with their phones.
Totally ok with funny thing until there is a choice. Who prefers it - good luck struggling with your phone. I am not one of you.
The restaurant could also lose customers who are tourists, who don't necessarily have a data plan while traveling. While it's a bit more convenient for the restaurant, the convenience comes at the cost of the customer.
Also, the UX for many of the menus is often pretty bad (with diners often asking: "how do I place an order?" "did I place an order or not?" "how do I go back?").
I can't enter my home?
Is it legal for a landlord to require tenants to log in and out of their apartments? Do these apps effectively do that?
As long as maintenance crew keeps an eye on the battery and replaces it proactively, I don't really have any issues.
I think one other time it needed some kind of soft reset but that's been it so far in almost two years of daily use.
A couple things I do wish it could do:
1. It seems to have a camera built in but there's no way to look through it on the app. Would be handy for checking who's at the door from my phone.
2. I can only unlock my door from the app. Occasionally I would like to check if it's already locked and if not, then lock it; for some reason this function isn't available.
Sometimes I do wish I had a physical key but I haven't really _needed_ one so far. There are also multiple ways to unlock the door:
1. Phone app 2. Watch app 3. Passcode
Sure you have to memorize the passcode but that's not really a huge deal, IMO.
Which means, as far as I can determine anyways, that Latch uses the app method so that building owners don’t have to deploy wireless AP infrastructure, and can instead externalize all status reporting about a lock to your phone’s cellular/wifi plan.
(It also offers backup PINs, but their keypads are really awful.)
The old key fob unlocked the door instantly (no noticeable lag) 100% of the time without fail. And I didn’t have to have a spare hand to “unlock” my fob to use it.
As an iOS user I enjoy being able to say (with phone in pocket) as I approach the lobby door "Hey Siri, unlock lobby" and have it be done by the time I am at the door. I wish this functionality was enabled for my apartment door but it's not, so I still have to pull the phone out, go to the widget, and push a button. As you said elsewhere, Latch doesn't seem to use the native iOS functionality for interacting with locks, so that may be the cause; it's also, as you also said, likely the cause of the latency between requesting an unlock and it actually happening.
So if your battery runs out, you can't get in?
Admittedly, keys can be lost too, but it's still a new way you can get locked out.
Also I am able to check the battery level myself inside the app. So if I see it getting low (20%) I can just cut a maintenance ticket and they'll come out and do it.
I've never been truly locked out. Maybe if maintenance and the tenant truly drop the ball that could happen. And of course yes it's an extra step you'd never need to spend cycles on with a physical key and lock. But as said, I haven't really gotten to that point in about two years of use.
Now we can dream that some day maybe in 10 years someone will push a software update to every Apple device that will automatically brick them and enjoy the ensuring chaos. As people are unable to do anything at all.
In fact this puts every cyber criminal in the world at exactly zero distance from your doorstep. And once they break into one apartment, they can break into them all.
There is perfectly nothing wrong with traditional locks to be substituted with another crappy app, whose only goal is data farming.
Landlord gets paid for the data app collects about tenants?
That's my guess about this situation.
Why does my keyfob need access to my messages and contacts?
The moment I get home is the time of the day I'm most likely going to have a flat phone battery. I've often headed out for a run or a ride only to have my phone die just before getting hime, since Strava (gps activity tracking) has burner through my battery.
So no way I'd want a house app for a house lock. Also, what about power failures, network outages? (I live on a island (pop 500k) so there have been already been multiple multi-hour near island wide internet outages - in which not even businesses can accept card payments). I assume the landlord couldn't blame you for smashing a window to gain entry in such a circumstance?
The locks also ran on batteries, which a technician came out multiple times in the ~year I lived there to replace. Overall was a nice add-on to the physical key for e.g. guest access but the economics of these things given the battery replacement seems dubious. If it ain't broke...
That's when I found out my business bank cannot do payments with their web banking if I don't have a registered, still working phone. And their phone-in banking service with its large voice menu and long waiting times also does not support making a payment. Lots of other things, general help, registering new devices, but not basic banking. For that you must have a registered device, they confirmed.
I had to buy a new phone (twice, in a hurry), and only then could I make a simple payment.
That was annoying. Imagine how much more annoying it would be to be stuck outside your home for a few days waiting for your new phone to be shipped!
(Hope the courier doesn't put it through the letterbox too!)
Regulatory suggestion: Any landlord with "smart" locks and an app is required to maintain an extremely large insurance policy, to cover the "if the app system is hacked" scenario. And any extra premiums which tenants' insurers require, because of issues with not-so-"smart" systems? Landlord pays.
I think a key to the apartment is something that's de facto supplied with a lease. They can't require you to spend additional money for a smartphone and service. (They key can be a fob or card in 2022, of course.)
plus at least in czechia only 81% people over 16 have smartphone, much less if you count also kids, so my kids would be locked out and most likely also me with rooted Android without gapps
In my experience, the axe is their first option - even if they could get the keys. It's kinda a job perk.
* I was locked out of my apartment because I left my charger cable at home.
* My home unlock app keeps crashing.
* My smartphone was stolen so I was homeless for a night while I waited for the Apple Store to open.
* Automate evictions with smartlocks
Landlords, that famously decent and 100% completely law abiding group of people.
The reality is that possession is 9/10ths of the law.
Anyway if you have to harass a tenant I think that cutting off electricity is the best way. Renders a home almost unusable. But it is not really vital.
The courts will have to square that one.
Cards don’t need batteries, don’t need internet connections and can be pretty robust. It is actually superior to smartphone in its simplicity and efficiency without needing its own power source.
What if I went somewhere and came back with a completely drained phone in the middle of the night? Should I wake up my neighbors and ask to charge my phone or should I sleep outside until the concierge opens their office the next morning?
Can someone here compare both systems?
Speaking of which, we are expecting (regular ?) power cuts this winter, I think the doors should automatically unlock during one, but I should check with the agency...
In Australia when I traveled interstate, I was required to install a government app to “confirm I didn’t have covid symptoms” daily with the threat of sending the police to your house if you don’t comply.
Rounding a temporary restriction during a crisis up to "that boat has sailed" seems overly dramatic.
“That ship has sailed” essentially means that it has already happened, and precedent has been set. Which… it has. That it was (initially) done as a temporary measure doesn’t change that.
it wasn't on a whim.
> ... is less egregious than doing so long term?
obviously it is, yes. For example, plenty of people just avoided travel during that time and managed to not have to use an app. If it was ongoing that wouldn't be the case.
The precedent that has been set is: if there is ever another crisis of that scale, using a smartphone app to try to mitigate it is one of the options on the table. That doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.
2) parkmobile has meter boxes you can pay at near any available parking
We here are all technical people, and can easily see the myriad ways in which this can fail (starting with: what happens if your phone battery does not have enough charge), but if you ignore all these many disadvantages, one can sort of see an utopic ideal behind it.
(In real life, I've seen people do the "all you need to carry is your smartphone" trick by using phone cases: some phone cases have small pockets, in which one can stuff an identity card, a bank card, and a single key without the ring, without getting it too bulky.)
This system _adds_ the requirement of carrying a smartphone. This is one _more_ thing to carry not one fewer.
> if you ignore all these many disadvantages, one can sort of see an utopic ideal behind it.
Yes it is true that if you ignore all the problems in a system, then the system has no perceived problems.
If so, cheaper for whom?
Kacynski is a distinctively stupid person to ask for reflections on modern life. Whatever you think of Stallman, putting him in the same sentence as Kacynski is calumny.
He wrote that original manifesto before the smartphone, basically before the internet and social media, but it’s only become more true in the 20 years following.
> A tenant with a disability should notify the landlord of their need for a reasonable accommodation, requesting an alternative to the app, like a traditional key. If the landlord does not comply with the request, the tenant can file a complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights
I imagine this exception would also apply to some conservative Jewish tenants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_on_Shabbat
> The Conservative movement's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards has argued that "refraining from operating lights and other permitted electrical appliances is a pious behavior," but is not required, while also stating that the use of some electrical devices (such as computers, cameras, and smartphones which record data) is forbidden on the sabbath
>But it needs to work, and you mentioned that yours is unreliable. If the system fails, the landlord has to fix it and provide you with an alternative method of entering the building and your apartment. Put your complaints about the problems in writing. If the landlord fails to address them immediately, file a complaint with the New Rochelle bureau of buildings.
I've sworn off anything "smart" for critical infrastructure since then.
Also, what happens when electricity is out or you don't have a data connection for some reason?
I remember a talk from a few years ago where someone in Germany could unlock all rent bikes in the vicinity by sending the Chinese manufacturer's default password...
[0] https://starfishmedical.com/blog/conformite-europeenne-mark-...
>Any change (invention) that happens before you're 10 is just life. Any change that happens after you're 35 is a disaster and should be banned.
You can only read so many reports of IoT devices causing damage, violating human rights or killing people until you realise a simple physical lock might not be that bad.
I like my banking apps, I can see my balance and move cash and pay for things instantly and more securely. Maps with GPS (and public transport integration) is a god send. I see only very very minor downsides to these. To be clear, there is plenty that I don't like (privacy has basically gone to zero for a start, plus the distractions). I just think we were in "unreasonable optimism" for the first 8ish years of smart phones. Now we are in "unreasonable pessimism" mode. Neither were reasonable responses.
I wish we could just skip to reasonable responses mode (pass a law requiring buildings over 10 residences to offer keys so you can always get one if you want and then let everyone get on with it?).
I have read the local news. Some old person is scammed, by making a fake site getting first the account id and the password for identification and then asked to provide secure on time code. And now after the app is installed it is fully trusted and the scammer is free to steal all the money.
Where as with website you need to verify each transaction with one time code.
If I was there when legislation was written I would have banned making transactions and approving them on same device.
I can see the need for a "non tech user" account for old people. Why not just mandate that as an option and let those of us happy with apps (which I think are much more secure than websites because you cannot divert/phish them) get on with it?