Frozenlock

About security, your opinion is that the private network should be considered insecure for HVAC control. IMO someone changing the setpoint of your air conditioned is the least of your worries if someone gets in your network. But you might be right, perhaps there's a need for yet another level of security. If that's the case, then we can evaluate if we can use what's in the standard, or if we need something brand new.

These flaws (believe it or not)(...)

You can keep your snarky comments, thank you very much. A year ago I was the only one on the BACnet mailing list saying BACnet should get its shit together or a giant like Google or Apple would come and eat its lunch. I know these are flaws. I also know there are ways to patch them. The question is whether it's worth starting from scratch. You know how many Apple's engineers asked info on the BACnet mailing list? Oh right, NONE.

This smells a lot like young software developers looking at a complex software thinking they can do better... only to realize later that heck, some of these complexities were there for a reason.

Some other times, it might be 'cleaner' to start anew, but the shear effort to shift an entire industry ins't worth it. Make no mistake, it's an entire industry, and a huge one!

--

Again, were I Apple, I'd

- Refuse to use any BACnet device that didn't provide a minimum level of security, because it could lead to bad PR.

- Refuse to use any BACnet device that didn't operate on top of TCP at a minimum (because using TCP allows me to use (say) TLS).

- Refuse to use any BACnet device that wouldn't support both IPv4 and IPv6.

- Have to work with all the BACnet stakeholders.

- Have to make all of my software backwards compatible.

- Have to find some way of agreeing with all the stakeholders to market their Apple-compatible devices in such a way that Apple customers won't have to spend days poring over spec sheets to find out which BACnet devices are compatible with the Apple software.

--

In other words, make your own walled garden where you can do what you want. That's pretty much the history of Apple, unfortunately. Sad days for those yearning for more open protocols.

BACnet is just a protocol, and a complex, bloated one - if it's flawed such that to fix it we must change it drastically, it's probably easier to just replace it.

MAYBE, but I've yet to see Apple (or anyone else) opening a discussion with the HVAC industry asking what's going on, what are the needs, etc.

What I do see, is a company on the brink of disregarding a standard in 3 of the biggest standard organizations, just 'because'.

If I use a trademark, say Ziglou, can I expect to have a right to every domain names with Ziglou?

Ziglou.com, Ziglou.net, Ziglou.org, Ziglou.some-new-top-level-name...

Can I expect to also have right to a top domain? Ziglou.ziglou?

Inversely, can one expect to have an established trademark just because of a domain name? In this case, HealthKit?

And no, by adding new stuff I don't mean a new standard.

It's called an addendum. Which, I'm surprised I overlooked, some were made especially to address the security issues: http://www.bacnet.org/Addenda/

If security really is a big issue, the LAST thing I want is give access to the secured network to my PHONE. Is your phone secure? Would you store your bitcoins on it?

The reason that home users have ethernet and IP is because of the hourglass model. The reason that most services just work is that they talk TCP/UDP - anything below that they can ignore - so if we use a new hardware layer, if we use FDDI etc we can still use TCP because everything talks in IP. BACnet kinda breaks that - you mentioned ZigBee adding BACnet support - ZigBee has supported IP for ages - had BACnet followed the hourglass model (as literally every other internet service I have ever seen has done) then support for BACnet would have been immediate and unnecessary to trumpet.

And by supporting IP, it was also (indirectly) supporting BACnet. You just explained how services using TCP/UDP could ignore everything below... I don't understand why you don't understand it's the same thing for BACnet. Those 'official' transport layers offer you alternatives. But guess what, by supporting Ethernet and IP, BACnet can already use pretty much all the network architecture around..

BACnet doesn't quite fit into that, mostly because it replaces IP for (as I understand it) no particularly good reason. Ok, this might be the source of the confusion. Yes, the BACnet network layer needed to be defined, because at the time IP wasn't everywhere like it is today. BUT, you can easily embed this into other protocols. That's exactly how you talk about your hourglass model: BACnet devices don't care if they are connected by MS/TP, Ethernet, IP, Arcnet... They just look at the BACnet level. Just like many services look at the TCP level, not at the IP or Ethernet level.

About IPv6 for new networks, if they become required, I see no real obstacle into extending the standard for IPv6. IPv6 is itself an example of a standard changing with time. Would you prefer to throw away IP a start from scratch because IPv4 devices might not be able to communicate with IPv6?

You want standards when you have a mature market and you want to prevent lockin. Standards in an emerging market can lead to stagnation and reduced innovation(...)

But why do you consider the consumer domain to be an emerging market? For all intended purposes, you still have lighting, HVAC, access... those all already exist in bigger organizations!

There's nothing new here!

Or one could consider that only very recently technology has become cheap enough to be a viable option. In fact, I'm still not convinced it's cheap enough to interest the average consumer. Tho Apple's team probably disagree.

What do you mean by not plug-and-play? Any BACnet device can be connected to a network and announce itself with a WhoIs, being instantly recognized by all the other devices.

(...) supports a relatively small number of transport protocols (...) BACnet has many official transport protocols, the 3 most popular being MS/TP, Ethernet and IP. Furthermore, nothing prevents the BACnet packets from being embedded into some other protocol.

And because you mentioned ZigBee: http://www.zigbee.org/Standards/ZigBeeBuildingAutomation/Ove... "The ZigBee Alliance joined forces with BACnet, the leading global building automation and networking protocol for building automation, to fully support BACnet over ZigBee Building Automation networks. Soon it will be possible to easily expand your wired BACnet-based building systems to new areas by using wireless ZigBee Building Automation products."

You are right about security, BACnet was not designed with security in mind (nor was the Internet). But this brings other questions:

1. Does the consumer space need security for thermostats?

2. If it does, why shouldn't this be handled by the network security?

3. If there's really a need for separated security, why not add the required changes in the next protocol version?

(i.e. most BACnet/IP devices will stop working as networks switch to IPv6)). No. No they won't. Firstly because most BACnet network are to remain inside the enterprise own intranet which will remain IPv4 for a long time. (Forever?) Secondly because IPv4 is a subset of IPv6.

BACnet is probably fine in the enterprise domain, where everything is installed at building construction time(...) Which is simply not true. Most buildings are many decades old. They are a (horrible?) mess of pneumatic systems, first generation electronics control with relays panel, and what we could call recent technology controls with micro-controllers.

In the home domain, it's at least overkill, and makes things incredibly difficult for users. I fail to see how using existing technology is 'overkill'. Was it overkill to bring Ethernet and IP to home users? Should we have come up with a different standard?

(...) Trying to do a standards-based approach at the moment would be a horrendous idea - firstly I know a large number of companies to be trying to come up with their own solution at the moment (...) How is many companies trying to come up with their own solution an argument against standard-based approach?

(...) but secondly it would just end up being a standard by committee (with no real implementers). You mean without the worldwide HVAC industry, right?

Personally, I find the BACnet protocol to be bloated. But is it a good enough reason to throw away everything?

BACnet is a ISO, ASHRAE and ANSI protocol.

If I buy a computer, I own it.

Far from a 'situation that basically no-one is in' I would say. I suppose what you meant is that basically no one really own their house. Well if it's the case, why use the word anyway?

Words have meaning. You can't just decide to apply a word to a situation where it doesn't apply and call it a day.

Historical reasons? Delusions? Sales tactics?

So if I summarize, you can't do what you want with it and you need to pay your landlord.

Why are people calling this 'owning' a house?

Exactly for the reasons you stated.

Funny, isn't it?

> Not behaving in a way that damages the reputation of his/her company or of YC.

This can turn 'unethical' pretty darn fast.

Then I want to see the speed. A time lapse doesn't do it.

The 15 "innovations"... I would try to emphasize the 3-5 most important. The other ones are... how would I put it... this is the kind of stuff I would have put in a school work just to take up some space:

8. Bold colors. Choose from Silver, Black, Blue, RedOrange, and Green. 9. New filament materials like Chameleon PLA. 10. Inspirational Micro filament spools. -----> Inspirational? Really? 11. Modernized touch-capable software. 12. Replaceable print beds for alternative materials. 13. Replaceable nozzles for experimenters. 14. Designed for fast assembly in the US for quality control. 15. An ABS-based print bed allows you to print larger ABS parts.

Another random thought: The art team is almost as big as the dev team... wtf?

I was an everyday Twitch consumer, but I practically stopped watching it overnight. Not because I don't enjoy the content anymore, but because my Chromium crashes every time it tries to load Flash.

Now, while this shows how lazy I can be in this regard, this is also a great insight. Sure, I could just fire up Firefox or even try to fix the Flash issue, but this is one step too much for my taste.

From watching Twitch everyday to watching practically never, only because of this issue.

So if you spend months developing an application and say to yourself "The user just has to do the little step X to fully enjoy my work...", I'd beg you to reconsider. Sometimes, the smallest friction can stop a user.

You can also find some documentation speaking about Netscape.

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/ntcs/scrty_tls-eng.html

That I can choose at which 'location' I incorporate for something that is immaterial?

If one of your costumers is in another jurisdiction, you have to comply with its rules?

Shouldn't the jurisdiction impose its rules on its inhabitants, rather than everyone else?

I would guess that the most advanced math people use in their daily lives is cross-multiplication.

That is also true for what is usually considered math heavy fields.

I've studied in mechanical engineering. I've never EVER seen anyone use calculus to solve their problem in the real world.

Edit: I'm not the creator.

Position 1:

"We would be better off with pipelines..."

Position 2:

"No! (assumptions 1 ---> 2 ----> 3 ---> 3 ---> 4) fossil fuel is bad, so we shouldn't build a more expansive fossil fuel infrastructure, even if it costs some human lives."

Excuse me, but that's a pretty big quantum leap in argumentation.

No I didn't. I pointed yours.

Furthermore, you inferred my position on the matter simply by me pointing out your assumptions. I could too want a better world less dependent on fossil fuels for all you know.

IMO when someone posts an article that's behind a paywall, he should at least put something like [paywall] in the title.

* 1st assumption: It is within human reach to change the climate.

* 2nd: Current climate variations are created by human activities.

* 3rd: A human induced climate change will make the planet warmer.

* 4th: A warmer planet is bad. (If you look at a world map, you'll see huge surface of land in the temperate and frigid zones.)

Suppose that all bitcoins are lost except one.

Well, we just use fractions of the one remaining. While the protocol currently supports 8 decimals, there isn't any hard limit; we can continue dividing forever as needed.