Ars Technica:
Hundreds of Internet-connected locks became inoperable last week after a faulty software update caused them to experience a fatal system error, manufacturer LockState said.
The incident is the latest reminder that the so-called Internet of Things—in which locks, thermostats, and other everyday appliances are embedded with small Internet-connected computers—often provide as many annoyances as they do conveniences. Over the past week, the Colorado-based company’s Twitter feed has been gorged with comments from customers who were suddenly unable to lock or unlock their doors normally. Complicating the matter: the affected LockState model—the RemoteLock 6i—is included in an Airbnb partnership called Host Assist. That left many hosts unable to remotely control their locks.
As convenient as these kinds of things are (and their convenience may be minimal), stories like this make it crystal clear why I personally will never own or install these kinds of IoT devices.
I prefer smart devices that still have a dumb backup, like a Bluetooth door lock that can still accept a normal key (which is pretty much necessary when using public betas).
“In the meantime, customers can use a physical key to unlock doors. (Like
most hotel rooms, the doors automatically lock each time they’re
closed.)”
Every smart lock I know of for retail/consumer/hotel use allows a normal key, because batteries and electronics fail.
(Ref. Mr. King’s post, I have a Schlage home automation lock that’s given flawless service.
But it also just does Z-Wave, and doesn’t have any concept of “automatic firmware update”.
Indeed, being super-simple and only doing Z-Wave, it doesn’t need firmware updates to speak of.
Let the hub handle all the fancy-pants stuff; devices themselves should be as simple and dumb as possible.)
“As convenient as these kinds of things are (and their convenience may be minimal), stories like this make it crystal clear why I personally will never own or install these kinds of IoT devices.”
You’re in the wrong business. Better to blog about brick-laying
Meaning that any tech writer you approve of must use and love every new device?
keys have worked well for thousands of years.
Love? No. But being a luddite about entire classes of stuff and then also not understanding the use cases is an odd attitude for a tech writer.
I don’t have a use for an IoT lock. But if I ran an AirBnB? Definitely. Had kids and let in cleaners, dog walkers etc? Again, I get how they’d help then. Saying their convenience may be minimal is a lack of awareness of how others live.
“Luddite” is a strong word. no?
If the class of stuff under discussion (by someone who’s observed consumer tech for decades) doesn’t seem fully-baked for use by a wide variety of non-enthusiasts, I’m interested in hearing many opinions about it. Whether it’s Shawn, Dave, Jim, or Mossberg expressing the skepticism.
I agree with rick gregory. While there are many items being promoted as part of the IoT with little value in my opinion, it does not mean that there is a lack of value to others. Maybe it’s not for locks – maybe it is the thermometer that alerts you while on vacation telling you your house temperature has dropped to a significant point. Or the deep freezer that tells you its too warm before the food spoils. Maybe it is managing lighting so you absence is less noticeable. Or maybe it is the lock — letting the distant friends who arrived early into your house, so they can rest. Or interconnected smoke alarms for older houses. Or, or, or….. Most likely, though it will be something we have not yet imagined.
Dismissing a whole class of devices because one does not see the value, especially as a tech writer, is like dismissing automatic transmissions, as an automotive writer. Yes, early automatic trannys were poor, but try to find a stick in a car today! Worse, is dismissing them because one portion of one manufacturer’s product of one small segment of the IoT does suggest a Luddite in tech clothing.
Big issue here is that the locks are used by a lot of AirBnB hosts so that they don’t need to give keys to guests (presumably the codes can easily be changed between guests).
The hosts have the keys but might not be near to swap in the keys.
Why this was an automatic update, rather than user instigated is what bothers me
Wow! Now with hacking into your network and now locking you out on poor update validates my fears of Internet of things devices! Never in my lifetime will that change!
so have wheeled vehicles without airbags. but i bet you prefer airbags amirite?
No. It’s not.
Damning an entire class of devices because there are growing pains and some companies don’t do execute well isn’t skepticism, it’s lazy thinking.
LOL I am not a Luddite and I do understand the use cases for this technolgy. I said I would personally never use it. You’re assuming things about me in order to straw man your argument. Sorry I can’t accommodate.
So is your argument that, because I write for a (nominally) tech focused web site I therefore must love and use all tech?
Next time, Shawn, read the entire comment thread. Try reading with comprehension. Then you won’t make a comment that makes it obvious you didn’t.
Sigh. Read what you wrote:
“As convenient as these kinds of things are (and their convenience may be minimal)…”
The last part of that is a general assertion. Not about their convenience to you. I have to read what you wrote, not what you meant to write.
Congratulations. You’ve won today’s award. You should be very proud of yourself.