Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.

I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires
using a phone to set it up - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how
unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of date for their
software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone
else's. Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{

So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?

TIA.

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

Mike Scott wrote:

> Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.
>
> I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires
> using a phone to set it up - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how
> unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of date for their
> software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone
> else's. Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{
>
>
> So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
> linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?
If you use a Sonoff device (may be the DIY version, or maybe one you've
replaced the factory firmware) there are python utils to control them

<https://sonoff.tech/product/diy-smart-switches/basicr2/>

<https://gist.github.com/Derkades/>

Mike Scott wrote:
> I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.

TP-Link Tapo re linux is what I was looking for.

Here are two conflicting replies seen in a TP-Link forum:

https://community.tp-link.com/en/smart-home/forum/topic/528792

> I would like to control two Tapo P100s using a workstation with
> Ubuntu 20.04 as OS. Is there a way to do that?

Yes:

> Yes, you can. First you need to install a javascrit runtime Node.js
> https://nodejs.org/en/ Then you can install Homebridge which is a
> javascript server emulating Homekit API
https://github.com/homebridge/homebridge/wiki/Install-Homebridge-on-Debian-or-Ubuntu-Linux
> Then you can install a Tapo plugin for Homekit to control Tapo
> devices https://www.npmjs.com/package/homebridge-tapo
>
> All installation details and download links are in the links I wrote
> above
>
> I used this combination both on Debian and macOS machines which
> worked well. Now I use Apple Silicon Macs which native iOS Tapo app
> runs just like an iPhone.

No:

> Currently, our Tapo plug can only be managed by Tapo application.

--
Mike Easter

On 15/01/2025 16:32, Mike Scott wrote:
> Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.
>
> I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires
> using a phone to set it up - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how
> unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of date for their
> software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone
> else's. Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{
>
>
> So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
> linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?
>
> TIA.
>
>
I can send you the boards to make one. Fits a Pi Pico W so you can talk
to it over wifi.

You only need to write the code to set it up :-)

--
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

On 1/15/25 16:32, Mike Scott wrote:
> Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.
>
> I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires
> using a phone to set it up - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how
> unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of date for their
> software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone
> else's. Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{
>
>
> So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
> linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?
>
> TIA.
>
>

I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a cloud
service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan connection
and you are exposed to the cloud service provider disappearing.

I use an open source firmware called Tasmota, which can be installed on
some devices but not others. I have installed it in a Sonoff device,
maybe 5 years ago, but it was a pain.

More recently I have bought Athom plug sockets with Tasmota
pre-installed. The ones I have include energy meters as well as a switch.

Tasmota gives you a HTTP webserver to control the plug, and also allows
you to communicate via mqtt (message queue protocol).

I have bought 10 of these a few years ago. I bricked one (maybe because
it didn't work properly), another one part of the energy meter doesn't
work, another one the switch doesn't work. So 7 good, 2 partial, one
total failure.

I use them all the time, in a minute I will turn my bed's electric
blanket on.

My knowledge is a few years old, maybe there are new and better solutions.

Pancho wrote:

> I use an open source firmware called Tasmota, which can be installed on
> some devices but not others. I have installed it in a Sonoff device,
> maybe 5 years ago, but it was a pain.

I think that's the idea behind the Sonoff "DIY" devices ... no soldering
required to get Tasmota installed ...

On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a cloud
> service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan connection
> and you are exposed to the cloud service provider disappearing.

(Thanks to all for replying)

This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
"cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we want
your data'. There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this case.

I've found python modules for actually running the thing - but
apparently the device's initial setup still needs tp-link's cloud services.

And the problem there is my phone and hudl are ancient so tp-link's code
won't install - and when I try to install it on my wife's phone, it
wants me to enable in-app purchases. WHY? It's totally unnecessary. All
I want to do is set up a device I've already purchased. (And it's not
going to happen: I avoid in-app purchase software like the plague, and
I'm not about to set up something like that on a borrowed phone anyway.)

Looks like Argos can have their device returned, although I doubt anyone
there will have the nous to understand the issues.

(FWIW I assumed there'd be a web interface to set it up, with their app
as a convenience wrapper for that. But no; it looks as though they use
BT for initial device discovery and tcp for actual use. Seems madly
complex to me.)

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

On 16/01/2025 09:33, Mike Scott wrote:
> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a cloud
>> service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan connection
>> and you are exposed to the cloud service provider disappearing.
>
> (Thanks to all for replying)
>
> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
> "cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we want
> your data'. There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this case.
>
Actually there is.

It is the simple way to solve 'remote access' to your 'behind NAS'
network connected gadgets

Now *we* can organise that because we are geeks, but te average
coinsumer? Doan mak me larf!

--
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.”

Vaclav Klaus

On 15/01/2025 at 16:32, Mike Scott wrote:
> Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.
>
> I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires
> using a phone to set it up - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how
> unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of date for their
> software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone
> else's. Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{
>
>
> So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
> linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?
>
> TIA.
>
>

If you're up to a bit of wiring, try a USB relay. E.g. Annadue Relay
Module (try Amazon, 2 channel £10.62)
Interface: apt install usbrelay
usbrelay --debug for information

1, 2, 3, 8 channels available

--
Chris Elvidge, England
LOOSE TEETH DON'T NEED MY HELP

Yes, they exist. One of them is this one.
https://www.shelly.com/products/shelly-plug-s-gen3
I have experience with one like this. You use your browser to control them. There is no
cloud if you don't want to. It connects to your wi-fi network. Just type address into your browser,
and you are ready to go.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:32:47 +0000
Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

> Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.
>
> I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires
> using a phone to set it up - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how
> unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of date for their
> software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone
> else's. Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{
>
>
> So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
> linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?
>
> TIA.
>
>
> --
> Mike Scott
> Harlow, England

--
Running Linux Mint 21.3 (Virginia) using Kernel=6.5.0-45-generic on x86_64 ,
Cinnamon, lightdm, x11
AMD Ryzen 7 5700G with Radeon Graphics (16) @ 5.288GHz

On 1/16/25 07:24 AM, Chris Elvidge wrote:
> On 15/01/2025 at 16:32, Mike Scott wrote:
>> Hi all. I'm looking for a so-called "smart plug" to control from linux.
>>
>> I've just had a bad experience with tp-link's offering, which requires using a phone to set it up
>> - and enabling in-app purchases to do so, how unnecessary! My own phone and tablet are too out of
>> date for their software to install, and I'm not about to change settings on anyone else's.
>> Unfortunately, PyP100 needs the device to be already set up :-{
>>
>>
>> So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from linux without all the
>> garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>>
>
> If you're up to a bit of wiring, try a USB relay. E.g. Annadue Relay Module (try Amazon, 2 channel
> £10.62)
> Interface: apt install usbrelay
> usbrelay --debug for information
>
> 1, 2, 3, 8 channels available
>
>
https://www.amazon.com/DSD-TECH-SH-UR01A-Controller-Computer/dp/B09PYML6Q7
That's the coolest. Damn! I wish I had that back when! Of course Linux Mint and good computers
etc weren't available when I was a huge DIYer and tinkered, but it really would have been fun.

I breadborded and built a bunch of stuff (digital clock from ICs) back in those days. Had a board
we plugged into our Commodore 64 that allowed me to program ePROMS. Fun days.
--
Linux Mint 22, Cinnamon 6.2.9, Kernel 6.8.0-51-generic
Thunderbird 128.5.2esr, Mozilla Firefox 134.0
Alan K.

On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a cloud
>> service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan connection
>> and you are exposed to the cloud service provider disappearing.

On 2025-01-16, Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
> "cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we want
> your data'. There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this case.
>
> I've found python modules for actually running the thing - but
> apparently the device's initial setup still needs tp-link's cloud services.

Will the new "matter" standard for "Internet of Things" solve this
problem?

On 2025-01-16 10:33, Mike Scott wrote:
> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:

....

> And the problem there is my phone and hudl are ancient so tp-link's code
> won't install - and when I try to install it on my wife's phone, it
> wants me to enable in-app purchases. WHY? It's totally unnecessary. All
> I want to do is set up a device I've already purchased. (And it's not
> going to happen: I avoid in-app purchase software like the plague, and
> I'm not about to set up something like that on a borrowed phone anyway.)

It is just a permission on this single app, you don't have to buy
anything. It will not buy anything for you on your back. In any case,
you have to actually approve the purchase (and have a banking account
registered with Google).

You could give the permission so that the app runs, and once finished
with the config, remove the permission for your ease of mind.

....

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Thu, 16 Jan 2025, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 16/01/2025 09:33, Mike Scott wrote:
>> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a cloud
>>> service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan connection and
>>> you are exposed to the cloud service provider disappearing.
>>
>> (Thanks to all for replying)
>>
>> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their "cloud"
>> service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we want your data'.
>> There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this case.
>>
> Actually there is.
>
> It is the simple way to solve 'remote access' to your 'behind NAS' network
> connected gadgets
>
> Now *we* can organise that because we are geeks, but te average coinsumer?
> Doan mak me larf!

I use tor to give me a globally unique name where I can access my stuff
behind NAT as a Tor hidden service.

I've been thinking that perhaps I might be able to use yggdrasil to get a
ipv6 address to do the same, without the latency of tor.

Has anyone tried it, or have some other methodology that does not depend
on dyndns or similar web sites?

In comp.os.linux.misc Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a
>> cloud service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan
>> connection and you are exposed to the cloud service provider
>> disappearing.
>
> (Thanks to all for replying)
>
> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
> "cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we want
> your data'.

> There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this case.

There is no actual /need/, provided the buyer is slightly technically
inclined.

For the 99.1% of their users, who are lost if their icon for FB moves
5mm away from the location it has always been located, it provides a
way for TP-Link to get them setup and working (and working from both
local to their home network and from somewhere remote).

Which would be the reason given if the maker was pushed. Reality is,
they also love the money available from selling the data treasure trove
they can hoover up as well.

In comp.os.linux.misc D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2025, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 16/01/2025 09:33, Mike Scott wrote:
>>> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>>>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a
>>>> cloud service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan
>>>> connection and you are exposed to the cloud service provider
>>>> disappearing.
>>>
>>> (Thanks to all for replying)
>>>
>>> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
>>> "cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we
>>> want your data'. There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this
>>> case.
>>>
>> Actually there is.
>>
>> It is the simple way to solve 'remote access' to your 'behind NAS'
>> network connected gadgets
>>
>> Now *we* can organise that because we are geeks, but te average
>> coinsumer? Doan mak me larf!
>
> I use tor to give me a globally unique name where I can access my
> stuff behind NAT as a Tor hidden service.

99.1% of the total users would be incapable of achieving what you are
doing with Tor, even if given infinite time to set it all up.

On 2025-01-16, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2025-01-16 10:33, Mike Scott wrote:
>
>> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> And the problem there is my phone and hudl are ancient so tp-link's code
>> won't install - and when I try to install it on my wife's phone, it
>> wants me to enable in-app purchases. WHY? It's totally unnecessary. All
>> I want to do is set up a device I've already purchased. (And it's not
>> going to happen: I avoid in-app purchase software like the plague, and
>> I'm not about to set up something like that on a borrowed phone anyway.)
>
> It is just a permission on this single app, you don't have to buy
> anything. It will not buy anything for you on your back. In any case,
> you have to actually approve the purchase (and have a banking account
> registered with Google).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's a deal-breaker right there.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

On 1/16/25 3:07 PM, Rich wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2025, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 16/01/2025 09:33, Mike Scott wrote:
>>>> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>>>>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a
>>>>> cloud service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan
>>>>> connection and you are exposed to the cloud service provider
>>>>> disappearing.
>>>>
>>>> (Thanks to all for replying)
>>>>
>>>> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
>>>> "cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we
>>>> want your data'. There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this
>>>> case.
>>>>
>>> Actually there is.
>>>
>>> It is the simple way to solve 'remote access' to your 'behind NAS'
>>> network connected gadgets
>>>
>>> Now *we* can organise that because we are geeks, but te average
>>> coinsumer? Doan mak me larf!
>>
>> I use tor to give me a globally unique name where I can access my
>> stuff behind NAT as a Tor hidden service.
>
> 99.1% of the total users would be incapable of achieving what you are
> doing with Tor, even if given infinite time to set it all up.

I don't disagree that most users are not likely to be able to set up
complex things, but realistically, companies should always make it
possible to bypass their cloud service. The ruse is "people are too
stupid to do this" as an excuse for cloud services being obligatory.
Even though, they actually aren't. Just give users the option to bypass
it. And honestly, most things now can be set up with a local app that
doesn't use any cloud service at all. I mean, apps can even autodiscover
their respective devices over bluetooth without the user actually doing
anything other then opening the app, and the user can add their wi-fi,
etc. There is never a reason to demand a user create a cloud account
ever. Users don't actually need one. This is nothing more then a scam.

Offer users the option, if they want it. But never force it or make it
mandatory. Philip's Hue does not require an account at all to use their
smart hub and lights/devices. In fact, their app can operate without any
internet connection at all. (You can disconnect your internet cable from
your router and turn off data on your phone and set the entire thing up
locally with the app, without any internet or online account creation.)

This is how it should be. And for users that want all that cloud stuff,
it can be optional available to them.

Anyone that thinks these things should be forced is just perpetuating an
abusive system or just lacks knowledge on how these things work.

--
Phillip
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

In comp.os.linux.misc Phillip <nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> wrote:
> On 1/16/25 3:07 PM, Rich wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2025, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16/01/2025 09:33, Mike Scott wrote:
>>>>> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>>>>>> I think you have to be careful that they are not controlled by a
>>>>>> cloud service. If you have a cloud service you need a working wan
>>>>>> connection and you are exposed to the cloud service provider
>>>>>> disappearing.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Thanks to all for replying)
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the rub. tp-link clearly /want/ the consumer to use their
>>>>> "cloud" service - which is usually just a fancy codeword for 'we
>>>>> want your data'. There's no actual /need/ that I can see in this
>>>>> case.
>>>>>
>>>> Actually there is.
>>>>
>>>> It is the simple way to solve 'remote access' to your 'behind NAS'
>>>> network connected gadgets
>>>>
>>>> Now *we* can organise that because we are geeks, but te average
>>>> coinsumer? Doan mak me larf!
>>>
>>> I use tor to give me a globally unique name where I can access my
>>> stuff behind NAT as a Tor hidden service.
>>
>> 99.1% of the total users would be incapable of achieving what you are
>> doing with Tor, even if given infinite time to set it all up.
>
> I don't disagree that most users are not likely to be able to set up
> complex things, but realistically, companies should always make it
> possible to bypass their cloud service.

Full agreement. Sadly the commercial entities don't seem to provide
that ability except in rare cases.

> Offer users the option, if they want it. But never force it or make it
> mandatory. Philip's Hue does not require an account at all to use their
> smart hub and lights/devices. In fact, their app can operate without any
> internet connection at all. (You can disconnect your internet cable from
> your router and turn off data on your phone and set the entire thing up
> locally with the app, without any internet or online account creation.)

Which is how all the other IoT stuff should be too. Sadly, too many
companies don't even think to offer the "non-cloud" option.

On 2025-01-16 21:22, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2025-01-16, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2025-01-16 10:33, Mike Scott wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/01/2025 20:31, Pancho wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> And the problem there is my phone and hudl are ancient so tp-link's code
>>> won't install - and when I try to install it on my wife's phone, it
>>> wants me to enable in-app purchases. WHY? It's totally unnecessary. All
>>> I want to do is set up a device I've already purchased. (And it's not
>>> going to happen: I avoid in-app purchase software like the plague, and
>>> I'm not about to set up something like that on a borrowed phone anyway.)
>>
>> It is just a permission on this single app, you don't have to buy
>> anything. It will not buy anything for you on your back. In any case,
>> you have to actually approve the purchase (and have a banking account
>> registered with Google).
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> That's a deal-breaker right there.

Unless google has your bank account details and permission to charge you
what you buy, or some other arrangement that they have (I haven't looked
recently, maybe paypal) there is no way an app with "in-app purchases"
permission can sell you anything.

The permission is quite safe with adults ;-)

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:55:46 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> Which is how all the other IoT stuff should be too. Sadly, too many
> companies don't even think to offer the "non-cloud" option.

Some of the original decisions were made based on the edge devices not
having the compute power. A good example is Alexa. The edge device can
recognize the wake word but after that all the processing is done in the
cloud. That brings in many issues including bandwidth, security, and the
necessity to add processing power to handle thousands or millions of
concurrent requests.

I chose Alexa as an example since that has been a money sink for Amazon.
The theory was people would use Alexa to order stuff; the practice is
people use Alexa to turn on the radio and so forth.

It may change as more companies realize the cloud is costing them a lot of
money particularly for AWS or other commercial providers. Some have went
back to running their own servers.

Meanwhile it is annoying. My Fitbit device won't synch with the
application on the phone without an internet connection. Leaving aside I
don't enjoy being radio-collared by Google I sometimes have to jockey the
phone around to get a connection.

On 2025-01-16, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:55:46 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
>
>> Which is how all the other IoT stuff should be too. Sadly, too many
>> companies don't even think to offer the "non-cloud" option.

Let me re-arrange those words a bit: Sadly, too many companies
think to not offer the "non-cloud" option.

> It may change as more companies realize the cloud is costing them a lot of
> money particularly for AWS or other commercial providers. Some have went
> back to running their own servers.
>
> Meanwhile it is annoying. My Fitbit device won't synch with the
> application on the phone without an internet connection. Leaving aside I
> don't enjoy being radio-collared by Google I sometimes have to jockey the
> phone around to get a connection.

The money the cloud is costing them might be a worthwhile investment
if they can make enough money back from all those radio collars.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey

On 2025-01-16, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:55:46 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:
>
>> Which is how all the other IoT stuff should be too. Sadly, too many
>> companies don't even think to offer the "non-cloud" option.

In the trade press, I keep reading about how the new "matter" protocol
will unitfy IoT devices so thay all can run on any brand of "smart home"
gateway. But it may not be real yet, or we should have heard about it in
the OSS circles. But really, all of these devices should be using SNMP as
their control protocol.

> Some of the original decisions were made based on the edge devices not
> having the compute power. A good example is Alexa. The edge device can
> recognize the wake word but after that all the processing is done in the
> cloud. That brings in many issues including bandwidth, security, and the
> necessity to add processing power to handle thousands or millions of
> concurrent requests.
>
> I chose Alexa as an example since that has been a money sink for Amazon.
> The theory was people would use Alexa to order stuff; the practice is
> people use Alexa to turn on the radio and so forth.

I hate Alexa. We had an Echo in the house for a bit, and it was forever
listining in on our conversations and breaking in on them. That got her
banished.

> It may change as more companies realize the cloud is costing them a lot of
> money particularly for AWS or other commercial providers. Some have went
> back to running their own servers.

I never understood how any business - large or small - could be
comfortable having their financial information or their proprietary
technical data on a cloud server. Quickbooks online would seem to be a
tempting target for Intuit data mining. For that matter, I worry about
having my personal tax return submitted to IRS through Intuit's servers
(TurboTax) - or for that matter HR Block's. But I pray that there are
data protection laws surrounding this that they can't bypass with a
click-wrap user agreement. Imagine how lucrative it would be to sell
mortgages, life insurances or investment packages to people based on
reading their annual Form 1040.

> Meanwhile it is annoying. My Fitbit device won't synch with the
> application on the phone without an internet connection. Leaving aside I
> don't enjoy being radio-collared by Google I sometimes have to jockey the
> phone around to get a connection.

I just discovered that in the last two weeks, as I replaced by Fitbit
Charge 5 with a new Charge 6. It somehow would not show me the time
when I had left my phone in the office while going out to get the mail
from the mailbox at the driveway. Recovered once I was in Blluetooth
range. Some datapoints can sync between the watch and the phone over
BlueTooth, but "deeper stuff" like sleep analysis does indeed require
connection to the Google servers.

Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>So - is there a smart plug around that can be set up and controlled from
>linux without all the garbage the makers seem to want to inflict?

Look (on Amazon, for example) for something that runs Tasmota. It has
a Web Interface and speaks MQTT. I have good experience with the
products from Gosund and Nous.

Be advised that I am from Germany, so looing for something compatible
with UK plugs might be a bit harder.

Greetings
Marc
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402

On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:53:38 -0000 (UTC), Lars Poulsen wrote:

> I hate Alexa. We had an Echo in the house for a bit, and it was forever
> listining in on our conversations and breaking in on them. That got her
> banished.

I never had an Echo. I asked a woman I worked with whose name a Alex about
t. Apparently you can select other wake words which was good for her. My
utterances on a normal day are 'Good morning, cat' when I go out to feed
her in the morning, or 'Hi cat' when she mysteriously appears when I drive
in. I've seen the cat galloping from the pasture about 100 yards away when
I pull in so she has learned to recognize my car or motorcycles.
> I never understood how any business - large or small - could be
> comfortable having their financial information or their proprietary
> technical data on a cloud server.

'The Cloud' buzzword was popular for CAD (computer aided dispatch) vendors
a few years ago but it died down to some extent. Part of the data
emergency dispatchers collect may be criminal justice records covered by
NCIC regulations, medical records covered by HIPAA, or juvenile records.
In theory the cloud provider's employees would have to be vetted by the
various agencies. Sites like that are available with a premium attached.
> I just discovered that in the last two weeks, as I replaced by Fitbit
> Charge 5 with a new Charge 6. It somehow would not show me the time when
> I had left my phone in the office while going out to get the mail from
> the mailbox at the driveway. Recovered once I was in Blluetooth range.
> Some datapoints can sync between the watch and the phone over BlueTooth,
> but "deeper stuff" like sleep analysis does indeed require connection to
> the Google servers.

Synching for me often shows a network connection is necessary and may
require multiple restarts of the app. It's not very smooth. The latest
feature, 'cardio load', has many people trying to figure out how it works
and the prompts to get your lazy butt in gear are not appreciated.

I got the Fitbit at a discount through Planet Fitness a year ago. It
usually works for distance and seems to be relatively reliable for HR. The
rest is iffy. The real selling point for me is it's not a Dick Tracy
Communicator on my wrist.