News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Home by TeMPOraL on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @06:17PM (#11726462)
I agree. The current trend of outsourcing everything to "the cloud" is partially fashion, partially laziness, and mostly dictated by business models - why do something the right way (from engineering point of view), when you can lock your users up in your own garden and extract rent (either directly, or by spamming them with ads and selling their data)?

Our devices have incredible amount of computing power now - a great untapped potential that we could use for something else than for supporting unnecessary indirection layers.

Re:Google Home by chongli on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @08:29PM (#11727113)
The problem is that our devices are locked up behind NAT routers and IPv6 is starting to resemble fusion power in terms of its ETA.

The future of all of our devices having extremely fast connections existing in a world of amazing, free, peer-to-peer applications still seems so far away.

Re:Google Home by TeMPOraL on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @09:14PM (#11727248)
Sadly so. Few years ago I thought we'd all be on IPv6 by now.

BTW just today I was thinking about IPv6 VPNs. Seems like a good way to extend one's Intranet of Things to one's mobile devices.

Re:Google Home by reitanqild on Thursday May 19, 2016 @12:05AM (#11727882)
FWIW it seems ipv6 is working (for some definition of working) at my house now :-)
Re:Google Home by wwwdonohue on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @08:21PM (#11727080)
"Business models" are why your devices have such incredible computing power too.
Re:Google Home by TeMPOraL on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @09:10PM (#11727237)
I agree. But business models are not created equal. Personally, I'd like more of those giving useful technology and less of those that are artificially limiting it.
Re:Google Home by incongruity on Wednesday May 18, 2016 @09:25PM (#11727296)
Well - it's their business and not your model :-)

The challenge is how do we make it economically viable for both the producer of the technology and the end user to keep it useful and local, while also making it a good user experience?

The thing about cloud-based services is that they leverage scale well, making many things cheaper than they ever could be locally unless you buy a device and use it for long time AND fixes can be rolled out quickly with no lagging install base to cause problems or bad user experiences.

I really do want to have my privacy and keep my data safe but I also recognize that's hard to do without higher cost or more hassle (or both).

Re:Google Home by wowtip on Thursday May 19, 2016 @05:27AM (#11728970)
- Security

- Reasonable cost

- Availability

- Ease of use, especially setup

- Eye candy

- Social connections

If you can check all of those for an FOSS solution, then I think you are home. Unfortunately most of the points are still not available for average Joe users with FOSS.

Add to that, most people will give you a blank look when you start discussing how companies own your data, and even those who understand just shrug and go the route of least resistance.

Re:Google Home by mbrock on Thursday May 19, 2016 @07:45AM (#11729436)
It's also worth building networks of free systems even if they aren't immediately friendly for Mr Average Joe, simply to create and maintain a foundation for the future. I believe this is part of the strategy of the Free Software Foundation, which recognizes explicitly that free software often will lack some attractive qualities of proprietary software.
Re:Google Home by reitanqild on Thursday May 19, 2016 @06:45AM (#11729225)
This is more or less what I actually mean:

We have a long way to go with all of the above points before we need megaclouds with asic and huge data *to move the state of art forward.

All of the above be solved without creating a new unicorn startup.

Re:Google Home by madmax96 on Thursday May 19, 2016 @11:36AM (#11730999)
While I agree with your assessment, there is an engineering advantage to the cloud: you don't have to deal with as many different system configurations, some of which result in a broken application and an angry customer. The functional package manager approach (like Guix) seems to solve this problem.