trimtab
One Tinc advantage is that it can run on an Openwrt router.
Spend some time with dementia patients and you'll quickly realize the issue.
Any VR would have to be able to determine current cognitive ability to not cause as much frustration and harm as relief.
Corporations and executives as well as stockholders must suffer. For executives there must be clear disincentives to bad management. Stockholders must learn to NOT invest in unethical companies. And employees need to learn that working for poorly run companies is a poor career choice.
Otherwise, these events will continue to occur and everyone on the inside will glad hand each other about how they got away with it.
The problem can be the Z-wave/ZigBee controller which may very well require Internet and Cloud access to "phone home."
I avoid using IoT devices that I can't re-program or if nothing is available except some proprietary/cloud driven device I isolate them into their own little network space, so they can't attack the rest of the network or "phone home" unless I let them. Sometimes, that isn't possible and that's when 30 day return privileges come in real handy.
The ability to trace the packets coming off of most IoT devices is fascinating and sometimes scary. A lot of devices are like the recent OnePlus smartphones that record and send most everything to their "true master" the manufacturer of the device. At least, with a Oneplus you can fix that, by reflashing the phone.... which is not true of most IoT devices being sold today.
Have you noticed that BestBuy seems to only sell IoT devices that will "phone home?"
It's easy compared to most other Internet Video Stream Receivers by offering a WiFi remote (not your phone) and a TV/Cable channel metaphor UI rather than a web metaphor UI.
It works really well for the non-technical and older people.
If they were not local regional monopolies they'd be losing customers a lot faster than they are now.
The faster we can make cable companies "dumb pipes" the better off we will all be... except if you are a Cable company exec or shareholder.
BTW, if you are an HOA board member make sure you maximize your "door fees" when they come up for re-negotiation. "Door fees" are what a cable company pays the HOA for access to living units within the HOA. "Door fees" also prevent the HOA from letting any other Cable company have the same access for the term of the contract. Since you can't break the monopoly, you can at least lower the regular assessments for your HOA members with Cable company cash.
Also Cable Companies continue to encrypt local channels that used to be on unencrypted clear QAM channels. So that HDTV or DVR that has a digital tuner that you purchased can't get a signal without adding yet another cable box (or cablecard) to your monthly bill for each and every device.
Then customers decide to try an Over-The-Air (OTA) antenna and realize that the Cable Co's have been degrading their local channels signal for years in favor of pay channels and shopping channels.
Next, a customer may get a Roku or Chromecast and realize the choice greater and quality better streaming from the Internet than via local cable and the customer has much better control over the costs.
Also "cord cutters" are making a lot of noise on social networks about what they are doing and how well it works. Couple that with how much "love" most people have for their cable company and well decline should be inevitable as long as the alternatives work and they do.
Eliminating the jack entirely just means I'll be looking elsewhere for my next phone and I've bought a lot of Google phones.
Bluetooth dropouts and interference are a regular occurrence. And dongles are not necessary unless the phone makers is just trying to make more money by removing existing functionality from the base device.
ADUs have to meet current building and fire codes. Though there is a loophole where an on-site resident owner may do their own construction without permits.
ADU construction along with rental housing starts is also slowing due to recent city legislation and the threat of rent control which has been illegal in the entire state of Oregon since the 1980s. And the city of Portland via new regulation has already added friction and increased costs in their rental market exacerbating their "rental housing crisis" except for those renters already in existing rentals.
ADUs were popular additions on family occupied and/or owned Portland properties until the recent regulatory changes and rent control threat. Now there is added known risk and uncertainty.
So existing residents already in place resist more residents arriving in the same area. Which is understandable, since ADUs do not address adding services provided by government to existing properties. They just increase the number of inhabitants in the same area.
Also much of Portland has a much better and less expensive public transportation system than the SF Bay Area does.
This industry hires inexpensive and untrained labor that regularly makes mistakes that injure customers.
The "customers" in many cases have dementia or cognition issues.
Mandatory Binding Arbitration is almost always bad for customers. The game board is tilted against them. Arbitrators must be agreed to by both parties, but companies are the primary repeat customers of arbitrators and will NOT select arbitrators that don't usually and regularly find for them.
Binding Arbitration as currently used should be eliminated as an option in all contracts. It should always exist as an option of the parties, but not be binding at the initiation of any service.
Binding Arbitration is a tool of companies to allow them to NOT be accountable to their customers AND prevent that lack of accountability to made public.
A mandatory binding arbitration clause in any contract presented to you should always be a warning flag that the other side does not intend to be accountable.
Never enter into such contracts if you can avoid them.
A platform vendor buys and kills closed source code that makes it faster and easier to make applications across platforms including those the new owner does not control, so the closed source product is killed and all the developers who used it now have to re-write all the their apps costing them significant resources and money.
Can anyone really wonder why developers do not like to buy closed code that acts as glue between platforms and their applications?
The only time it's smart to do is if it lets you reach the market faster than others, and then only if that buys you time to get off the cross-platform tool before it lags and degrades in the face of platform updates the tool vendor does not control or dies.
Paypal had independent access to markets. It just grew fastest via eBay because it solved a problem that eBay initially could not.
Clone PC makers had independent BIOS and MS-DOS so IBM could not snuff them. It finally lost when it tried to move PC users to the PS/2 platform and customers would not follow.
Microsoft negotiated and blocked exclusive licensing and control by IBM of MS-DOS before the first IBM PC shipped.
So yes, you can succeed if you have a way out of the inherent trap of being just another sharecropper. And to do that you better have negotiated a much better deal where you have options that cannot be easily blocked that are not being offered to everyone else. But you cannot expect to win much if you accept the publicly offered terms.
Facebook's terms of use for their platform allow them to cut you off from "your passionate users" at Facebook's whim.
You better have completed your "liquidity event" before that happens.
A specialized device is not really needed. Just a Mitm position between the stores and the Internet.
Chuck Forsberg was the kind of optimizing engineer we just do not see much anymore.
However, if all you want is an excellent "out-of-box" experience, you really won't "own" any IoT device you can currently purchase. They are all remotely managed.