ᐅ Smart Home – The General Purpose Question

Tarnari schrieb:

Then it’s said that I can’t change anything. Continuing like this, however, makes it unbelievable.

That wasn’t me who said that, it was your friend.

And yes, I’m not super consistent either. I can’t manage that. The world is organized in such a way that, for example, it’s too much effort for me to give up using a smartphone.

I brought up the topic of electronic waste and environmental damage because I would like to understand how these impacts can be accepted for the added value/"added value" of home automation without, it seems, having given it much thought.

@motorradsilke

Exactly what you describe is also the goal of a truly intelligent home—some might call it a smart home. For example, having the coffee ready exactly when you want it, or keeping the blinds up when necessary.

Nowadays, this works quite well. The fear that the house will take over and make decisions for the person is unfounded. The person is always in control, while repetitive tasks or things that people forget or don’t want to do are handled automatically.

For instance, I don’t want to run through the entire house every time before leaving to turn off devices, close windows, or switch off the heating.

However, I want my home to save energy when I’m away, and depending on the season, to adjust things automatically without my intervention to achieve this goal.

The list could go on forever. But truly intelligent buildings always work with the residents, not against them. You just have to teach the house what to do or not to do, which things are fixed or variable, and how to respond in certain situations.

rick2018 schrieb:

The goal in a smart home is for everything to run automatically or based on logic controls as much as possible.
This starts with lighting, continuing with shading, ventilation, heating, cooling, garden irrigation, and so on.

I understand that. I believe smart home systems offer particular benefits when integrating multiple technologies (like the ones you mentioned). In my case, shading, ventilation, and cooling are not part of the setup at all. That’s probably why it doesn’t make sense for me. I agree with @manohara that I still want to handle a few tasks around the house myself, especially when they don’t require much effort. It’s hard to explain, but it gives me a better “feeling” for my home and living space.

Mycraft schrieb:

@motorradsilke

Exactly, what you describe is the goal of a truly intelligent home—some might call it a smart home. Like having the coffee ready exactly when you want it, and keeping the blinds open when necessary.

And nowadays, this works quite well. The fear that the house will take control and make decisions for the person is unfounded. The person is always in charge; repetitive tasks are simply taken off their hands, or things they might forget or don’t want to do at all.

For example, I don’t want to run through the house every time before I leave, turning things off, closing windows, or switching off heaters.

However, I want my home to save energy when I am away and to adjust certain settings automatically according to the season to achieve that goal, without my intervention.

The list could go on forever. But truly intelligent buildings always work with the residents, not against them. You just have to teach the house what it should and shouldn’t do, which elements are fixed or variable, and how to respond in different situations.

Then please explain to me how that is supposed to work. How does my house know that today I have to leave at 8:30 a.m. and want coffee at 8, if that isn’t the case every day? How is my house supposed to know tomorrow that I want breakfast at 10:57 a.m., when I only decide that at 10:56?
How should my house know that tomorrow morning I want to be woken by the sun, when I only decide that myself the evening before?
How does my house know if I’m just going into the garden, so it shouldn’t close everything, or if I will be away for a longer time?
These are all things that don’t follow any automation.

Honestly, I can hardly imagine many situations where automation would be possible, at least in my life. That might be different for others, especially if they have to go to work at the same time every day.
But maybe you can convince me otherwise?

motorradsilke schrieb:

How does the house automation system tell the difference between me just going into the garden, so not all doors are locked, and when I leave the entire property?

Just because you don’t know how it works doesn’t mean it’s bad. Or can you technically explain exactly how your car knows when the key is inside so it doesn’t let you lock it from the outside?

motorradsilke schrieb:

If I can lock all the doors with one button press, that’s definitely more convenient, and I would like that for the house too. But I don’t like the feeling that my house locks all the doors on its own.

Same example. Do you find it more convenient with your car, or do you have a problem with it locking itself when you leave with kids and everything, and unlocking again without searching for the key when you come back fully loaded from the supermarket standing in front of the trunk?

Here, it mostly comes down to fear of technology and a lack of understanding. The order of those feelings just differs for some people.

No one has to live in a smart house. It’s definitely a more expensive luxury that some want and some don’t. That’s why some people buy new cars loaded with technology, and others choose a basic model like a Dacia Duster.

Reading some of the quite strict environmental arguments in a house building (!) forum on the internet (!) is actually quite interesting to me.

In my opinion, a morning cup of coffee is a really bad example of smart home automation because it requires a lot of sensors for very little benefit (is there a coffee cup under the machine, is there water and coffee powder available), and you still have to clean and refill it yourself or it becomes very complicated (technically). It’s possible, but these kinds of automations are, in my view, far beyond the initial steps.

If you don’t have a fixed daily routine, then the shutters in your bedroom are simply operated manually (via a switch). But all the others in the house should be controlled in a way that makes sense according to the weather and saves energy. Not having to reach for the light switch is convenient (if well configured). With a single button press, a night scene could be activated—so that the lighting doesn’t go to full brightness when you wake up at night but is gently dimmed—especially if you go to bed at different times every day and can’t control this by schedule. With keyless entry, a car locks when you walk away and unlocks when you approach and touch the handle. Why shouldn’t this work in a house as well?

And is your daily routine really that inconsistent, or are you just telling yourself that? My mother is a nurse with shift work. She cursed the automatic shutters ... until she had to live with crank handles again for a while. Is it really that much fun to water the flowers on the balcony regularly? And reminders related to the house (like trash collection, chimney sweeping, or maintenance work) are only helpful to us; no one else needs them, or you keep them in every resident’s calendar anyway—my car even tells me when it needs service.

There are more than enough regular routines in almost everyone’s daily life. NO, I do not and will not automate everything, but the opportunities are sufficient for everyone. That said, there are sensible applications that make life easier. Whether it’s worth the money and whether you want to embrace something new is, of course, everyone’s own decision.

motorradsilke schrieb:

For us, it’s not the “fear” of something new and unknown, but rather the feeling that the house (or the automation) more or less controls us.

As you write, however, this is a feeling that it triggers in you now. You don’t know whether the feeling would remain if you lived in an automated house or whether it is justified. So maybe it is still the ‘fear’ of the unknown.