Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday April 06 2017, @03:17PM   Printer-friendly
from the device-went-doormant dept.

Denis Grisak, the man behind the Internet-connected garage opener Garadget, is having a very bad week. Grisak and his Colorado-based company SoftComplex launched Garadget, a device built using Wi-Fi-based cloud connectivity from Particle, on Indiegogo earlier this year, hitting 209 percent of his launch goal in February. But this week, his response to an unhappy customer has gotten Garadget a totally different sort of attention.

On April 1, a customer who purchased Garadget on Amazon using the name R. Martin reported problems with the iPhone application that controls Garadget. He left an angry comment on the Garadget community board:

Just installed and attempting to register a door when the app started doing this. Have uninstalled and reinstalled iphone app, powered phone off/on - wondering what kind of piece of shit I just purchased here...

Shortly afterward, not having gotten a response, Martin left a 1-star review of Garadget on Amazon:

Junk - DO NOT WASTE YOUR MONEY - iPhone app is a piece of junk, crashes constantly, start-up company that obviously has not performed proper quality assurance tests on their products.

Grisak then responded by bricking Martin's product remotely, posting on the support forum:

Martin,

The abusive language here and in your negative Amazon review, submitted minutes after experiencing a technical difficulty, only demonstrates your poor impulse control. I'm happy to provide the technical support to the customers on my Saturday night but I'm not going to tolerate any tantrums.

At this time your only option is return Garadget to Amazon for refund. Your unit ID 2f0036... will be denied server connection. [Ed's Comment: As of Apr 5, Garadget have apologised for this action and have restored connectivity]

The exchange then went viral, being picked up by the Twitter account @internetofshit and rising to the top of Hacker News.

Source: ArsTechnica


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday April 07 2017, @03:32AM (3 children)

    by butthurt (6141) on Friday April 07 2017, @03:32AM (#490028) Journal

    > Which thread did you post it in?

    In this thread. You replied.

    /comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=18848&cid=489845#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]

    At any rate the 'common dictionary definition' that I get with a single obvious search and no cherry-picking is:

            2. informal

            cause (a smartphone or other electronic device) to become completely unable to function, typically on a permanent basis.

    I'm not seeing how that says the device itself has to be altered. And here's the one I had posted. Of course I cherry-picked the definition that pertains to electronic items. Mea culpa.

    Informal. to cause (an electronic device) to become completely nonfunctional:
    I bricked my phone while doing the upgrade.

    They look rather similar.

    This thing, assuming it was ever actually refused service at their server to begin with (which we have no indication actually happened,)

    > [...] it could still send signals to operate the door, etc.

    My understanding is that those signals could only reach the opener through the central server.

    > It was not changed in any way.

    No one said it was changed. Yet, it was rendered non-functional.

    > Of course it's not true [that someone else could provide the central server.]

    I think that if someone else were offering an alternative service, we would have read about it. How readily someone could depends on how the door opener communicates with the server. Do you know the details of that? If they're published as an specification that can be readily followed, fine, it's not bricked. I doubt that's the situation.

    Anyway, thanks for changing your font.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday April 07 2017, @03:35AM

    by butthurt (6141) on Friday April 07 2017, @03:35AM (#490033) Journal

    correction:

    This thing, assuming it was ever actually refused service at their server to begin with (which we have no indication actually happened,)

    The owner of the company wrote that he had done that. I'd say that's a strong indication.

  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Friday April 07 2017, @04:35AM (1 child)

    by Arik (4543) on Friday April 07 2017, @04:35AM (#490076) Journal
    OK, same definition.

    "I'm not seeing how that says the device itself has to be altered."

    You don't see how making a device completely non-functional means altering the device?

    "My understanding is that those signals could only reach the opener through the central server."

    That makes no sense at all. How can you even imagine that's possible? The device connects to the hardware that opens the door, but instead of simply sending a signal to the motor, which it's presumably attached to, it sends a signal across the internet to a central server, which magically opens the door to which it has no connection whatsoever?

    Not in this universe or any which resembles it.

    "I think that if someone else were offering an alternative service"

    I didn't say anyone was 'offering an alternative service' nor does that have anything to do with anything.

    "Anyway, thanks for changing your font."

    I didn't change any fonts.

    You're batting null, it's like you really don't have a clue how anything works at all.

    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Saturday April 08 2017, @04:05PM

      by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Saturday April 08 2017, @04:05PM (#490875)

      Most IoT devices appear to be designed to be non-functional without a central server.

      Stupid, but the server can be considered part of the device. In that case, the manufacturer can "brick" the device by tampering with their little piece.

      To get the hardware to work again my involve reverse engineering and flashing the firmware.