Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Saturday July 30 2016, @08:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the in-the-dog-house dept.

Humans have been forced to temporarily interact with their dogs or cats -- perhaps both -- after PetNet's internet-controlled smart feeder system suffered a blackout.

For $149, the company provides a web-enabled dog/cat feeder that is pre-programmed to dispense food stuffs at certain time and portion sizes.

But PetNet warned customers [...] that all was not well in its virtual animal kingdom as it was "experiencing some minor difficulties with a third party server. This is being investigated."

[...] "You may experience a loss of scheduled feeds and failed remote feedings. Please ensure that your pets have been fed manually until we have resolved this issue."

Source: The Register .

-- submitted from IRC


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This discussion has been archived.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 frojack on Saturday July 30 2016, @09:59PM

    by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Saturday July 30 2016, @09:59PM (#382073) Journal

    Surely having a fallback time mode would not be too much to ask.
    Its not like the internet never goes down.

    We don't want to make it too foolproof, because, If it were legal, some people would feed their children this way.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by n1 on Saturday July 30 2016, @10:20PM

    by n1 (993) on Saturday July 30 2016, @10:20PM (#382079) Journal

    It's not too much to ask, but I can't see how that would benefit the companies or investors involved in this product.

    I can see how it would cost more in various ways for the company and investors, especially over a "*requires internet connection" disclaimer.

    If they don't keep detailed analytics on every interaction with the system, and retain full control over it, how can they possibly hope to improve the next generation of smart devices to absolve people of their responsibility for their pets and or children?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 30 2016, @11:06PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 30 2016, @11:06PM (#382092)

    We don't want to make it too foolproof, because, If it were legal, some people would feed their children this way.

    I don't know about you, but I'm looking forward to the creation of Bachelor Chow™.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 30 2016, @11:09PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 30 2016, @11:09PM (#382093)

      Its already here.
      Its called soylent. [soylent.com]

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 31 2016, @01:13AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 31 2016, @01:13AM (#382126)

    Tell this to all the shitty sites that use Ajax that times out yet your browser will pretend the page loaded fully. The internet never goes down in the Web 2.0 universe.

  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Sunday July 31 2016, @04:39AM

    by edIII (791) on Sunday July 31 2016, @04:39AM (#382166)

    It's way more fucking stupid than that.

    Who wants to bet that isn't an embedded Linux/BSD device? CRON would solve that problem simply by setting jobs on scripts that disappear in a week, unless reauthorized by a central authority. Water doesn't need to be on schedule, and the most I could see is logging for watering events from GPIO, which means logging to disk locally. This doesn't actually require the Internet. Just log some timestamps on disk and upload them to centralized server in an opportunistic fashion.

    These engineering geniuses created a device fully capable of carrying out all instructions, yet chose to turn it into an overpriced remote control with the entire fucking Internet between them. Not some plants, a freaking out cat, or your misplaced foot between you and the remote sensor, but the whole fucking Internet including any other clueless engineers and malevolent PHBs.

    9/10 of us on this site could code their fucking doohickey for pizza in 20 minutes and we wouldn't need centralized servers :)

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 2) by driverless on Sunday July 31 2016, @07:05AM

      by driverless (4770) on Sunday July 31 2016, @07:05AM (#382197)

      Who wants to bet that isn't an embedded Linux/BSD device?

      More likely an Arduino or ESP8266 or something similar, the cheaper the better. All it needs to do is activate a solenoid at preprogrammed intervals, so you can get away with a minimum of hardware.

      These engineering geniuses created a device fully capable of carrying out all instructions, yet chose to turn it into an overpriced remote control with the entire fucking Internet between them.

      You've just described about 95% of the Internet of Things you Don't Need. It can't be an IoTyDN device if there isn't some Internet in there somewhere.

      I have a cat feeder that I use when I need to go away for a few days. Mains-powered, battery backup, runs off a built-in timer. No hipster iPhone interface that I don't need, all it does is feed the cat when I'm gone.