Cheesy murder mystery plot device: hack in and disable carbon monoxide detection and then pump house full of carbon monoxide, re-enable detector... viola a modern locked room mystery.
Nest has stopped selling its smart smoke alarms after it discovered a flaw
which could prevent the timely detection of fire.
the company is not aware of any customers who have experienced it
this is disingenuous. you would expect this feature (detect fire and save your life) to be used by a tiny, tiny percentage of customers. the fact that nobody's experienced the failure does not make this situation any better.
it's like selling a car with a broken airbag. "well, it's not caused me a problem, I don't see the issue ..."
(I'm not criticising Nest, they're doing the right thing. I'm saying it's bad journalism to throw that in the article as if that mitigates things)
> Nest's own internal testing identified this problem and the company is not aware of any customers who have experienced it, "but the fact that it could even potentially happen is extremely important to me and I want to address it immediately."
Where did they imply that the situation is better because no one has experienced the failure??
I felt smoke alarm was un-natural product for Nest, but again they were the men in arena and its their company - much respect there. I was anticipating something like a device that lets timing for water heater and calibrate the temperature etc. but I guess there are just too much variety of water heater systems for that, but it would be cool and reduce gas bill and in a true nest fashion would pay_for_itself.
But this device also show-cases how bringing "smartness" into safety devices is fraught with risk and in the case smoke detector the convenience is not worth the economics. The Nest thermostat was true win-win value proposition - where as the Smoke detector is just not that.
Is there any more information on what exactly the problem was? From the article it is unclear if this is a pure software bug, a UI problem, or something else.
Question: If this was a simple fix (disabling Wave) for a convenience feature (waving instead of having to reach and hit a button), then why are they stopping sales? It would seem logical to update all unsold devices to disable Wave and continue on with sales.
Safety concern, slightly. Nest has made note that this feature have never been compromised yet (then again, its the one time when the Wave does fail that caused a huge issue so this point is null). Also, the Wave feature does not affect the detection of smoke, only the resulting alarm.
I think there is something else going on here. Possibly a more serious safety hazard. If a software update can solve the Wave issue, then why the stopped sales? If there are stopped sales, why not a more serious email/note or a recall?
Aww that's sad. What I liked about the Nest smoke alarm was that I could check which of my various houses was on fire, right from my smartphone. Ugh, guess will have to wait for version 2.0.
sigh I just ordered one of these and was really looking forward to it :(
As a safety device, it's a no brainer - I have to return it until it's rock solid. I can't knowingly replace my existing smoke detector with one which has the potential to under perform.
As a safety device, it performs to the standards that are expected. The issue is with a "feature", which lets you silence the siren in situations where the alarm is a false one. The siren can still be silenced by pushing the button.
[+] [-] eik3_de|12 years ago|reply
How can I be 100 % sure that the "just beep when smoke" feature can't be remotely disabled without my notice?
Intelligent home appliances are nice and all, but when the lives of your family depend on it, I'd rather be on the KISS side.
[+] [-] rbobby|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raldi|12 years ago|reply
Would you therefore avoid streets?
[+] [-] atwebb|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brey|12 years ago|reply
it's like selling a car with a broken airbag. "well, it's not caused me a problem, I don't see the issue ..."
(I'm not criticising Nest, they're doing the right thing. I'm saying it's bad journalism to throw that in the article as if that mitigates things)
[+] [-] spuz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] schnevets|12 years ago|reply
https://xkcd.com/937/
[+] [-] darkarmani|12 years ago|reply
> Nest's own internal testing identified this problem and the company is not aware of any customers who have experienced it, "but the fact that it could even potentially happen is extremely important to me and I want to address it immediately."
Where did they imply that the situation is better because no one has experienced the failure??
[+] [-] sremani|12 years ago|reply
But this device also show-cases how bringing "smartness" into safety devices is fraught with risk and in the case smoke detector the convenience is not worth the economics. The Nest thermostat was true win-win value proposition - where as the Smoke detector is just not that.
[+] [-] M4v3R|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _Robbie|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] justincormack|12 years ago|reply
Basically the wave to disable alarm feature is too aggressive, and other movements can disable it.
[+] [-] coreymgilmore|12 years ago|reply
Safety concern, slightly. Nest has made note that this feature have never been compromised yet (then again, its the one time when the Wave does fail that caused a huge issue so this point is null). Also, the Wave feature does not affect the detection of smoke, only the resulting alarm.
I think there is something else going on here. Possibly a more serious safety hazard. If a software update can solve the Wave issue, then why the stopped sales? If there are stopped sales, why not a more serious email/note or a recall?
[+] [-] nutate|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alistairjcbrown|12 years ago|reply
As a safety device, it's a no brainer - I have to return it until it's rock solid. I can't knowingly replace my existing smoke detector with one which has the potential to under perform.
[+] [-] hugodahl|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raldi|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] csmatt|12 years ago|reply