Ring Doorbell App Packed with Third-Party Trackers - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/01/ring-doorbell-app-packed-third-party-trackers <comment><USER2> Other product companies take note: the tide is turning on all this "tracking" nonsense. Clean up your house now or find yourself shamed into submission later.

Consumers increasingly don't care that "the lawyers said it was OK because it's on page 73 subsection C line 4 of the use agreement For the product." Privacy is the new black.

<comment><USER3> Honestly what we need is an equifax-style hack at the NSA/Facebook/Google to absolutely shock people into reality about privacy.

Imagine being able to type in anyone's name and see their entire search history for the last 10 years. It would be total chaos. We'd have a constitutional amendment enforcing digital privacy within a few months.

<comment><USER4> I'm already thinking of doing any "sensitive" searches (i.e. stuff i would rather google not know, e.g. my mental health state) on google through chrome's incognito mode, but then I think about it more and I realise that if I do a search on incognito mode, the browser probably knows and marks it as an extra special search and hence becomes even more "sensitive" (and reports back to Google)

<comment><USER5> If you're worried about Google knowing, you shouldn't use Google's browser. While they might not mark searches like that, we don't know what Chrome does when we tell it to search for something we're sensitive about.

<comment><USER6> If you're worried about Google knowing, you shouldn't use Google's search engine!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> For those that want to avoid such sillyness, Reolink sells relatively cheap cameras. Rated for out doors, power over ethernet, $50-$60 per camera, and includes a microphone.

They can easily be connected to zone minder, or any software that can take a rtsp:// URL. Even handles motion detection for specific areas of camera, so you can include the driveway but exclude the sidewalk. You can have it email or upload videos... without access to any reolink related cloud.

So you could easily put them in production with zero network access and let something you control notify you with images or video clips for any activity.

There's numerous cheap products, but the reolink seems to be one of the better ones that play well with others and doesn't require any WAN network access.

Ubiquiti and Axis also have some very nice products, but generally are more expensive.

<comment><USER8> Having thrown countless hours into zoneminder I had to give up. It's just too buggy. Does anyone have any other alternatives they've got to work? Open Source or otherwise

<comment><USER7> Try shinobi or motioneye if you want open source.

There's quite a few solutions in this space: free, freemium, and commercial.

<comment><USER9> I don't recommend Shinobi after using it for a few months. It's far from finished, can't do most basic stuff and the interface is horrible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Are many Ring units sold outside of the US? I see them advertised as a way to combat this "porch pirate" thing. But to me, as someone living in the UK, the idea of a delivery person leaving a package on my doorstep for someone to steal is mad. If I'm not in I expect another delivery attempt or for the package to be taken to the secure local* depot where I can pick it up. If they decide to leave it outside my door and it gets stolen, I fully expect (and will get) another one delivered at no cost to me, other than the time penalty. Why is this even a thing? Is this a new thing that Amazon created with their delivery strategy and now you also get to buy the solution from them?!

And if it's just a security camera watching my property/car, then a dumb one sounds fine and cheaper. Not to mention it'll actually look like a security camera which is arguably more valuable as a deterrent.

* rarely that local.

<comment><USER11> So do you just always have someone at home? Or do your packages always go to the secure local depot?

Neither is really a great option in the US because:

most families have both adults working.

Other than a handful of cities, people are so spread out that having enough secure depot's in the right locations would be astronomically expensive.

<comment><USER12> In Sweden most packages are delivered to third party businesses that sign agreements with the delivery companies. Places like gas stations, convenience stores and grocery stores.

Nowadays there are companies that offer evening time home delivery so that you can always be there.

<comment><USER13> we have this here in the USA too. UPS has what's called "access points" where things can be delivered, or are dropped off if they can't get you. Some packages are signature required, so if no signing, it gets sent there. Convenience stores, etc.

It's just mostly people aren't used to doing that and are hard to change. People often just send packages to work or a friends house instead. With access points, they can and will return a package to sender beyond a certain time.

<comment><USER14> > People often just send packages to work or a friends house instead.

I'd say that about half of the packages that get delivered where I work are for individuals getting their personal stuff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wonder why Ring is being specifically called out for this practice. This combination of "trackers" are very common in the app ecosystem as they perform much the same analytics functions used on the web ecosystem (e.g. Branch offers ad campaign attribution - did this user sign up from an ad campaign and which one so I can work out ad ROI). I'd hazard a guess that analysis of the apps on your phone (Android and iOS) would result in well over 50% of them using some combination of these services.

What's more interesting is that it could be argued these fall under the intent of the EU cookie directive (even though in a lot of cases they don't actually use cookies). The only app I have seen asking for cookie like consent is Airbnb (who use all of these same services and more)

<comment><USER16> I think several companies are routinely called out for nefarious privacy invasions. Ring is extra interesting because of the hypocrisy in claiming they're in the home security business, while actually gathering and selling information that can be be directly counter-productive in that effort (such as when a customer is likely to be home or not).

<comment><USER15> The thing is they aren't actually selling that data. All the services mentioned are paid services that ring are paying to use. And ironically they sprang up to fill a need because Google and Apple made it almost impossible to do app install attribution to protect people's privacy. So we now get more invasive tracking to work around that.

<comment> blaser-waffle > The thing is they aren't actually selling that data.

Says who, the company itself? Why install trackers if you're not going to use them?

<comment><USER15> They aren't trackers in that respect. Read up on the companies in question. They basically provide analytics to mobile apps so they can better understand their customers to allow them to improve the experience of the app.

It's the equivalent of Google Analytics.

Now how those companies then use the data they collect as part of providing analytics is another question (and why lots of people prefer to block Google Analytics for example)

<comment><USER14> OK, not technically trackers, but certainly spyware.

<comment><USER17> Bingo! Spyware. Let's call it what it really is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> So how many developers here use Google Analytics, Intercom, Segment, error logging like BugSnag or Sentry, etc?

Wait until the BBC finds out how many of us are giving Amazon user data. (I mean, it's s3 and RDS, but that clarification would be overly pedantic)

<comment><USER19> The difference is that Amazon isn't an advertising company and has little incentive going through user data on their systems. In addition, the data isn't in a standardised format so they would have to spend considerable efforts parsing the data first.

Facebook and Google on the other hand make their money from stalking people and developers are giving them data in a nice standardised format.

<comment><USER18> > Facebook and Google on the other hand make their money from stalking people > and developers

Yet React and Angular are quite popular

<comment><USER19> I fail to see the correlation. You can be an asshole on one side and still make a great product on the other side.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I could show this article to my neighbor who owns a Ring doorbell and he wouldn't care. Nobody I know seems to care about digital privacy. And it's not just people who are less technically knowledgeable, either. A friend of mine who has worked in computer sciences his entire life doesn't care about privacy. A different friend, who already has a raspberry-pi connected to his home network, refused to install pi-hole (pi-hole.net) because, in his words, "I don't really care." Nobody cares.

</comment><comment><USER21> For those interested in alternatives, check out this project to build an open, privacy-preserving home AI/ML platform [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/aikea5/aikea-your- priva...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/aikea5/aikea-your-private- camera-at-home)

<comment><USER22> What does 'home AI' even mean? Most people just want a video camera with a webserver on their doorbell.

<comment><USER23> Quite likely many people don't even want the webserver.

<comment><USER24> webservers can be local, homes.

<comment><USER25> Still just another useless attack surface.

<comment><USER24> Put it on its own subnet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> There is a big difference between saying Ring Doorbell leaks user data, and Ring App leaks user data.

Even though BBC purposefully puts the wrong thing in the title for clicks, I would hope that HN users would pay more attention to detail.

In other news, smartphones spy on you.

<comment><USER27> This is pedantic. The Ring Doorbell doesn't function without the App.

<comment><USER28> "No, you see? It is the remote control that explodes when you push the button. Not the TV! That's entirely different!"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The user data for Google is just crashlytics. Saved a few people a click.

<comment><USER30> _The user data for Google is just crashlytics_

Is there an opt-out? Or, more importantly, was there an explicit opt-in?

Data from crashes on my device is still my data, not Google's. Google can pop up an alert telling me things went pear-shaped, and then _ask_ to send it back to the devs for analysis.

<comment><USER31> Every single app on your phone will use such service (Android or iOS,).

You're not wrong about ownership of data. But highlighting Ring and Google in this manner is some seriously biased and dishonest reporting.

<comment><USER32> Well maybe Ring shouldn't have bundled so many third party trackers.

If it really were just crash reporting, this would have probably gone unreported on.

<comment><USER33> Worth noting that "crash reporting" is very much worth reporting on and paying attention to, as transmitting a lot of sensitive data in crash reports could be beneficial to fixing bugs (but obviously not beneficial to the indiviual's rights).

<comment><USER34> Crash reporting can be important, but there isn't a requirement to use an advertising company to facilitate it.

<comment><USER35> This sort of pedantic hand-wringing is tiring. Google sells many things, one of which is advertising. Firebase Crashlytics may be free, but it's made available by Google in the hopes that developers pay for Firebase's full suite of paid offerings—it's not to populate additional user data to their ad or search algorithms.

<comment><USER34> > it's not to populate additional user data to their ad or search algorithms.

How do you know this?

Is it "pedantic hand-wringing" to not want my DNA analyzed by an advertising company as well?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Should be retitled " _Android_ Ring Doorbell App..." because there is no mention of iOS or iPhone anywhere in the article.

Still sucks, but to iPhone users, this just validates their Apple purchase even more.

<comment><USER37> Do you have some kind of source that would indicate that phone apps on iOS cannot possibly have any sort of 3rd party trackers?

No claims in the article were made regarding the iOS version of the app, so I don't know why we should jump to the conclusion that the iOS version doesn't track what you do and report to 3rd parties.

It looks like the iOS app was not included in the test at all, so no conclusion can be assumed.

<comment><USER36> I agree. But the titling is wrong because it only addresses Android.

Likewise, if the reverse were true, and it only dealt with iPhone, then it should say iPhone in the headline because it didn't address Android.

This isn't a preference argument for one phone or the other - it's about clarity of what the article is about.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Half a dozen ad trackers, a/b testing frameworks, & analytics libraries have been the standard in mobile apps for years.

Growth at all costs.

<comment> rooam-dev How should someone grow a product without a/b testing and/or metrics?

<comment><USER38> Did I say you could? Just pointing out the standard because I'm somewhat surprised this is news to anyone here.

A growth at all costs mindset in many cases leads to redundant and irresponsible overuse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Loads of Android apps do this. If you are running Android >=9 then you can block the trackers by changing your DNS settings to use one from [https://nextdns.io/](https://nextdns.io/)

Instructions on changing DNS settings [https://joyofandroid.com/how-to-change- dns-on-android/](https://joyofandroid.com/how-to-change-dns-on-android/)

</comment><comment><USER40> Does this only apply to the Android version? Wouldn't the iOS version need permission to collect things like bluetooth info?

</comment><comment><USER41> Don't install any apps on your Android telephone.

<comment><USER42> Or better, but still not perfect advice: Do no install any closed-source app on your telephone/computer of any brand.

<comment><USER24> www.f-droid.org

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> The article references Crashalytics and MixPanel as third party services where the data is sent. Aren't those just tools for error logging and usage measurement? Not sure about the others though.

</comment><comment><USER44> I work at Google (on Firebase) but I am asking this question as a regular mobile developer.

What do people on HN find acceptable in the apps they use? As a developer I want some basic analytics and crash reporting so I'm not just stumbling in the dark but I would hate for my users to say that I'm tracking them involuntarily. Is there a way to strike a balance that seems fair? Are there particular services people trust?

<comment><USER45> I think it all depends on what you use that data for. I have no problem with a developer tracking me throughout the app, as long as they use the data to improve their app. The same goes for crash reporting.

But as soon as that data is sold, or used to somehow push sales or content, then it becomes a problem for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> It's frustrating that Amazon is trying to hard to win the prize for being the creepiest tech giant. I generally like Amazon and much of my online shopping is through them, but this makes me more inclined to try alternatives.

I've already mostly dropped Facebook and Google, it'll be harder for me to ween myself off of Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER47> Wow what a great irony - a device that's designed to help your surveil your own property is being used to surveil the people that bought the device and by extension put their trust in it and the company.

It's one thing to have a business model where it's understood that a service is free in exchange for user data but what we are seeing increasingly is this greed where its not enough to sell a good or service for cash because that would be leaving money on the table. These companies seem to have an expectation and entitlement that your data is part of the business model despite not disclosing that to their customers.

</comment><comment><USER48> How does Ring compare with Nest in terms of the privacy issues noted in the article ?

</comment><comment><USER49> This may be a workaround for the app for those who are more technical. Since I have NextCloud Server set up, I added a custom script on the server to auto- download all my ring MP4s from the Ring Server every 15 mins. Also:

\- creates GIF for faster viewing through the nextcloud app. \- updates info for current status of the ring devices.

[https://gist.github.com/parvez/f8375438070fa3b0572013efbe72c...](https://gist.github.com/parvez/f8375438070fa3b0572013efbe72c03d)

It could be enhanced to support SIP for live viewing.

</comment><comment><USER50> Has anyone contacted Ring and asked them to enumerate all the third party services they send data to, why they do it and how to opt out?

I'm a long time Ring customer and this is completely unacceptable.

<comment><USER51> If you are an EU citizen, you can ask the company for that data yourself and if they don't reply, file a complaint with privacy commission of your country.

The various privacy commissions (PC) in the EU are actually talking to each other. The privacy invading companies are testing whether or not they can force their case to be decided only in the jurisdiction of the PC in Ireland. (legally, this is just nonsense... )

I've seen many try this tactic and it has always failed. I'm guessing they are using this as a delay tactic to prevent it being decided by the courts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Is there any legal precedent for a retailer being held accountable for the products they sell. Enough to sway decision making at the C-Level? Perhaps we're one Home Depot or one Lowe's away from "Sorry. We're not going to sell these type of products." A massive return of unsold product could crush a young company. If CVS can stop selling cigarettes, perhaps others might follow but in a different way.

</comment><comment><USER53> This rampant surveillance economy will continue to fester until it bites some influential people where it really hurts. Until then nobody will be safe.

<comment><USER54> There will be safeguards for influential people but not for us.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> The privacy horror aside is there a possibility that this data sharing could possibly be used to subvert the security of the owners home that ring is protecting? Could patterns be inferred such as a home owner's work schedule, when they are on vacation, that they might be using a device with outdated firmware etc? Or is that too far fetched?

</comment><comment><USER55> Can you wipe the ring firmware and repurpose it?

</comment><comment><USER56> This is truly ironic. In that Amazon is using FUD about crime to expose people to potentially criminal exploitation.

</comment><comment><USER57> Makes you wonder why Facebook needs that data? To link who comes home to FB location and people's profiles? I'm sure they pay them for this but then you read what happened after the NSA leak in recent times where the NSA had put intentional backdoors in with companies

</comment><comment><USER58> I hope they do Audible next. I'd really like to know whether or not the extreme sluggishness of the app is due to what I suspect: badly designed activity tracking that implemented by developers who don't know how to do this asynchronously.

</comment><comment><USER59> I would love to see some financial documents leaked from these companies.

Let's say Apple pre installs Google+ on all its phones. Then I want to know how much apple got paid for this, i.e. how many cents is a users privacy worth to them. And how much money did Google make by using this data, i.e. how much was the data really worth.

Because until we have such data, companies can always hide behind phrases such as "... share with partners ... to provide relevant services" and all that nonsense.

<comment><USER60> Does that really matter? Let's say they get a hundred dollars per service, does that make it better or worse, or maybe it doesn't change anything?

Having said that, I've always wondered the same for TV ads. Let's say I wanted the option to pay extra to never see ads, how much would that be? Why doesn't the market give me that option?

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> Nanoleaf light panels also phone home (to Nanoleaf) constantly, from the hardware itself.

</comment><comment><USER62> Time to set up a vpn pi hole combo on a VPS. This is getting ridiculous

</comment><comment><USER63> does anyone know if xprivacylua and adaway can protect me from this kind of bad behavior?

</comment><comment><USER64> A blatant violation of European privacy law. I hope an ICO picks this up (I've filed a notice with mine).

<comment><USER65> Most apps that you have installed track information, ip, carrier etc. Its called analytics. Its naive to think this app does it for evil purposes.

Note: Maybe all apps shouldnt be tracking this. But this is currently how analytics in apps work.

<comment><USER64> That everyone does it is hardly a justification. And companies have no divine right to analytics, especially not when it concerns PII and paying customers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> This all is a side effect of the paranoia built by the corporation's. Why would you even want to look at the door when you are 1000's of miles away from your home. I understand pet and baby monitors but this information being on the web for anyone is just bonkers. We are in an age where Technology is advancing at a pace where we don't understand what we need to do with IoT devices.

<comment><USER67> Aside from the obvious use of monitoring my door while I'm away, it's also useful to knowing when a package is delivered unexpectedly when I'm away from home so I can ask a friend or family member to pick it up so it's not sitting on my front porch for a week or two.

<comment><USER24> > package is delivered unexpectedly

I...huh? How?

Are you a darknet dropshipper? (Nothing wrong with that, just can't imagine what carrier doesn't give you a tracking number that you can get alerts on delivery/check status of.)

<comment><USER68> All those Chinese products with free shipping were like that. They'd show up one day randomly. Also, I buy most of my stuff online so there's always something in flight. Books, toothpaste, whatever.

<comment><USER69> I use 17track for that. It's an app that I drop all my AliExpress/Amazon/eBay tracking codes in and I will get a push notification that the package has been delivered. Don't need a camera monitoring my neighbours front door for that.

<comment><USER7> Heh, so never had a friend or family ship you something?

<comment><USER14> Not without them telling me in advance, no.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> There goes the argument "if you're not paying for the product then you are the product" because ring and associated services aren't cheap.

<comment><USER71> > There goes the argument "if you're not paying for the product then you are > the product" because ring and associated services aren't cheap.

Not really. If you aren't paying for the product, then you _certainly_ are the product. If you are paying for the product, then you _may_ still be the product, but you also _may_ not. It all boils down in that case to how trustworthy and greedy the vendor is.

<comment><USER72> I think the OP's point is that the latter is so common nowadays that it makes more sense to not give the benefit of the doubt and assume that paying for something gives you privacy and makes vendors less data-hungry, and I think that's probably becoming good advice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> Little story for you.

When I made the GPT-2 Chess notebook (sigh... do I link to it and risk seeming like I'm plugging my stuff, or let people google for it? Whatever: [https://colab.research.google.com/drive/12hlppt1f2N0L9Orp8YC...](https://colab.research.google.com/drive/12hlppt1f2N0L9Orp8YCLgon6EF5V3vuR)) one of the first questions a reporter asked me was "How many people played it?"

I had to be like "I have no idea. A few thousand at least, based on bandwidth bills."

Then they started asking if I was tracking the games. "Nope. I don't like apps that track data, so I didn't want to make one here."

And at the end of it, I was like... this is stupid. I should have tracked clicks and tracked the games.

We should have a clear distinction between "user data" and "data that common people might reasonably care about being tracked." The headlines are a strange game of telephone. Every app tracks data. That's what most apps are for.

<comment><USER74> > And at the end of it, I was like... this is stupid. I should have tracked > clicks and tracked the games.

Why do you feel this way? I agree with your positions at the beginning ("I don't like apps that track data, so I didn't want to make one here.") and the end ("Every app tracks data. That's what most apps are for."), but I don't see why that would cause you to want to have tracked games and interaction data on your own project.

Perhaps if I'd ever built something that got popular I'd know the feeling better.

<comment><USER7> Well generally I think anyone who creates something is interested in some feedback on how well it's going.

A developer might react differently if 10 people used their software or 10,000. Or even if 10 people used the program 1000 times vs 10,000 people using it once.

Not to mention that it's hard to iterate on something and make clear improvements if you can't tell how the software is being used. Sure you can read forums, tickets, issues, etc. But if your settings allow 1000 different configurations and 99% of your users use one of 5 different configurations that can be a very useful thing to know.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> I had a ring for one week. After about 24hrs of ridiculous setup, constant notifications when I left the house or anything happened inside the detection zone even shadows, and realizing I didn't coming home to look into a camera that was constantly uploading to someone's computer I'll never be allowed to access - I put that POS back in the box and returned it.

Nice idea in theory, exploitive data mine in practice. I hate it.

<comment><USER26> Ring doesn't upload data unless you pay for a cloud storage account.

You could argue that the doorbell transmits the video/audio over the internet, but that transport is encrypted to the Ring app, and its deleted off of AWS after its viewed on the App.

If you really want privacy, you should also return your cellphone and go back to using a flip phone.

<comment><USER76> > If you really want privacy, you should also return your cellphone and go > back to using a flip phone.

Or how about an iPhone with minimal or no 3rd party apps?

Which is practically impossible unfortunately because in order operate in the modern world you need at least a few 3rd party messenger apps, your bank's app and maybe a few more. Theoretically, however, I can have a phone free from social platforms and 3rd party analytics platforms like MixPanel or AppsFlyer, with regard to whom I have absolute zero trust.

<comment><USER77> > Which is practically impossible unfortunately because in order operate in > the modern world you need at least a few 3rd party messenger apps, your > bank's app and maybe a few more.

I think that this may be true for _convenient_ operation, but not for operating period. I have none of these apps on my phone and, in fact, don't regularly use my phone for anything but receiving calls and listening to audiobooks. (Oh, and alarms, and probably some other stuff I'm forgetting; but not otherwise for interacting with the outside world.)

<comment><USER76> I've tried that. All things aside, in business if there's even one important person you deal with (your investor?) you will have to install at least one of the messengers they use. It's a question of the balance of power. And you'd likely end up having more than one VIP in your contact list anyway, unless you live a totally isolated life.

<comment><USER77> That's a good point—in academia, we're a lot more tolerant of technologically backwards folk like me.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


'Homeless' Galaxies Ejected from Clusters - <AUTHOR> http://news.discovery.com/space/astronomy/tiny-and-speedy-homeless-galaxies-ejected-from-clusters-150423.htm

<comment><AUTHOR> "that underwent some unpleasant gravitational turbulence and flung from their home clusters, marooned in intercluster space"

They make is sound so heartbreaking and sad.

Curious as to the gravitational forces that occurred, not blackhole crazy, but insane to move something that large!</comment>


Why attend predatory colleges in the US? - <AUTHOR> https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/64834/746 <comment><USER2> > _Why would people attend predatory colleges?_

Why would people make an investment with insufficient ROI (Return on Investment)?

Insufficient information.

College Scorecard [1] is a database with a web interface for finding and comparing schools according to a number of objective criteria. CollegeScorecard launched in 2015. It lists "Average Annual Cost", "Graduation Rate", and "Salary After Attending" on the search results pages. When you review a detail page for an institution, there are many additional statistics; things like: "Typical Total Debt After Graduation" and "Typical Monthly Loan Payment".

The raw data behind CollegeScorecard can be downloaded from [2]. The "data_dictionary" tab of the "Data Dictionary" spreadsheet describes the data schema.

[1] [https://collegescorecard.ed.gov](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov)

[2] [https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/)

Khan Academy > "College, careers, and more" [3] may be a helpful supplement for funding a full-time college admissions counselor in a secondary education institution

[3] [https://www.khanacademy.org/college-careers- more](https://www.khanacademy.org/college-careers-more)

(I haven't the time to earn 10 _academia.stackexchange_ points in order to earn the prestigious opportunity to contribute this answer to such a forum with threaded comments. In the academic journal system, journals sell academics' work (i.e. schema.org/ScholarlyArticle PDFs, mobile-compatible responsive HTML 5, RDFa, JSON-LD structured data) and keep all of the revenue).

"Because I need money for school! Next question. CPU: College Textbook costs and CPI: All over time _t_?!"</comment>


Hey Google.  You should compete with Dropbox. - <AUTHOR> http://kent.posterous.com/wheres-my-g-drive <comment><USER3> Look for the G-Drive in 2012 or 2013. It will be a piece of engineering genius that nobody will use. Over-engineering is Google's achilles heal and Dropbox is exploiting that brilliantly. Microsoft and Apple are irrelevant-- they are committed to closed platforms and they haven't demonstrated any competency otherwise. Dropbox should be a textbook case for how scrappy startups can compete against the behemoths.

Edit: Dropbox biggest competition seems to be the shift from file systems to apps. A Google acquisition seems most likely. Personally I think Apple should snap them up for deep integration with iTunes/iOS. It could be a perfect marriage, but it doesn't seem like a very Apple thing to do.

<comment><USER4> Google would make it free - but trawl all your data to send you ads.

Apple would make it apple only - which is kind of irrelevent to 99% of people.

Microsoft would just do it sooooo badly.

<comment><USER5> Well, Apple already has iDisk, which is Mac/iOS only and Microsoft has SkyDrive, which I've heard performs horribly, so it's already happened, except for google.

<comment><USER6> Apple's iDisk is not Mac/iOS only. Any WebDAV client can access it. I use it on an XP machine without any extra software. In fact, using an open standard like WebDAV is probably the reason for iDisk's performance issues. Any WebDAV "disk" I have ever connected to has had performance issues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Why wouldn't Google just buy out Dropbox? Anything they need to build wouldn't be _that_ complicated (what, selective syncing is hard? Isn't there a unix util that did that decades ago?) and they would have the advantage of a honed conversion funnel and solid wom marketing.

<comment><USER8> Why would Google buy dropbox? How does it fit with their established advertising business? How does it feed into their other offerings?

Your claim seems to be "dropbox is profitable, therefore Google should buy it" - Ben and Jerry's is profitable but I don't see it as a potential Google acquisition.

Dropbox is built for a time when the desktop is still relevant. Google are gearing up to overthrow that paradigm. Dropbox doesn't have a clear link to the web at large, or to search, or to the creation and indexing of content. Those are the attributes I associate with "google acquisition fodder". Compare tineye.

If Google do buy dropbox, it'll be as a talent acquisition and/or so they can leverage the userbase into a chrome OS based solution.

<comment><USER9> What would you think if you were told an offer was extended and rejected?

<comment><USER8> I would think the same - that it doesn't fit into their current offerings and that the offer was made so they can get the talent and use the userbase to feed into a future web-os offering.

Did that happen?

edit: Just read some of your comment history. So why do you think the offer was made?

edit2: I mean, ok, say I'm google and I'm thinking about buying dropbox:

We can index the user's documents and provide a kick-ass search interface as a product feature, as well as pushing existing products like google docs. Indexing will also feed into advertising across the board, if the user's logged in to their Gbox we can make any adverts they see relevant based on the contents of their own files, which will potentially create an awesome relevance to the user thus increasing CTR and revenue.

I guess that's a pretty convincing argument actually...

<comment><USER9> I am bound by paperwork to not comment on any actual first hand knowledge, and can not find external sources to point you at. But before it was deprecated, getting Google desktop on every desktop was a priority. Some of those goals are still being pursued.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> As much as I love Dropbox I have a feeling they're gonna get squished by competing products from Google, Apple, and Microsoft that integrate into mobile platforms.

<comment><USER11> I suspect that Apple is already out to completely redefine the Memory Hierarchy. In the process Dropbox will get squished or redefined out of existence.

I was thinking today: If persistent Flash memory has RAM-like characteristics, why are we still treating it like it's a _spinning disk_? Laptops and mobile devices should have a completely different memory hierarchy:

        - <USER2>
        - L1 and L2 cache
        - Main Memory
        - Persistent Memory
        - Cloud Memory

The 1st three are also what we have today, but the last two are completely new. Persistent Flash stores are faster but more expensive than spinning magnetic platter. Cloud Memory is vaster and omnipresent, but much slower and less reliable than the hard drive. Together, they can fill in each other's weaknesses and create something vastly more useful than the old spinning hard drive.

Apple is moving in this direction with their new Macbook Airs, which have taken the first step by taking the MLC Flash chips out of the pointless metal box and placed them on a form factor somewhat like a DIMM. They have moved even further with the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad. Here, we have computers as powerful as workstations of the mid-1990s, but there is almost no notion of a Disk Drive. Instead, files are organized primarily by the Apps that create and manage them.

My prediction is that Apple is moving toward a world (at least for the average user) where there are only Apps and your data magically takes care of itself.

EDIT: Does anyone else also realize that a big reason our lengthy boot-up procedure even exists is because we had to have a spinning disk? Now that we have RAM-like stuff that's cheap enough to use in spinning-disk quantities, we don't really need the kinds of boot-up procedures we have now.

<comment><USER12> _If persistent Flash memory has RAM-like characteristics, why are we still treating it like it's a spinning disk?_

I'm not sure we are (other than low-level details like how the kernel does I/O scheduling and filesystem implementation details). RAM is transient; SSDs and magnetic disk are both persistent. Hence, both SSDs and magnetic disk can serve as stable storage. SSDs and HDs have different performance characteristics, but I'm not so sure that a radical rethinking of the storage hierarchy is actually called for.

 _a big reason our lengthy boot-up procedure even exists is because we had to have a spinning disk_

Offhand, I would guess that a big reason for lengthy bootups is the time required to probe, detect and configure hardware (plus latency stuff like BIOS init). An intelligent OS will be able to arrange the disk I/O that needs to be done on startup so it is mostly sequential; SSDs and HDs are not significantly different with respect to sequential read performance.

<comment><USER11> _RAM is transient; SSDs and magnetic disk are both persistent._

Wow, somehow I missed this fact after 30 years of programming!

 _both SSDs and magnetic disk can serve as stable storage_

Yes, but sometimes a quantitative difference can result in a qualitative one. (Like branching and merging and using historical information in Git. The fact that you can do this so quickly from the local Git repository means you can use it in ways that wouldn't be practical in something like Subversion.)

 _Offhand, I would guess that a big reason for lengthy bootups is the time required to probe, detect and configure hardware_

Why doesn't this apply to hibernating laptops? (Or for that matter, the iPad?) In this day and age, to we always have to turn the power 100% off on a regular basis? Also, there are experimental OS like EROS, where there is no boot-up, only a reactivation of certain facilities like network cards.

The lengthy boot-up process is now living on a set of cultural expectations. There is no longer a technical reason for its existing.

<comment><USER12> _Wow, somehow I missed this fact after 30 years of programming!_

Yay for sarcasm. My point is that changing the performance characteristics of the lower levels of the storage hierarchy does not necessarily mean we need to make radical changes.

 _The lengthy boot-up process is now living on a set of cultural expectations. There is no longer a technical reason for its existing._

Maybe so; my point was just that I don't see how SSDs vs. magnetic disk fundamentally effect the boot-up process. Hibernation vs. power-off is orthogonal to the type of storage used.

<comment><USER11> SSD can also have lower power requirements. Combine SSD with the cloud, and you can have something which can respond faster to the typical user while eliminating any thoughts about storage size and backups.

If you just treat the Flash as RAM, with volatile RAM as a very large L3 cache, the notion of hard drive can just disappear. Everything just becomes orthogonally persistent.

I'm guessing this is a troll. Most programmers I talk to in person just get this without so much exposition.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Google doesn't have a Dropbox product, but Google has put together a series of APIs so that you can create a similar product of your own off their infrastructure.

<http://code.google.com/apis/storage/>

It was presented at Google I/O 2010; though perhaps it didn't make as big a splash considering everything else that was discussed there. Here's the session page on it:

[http://www.google.com/events/io/2010/sessions/google- storage...](http://www.google.com/events/io/2010/sessions/google-storage-for- developers.html)

Then again, I might be mis-understanding what the OP is asking for...

<comment><USER14> Not really about the point you were making, but...

Google seems to be aiming this at enterprise customers looking for essentially a private cloud SAN. Their fees otherwise seem quite high.

Lets compare pricing:

      Google: .17/G storage .10/G in .15/G out US/EU .30/G asia
      AWS <10TB : .14/G storage .10/G in .15/G out US/EU .20/G out asia
      AWS =100TB: .14/G storage .10/G in .07/G out US/EU .11/G out asia
      Loss leading CDN: as low as .10/G storage - .01/G in - .01/G out US only (new customers only)
      Biggest video CDN =250TB: ??/G storage - .10/G in - .10/G out US ??/G out asia
      Managed DFW colo =2TB: 250G storage free - .21/G in - .21/G out worldwide
      Carrier hotel rack 100mb/s 1yr: ~.10/G storage ~.06/G in ~.06/G out worldwide - ~.02/G out citywide

Obviously services offered vary - but the only player google is beating on price is rackspace with their entry level commit, but the colo also gets you ~4ECU's, dynamic content and 24hr phone NOC.

Google competes with AWS at the low end but once you scale amazon wins by 50%-66% or more. Akamai beats google by 33% with a sizable commit but that gets you on net at ~1000 edges and a great SLA. Google won't even tell you where your content is - except that it's US only.

I think this is only being marketed at applications like b2b sales force hosting, data heavy scientific apps and enterprise offsite backups. You'd get killed trying to use them for a consumer service. I mean $0.30/GB to .au AND high latency?

The irony is that google's real operating costs are probably the lowest out of any of the players at least for US delivery. Their backbone enjoys tremendous scale based on their search & ad traffic and everyone peers with them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'm surprised that google is really slow to move on this. Our organisation has already been using Google Apps for a year or so and want to replace our network shares. With all our user accounts and email groups, Google is in the best position to do execute yet the lack of good solutions means we're likely to look elsewhere.

There's a couple of third parties that integrate with Google Docs, but none of them fit the bill from some quick internal tests. Gladinet - unreliable with certain functions. Insync - still very much "beta" mode; no folders, no business plan options.

<comment><USER16> This!

I'm using Google Apps in an SMB, and it's great for zero-admin, but downloading attachments to a download folder, finding them again by filename, doing 'save as' to avoid filename collisions so you can save changes, is a total pain in the ass. And we still need a network drive. We still use Google Apps in spite of this but handling file attachments seems unnecessarily difficult. And no, Google Docs is not a solution. Not all attachments are .docs, some of us use CAD files.

Dropbox, fully integrated with Google Apps and Chrome's Downloads folder, would mean the end for millions of intranets.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I sincerely hope they don't.

Google has made a habit of entering new markets with products priced at 0, destroying competition. In classical economics this is called "dumping", and the only reason they can afford it is because of the huge cash cow that is online advertising.

I would much rather have a healthy ecosystem with many smaller companies competing with paid services (you know, paid, with terms of use, support, and all that), than yet another free service from google and works except when it does not and there is no one to turn to in case of trouble.

</comment><comment><USER18> Why would a cloud-based filesystem be useful beyond storing your home folder? It's not like you need group collaboration on your kernel binaries. You also can't really run different computers off of the same harddrive image (unless you are a corporation and buy multiple, identical machines).

</comment><comment><USER19> I don't think dropboxing an entire harddrive is required. Case in point: I use dropbox for my school files, personal docs, etc and it works wonders. Copying my copy of /bin/bash is kinda pointless.

</comment><comment><USER20> Posted a reponse over on my blog, but figured I'd post it here as well in case you didn't find it (mostly because no one reads it. =))

\--

Kent asked "Where's my G-Drive?" where he pondered what it would be like to have your computer dropboxed (verbing the noun). He went on to dream of a time when your computer was essentially just a thin client connecting to a remote server run by Google, and a all your data was stored there. He listed off some really cool use cases, and then went on to explain why they weren't a possibility yet. Bandwidth, privacy, space, etc.

But he's thinking small. He's also not ignoring some fundamental human concepts, and also why Dropbox is successful.

First, let's look at why Dropbox is successful: automatic syncing. I can be on my computer, move to my iPhone, and still have all the files. Move to my laptop, and the files are there as well. You can even log onto their website into your account and access your files.

None of this is data backup. It's all syncing. Once you realize _why_ Dropbox is successful, you realize what you are actually looking for. You are looking for a device that intelligently syncs your data across all your devices without needing to sacrifice bandwidth, eliminating privacy concerns, and not requiring massive amounts of storage.

So, let's move on, and discover what _the_ service will be that takes the throne.

First, it will focus on syncing intelligently. This doesn't mean syncing everything all the time, but syncing what you use. There are things my iPhone can't open that I sync via Dropbox. It's useless to download this. It's also useless to sync this over the web when my phone and computer are on the same network. So, the idea is to sync, but only when needed. Sync-on-Read. Bandwidth here is an issue, sure. But only in speed, and frankly, when your living in an era when streaming HD movies is a reality and common place, it's not a big concern. Let's just say, Sync-on-Read is no more a problem then the current Sync-on-Save model currently in place. Also, once something is synced, it can be stored locally.

Next, since you only sync when you read, that means you need to connect to machine that holds the data. The downside here is that you need to connect to your home machine to access the data, and the machine needs to be powered on. But, I venture to guess that anyone using a system like this would keep their computers on anyways. After all, a computer shut off can't sync regardless. Of course, you could also ensure that the system will figure out where it can get the file. If I have a file on multiple machines, and the main machine is off, the software can still grab the data.

The benefit to this is you still get to store you data locally. Local storage isn't going away. People want their data. Sure, they want backups, but if their internet goes down, they don't want to lose access to the data. And adding more data to the system is easy. Just add another hard drive like you do now. Also, the service provider need not store the data remotely. They just need to keep track of your various machines, and make sure machine A can speak with machine B. This eliminates privacy concerns. Instead of worrying how much disk space to rent, you just handle it yourself.

Essentially, you turn this from a push environment into a pull. You aren't handed data, you ask for it. The service provider would manage things like figuring out which file is the latest copy, and keep track of local copies in case something changed and you didn't want.

Kent's original plan was "Install G-Drive, Tell G-Drive which files to sync, Wait 3 days for the magic to happen, That's it." In my plan, the idea can essentially be "Install G-Drive" and that's it. Take your phone with you, and have access to the file. Technically speaking, it's not incredibly difficult. It's making the workflow easy. Dropbox easy.

Who will deliver this? Apple has the best opportunity to do something like this. They have the complete infrastructure, from hardware to software, to handle something like this. Controlling the entire pipeline, it's really just a willingness on their part that is needed. Consider for a moment that they already have MobileMe which handles a lot of this. Microsoft can do this. Live Mesh and SkyDrive were initial attempts at this field, but still, it's not a complete end to end solution like what I discussed. Google, if anything, is the one company farthest behind on this. They have various services, like Picasa, that already handle online storage. The problem is syncing everything together across the OS. MS and Apple both have their own operating systems and phone platforms they can use to bring it all together. Google is missing out (and while Android is awesome, it's missing it's older cousin, a Google OS that is actively being pushed).

Could Dropbox deliver? Maybe. At the software end, I think they could pivot fast enough and release a product like the one I discussed quickest. Will they? I don't know. They'd have to charge for the service, and would someone want to pay for this? I would. A couple bucks a month to have all my computers synced like this easily would be nice.

I'd love to leave everything at home, and go, and not worry about forgetting to sync up the pictures this Christmas while I'm at my mother's. If I want to show her videos, I shouldn't have to plan that in advance.

Cloud storage is an excellent idea, don't get me wrong. But I'd much rather have proper syncing first.

\--

[http://blog.jasonlotito.com/uncategorized/whats-better- then-...](http://blog.jasonlotito.com/uncategorized/whats-better-then-kents-g- drive/)

<comment><USER21> This entire idea of pull syncing is based on the premise that Netflix works, so bandwidth must be almost unlimited. But video streaming is a special case, in that the content is specifically engineered with streaming in mind, unlikely to be randomly accessed (but amenable to the procedure if it is), and streamed from a central server. Other content types often require the entire thing to be read before the data is useful. Also, most people's Internet connections have pretty lousy upstream (mine at home is about 14 KB/s, and at work it's about 200 KB/s).

<comment><USER20> Pull syncing wouldn't use any more bandwidth then "push" syncing. As I mentioned, the only downside is the upload speed for most ISPs is much worse then their download speeds. However, you have this same problem with push syncing. The only difference is that for push syncing, by the time you need it, it's most likely already been pushed up, and then down again.

I mentioned two things that solve for this:

1\. Local network syncing. Much of my syncing occurs between my desktop and my laptop. Syncing shouldn't require an outbound connection (send up to dropbox, send down from dropbox).

2\. Beyond large media files, most files people want to sync are still fast on high speed internet. Most pictures and documents aren't large enough to be a concern.

Finally, while most people's internet connections might be lousy, then they will suffer with the syncing regardless of the method used.

So yes, I do realize upload speeds are an issue, but it's not a big problem.

<comment><USER21> I think that "only difference" you mention is pretty crucial given the limitations we're talking about. If it's sync-on-save, then it's syncing while I'm doing other stuff. If it's sync-on-read, then it has to sync _when I need the file_ , which can take a nontrivial amount of time. Looking at my desktop right now (which is just random stuff I happen to have received in the past couple of days — pictures grabbed off cameras, files emailed to me, etc.), I see that 10% of the individual files are over 10 MB and 25% are 1 MB or more. My browser's icon cache takes about 10 MB. Firefox itself is 53 MB. That's a heck of a launch time at 14 KB/s. A 1 MB file on my home computer would take more than a minute to open at work even if I use 100% of my home upstream.

<comment><USER20> > I think that "only difference" you mention is pretty crucial given the > limitations we're talking about

Yes, it's a problem. A problem I talked about in the original post. However, it's temporary problem, and only for people that have to suffer with slow internet. For these people, even download speeds are horrible. Steam, for example, as wonderful as it is, is hated in places where download speeds suffer.

However, global internet speeds are increasing.

For me, I can stream my music and videos from my home to work. While I don't for a moment hide behind this problem, I won't pretend it's a road block.

Simply put: it's a problem as much as people without internet wouldn't be able to use it either. Enough people can use it that it would be useful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I don't see the point. Why would you want google too host your hard drive ? In my book it has only disadvantages.

</comment><comment><USER23> OK, I'll bite. I will do a long bet that Dropbox either 1) IPOs or 2) has a $750MM+ exit by 2014. I can't guarantee that Dropbox IPOs the way that LogMeIn did, but the $750MM hedge is there to say that Dropbox is worth more to Google than Yelp was.

</comment><comment><USER11> Apple: Hacker/tinkerers start turning netbooks into little OS X boxes. Eventually, Apple comes out with the 11" Macbook Air.

Google: Hacker/tinkerers start using their Gmail storage space as a cloud storage utility. Google does nothing. Eventually a 3rd party comes out their own solution with a brilliant additional twist, which becomes massively successful.

If I were Apple, I'd come out with my own Dropbox-like service and call it something like "Warp Drive." (Ansible? Wormhole?) I'd have it sync accounts on different laptop/machines based on about a dozen different "plans" which are never presented as a list to the user, but only suggested, based on their disk use. (Along with one or two options to "downsize" the plan.)

A "plan" for me might go like: store everything on the Mac Mini, because it fits there, and sync everything to the 256GB Air except the Movies directory. (Which will be available anyways through streaming like AirVideo does it.)

<comment><USER24> Apple already has a Dropbox-like service.

<http://www.apple.com/mobileme/features/idisk.html>

<comment><USER11> I tried it years ago. It wasn't 1/5th as good as Dropbox!

<comment><USER24> I use both. iDisk is pretty good for what it is: a webdav drive. Sometimes I just want a place to dump and retrieve files, not sync them. The sync model used by Dropbox is sometimes problematic. I just bought a new Macbook Air and don't want to sync all my Dropbox files, but I do want access to them. However, there's currently no way to selectively sync files. In this scenario iDisk actually works better. Also, the iDisk iPhone app is really nice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> quoted:

 _Privacy: There will be problems. Enough said._

I've also heard that death valley gets a bit warm in the summer.

</comment><comment><USER25> insynhq.com seems close to this (available on google apps marketplace)...perhaps google prefers to allow (charge) vendors to utilitize their storage and not have to worry about the customer service and software side of things...

</comment><comment><USER26> I found Insync they apparently want to create a DropBox over Google Apps insynchq.com</comment>


Retiring? - <AUTHOR> https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2018/10/25/On-Retirement <comment><USER2> Seems a bit all or nothing/permanent, though I don't have the perspective of age quite yet.

In my mind, paid work is the 'degraded' form of life; you do it when you have to, for as long as you have to, and aim to not be doing it.

I've probably spent less than half of my adult life "working" (easy as a software dev, a starting salary is more than double minimum wage).

That doesn't mean I'm not studying/working in the abstract sense (I work on my own projects or play sysadmin or whatever), but money really shouldn't be an issue I think, unless you inflate lifestyle to require an always-on income.

I think another poster dealt with this well. A job is a job, work is work, they are seperate. Work is good; jobs are necessary evil.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have decided to not wait until retirement to do things that I want. I don't know if I will have health and money to do things when I retire. I have a full time job and I try to manage my time well so that I have free time and time to pursue hobbies. As a result my career will most likely suffer and overall I will make less money but I am OK with that trade off. I am happier, less stressed out, get time to pursue my hobbies, have more time with family. I think that's a good deal.

<comment><USER4> I haven't done it more recently for a variety of reasons but in a former job I took month-long vacations every couple of years. I definitely knew co-workers who thought this was just shocking and had trouble wrapping their heads around just taking extended time off like that. (I still take my full vacation; I just haven't taken it in such a large chunk recently.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Never retire. It is the downfall of a human being; you don't want to stop working, you're just wanting a different routine. The author mentioned things they'd prefer to do; oddly enough, they can all be done WHILE working. Maybe stop having a J.O.B. , but not working. I plan to work into my mid-80's.

<comment><USER6> My anecdata with my parents generation suggests the same. Quite often retirees I know grow 'old' quite overnight after retiring. One or two even died soon after retirement with no prior illnesses. The total absence of responsibilities is what I contribute it too. You don't want too much stress in your life, and winding down a bit at 60+ seems legit, but a sound daily rhythm and outside expectation just seem to fit with being a social animal. They all want to see the grandkids more but end up mostly being entertained while doing groceries. Obviously a massive simplification of other peoples real lives, but the fittest 60+ yr olds I meet are usually (partially) employed. I totally acknowledge that it is more feasible for consultant-type white collar jobs and that on it's own is a subset with different health characteristics, so I'd happily learn of more research in this area.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm not quite there yet (mid-40s), but I have reached the point where I've started thinking about what life would be like post-career. I have no desire to sit around watch the news all day, or commiserate over coffee with other retirees, but like Tim, I have any number of projects that could be interesting to work on. They're unlikely to be profitable, but would be fun to build, and would keep the gears turning.

Regarding his comment about his father declining rapidly after retirement, this seems to be a frequent enough occurrence - I heard some statistic once about a large percentage of people dying within 6 months of retirement, but I've no idea if it's accurate. I'm wondering if there are studies that have looked at why this is and what separates people who live long lives after retirement, and those who don't.

<comment><USER8> My guess is a lot of people retire early because they are ill, that a lot of those studies have the causation backwards.

<comment><USER7> I was wondering the same thing as I posted that. It would definitely make sense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> A couple of months ago, I had a nice conversation with a local restaurant owner. He's in his 70s, and mostly runs the place himself, doing the waiting and the cooking. His wife died a few years back, his kids are grown, and what else is he going to do? Watch tv? Move back to Trinidad? (He's lived in Minneapolis since the 1960s) Nah. He likes to cook, he has loyal customers due to his flatly amazing food, and he feels useful. It keeps him going. I'm sure if he "retired", he'd be dead not long after.

<comment><USER10> Minneapolis? Can you share the restaurant? Anything that leaves that big of an impression is worth visiting.

<comment><USER9> Harry Singh's Caribbean. If you like spicy, and like Indian food (Trinidad food is basically Indian food), it's a must-try. He's the Picasso of chili peppers. Do _not_ order "as hot as you can make it", because you'll just annoy him and he might have to call an ambulance. I recommend getting the roti with whatever filling you like - he makes all his roti by hand, refusing to use a machine, because it makes a real difference. Jerk chicken and curried vegetables are standouts, but it's all amazing. If in doubt about heat levels, order milder than you expect and ask for hot sauce. He makes his own from Trinidad scorpion peppers...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This article equates "exciting work" with "9-5 job at BigCo".

After going independent, my impact has only gotten bigger and my work more interesting and engaging. Write and share what you've learned, consult, do OSS, be an "emeritus", work part time... these require the ability to self- manage, but it's a skill that can be learned like anything else.

Why a financially independent person would spend most of their waking hours chipping away on Amazon's problems is baffling to me.

<comment><USER12> I think he explains it pretty clearly. Seems like pretty low stress for him, he seems to be enjoying it and it gives him the opportunity to work on high scale projects, which is more tricky to get when being independent.

I guess the perfect work for him would be to find a way to start contracting for his current position, but I can see how he's happy at work.

On another note, I became independent myself recently and I totally agree with you. I don't see myself going back to another company ever, but I'm still opened to the idea, because it might allow me to get to work on super interesting problems somehow.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Maybe I'm crazy, but I feel like I would get really bored if I were to retire and stop working altogether. I'm in the very fortunate position that I really enjoy the work that I do so that obviously helps. I also love the interactions that occur while working on projects and in business that I'm not sure you really get once you're retired.

I also know a number of older folks (70+) who kept working and it seems like they are still quite a bit more "with it" because they have work to keep them motivated. That's not to say there aren't retired people like that, but my sense is that it's more common among people who keep working beyond retirement age.

<comment><USER14> I believe your chances of staying "with it" increases if you have something meaningful to do and to exercise both your body and mind.

My late grandpa was still quite bright when he was in his 90's. He kept doing work around the house and going for hikes till his last days.

If I ever get to retire before I die, I'll find something to do for "work", but I'll probably not work for someone else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> According to Wikipedia, he's 63. Doesn't seem to be all that old, from my perspective (I'm 40). Good on him, that he has the money to call it quits. I'm saving/investing money to be in that position as well, after reading about the FIRE movement.

<comment><USER16> Thanks for the reference to the FIRE ("Financial Independence, Retire Early") movement. Bookmarking the documentary[1] for this weekend.

[1] [https://www.playingwithfire.co/the- documentary/](https://www.playingwithfire.co/the-documentary/)

<comment><USER15> Never saw any documentary, I just read this classic: [http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly- sim...](http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math- behind-early-retirement/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> One of my favorite books, "A Pattern Language" [1] – which is a sort of architecture manifesto / philosophy book – has a section related to building a workshop for retirement. The idea is that retirement shouldn't be an end, but rather a transition to a kind of work more suited towards one's later years. In building that space, one starts preparing for that next chapter, considering what that new role will look like, and eventually moving into it when the time is right.

1: [https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/79766.A_Pattern_Language](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/79766.A_Pattern_Language)

</comment><comment><USER18> This is constantly in my mind as a 57 yo computer scientist with an uninterrupted working career since 1982.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm jealous that he's able to have "money" as the last (least important?) item in each of the pro/con lists for retiring. I can say the only think keeping me from retiring today is my perpetually insufficient $$$ savings.

I can understand his "reasons to retire" list, but his "reasons to keep working" 1-7 don't resonate with me at all. I mean, I'm glad my own career lets me do some of those kinds of things (moving the needle, working with great people, etc.) but it's not a "reason to not retire." Not saying I'm right and he's wrong, but I feel that strange feeling when you read something from someone whose world view totally unaligned with your own! To be so wrapped up in your career and to have it so strongly define who you are--it seems so alien.

I look at the CxOs and SVP level people in my TechMegaCorp employer and wonder why on earth they still come to work every day. They all have more money than God, and could literally stop any time they wanted, and do whatever they wished to do. Collect airplanes, travel the world, build a monorail for the city, but no, they simply keep on being SVP of software technology or whatever. The mind boggles!

</comment><comment><USER20> We can always negotiate a shorter work week, or shorter/time-shifted work days, or move to a place/company where that can happen. It's easier if you are The Tim Bray, but I've done it before and, if I can do it, so can anyone.

</comment><comment><USER21> I'm 58. The only reason I haven't already made the decision is because, well, I've never retired before. It's hard to _know_ that you've got enough to last the next 30+ years.

I've three income legs - pensions, SS & 401K money. Each has its own perils; all of them seem to have the US's growing instability at their core. Being an expat is looking better and better.

<comment><USER22> Have you considered transferring some of your 401k funds to foreign funds? Perhaps that would help you to feel more diversified?

<comment><USER21> It's an option, but not enough make a major dent. (IMO.) But thanks for tickling that corner of my brain.

<comment><USER23> If you actually want to know the likelihood of your retirement income sources failing use firecalc.com.

The U.S. descending into anarchy is unlikely. The way you are talking it sounds like you're flying by the seat of your pants and feeding into your own paranoia, even though you may be just fine. The backtesting data used in firecalc includes the Great Depression, so is likely to already include your worst nightmares.

<comment><USER21> We actually use a similar tool via our Financial Advisor. It Monte Carlos a probability of meeting our goals and says we're >95%. So you may be right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> > 6\. I want to write a truly great Twitter client for Android Auto, to > keep me informed as I cruise down the road.

Please for the love of all, no.

</comment><comment><USER25> > I want to write a truly great Twitter client for Android Auto, to keep > me informed as I cruise down the road.

Maybe the whole piece is satire.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm 34. My plan is to have a big enough nest egg to retire (even if it's a pretty lean retirement) at 40 and be actually ready to retire by the time my oldest kid graduates HS, which will be when I'm 50. My wife and I want to see the world before big chunks of it are under water, so that's what we'll be doing in retirement.

</comment><comment><USER27> "Progressive friends, people whose opinions I respect, give me shit about working for Amazon."

I hope he's exaggerating. While I can see how friends can meaningfully criticise him, if he feels like shit afterwards, they are not very good friends.

<comment><USER19> I think you might be interpreting the figure of speech wrong: You can "give someone shit" in a joking or less serious way. It doesn't necessarily end with personal internal crisis. I used to give my buddy shit for being an investment banking associate, "you're helping to cause Wall Street to take over the world, duuuuude!" over a couple of beers.

<comment><USER27> Good to know!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I think a good middle ground is taking care of an open source project. Something simple but important, where experience counts a lot more than rambunctious energy to add a bunch of poorly thought-out features that will cause problems.

Some projects need greybeards.

<comment><USER4> If it's something other than a personal hobby project, you usually can't just dip in and out as you feel like it or have time and disappear for a month or two because you want to go on a long trip somewhere.

As I wrote elsewhere, this is the general problem with part-time activities for me. Cutting back on the hours per day or days per week is pretty straightforward. But extended absences are a lot harder.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I would hope that Amazon would be smart enough to let someone like Tim semi- retire. I'm just a few years younger and I completely sympathize with what he says about being tired after a full day at work. I have a raft of project I'm not working on, largely due to not having the energy I once had. Maybe working 30 hours, or 20 hours, a week should be an option for more people. I would seriously consider working half time if I still got health care. I expect health care will keep me on the job until age 65 even if I have the money to quit sooner.

<comment><USER4> The problem for me--and I've thought about this--is that shorter days wouldn't really buy me anything (I already have a lot of flexibility) and a 4 or 3 day week would only buy me, well, longer weekends. Those would be nice but nothing life-changing. What I'd really like to do is take regular extended vacations to go hiking, etc. And, once you're heading off for a month here and there, it's really hard to keep up with what's going on/being someone people can depend on/etc.

It is possible in some roles where things don't change all that much, you don't need to deal with the business side, and tasks are fairly short in duration. (I knew someone who worked as a lawyer for around 6 months a year.) But for me, disappearing for a month or two at a time and unplugging would be hard to pull off while doing what I do now.

</comment></comment><comment> village-idiot Retiring without a plan for what you're going to do with all the time is a very bad idea. You don't have to have hobbies and what not planned out with the rigor you'd bring to a day job, but you need _something_. I've seen far too many people in my family retire, plop down in front of a TV, and fall apart mentally and physically within a few years.

Social contact is good too, and an underrated aspect of in person day jobs. Social isolation kills.

</comment><comment><USER30> please don't write that twitter client

</comment><comment><USER31> Ivan Sutherland quoting Fred Brooks: "It's not that I'm not planning to retire, I'm planning _not_ to retire."

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR9pAaQlVRc#t=2m30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR9pAaQlVRc#t=2m30)

</comment><comment><USER32> I'll be in that position, minus the fame, eventually as well.

I'm leaning more towards a second career around 50 at this point. Not any stop in work really, until much later. Just something less stressful; and to say _I finally did it_.

</comment><comment><USER33> It seems to me that his reasons to retire are much more geared towards himself than are his reasons to keep working(?)

</comment><comment><USER34> retire if you can. really at the end of your life you are never going to say to yourself 'i worked too little', but 'what would have happened if i had stayed on holiday a while longer in spring 2018 instead of going back to work'</comment>


I No Longer Have Any Trust in the Nest Protect - <AUTHOR> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Nest-Protect-Fail&ut <comment><USER2> Some things are fine just being "dumb" products. Smoke alarms have worked (well, too!) for years long before Nest arrived, adding likely thousands of lines of code to a device that literally only has to beep when it detects smoke or CO.

I have a $20 hunk of plastic on my ceiling. It beeps when it detects smoke, stops when I press the button, and requires battery changes once or twice a year. It doesn't have a smart phone app, wake me up in the middle of the night unnecessarily , cost $100, or add a ridiculous amount of complexity.

<comment><USER3> I have a $20 hunk of plastic on my ceiling too. It beeps whenever I cook a bunch of things, won't stop until I get out the stepladder and literally press a button on it, and when it needs a new battery it helpfully lets me know by beeping just infrequently enough that I can't tell if I'm imagining the beep, or tell which smoke detector it's coming from.

The Nest seems like overkill to me, but let's not pretend that old-fashioned smoke detectors are some kind of awesomely perfected tech.

<comment><USER4> I disagree, these 'dumb' smoke detectors are spot on.

Learning to cook, ceiling height regulations and hallucinating aren't problems a smoke detector is trying to solve.

Also, if it beeps when there is smoke (from your cooking), it is doing it's intended job.

Fires from cooking (2013) take up nearly 50%!! of residential building fires.

SEE: [http://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/statistics/](http://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/statistics/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This happened to me a week or so ago. Unlike the OP, I searched for "Nest Protect false alarm" and was sent directly to this helpful page: [https://nest.com/support/article/Nest-Protect-sounds- false-s...](https://nest.com/support/article/Nest-Protect-sounds-false-smoke- alarms-or-my-Nest-app-says-The-smoke-sensor-has-failed)

After blowing the visibly-accumulated dust out of the interior everything was back to normal.

I wonder if the OP uses similar debugging tactics on servers that send alerts? "Hmm. 'CRITICAL: disk full' alert? Guess I'll hit it with a hammer until I stop getting paged."

<comment><USER6> Yeah, the difference with the disk full alert and the alarm is that the alarm is emitting a very obnoxious noise continuously while you're trying to debug it; and in the meantime, not actually providing a useful service, like the server is. Trying to debug a problem at 3 AM when you just want to go back to sleep because there isn't anything actually wrong, just faulty alarm hardware, is not nearly so useful as clearing out some space on a full disk when it is in active operation.

<comment><USER7> I've never seen a Nest product in person. A quick search [0] makes it look easy to replace the batteries in all models. Can't you just remove the battery plate and pop one out quickly before debugging?

[0] [https://nest.com/support/article/How-do-I-replace-my-Nest- Pr...](https://nest.com/support/article/How-do-I-replace-my-Nest-Protect-s- batteries)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Here's a good video demonstrating a similar experience:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsMkLaEiOY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsMkLaEiOY)

It is amazing how many of his attempts to silence them fail, until he finally gives up and packs them away in multiple coolers in his garage to insulate away the noise.

<comment><USER8> With a little bit of editing Brad could have made a fantastic terror short film out of that video.

<comment><USER9> I felt like [https://www.google.com/search?q=I%27m+sorry+dave](https://www.google.com/search?q=I%27m+sorry+dave) all along.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Back when I worked at Best Buy in high school, I heard this basic story -- "A single unit of a particular product went bad, and therefore this product/brand is untrustworthy and bad, and I will never buy it again." \-- from probably half the people who walked in.

Sony/Toshiba/Panasonic/Dell/HP/Compaq/Apple/Canon/NEC... seriously, every brand of anything, there was someone who was prepared to swear up and down that it was all junk, because one thing broke on them one time.

There's something interesting about that, to be sure, but I don't think it has much of anything to do with Nest.

<comment><USER10> It's slightly different when a product is supposed to be significantly more reliable than consumer entertainment. And even in that space, where there are multiple similar options, it's not crazy to use the "I've had [good/bad] luck with brand X" as one of many shopping evaluation metrics.

A single unexplained false positive is rightly enough to ruin an end user's confidence in a smoke detector. And the rate I hear about Nest Protect failures is enough to shake my confidence in the product even without experiencing it first hand.

<comment><USER11> > single unexplained false positive is rightly enough to ruin an end user's > confidence in a smoke detector.

Wait what? You want false positives. You definitely don't want false negatives.

<comment><USER12> > You want false positives

Absolutely, 100%, no. This is terribly wrong. I work for a company that manufactures smoke detectors, and false positives are almost as dangerous as false negatives. False positives encourage people to disregard the alarm as "just a false alarm", and ignore it, which can, and has, led to people die needlessly.

Also, if one of our products woke people up in the middle of the night because of a false alarm and they were unable to silence it, I would join them in calling it crap.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's simple, designing a smoke detector for convenience is a really bad idea because it adds unnecessary complexity to something that has just one purpose: to save lives. The primary design pattern is failing safe. In the case of warning devices, this means loudly and spectacularly so that ignoring the problem is more unpleasant than fixing it. Convenience features are all centered around preventing this.

On the other hand, what sounds like a feature, one unit triggering all the others, doesn't add anything in a residential setting because smoke detectors are required to be really loud and annoying and awaken people when their is a danger of smoke [1]. If building wide notification matters, there's no substitute for hard wiring.

[1]: Mortality from dwelling fires is largely from smoke inhalation not burns. That's why smoke detectors rather than heat detectors are used.

<comment><USER14> You are the most correct and relevant person to have commented so far. Adding consumer-level smarts to safety-critical devices, is a very very bad idea.

I do like hard-wired one-triggers-all in residential settings, but my house has three floors and if I'm soundly asleep in the top floor, an alarm going off on the ground floor won't wake me up :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Nest seems to have a big problem with false alarms. There's an article in the San Francisco Chronicle.[1] It's so bad there's a class action lawsuit against Nest.[2] There's no reason a photoelectric smoke detector should be so troublesome. (Nest is photoelectric only - no ionization detector.)

Photoelectric detectors are supposed to automatically compensate for dust accumulation. See UL standard 217, section 9, "Automatic Drift Compensation for Smoke Sensing". Someone should take a Nest smoke detector apart and figure out how they do their compensation. Here's a paper on drift compensation for smoke detectors.[3] This is a solved problem.

Maybe Nest got too fancy and tried to handle it in the "cloud".

[1] [http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Nest-smart-smoke- dete...](http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Nest-smart-smoke-detectors- not-so-smart-6305235.php) [2] [http://www.girardgibbs.com/nest-smoke- detector/](http://www.girardgibbs.com/nest-smoke-detector/) [3] [http://www.systemsensor.ca/es/docs/guides/A05-0340.pdf](http://www.systemsensor.ca/es/docs/guides/A05-0340.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER16> So, let me get this straight:

* One unit sounds a false alarm (because normal smoke detectors _never ever do that_ )

* The rest of them relay the alarm

* He then _takes a sledgehammer_ to the unit that generated the false alarm

* ..And because of this, he has "no trust" in the nest protect.

And this guy writes for Phoronix?!

Yknow, downvote me if you wish, but that post just comes off as remarkably ignorant, with a side of "all that newfangled tech these days..." ludditism subtext. And the fact that he _took a goddamned sledgehammer_ to the smoke detector is just the icing on the cake. It was stupid behavior, as is the suggestion that we take that post seriously.

Devices fail. Find a person, any person, and they'll tell you that they won't use X brand of thing because they had one unit of said thing fail on them one time. This is that fallacy, writ large, but less forgivable because this person writes for a tech blog of some note.

</comment><comment><USER17> Just to counter his anecdote, I'll give mine. I have two hard wired Protects, since they were launched. They've gone into their low threshold alarm modes twice from cooking, and both times I've had my kids silence them. They know how to "go wave at the alarm" because they're around when I test it (monthly) and I tell them about it. I've never had any unusual behavior, I look out for the green "everything's okay" response every night when I turn off the lights, and I've been very happy with the Nest Protect.

<comment><USER18> The Nest Wave feature has been disabled since April 2014 [https://nest.com/support/article/Nest-Protect- Safety](https://nest.com/support/article/Nest-Protect-Safety)

<comment><USER17> Guess that goes to show you how long it's been since I've had a false alarm. Makes me feel even better about it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I can attest to similar feelings during multiple middle of the night false alarms with dog barking and kids crying. I've followed online support articles including regular dusting and all units are hard wired. I've spoken with support on multiple occasions and exchanged 3 of 5 units with Nest. The units have improved over time with software updates, but continue to be problematic. During one recent false alarm we were not home and the neighbors called the fire department who had to break in to verify there was no fire and disable the alarm. I contacted Nest support after that incident and they were unable to determine the cause of the alarm. We never had a false alarm with the previous dumb detectors.

</comment><comment><USER19> To be fair, getting some "false positives" is quite common even with normal, dumb smoke detectors. The real question here is how frequent such behavior occurs. Personally, I'd happily tolerate some false positives if in exchange I can be sure that the alarm will always go off in case of real danger.

Also, when working with an imperfect measurement device the engineer designing the system will always be forced to choose an operating point that fulfills the desired characteristics of the device best. In case of a smoke detector the most desirable characteristic is probably that it ALWAYS goes off when there is some smoke in the room, so choosing a working point that might incur some false alarms but that will never (or only under very unlikely circumstances) create a false negative is still the best choice. Of course there are other strategies for dealing with failures in a given component (e.g. by using several, distinct and uncorrelated sensors), but those tend to increase complexity and cost as well (after all, no one wants to spend a fortune on a fire detector).

<comment><USER14> Lots of people are throwing around the words "false positive" in relation to dumb smoke detectors, and I suspect a lot of you mean "the alarm sounded, but I wasn't about to die". If it detected smoke, it told you there was smoke. That's a true positive :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> While visiting my parents this summer I realized they had no working smoke or CO detectors. I ordered some 10 year lithium units on Amazon (not Nest Protect). Two weeks after we left one of the smoke detectors went bananas and wouldn't stop beeping. My father had to pull the "permanently disable" tab to get it to shut off.

My point is no technology is perfect; not even normal "dumb" smoke detectors.

<comment><USER21> We've had interconnected smoke alarms for years in our houses and it has been my experience that what's describe with the Nest happens with every brand of interconnected smoke detector I've ever had. In the last 20 years or so we've had at least a dozen alarm events, many at night and during the winter where all of them will go off. It turns out that there are two sensor types, optical and ionizing radiation. Both are susceptible to interference by bugs, specifically small spiders as well as their waste products and webs. Moths also can cause a problem if they get inside a unit and cause dust to be kicked up. I suspect false alarms happen more in the winter because spiders and other critters might seek out the additional warmth at night that the units provide. Typically when our alarms go off, I trace it back to the originating unit, pull it down, disconnect it from the mains and take the battery out. If it happens in the middle of the night I'll wait till morning to take it out to the shop to blow it out with an air-compressor. I won't buy any unit that doesn't allow me air-gap the power - that's why I walk right past the Nest units at the local hardware store. To mitigate this problem with my existing detectors, I've started lining the inside of the units with double-sided sticky tape when they have a false alarm event. My hope is that it will trap insects. It seems to work, but your mileage may vary.

<comment><USER11> Doesn't poking a vacuum cleaner nozzle at them once a month / week work?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Reading the title, I expected to read about some deep technical design flaw or a bad direction decision or something...

</comment><comment><USER23> Cache: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1sJ0j7O...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1sJ0j7OhH_IJ:www.phoronix.com/scan.php%3Fpage%3Dnews_item%26px%3DNest- Protect-Fail&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1&vwsrc=0)

</comment><comment><USER24> A false positive is better than a false negative. And OP's actions have presumably precluded any further diagnostics.

I think once it'd had the heck smashed out of it with a sledgehammer, it's out of warranty and Nest/Google/whatever won't be in a hurry to RMA it.

Which is not to say I'd have necessarily done anything different, or that it was OP's responsibility. I'm just saying it's not very helpful.

It could have just been something daft and it just needed to be blasted clean. Or it could be something serious and systemic, in which case getting the manufacturer to take a look would have been wise.

Still, if my whole house was turned into some sort of chamber of loud alarms in the middle of the night, I don't think logic would have been my primary response either.

<comment><USER25> I think the Nest smoke detectors are overengineered pieces of shit. The dumb whitebox kind you buy from Walmart are well understood, you know where you are. If any one goes off at random at night you push the silencer button, throw the thing out and replace it for very cheap. But they won't turn the whole house into Pandaemonium and tempt you to fetch the sledgehammer for an exorcism. It's another instance of Chesterton's Fence.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This space is just bizarre in general. The fact that a smoke alarm was Nest's #2 product was strange given the advantages over standard ones are marginal. Then they did a poor job executing (remember accidental wave off...). In the same space, all these VCs pumped butt loads into this mysterious company, Leo, who was making an audio/internet bridge for smoke alarms (I am sure they had more eventual value planned but that was the pitch to the consumer). I think they laid off over half the team when reality set in.

</comment><comment><USER27> I had the same thing happen to one of mine recently - I put it in the microwave (not on) to silence it. No smoke, no fire, nothing - and it went absolutely bananas.

</comment><comment><USER28> >Once smoke reaches emergency levels, Nest Protect can't be silenced- by regulation in the US and Canada. Address the source of the problem, and Nest Protect will quiet down when the smoke level gets lower.

[https://nest.com/support/article/Nest-Protect- Safety](https://nest.com/support/article/Nest-Protect-Safety)

</comment><comment><USER29> Due to their nature smoke alarms have to fail in the most annoying way possible, and be difficult to disable. I decided a couple of years ago to sleep by a window and take my chances. Now I can eat steak without that cold bead of anxiety sweat as I wait for the cooking detector to go off.

<comment><USER30> "and be difficult to disable"

Difficulty to disable doesn't really benefit you in a fire.

<comment><USER31> Having a disabled fire alarm doesn't really benefit you either in that case.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> My unit had its path light on all night and wore out the battery's on a nightly basis. It went from full battery to chirping in less than a night.

Support wasn't very helpful, so I just disabled that feature and haven't had an issue since.

</comment><comment><USER33> Some detectors respond well to blowing fresh air into them when they misfire- holding them in your hand and swinging swiftly back and forth in fresh air. I don't know about these devices specifically.

<comment><USER34> That only helps when there is a cause to the false alarm, steam from a shower or cooking smoke typically.

<comment><USER33> They can also trip with things like dust and some other ways of fouling the detector or circuitry that I haven't yet discerned. Again- different system, but I've had success.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I got to stay in a house that had a nest thermometer. The AC compressor happened to be broken and the nest perpetually said 1 hour until cool. Nest isn't smart enough to detect a broken AC.

</comment><comment><USER36> Some guy had a problem with his Nest Protect. Why did someone rush to put this on HN? Will we need to hear about his car problems, too?

<comment><USER37> Google Derangement Syndrome guarantees that all such articles reach the top of HN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I've never had any trust in the Nest Protect, because I've never used it.

</comment><comment><USER39> I wonder what Nest Protect is using to detect smoke that it false alarms, in a pot with a lid on it, without any smoke anywhere in the vicinity.

Unsmart smoke detectors use minute amounts of radioactive materials (such as Americium-241[1]) and almost never false, although they can be annoying if the source of smoke is otherwise legitimate.

My chemistry professor in college pointed out that a big stack of smoke detectors in a hardware store was not regulated and yet would collectively emit radiation that would probably exceed legal limits for people walking by. I thought about that the last time I was in Home Depot and there was a huge stack of $10 smoke detectors. (Yep. I bought three.)

1\. [http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Non-Power-Nuclear- Applicat...](http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Non-Power-Nuclear- Applications/Radioisotopes/Smoke-Detectors-and-Americium/)</comment>