this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
69 points (90.6% liked)

Selfhosted

40329 readers
364 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
69
Why is replacement for home device controls so complicated? (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by gedaliyah@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
65 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I recently learned about Home Assistant here on Lemmy. It looks like a replacement for Google Home, etc. However, it requires an entire hardware installation. Proprietary products just use a simple app to manage and control devices, so can someone explain why a pretty robust dedicated device is necessary as a replacement? The base model has a quad core processor, 4 gigs of ram, and a 32 gig hard drive. Admittedly it's no gaming PC, but it's no arduino either.

What actually happens when I turn on a smart switch in my home? Does that command have to be sent to a server somewhere to be processed? What really has to be processed, and why can't a smartphone app do it?

Edit: I am still getting new replies to this (which are appreciated!), but I wanted to share what I've learned from those who have posted already. I fundamentally misunderstood how smart switches work. I had very wrongly assumed that when my phone is connected to the WiFi, it sends a signal over the local network to toggle the switch, which is connected to the same network, and it turns on/off. While there are technologies that work like this (zigbee, kinda?), most smart home devices rely on a cloud server to communicate the signal. This enables features like using the switches from outside the home network, automation, voice controls, etc. The remote server is what's being replaced.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lifebandit666@feddit.uk 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

My words.

When you read "Cloud" change the word in your head to "Someone else's computer"

So when I was using Tuya lightbulbs I was connecting Tuya's Computer to Googles Computer to turn my lights on.

Now I use Home Assistant, I'm connecting MY computer to Googles Computer to turn the lights on, since I'm asking Google to turn MY lights on.

I can just not use the Google Cloud and have a voice assistant in Home Assistant do it, then I'm just using my own computer.

Now then, you don't think that all the photos you've ever taken reside in an app on your phone do you, because if you do I've got some news for you....

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago

Except Google likes to collect that data

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (6 children)

I don't really understand why a computer is necessary at all, is the thing. I know that it's possible to use wifi network to send a signal between two devices. I have a sound board that works this way, and manages to communicate precise multichannel instructions directly over the network without an internet connection.

If I want to turn on a light switch, it seems like all I should need to send is the location of the light switch on the network and the on/off command. I know that there is not the computing power in the light switch itself to process much more than that.

Do these devices all connect to a remote server to switch on and off??

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.procrastinati.org 5 points 6 months ago

Yes. That's why it's called the Internet of things. Every "smart", wifi connected, device you have uses that connection to communicate with a remote server. The app on your phone does the same to control the light.

Check out Zigbee for an example local control.

[–] cron@feddit.de 4 points 6 months ago

Many "smart" devices are sold with the idea that you can control your home from somewhere else. Maybe change the temperature on your way home or get notified when someone rings your doorbell. All this stuff requires servers to work.

Controlling some lightbulbs via bluetooth/wifi would be possible of course, but probably not very interesting for many.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago

https://github.com/jkbenaim/hs100 if you have tplink kasa hardware this cli tool lets you send direct commands via Wifi, no hub required. it is not that the tech actually needs a server, it is that the server handles IP address changes, records data, checks switch on/off status, scheduling, etc, to provide a better experience than hitting an on off command.

[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Pretty much, yes.

I think you're underestimating the computing power of these devices. If it has WiFi, it has an operating system.

You're looking for something like ESPhome maybe. It's a project from the same people that do home assistant. There's a web server (and/or local API) available that allows you to toggle outputs locally, your browser directly to the microcontroller.

[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

From the wifi wikipedia page> Hardware>Embedded Systems

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi

Increasingly in the last few years (particularly as of 2007), embedded Wi-Fi modules have become available that incorporate a real-time operating system and provide a simple means of wirelessly enabling any device that can communicate via a serial port. This allows the design of simple monitoring devices. An example is a portable ECG device monitoring a patient at home. This Wi-Fi-enabled device can communicate via the Internet.

[–] oldfart@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

It's crazy, given that all these devices have something powerful like an esp32, isn't it?

I've done some of my home stuff this way, but I had to program it myself. Tasmota has some features which can be used without a server, but that's just for simple stuff like switches. For whatever reason (simplicity for non tech people?), out of the box products don't work this way.

If you don't have days of spare time, you buy ready made products and set them up in minutes in Home Assistant

[–] Lifebandit666@feddit.uk 1 points 6 months ago

The computing as to when they need switching on and off is done by the computer.

I used to use Tasker and Smart Life connected through Google to control my lights. It worked but it was fucking shit. I wrote all the logic for it based off my phone, so it kinda worked for me, and everyone else in the house hated it.

Now it's all controlled by a computer based in the home, based on sensors that are in the home from all kinds of manufacturers using different protocols (because that's what Home Assistant does, conglomerate protocols) it works much better for everyone involved.

You can try to make iot devices work without a computer or cloud if you like but it will just be absolutely garbage.

Good luck