Cats, dogs starve as web-connected chow chute PetNet plays dead(theregister.co.uk)
theregister.co.uk
Cats, dogs starve as web-connected chow chute PetNet plays dead
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/27/petnet_outage/
58 comments
A broken automatic door from Amazon killed my friend's chickens. Not quite an automated feeder, but since the door opening was a condition of the chicken eating, similar situation.
There are some interesting points this brings up expanding beyond the whole internet-of-things/robot-ification of the world.
a) Google, Amazon, and Facebook mean really bad products can get global reach instantly. Even Walmart had pretty big hurdles which products had to cover. There are some controls in place, but the problem has to be pretty large to register.
b) Products accidentally killing humans let alone animals is a very common occurrence, see global vehicle deaths. Plenty of stories of very dangerous products litter Amazon reviews.
c) The companies making a lot of money from bad products are the online marketplaces. Somehow this hasn't hurt their brands too much yet, which is interesting.
d) There is a market need for a better rating and review process for everything. Given the more reviews are viewed publicly the greater their perverse effects are so maybe it won't even be publicly viewable.
I spend a lot of time thinking about the d) problem. The scarier thing is that this already exists to a large extent in many businesses using machine learning methods and labeled fraud detection. What happens in a future IOT where you product doesn't function on purpose?
There are some interesting points this brings up expanding beyond the whole internet-of-things/robot-ification of the world.
a) Google, Amazon, and Facebook mean really bad products can get global reach instantly. Even Walmart had pretty big hurdles which products had to cover. There are some controls in place, but the problem has to be pretty large to register.
b) Products accidentally killing humans let alone animals is a very common occurrence, see global vehicle deaths. Plenty of stories of very dangerous products litter Amazon reviews.
c) The companies making a lot of money from bad products are the online marketplaces. Somehow this hasn't hurt their brands too much yet, which is interesting.
d) There is a market need for a better rating and review process for everything. Given the more reviews are viewed publicly the greater their perverse effects are so maybe it won't even be publicly viewable.
I spend a lot of time thinking about the d) problem. The scarier thing is that this already exists to a large extent in many businesses using machine learning methods and labeled fraud detection. What happens in a future IOT where you product doesn't function on purpose?
Looks like they applied the CueCat model to actual cats.
A pet feeder that needs Internet access? Come on. This is something that's a job for a dumb timer, or, at most, a simple microcontroller.
A pet feeder that needs Internet access? Come on. This is something that's a job for a dumb timer, or, at most, a simple microcontroller.
I understand the benefit of creating a pet feeder with Internet connectivity. It allows you to provide a web portal to your customers so they can update their feeder timings or view food reserve quantities while they're in the office or on holiday.
But making it so the pet feeder needs to be connected to dispense food?? That's insane. The internet connectivity should be to upload new timings. But if a connection can't be made, the old timings should continue to be used.
Write failsafes into your models!
But making it so the pet feeder needs to be connected to dispense food?? That's insane. The internet connectivity should be to upload new timings. But if a connection can't be made, the old timings should continue to be used.
Write failsafes into your models!
Which in this case is just a slightly smarter timer.
But then slapping pointless "HOT NEW TECHNOLOGY" on things thinking you'll make a buck isn't exactly new.
<s>That said, you wanna invest in my "Big Data pet feeder"? It runs hadoop and its all cloud 2.0.</s>
But then slapping pointless "HOT NEW TECHNOLOGY" on things thinking you'll make a buck isn't exactly new.
<s>That said, you wanna invest in my "Big Data pet feeder"? It runs hadoop and its all cloud 2.0.</s>
I can understand having the option to control/monitor something over the network being useful, but making it deliberately dependent on Internet access is IMHO horrible design that could only be good for vendor lock-in, forced obolescence, or other anti-user measures.
Had to double check if this was not from The Onion.
Don't know about dogs, but don't cats feed themselves? Mine certainly does, when we leave for holidays (or even sometimes during the year) we just leave a lot of food and it just eats what it needs everyday.
Don't know about dogs, but don't cats feed themselves? Mine certainly does, when we leave for holidays (or even sometimes during the year) we just leave a lot of food and it just eats what it needs everyday.
Neutered / castrated cats are often prone to overeating, it's better to feed them at intervals (2-3 times per day).
Can't say I blame them. If someone were to chop me, food would be my goto.
Most underrated comment on HN. Can't believe how long I laughed at this.
Not all cats eat just what they need, one of our cats eat twice the amount of what he needs if he finds food available. That's why this kind of automated feeders makes sense.
To provide anecdata contrary to all the other replies you're getting, yes, our cat does the exact same thing. She's even neutered but she will just eat when she's hungry and she hasn't gotten fat or anything.
Thanks! so that makes at least a few of us... ;-)
In fact when I bought the recipient for holding the food (a kind of plastic vase with a hole at the bottom) there were a lot for sale at the shop so there must be many cats who can use that without harming themselves...
In fact when I bought the recipient for holding the food (a kind of plastic vase with a hole at the bottom) there were a lot for sale at the shop so there must be many cats who can use that without harming themselves...
Our cat just eats everything he can find, as quickly as possible - this includes rifling through cupboards and stealing from drawers. We had to fit child locks.
Most cats who eat that way are massively overweight.
Not this one! We've done this for 10 years now and no problem whatsoever.
Cats are opportunistic feeders: if food is available, they will eat. This was a fine adaptation for cats' EAA, as for wild cats, food was much scarcer and would run away unless stalked and caught!
But leaving more than enough food lying around to be eaten ad libitum is a recipe for a fat cat, as they will not stop when they've had enough.
But leaving more than enough food lying around to be eaten ad libitum is a recipe for a fat cat, as they will not stop when they've had enough.
When it comes to dry food, many cats do stop when they've had enough. My cat is given 1 cat of wet food a day and then unlimited dry food, and she's 10 lbs; 9 would be ideal but 10 isn't worth worrying about for a cat her age. My ex's cats are both allowed access to unlimited dry food; one is in a similar position to mine, slightly pudgy but not worryingly so, and the other is perfectly fit.
A dog would eat until it weighed 500 lbs, but some cats will actually pace themselves.
A dog would eat until it weighed 500 lbs, but some cats will actually pace themselves.
Ah, maybe that's the explanation: we indeed only use dry food.
Mine does. His bowl gets refilled whenever it's empty. He is not fat. He is castrated.
I've had this particular cat (my first) for 10 years and she's lean and mean.
[deleted]
> we just leave a lot of food and it just eats what it needs everyday.
Possibly including the mice and rats attacted by all that food? let alone flies.
Possibly including the mice and rats attacted by all that food? let alone flies.
Who would design a feeder that only worked if the server was online? Wow.
Not sure if you're legitimately asking, but if it were client-side, that would remove the need for the server, and thus the recurring payment. A greedy, unnecessary, and not well thought out design (i.e. see what happened in this situation), but one that earns good money in this luxury product field.
I don't think they charge a monthly rate, only an up front payment.
Someone that has never heard of cron?
I mean presumably they might have had some web-ui functionality to change feed-settings - but why that wouldn't just update a cron-tab is beyond me.
I mean presumably they might have had some web-ui functionality to change feed-settings - but why that wouldn't just update a cron-tab is beyond me.
Cause that's probably outside the scope of the request tht was given.
This is absoultely speculation, but my guess would be that the way this product came to life is as follows:
1. Company saw a niche for IoT products with pet owners willing to splurge on their pets (an aside, pets owners are very happy to spend...)
2. Requested IoT software for already existing auto-feeders to be written up as fast as possible
3. IoT part written and works, product is rushed out without designing an offline mode (either not interested or to be patched later) [1]
It was an imagined race to be first with the product and get the pet feeder IoT device on the market first and build up a brand name. The end result is this silliness.
Basically, I don't think they envisioned an issue where the servers would go down - if the customer's own net went down, obviously they're to blame for Sharik and Musya not being fed.
I sure this sounds overly cynnical, but as was mentioned by someone else, this is just the first of many such things to come with shoddy IoT devices. The practical consideration of "well, what if the servers go down?" just doesn't seem to be on people's minds with IoT.
[1] From their twitter, I was right - they didn't bother with an offline sync in the firmware, and had to build it out: https://twitter.com/petnetiosupport/status/75838081375903334...
This is absoultely speculation, but my guess would be that the way this product came to life is as follows:
1. Company saw a niche for IoT products with pet owners willing to splurge on their pets (an aside, pets owners are very happy to spend...)
2. Requested IoT software for already existing auto-feeders to be written up as fast as possible
3. IoT part written and works, product is rushed out without designing an offline mode (either not interested or to be patched later) [1]
It was an imagined race to be first with the product and get the pet feeder IoT device on the market first and build up a brand name. The end result is this silliness.
Basically, I don't think they envisioned an issue where the servers would go down - if the customer's own net went down, obviously they're to blame for Sharik and Musya not being fed.
I sure this sounds overly cynnical, but as was mentioned by someone else, this is just the first of many such things to come with shoddy IoT devices. The practical consideration of "well, what if the servers go down?" just doesn't seem to be on people's minds with IoT.
[1] From their twitter, I was right - they didn't bother with an offline sync in the firmware, and had to build it out: https://twitter.com/petnetiosupport/status/75838081375903334...
Exactly what I was thinking - remote server activation of every single feed was just a fuck-up waiting to happen.
Someone who lives in San Francisco, where Internet access is apparently bulletproof.
I wonder if security systems work the same way. Robbers want to take in a smart home so they just cut the coaxial line and the whole thing goes 404, unlocks all the doors, turns off monitoring and can't alert emergency services.
Hopefully they have the decency to feed the dog.
I wonder if security systems work the same way. Robbers want to take in a smart home so they just cut the coaxial line and the whole thing goes 404, unlocks all the doors, turns off monitoring and can't alert emergency services.
Hopefully they have the decency to feed the dog.
I think some have a cellular connection. They also have backup battery power in case the power gets turned off.
Not impossible to circumvent, but probably beyond the scope of the average burglar.
Not impossible to circumvent, but probably beyond the scope of the average burglar.
I was being facetious. :) Imagining the world where if the Internet goes out all the smart home stuff just turns off.
AMAZING!
Everything should be in the cloud, just to make sure it can fail when your internet connection is down or some server has hiccups or whatever.
Those are strange times.
Everything should be in the cloud, just to make sure it can fail when your internet connection is down or some server has hiccups or whatever.
Those are strange times.
Yeah, instead they could have built a digital timer into the device like in the 80s.
Even though this would be more reliable, you couldn't control it from your phone, which seems to be a selling feature for all of these badly designed IOT devices.
Somebody should design a timer module that can be controlled via bluetooth and (optionally) via Wifi.
Then you could program the timer from your iPad or whatever, but if connectivity is lost, the local controller would retain the settings and continue to work until connectivity is re-established.
Even though this would be more reliable, you couldn't control it from your phone, which seems to be a selling feature for all of these badly designed IOT devices.
Somebody should design a timer module that can be controlled via bluetooth and (optionally) via Wifi.
Then you could program the timer from your iPad or whatever, but if connectivity is lost, the local controller would retain the settings and continue to work until connectivity is re-established.
Exactly, it's nice to be able to change the frequency of the timer remotely via the web, but the device should cache the latest settings offline. This is definitely an instance of malice/greed rather than an oversight...
How often do you need to change your cat feeding frequency? Once per 10 years?
Well and that's the other thing, exactly. The offline caching is more important for other appliances that need to happen on a timer and you might alter the frequency more often (e.g. a thermostat or something).
If you think this way, you wouldn´t need something but a digital timer at all.
Yeah exactly, it's not like we have to measure out cat food by the gram every day.
And, personally I can't wait for this fad for "control X from your phone" apps and devices to die down.
And, personally I can't wait for this fad for "control X from your phone" apps and devices to die down.
Locally caching the results from the application server would have done the job just fine.
Strange indeed.
Why are they using a software development process that optimizes for time to market when reliability is critical to their business? The former is somewhat acceptable for a startup in the web but incredibly irresponsible for developing hardware.
It's not like it's impossible to ship software that rarely has major bugs even though there are no consequences to the real world compared with the space shuttle. We've done that during the entire console era until consoles became internet connected devices.
Why are they using a software development process that optimizes for time to market when reliability is critical to their business? The former is somewhat acceptable for a startup in the web but incredibly irresponsible for developing hardware.
It's not like it's impossible to ship software that rarely has major bugs even though there are no consequences to the real world compared with the space shuttle. We've done that during the entire console era until consoles became internet connected devices.
Rather than each individual company cobbling together systems like this with massive security/ privacy/ ... issues, it might be better to establish an Internet of Things operating system, no? That way, some common standards could be established and one company/ organisation would be in charge of patching things.
> one company/ organisation would be in charge of patching things
That company would also be the one that gets all the surveillance data and would be the one that gets to make all of the money.
This is part of the problem of IOT: lock-in is critical to the business model.
That company would also be the one that gets all the surveillance data and would be the one that gets to make all of the money.
This is part of the problem of IOT: lock-in is critical to the business model.
So let's say Amazon comes up with an IoT operating system. Then the question is: do you want a cat feeder/ home security system/ teleporter that is made by Amazon, according to their standards of quality and reliability, or one made by a random company you've never heard of? Then it comes down to privacy and who gets to use what data. I.e. Amazon would have a motivation to use your data sparingly (otherwise nobody would use the system). Or it could even be a freemium model, where you pay in exchange for not giving access to your data.
Many questions to sort out.
Many questions to sort out.
Amazon are one of the few companies that could make this work, as an extension of AWS, and people suspect the 'Dash' button is an initial foray into the space. However all their Kindle Fire incompatible Android systems haven't exactly been a roaring success.
ARM is trying to do just that with their m:bed platform.
Can't wait to see this happening to a web-connected human baby feeder.
Internet-connected insulin pump.
the Powers That Be who regulate and approve such medical devices would surely have one or two things to say about a device whose functionality is dependent on connectivity to the internet.
Thank god for strong regulation of medical devices.
Why does this have to be web enabled!?
If it has enough power to connect to the web, it should have enough power to "serve" up it's own web form so that you can adjust the schedule. Why does _everything_ have to go back to someone _else's_ computer!?
Edit: Well at least we know who NOT to hire, they conveniently supplied photos! http://www.petnet.io/about
If it has enough power to connect to the web, it should have enough power to "serve" up it's own web form so that you can adjust the schedule. Why does _everything_ have to go back to someone _else's_ computer!?
Edit: Well at least we know who NOT to hire, they conveniently supplied photos! http://www.petnet.io/about
According to their Twitter, they're working on a firmware update to eliminate the reliance on network connectivity for scheduled feedings.
https://twitter.com/petnetiosupport/status/75838081375903334...
It's still pretty ridiculous that this kind of logic made it into a product that is relied upon for feeding.
https://twitter.com/petnetiosupport/status/75838081375903334...
It's still pretty ridiculous that this kind of logic made it into a product that is relied upon for feeding.
For that price I would expect build-in battery as a backup for main power supply. This thing does not even work without internet.
Obvious Facebook/Instagram/Snapchat metaphor is obvious.
This pet-feeder is simply a motor on a timer. You have to make some hilariously bad design choices to make it 100% dependent on the internet for scheduling.