1358

submitted 1 week ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

211 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] prole 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Why would you ever get a toilet that requires anything but the laws of physics to operate?

[-] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago

I mean... Electronics and the Internet are also following the laws of physics. But I get what you mean, levers should be the only activation, and gravity should be the only requirement.

That being said, electronics in our devices do tend to reduce the amount of water and power that appliances use. Dumb devices are extremely inefficient, even though there are fewer points of failure.

It sucks that a 1950's fridge can still function just fine today, but it also is a bigger strain on the power grid, and a leak in the refrigerant would destroy the ozone.

[-] sugarfoot00@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

> That being said, electronics in our devices do tend to reduce the amount of water and power that appliances use. Dumb devices are extremely inefficient, even though there are fewer points of failure.

I fail to see how electronics in these (unpowered) devices in any way reduce the amount of power that they use.

[-] 1D10@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

In theory you could have a system that monitors input and then uses a precise amount of water to vacate the bowl.

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Oh sick, a toilet with bowl cameras

[-] Ironfacebuster@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I think that was just a general statement regarding old devices, since they brought up a 1950s refrigerator as an example of a powered "dumb" device

[-] Natanael@infosec.pub 1 points 1 week ago

Sprinklers and all kinds of stuff are more efficient with sensors and electronic regulators

[-] Sneptaur@pawb.social 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah I think the meaning of the above comment boils down to "If it doesn't have a simple fallback, it can't be trusted".

[-] ace_of_based@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

You're already @ the mf toilet too, or the sink. what is even the purported purpose of remotely activating something you have to stand there to use?

[-] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I can see some purpose in having a 'smart' toilet for monitoring health. Your pee and poo can have some value in seeing if there anything that needs to be dealt with medically. But even that is difficult to do. For one thing, it must still function ad a toilet first before anything. Meaning it uses the simple mechanical flushing and refilling and stopping when it is sufficiently full.

However for this the analysis and storage of data must be 100% at the user's control. If they want it gone. It is gone. Irrecoverable. Any update must be done via USB or other connection. No wifi or internet.

And even then the analysis can be off for obvious reasons. People need to scrub their toilets and some keep it clean by having one of those pucks in the tank that sanitize the water. All of these can interfere with any results out of a medical setting.