this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
33 points (100.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

35334 readers
1 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 3 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I agree with the overall sentiment, but a smart switch would be harder to change than a smart bulb most of the time. Smart switch would require electrical work to replace. A smart bulb can just be swapped. If anything the toilet is a good proxy. A smart flush means it won't manually flush. If they had done a smart fill you could just manually fill the tank with water.

[–] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not necessarily. The "smart" necessarily causes some real world movent (opens a valve). Just design the physical action to be able to be performed both manually and electrically.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 3 points 8 months ago

In this post it seems as though smart is being used to mean completely replacing the thing. I think that having both smart and dumb options is ideal, but in this particular context I think the reference point is that the smart object does not allow a manual override.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 3 points 8 months ago

True, but you could also add a switchbot to it. Ugly but simple and without electrical maintenance needed.

[–] Darleys_Brew@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago

To be fair, if you had a water supply you could just chuck buckets of water down your toilet if the flush wasn’t working.