This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Apparently every house in the country is going to be compulsorily fitted with asmart meter The efficacy of these is apparently dubious and householders are to be charged £200 for them.
Can somebody please explain to me why I should have to pay for something I do not necessarily want. Surely, if I have to pay for something I should have a choice as to whether or not I have it. Or am I missing something?
Post edited at 10:05
In reply to mypyrex:
They won't save me any power, as I turn things off when not using them, and use things sparingly. My life will not be enriched by being able to remotely read the numbers off something in my house. The time saved by me submitting a meter reading online will be negligible.
I will bet you now they turn out to be vulnerable to hacking. Interrogate an entire housing estate remotely to find out which houses are temporarily empty, or raising/lowering metered usage or hacking to shutdown. The lies of the banking industry over the "security" of chip and pin pave the way, their only interest in security is shifting liability onto the customer.
The only motivation I can see for them is to facilitate fine grained load shedding when the chickens of our insane energy "policy" come home to roost in the next 24 months.
They won't save me any power, as I turn things off when not using them, and use things sparingly. My life will not be enriched by being able to remotely read the numbers off something in my house. The time saved by me submitting a meter reading online will be negligible.
I will bet you now they turn out to be vulnerable to hacking. Interrogate an entire housing estate remotely to find out which houses are temporarily empty, or raising/lowering metered usage or hacking to shutdown. The lies of the banking industry over the "security" of chip and pin pave the way, their only interest in security is shifting liability onto the customer.
The only motivation I can see for them is to facilitate fine grained load shedding when the chickens of our insane energy "policy" come home to roost in the next 24 months.
Post edited at 10:19
In reply to mypyrex:
No they're not. There's no legal obligation to have one.
> Apparently every house in the country is going to be compulsorily fitted with asmart meter
No they're not. There's no legal obligation to have one.
In reply to wintertree:
Chip & PIN is more secure than swipe and signature, like it or not, because it stops many "bad" transactions before they occur. Because signature checking was cursory or non-existent, particularly abroad, it could only be used to determine if a transaction was genuine or not by recalling the signature slip. But the fraud had already occurred. C&P prevents a far greater proportion of it *before* it occurs.
I believe appliances rather than meters will increasingly be designed to do this, by reacting to a "brown-out" (voltage drop) by turning off.
Neil
> The lies of the banking industry over the "security" of chip and pin pave the way, their only interest in security is shifting liability onto the customer.
Chip & PIN is more secure than swipe and signature, like it or not, because it stops many "bad" transactions before they occur. Because signature checking was cursory or non-existent, particularly abroad, it could only be used to determine if a transaction was genuine or not by recalling the signature slip. But the fraud had already occurred. C&P prevents a far greater proportion of it *before* it occurs.
> The only motivation I can see for them is to facilitate fine grained load shedding when the chickens of our insane energy "policy" come home to roost in the next 24 months.
I believe appliances rather than meters will increasingly be designed to do this, by reacting to a "brown-out" (voltage drop) by turning off.
Neil
In reply to Neil Williams:
Indeed I agree. The problem is that the banks insisted it was secure whilst refusing to release the design for scrutiny. Quite a few people had fraudulent transactions, the bank denied liability as "they must have written down their PIN". Eventually proof is arrived at by a 3rd party that the pin can be circumvented. As well as reducing fraud, by keeping the architecture closed and insisting it was secure (it was nowhere near) banks transferred the remaining liability of fraud to their customers.
If smart meters security is not fully open to independent scrutiny I fear the same will happen.
Indeed. Might not be enough though, especially given the slow turn over of electric ovens, immersion heaters and fridge freezers.
> Chip & PIN is more secure than swipe and signature, like it or not, because it stops many "bad" transactions before they occur. Because signature checking was cursory or non-existent, particularly abroad, it could only be used to determine if a transaction was genuine or not by recalling the signature slip. But the fraud had already occurred. C&P prevents a far greater proportion of it *before* it occurs.
Indeed I agree. The problem is that the banks insisted it was secure whilst refusing to release the design for scrutiny. Quite a few people had fraudulent transactions, the bank denied liability as "they must have written down their PIN". Eventually proof is arrived at by a 3rd party that the pin can be circumvented. As well as reducing fraud, by keeping the architecture closed and insisting it was secure (it was nowhere near) banks transferred the remaining liability of fraud to their customers.
If smart meters security is not fully open to independent scrutiny I fear the same will happen.
> I believe appliances rather than meters will increasingly be designed to do this, by reacting to a "brown-out" (voltage drop) by turning off.
Indeed. Might not be enough though, especially given the slow turn over of electric ovens, immersion heaters and fridge freezers.
In reply to wintertree:
"Indeed. Might not be enough though, especially given the slow turn over of electric ovens, immersion heaters and fridge freezers."
True. But then again, you can't just cut the power to a whole house without causing issues - in some houses that might make some toilets unusable, for instance, if they have Saniflo connections, and there's precious little point turning off a few 6W LED light bulbs. The things you can turn off with almost no effect are fridges, freezers and the likes provided the doors aren't opened, as well as electric heating and aircon. A meter couldn't do it on that granular level.
And if you don't want to do it on a granular level like that, you might as well just knock whole areas out at the substation as I believe is common in many countries.
Neil
"Indeed. Might not be enough though, especially given the slow turn over of electric ovens, immersion heaters and fridge freezers."
True. But then again, you can't just cut the power to a whole house without causing issues - in some houses that might make some toilets unusable, for instance, if they have Saniflo connections, and there's precious little point turning off a few 6W LED light bulbs. The things you can turn off with almost no effect are fridges, freezers and the likes provided the doors aren't opened, as well as electric heating and aircon. A meter couldn't do it on that granular level.
And if you don't want to do it on a granular level like that, you might as well just knock whole areas out at the substation as I believe is common in many countries.
Neil
Post edited at 10:54
In reply to jkarran:
It's been said that they do not always work correctly or fail to do so in certain buildings.
> In what way is the efficacy dubious?
> jk
It's been said that they do not always work correctly or fail to do so in certain buildings.
In reply to Neil Williams:
They should but there is no incentive for them to do so, at present it's added cost and risk (complexity) to the consumer with no obvious short/medium term return.
jk
> I believe appliances rather than meters will increasingly be designed to do this, by reacting to a "brown-out" (voltage drop) by turning off.
They should but there is no incentive for them to do so, at present it's added cost and risk (complexity) to the consumer with no obvious short/medium term return.
jk
In reply to jkarran:
" there is no incentive for them to do so"
I'm sure the law will provide one soon, i.e. it will be required.
Neil
" there is no incentive for them to do so"
I'm sure the law will provide one soon, i.e. it will be required.
Neil
These things take years as someone pointed out, equipment has to change.
You can imagine bad uses for smart meters as well as good. Like prepayment meters, those stuck with them are penalised on cost. Similarly someone with a high daytime energy use might find themselves unable to get as cheap tariff as someone with the same usage over more hours. For an example, in some regions there is an economy 10 tariff with 2,3,5 hour cheap slots in the day for charging storage heaters. But this tariff is restricted to the supplier that previously held the monopoly for that area.
What needs to follow is equipment capable of reacting to demand or production. I'm looking at solar PV, and I haven't seen yet if there are devices that can kick the washing machine, tumble dryer, etc in when the panels start working.
While I don't imagine the freezer or TV would go off at peak usage, it would be good night time costs could be brought down by controlling when things came on in the night in real time. It takes time for the grid production to respond to demand, but if two-way smart meters could help this.
You can imagine bad uses for smart meters as well as good. Like prepayment meters, those stuck with them are penalised on cost. Similarly someone with a high daytime energy use might find themselves unable to get as cheap tariff as someone with the same usage over more hours. For an example, in some regions there is an economy 10 tariff with 2,3,5 hour cheap slots in the day for charging storage heaters. But this tariff is restricted to the supplier that previously held the monopoly for that area.
What needs to follow is equipment capable of reacting to demand or production. I'm looking at solar PV, and I haven't seen yet if there are devices that can kick the washing machine, tumble dryer, etc in when the panels start working.
While I don't imagine the freezer or TV would go off at peak usage, it would be good night time costs could be brought down by controlling when things came on in the night in real time. It takes time for the grid production to respond to demand, but if two-way smart meters could help this.
In reply to Neil Williams:
Perhaps I am to negative but that's where I fear we are heading. If you shed per house you can prioritise supply to vulnerable households, local councillors, police stations, shops and community facilities. It's going to take some combination of those to maintain order if our grid really does drop out of first world status.
> And if you don't want to do it on a granular level like that, you might as well just knock whole areas out at the substation as I believe is common in many countries.
Perhaps I am to negative but that's where I fear we are heading. If you shed per house you can prioritise supply to vulnerable households, local councillors, police stations, shops and community facilities. It's going to take some combination of those to maintain order if our grid really does drop out of first world status.
In reply to Neil Williams:
I'm not so sure but we'll see. Personally I doubt we'll see compulsion but perhaps a tweak to the energy performance certification scheme meaning low duty cycle machines like refrigerators and domestic washing machines require the feature to achieve A+++ or whatever the current top rating is.
jk
> I'm sure the law will provide one soon, i.e. it will be required.
I'm not so sure but we'll see. Personally I doubt we'll see compulsion but perhaps a tweak to the energy performance certification scheme meaning low duty cycle machines like refrigerators and domestic washing machines require the feature to achieve A+++ or whatever the current top rating is.
jk
In reply to Philip:
An engineered building controls/management system could do this, but the cost of the controls equipment and additional wiring installation would make it cost prohibitive.
> What needs to follow is equipment capable of reacting to demand or production. I'm looking at solar PV, and I haven't seen yet if there are devices that can kick the washing machine, tumble dryer, etc in when the panels start working.
An engineered building controls/management system could do this, but the cost of the controls equipment and additional wiring installation would make it cost prohibitive.
In reply to Neil Williams:
I have often thought how i would integrate PV into my house if i went down that road and have come to the conclusion that unless you're starting from scratch and converting a rural property with no electricity supply and no wiring, the cheapest way has got to be to run a single feed into the consumer unit and benefit from the feed in tariff.
In answer to the Smart Meters, i believe that they are not compulsory but that we will be 'persuaded' to use them. Even if they give you something off your monthly bill like they do if you pay by direct debit, the cost of new meter installation (£250 plus?) is borne by the consumer.
Can't see that i will be persuaded
> Probably cheaper to use PV to charge batteries for lighting etc.
I have often thought how i would integrate PV into my house if i went down that road and have come to the conclusion that unless you're starting from scratch and converting a rural property with no electricity supply and no wiring, the cheapest way has got to be to run a single feed into the consumer unit and benefit from the feed in tariff.
In answer to the Smart Meters, i believe that they are not compulsory but that we will be 'persuaded' to use them. Even if they give you something off your monthly bill like they do if you pay by direct debit, the cost of new meter installation (£250 plus?) is borne by the consumer.
Can't see that i will be persuaded
In reply to jkarran:
But a house is sold empty, without appliances? (They may sometimes be sold at the same time, but that's a separate arrangement, if it happens...)
> I'm not so sure but we'll see. Personally I doubt we'll see compulsion but perhaps a tweak to the energy performance certification scheme meaning low duty cycle machines like refrigerators and domestic washing machines require the feature to achieve A+++ or whatever the current top rating is.
But a house is sold empty, without appliances? (They may sometimes be sold at the same time, but that's a separate arrangement, if it happens...)
In reply to climbwhenready:
You get an EPC for each appliance as well, and it influences the buyer of each appliance.
Neil
You get an EPC for each appliance as well, and it influences the buyer of each appliance.
Neil
In reply to Neil Williams:
interesting perspective.
I completely agree with @Neil Williams above that chip and pin was a method for the banks to transfer fraud liability from there balance sheets to the customer.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3173346/Chip-and-pin-s...
> Chip & PIN is more secure than swipe and signature, like it or not, because it stops many "bad" transactions before they occur.
interesting perspective.
I completely agree with @Neil Williams above that chip and pin was a method for the banks to transfer fraud liability from there balance sheets to the customer.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3173346/Chip-and-pin-s...
In reply to wintertree:
You do know it's the government that has made it compulsory for energy providers to fit smart meters, don't you, not the energy companies?
The benefit for many people who don't submit readings is they enable them to have accurate bills - the system is basically dumb, so the provider doesn't know how much energy is being used unless they get a reading - if they don't get one (because people won't let them in, or the meter's up a tree down the road) then they estimate - and estimates are why people get huge under or overpayments.
If you submit regular readings, and you understand how to minimise your energy usage then Smart meters aren't really much benefit.
You do know it's the government that has made it compulsory for energy providers to fit smart meters, don't you, not the energy companies?
The benefit for many people who don't submit readings is they enable them to have accurate bills - the system is basically dumb, so the provider doesn't know how much energy is being used unless they get a reading - if they don't get one (because people won't let them in, or the meter's up a tree down the road) then they estimate - and estimates are why people get huge under or overpayments.
If you submit regular readings, and you understand how to minimise your energy usage then Smart meters aren't really much benefit.
Post edited at 21:48
In reply to mypyrex:
Not compulsory and you're not charged.
Next...
> Apparently every house in the country is going to be compulsorily fitted with asmart meter The efficacy of these is apparently dubious and householders are to be charged £200 for them.
Not compulsory and you're not charged.
Next...
In reply to Indy:
Card fraud has massively reduced since the introduction of chip and pin - about 36% down over ten years - what is it in the report above that makes you say that banks have "transferred the risk from there (sic) balance sheets to the customer"? There's no suggestion that any customers lost money there, is there?
Card fraud has massively reduced since the introduction of chip and pin - about 36% down over ten years - what is it in the report above that makes you say that banks have "transferred the risk from there (sic) balance sheets to the customer"? There's no suggestion that any customers lost money there, is there?
In reply to wintertree:
The smart meter is not capable of switching anything - in the vast majority of the LV network, the only way to disconnect a single property is by manually removing the fuse on the incoming main (which requires access to the property in most cases).
The smart meter is not capable of switching anything - in the vast majority of the LV network, the only way to disconnect a single property is by manually removing the fuse on the incoming main (which requires access to the property in most cases).
In reply to mypyrex:
What is your definition of the word "apparently"?
> Apparently every house in the country is going to be compulsorily fitted with asmart meter The efficacy of these is apparently dubious and householders are to be charged £200 for them.
What is your definition of the word "apparently"?
In reply to Indy:
It did both. It improved convenience and security generally, but did transfer some liability to the customer. However as a whole I believe it has been of benefit.
The risk on contactless, OTOH, is I believe on the retailer.
Neil
It did both. It improved convenience and security generally, but did transfer some liability to the customer. However as a whole I believe it has been of benefit.
The risk on contactless, OTOH, is I believe on the retailer.
Neil
In reply to andy:
There are two types of smart meter, in any case. Some of the suppliers give you a sort of gadget that lets you monitor energy usage. The full-blown "smart meter" will report readings back to base - so the energy companies are very much motivated to install them, as they won't have to pay people to read meters any more. And I'm quite happy with the idea, as I won't have to be bothered to send the monthly reading in. (I actually do it about once every 2-3 months as the estimates are normally fairly accurate as my usage is fairly consistent).
Neil
There are two types of smart meter, in any case. Some of the suppliers give you a sort of gadget that lets you monitor energy usage. The full-blown "smart meter" will report readings back to base - so the energy companies are very much motivated to install them, as they won't have to pay people to read meters any more. And I'm quite happy with the idea, as I won't have to be bothered to send the monthly reading in. (I actually do it about once every 2-3 months as the estimates are normally fairly accurate as my usage is fairly consistent).
Neil
In reply to andy:
Yes. If we're going to play this game, you do realise that an EU directive has made it compulsory for governments to make it compulsory, don't you?
I don't see how the government being in charge makes the energy companies any more or less likely to screw up the security on the meters, whilst blithely insisting its secure and letting the customer get shafted.
> You do know it's the government that has made it compulsory for energy providers to fit smart meters, don't you, not the energy companies?
Yes. If we're going to play this game, you do realise that an EU directive has made it compulsory for governments to make it compulsory, don't you?
I don't see how the government being in charge makes the energy companies any more or less likely to screw up the security on the meters, whilst blithely insisting its secure and letting the customer get shafted.
In reply to jamespilgrim:
Really? That's not how it's working out aboard -
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Papers/meters-offswitch.pdf
It's not what this Cambridge academics think...
http://www.bge.com/smartenergy/smartgrid/pages/smart-meter-features.aspx
It's not in line woth the emergng legal requirement in the UK for customers to be automatically roled over to pre pay if they consistently can't pay.
Oh, and parliament say you're wrong, see section 3.5
http://www.parliament.uk/Templates/BriefingPapers/Pages/BPPdfDownload.aspx?...
In September 2011 Ofgem introduced new licence conditions for suppliers as part of its “Smart Metering - Consumer Protections Package” which ensure that rules around pre- payment and disconnection apply to remote switching and remote disconnection.
The state, the utility company and anyone able to hack the meters, the encryption or the utilities systems will have a remote kill switch for your house.
> The smart meter is not capable of switching anything - in the vast majority of the LV network, the only way to disconnect a single property is by manually removing the fuse on the incoming main (which requires access to the property in most cases).
Really? That's not how it's working out aboard -
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Papers/meters-offswitch.pdf
It's not what this Cambridge academics think...
http://www.bge.com/smartenergy/smartgrid/pages/smart-meter-features.aspx
It's not in line woth the emergng legal requirement in the UK for customers to be automatically roled over to pre pay if they consistently can't pay.
Oh, and parliament say you're wrong, see section 3.5
http://www.parliament.uk/Templates/BriefingPapers/Pages/BPPdfDownload.aspx?...
In September 2011 Ofgem introduced new licence conditions for suppliers as part of its “Smart Metering - Consumer Protections Package” which ensure that rules around pre- payment and disconnection apply to remote switching and remote disconnection.
The state, the utility company and anyone able to hack the meters, the encryption or the utilities systems will have a remote kill switch for your house.
In reply to wintertree:
"It's not in line woth the emergng legal requirement in the UK for customers to be automatically roled over to pre pay if they consistently can't pay. "
While inconvenient, one side of me wonders if a good way to encourage energy saving would be to mandate *everyone* to use pre-pay, perhaps with a relatively low maximum credit on the meter. That way you have a much better handle on what you're spending than just paying by direct debit and ignoring what the figure is unless it's stupidly high, as I imagine most people do.
Neil
"It's not in line woth the emergng legal requirement in the UK for customers to be automatically roled over to pre pay if they consistently can't pay. "
While inconvenient, one side of me wonders if a good way to encourage energy saving would be to mandate *everyone* to use pre-pay, perhaps with a relatively low maximum credit on the meter. That way you have a much better handle on what you're spending than just paying by direct debit and ignoring what the figure is unless it's stupidly high, as I imagine most people do.
Neil
In reply to Neil Williams:
The parliamentary report agrees with you there. Take it a step further - you have to supply 5% of your energy by pedalling. Direct feedback...
> "It's not in line woth the emergng legal requirement in the UK for customers to be automatically roled over to pre pay if they consistently can't pay. "
> While inconvenient, one side of me wonders if a good way to encourage energy saving would be to mandate *everyone* to use pre-pay, perhaps with a relatively low maximum credit on the meter. That way you have a much better handle on what you're spending than just paying by direct debit and ignoring what the figure is unless it's stupidly high, as I imagine most people do.
The parliamentary report agrees with you there. Take it a step further - you have to supply 5% of your energy by pedalling. Direct feedback...
Post edited at 09:58
In reply to climbwhenready:
You get the certificate on more than just houses, maybe it's not the same scheme or certifying body but the layout is similar. All appliances seem to come with energy performance stickers and oddly enough I've seen them appearing on airliners.
Anyway, plenty of houses sell with appliances installed. Not that it's relevant to the point I was making
jk
> But a house is sold empty, without appliances? (They may sometimes be sold at the same time, but that's a separate arrangement, if it happens...)
You get the certificate on more than just houses, maybe it's not the same scheme or certifying body but the layout is similar. All appliances seem to come with energy performance stickers and oddly enough I've seen them appearing on airliners.
Anyway, plenty of houses sell with appliances installed. Not that it's relevant to the point I was making
jk
In reply to jkarran:
I think it's a Flybe thing, because the turboprops they often use are comparatively very efficient (but also noisy and slow).
Neil
I think it's a Flybe thing, because the turboprops they often use are comparatively very efficient (but also noisy and slow).
Neil
In reply to Blue Straggler:
dailymail.co.uk/money/bills/article-2681954/Unveiled-New-200-smart-meters-household-pay-not-work.html ?
like this bit..
Sir Bob Geldof will launch an expensive publicity drive, featuring 'out of control' cartoon characters called Gaz and Leccy, on Tuesday. Last night he confirmed he was being paid for the campaign, but refused to reveal how much, saying it was 'none of your f***ing business'
> What is your definition of the word "apparently"?
dailymail.co.uk/money/bills/article-2681954/Unveiled-New-200-smart-meters-household-pay-not-work.html ?
like this bit..
Sir Bob Geldof will launch an expensive publicity drive, featuring 'out of control' cartoon characters called Gaz and Leccy, on Tuesday. Last night he confirmed he was being paid for the campaign, but refused to reveal how much, saying it was 'none of your f***ing business'
In reply to wintertree:
Dragons Den opportunity there - Faraday cages for smart meters.
> The state, the utility company and anyone able to hack the meters, the encryption or the utilities systems will have a remote kill switch for your house.
Dragons Den opportunity there - Faraday cages for smart meters.
In reply to andy:
An example using hypothetical figures.... if 10 years ago under the old system £100 million was lost to fraud then the banks were liable for £100 million. Move forward to Chip and Pin and Wa Who fraud is down 50% to £50 million but the thing is a transaction using the Pin isn't considered a fraud by the banks so no refund. Cost to the banks has gone from £100 million to zero.
here is a response from a bank regarding (alleged) Chip & Pin fraud...
""Following my investigation, I am unable to accept the disputed transactions a total of £212.98 on the above card as fraudulent. This is because the transaction was authorised using the correct details on your card. The PIN was input correctly on the first attempt. I can only conclude that the transaction was authorised by you, or someone known to you with your permission."
heres a link of interest...
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-2215223/Victim-chip-pin-f...
"transferred the risk from there (sic) balance sheets to the customer" :|
> Card fraud has massively reduced since the introduction of chip and pin - about 36% down over ten years - what is it in the report above that makes you say that banks have "transferred the risk from there (sic) balance sheets to the customer"? There's no suggestion that any customers lost money there, is there?
An example using hypothetical figures.... if 10 years ago under the old system £100 million was lost to fraud then the banks were liable for £100 million. Move forward to Chip and Pin and Wa Who fraud is down 50% to £50 million but the thing is a transaction using the Pin isn't considered a fraud by the banks so no refund. Cost to the banks has gone from £100 million to zero.
here is a response from a bank regarding (alleged) Chip & Pin fraud...
""Following my investigation, I am unable to accept the disputed transactions a total of £212.98 on the above card as fraudulent. This is because the transaction was authorised using the correct details on your card. The PIN was input correctly on the first attempt. I can only conclude that the transaction was authorised by you, or someone known to you with your permission."
heres a link of interest...
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-2215223/Victim-chip-pin-f...
"transferred the risk from there (sic) balance sheets to the customer" :|
In reply to mypyrex:
My elderly mother was told she must have one fitted, they wanted to make her an appointment ( the house was only 3 years old) on the other hand mother is not, she is kicking 80 , and can't cope with the disruption these days.
I called them and said no, and don't send anymore letters. Heard nothing since.
> Oh, I thought they were compulsory.
My elderly mother was told she must have one fitted, they wanted to make her an appointment ( the house was only 3 years old) on the other hand mother is not, she is kicking 80 , and can't cope with the disruption these days.
I called them and said no, and don't send anymore letters. Heard nothing since.
As said before they are not compulsory, however as your standard meters come up for certification it will be replaced with a smart meter, so once the government say 'yes' this smart meter is allowed. (to which none of the current smart meters have been given yet) then with in the 25 years following very one will have one.
They are very Big Brother, they will know when your home, when the kettles on, what fridge you own, everything its scary technology and can be hacked (its only a mobile phone stuck to a meter).
the £200 installation fee will subtly be driven into our bills, (one of the main reasons for the last price rises was this project) old electric meters cost about £5 to make these smart meters are about £55.
The mass installation is years possibly over a decade away. To anyone who has one, be aware it may be removed at any point if the government say its not compatible with their specification. I know one person who is on their 3rd meter. they've just left their supplier because they wouldn't give them a standard meter.
Post edited at 21:02
In reply to rob_lee:
How will a mobile phone stuck to a meter know what sort of fridge you've got (which doesn't terrify me, anyway, to be honest) unless you've got a mobile phone stuck to your fridge as well?
My fridge is a big silver one, btw.
How will a mobile phone stuck to a meter know what sort of fridge you've got (which doesn't terrify me, anyway, to be honest) unless you've got a mobile phone stuck to your fridge as well?
My fridge is a big silver one, btw.
In reply to andy:
the meters use sim card technology, when hacked it can allow people to know when your in and your daily routine.
I've heard hackers could possibly de-energise the meter to cause a power cut. the main hub where all the data is sent will be able to work out the load being pulled and match it to appliances. these are all things i've heard from the industry and one of the meter designers for one of the big 6.
the meters use sim card technology, when hacked it can allow people to know when your in and your daily routine.
I've heard hackers could possibly de-energise the meter to cause a power cut. the main hub where all the data is sent will be able to work out the load being pulled and match it to appliances. these are all things i've heard from the industry and one of the meter designers for one of the big 6.
In reply to andy:
There are various characteristics to how a motors starts up and stops, so you could conceivably identify specific compressor motors, if not fridges. Then looking at the duty cycle of the motor tells you a bit more. I honestly can't see anyone bother to build an database of fridge characteristics however. Someone profiling my fridge doesn't bother me.
I've no doubt the intelligence services are salivating at the information they'll get from this additional insight into the various people they keep tabs on. Real time information on when they come into a house or leave it, regardless of CCTV coverage in the area. When a computer turns on or off, when they're in the shower etc. If you're profiling potential terrorists, a sudden change in daily routine could be significant?
Having some crim use a back door into the meter or the central system to profile when the house is empty worries me more. Instead of having to steak out one house for weeks at a time, an enterprising crim could profile an entire city in a few minutes. That bothers me a bit.
Having some crim be able to shut down my meter worries me a lot more. Even that is nothing compared to what happens if they do this to a whole city, and revoke the encryption keys form the meters, or brick the firmware. Just imagine the power going out across a city of 1,000,000 people, and the only ways to fix it are to replace the meters or to illegally bypass them (lots of fires then). Yet another reason not to get a Saniflow for the toilet.
Hopefully by the time I have no choice in the matter, I'll have an independent renewable/battery system to go with my normal low energy usage, and the smart meter will feed nothing but a slow charger onto the battery bank with a little micro controller randomising the timing...
> How will a mobile phone stuck to a meter know what sort of fridge you've got (which doesn't terrify me, anyway, to be honest) unless you've got a mobile phone stuck to your fridge as well?
There are various characteristics to how a motors starts up and stops, so you could conceivably identify specific compressor motors, if not fridges. Then looking at the duty cycle of the motor tells you a bit more. I honestly can't see anyone bother to build an database of fridge characteristics however. Someone profiling my fridge doesn't bother me.
I've no doubt the intelligence services are salivating at the information they'll get from this additional insight into the various people they keep tabs on. Real time information on when they come into a house or leave it, regardless of CCTV coverage in the area. When a computer turns on or off, when they're in the shower etc. If you're profiling potential terrorists, a sudden change in daily routine could be significant?
Having some crim use a back door into the meter or the central system to profile when the house is empty worries me more. Instead of having to steak out one house for weeks at a time, an enterprising crim could profile an entire city in a few minutes. That bothers me a bit.
Having some crim be able to shut down my meter worries me a lot more. Even that is nothing compared to what happens if they do this to a whole city, and revoke the encryption keys form the meters, or brick the firmware. Just imagine the power going out across a city of 1,000,000 people, and the only ways to fix it are to replace the meters or to illegally bypass them (lots of fires then). Yet another reason not to get a Saniflow for the toilet.
Hopefully by the time I have no choice in the matter, I'll have an independent renewable/battery system to go with my normal low energy usage, and the smart meter will feed nothing but a slow charger onto the battery bank with a little micro controller randomising the timing...
Post edited at 21:34
In reply to wintertree: do you work in risk management, by any chance? This is all a bit "let's think of the worst that could possibly happen and worry about it." isn't it?
A criminal mastermind with the technological know-how to profile your movements and hack your meter - presumably all with the evil intent of nicking your telly whilst you're at the shops?
Really?
A criminal mastermind with the technological know-how to profile your movements and hack your meter - presumably all with the evil intent of nicking your telly whilst you're at the shops?
Really?
In reply to andy:
Because the worst never happens. Nations don't train and hire hundreds or thousands of hackers to prepare to exploit network connected systems for profit or war. The IRA never seriously plotted to take down London's power grid, and Stuxnet never happened. Cyber crime isn't a global industry with an impact into the hundreds of billions of pounds.
When it comes to critical infrastructure, only a fool would not think of reasonable worst case scenarios.
No. A criminal mastermind profiling an entire city, and targeting a few houses with the greatest usage - best toys - when they're away for two weeks.
Or more likely the criminal mastermind will hack or swindle the data, then auction the data to the highest bidder, as currently happens with stolen credit card numbers, bank details or identity details from social engineering (phishing) and literally hundreds of thousands of infected home computers.
Here's today's example of networking something going wrong - Internet connected light bulbs giving your wifi password away to your neighbours and passers by - http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/07/crypto-weakness-in-smart-led-lightb...
> do you work in risk management, by any chance? This is all a bit "let's think of the worst that could possibly happen and worry about it." isn't it?
Because the worst never happens. Nations don't train and hire hundreds or thousands of hackers to prepare to exploit network connected systems for profit or war. The IRA never seriously plotted to take down London's power grid, and Stuxnet never happened. Cyber crime isn't a global industry with an impact into the hundreds of billions of pounds.
When it comes to critical infrastructure, only a fool would not think of reasonable worst case scenarios.
> A criminal mastermind with the technological know-how to profile your movements and hack your meter - presumably all with the evil intent of nicking your telly whilst you're at the shops?
No. A criminal mastermind profiling an entire city, and targeting a few houses with the greatest usage - best toys - when they're away for two weeks.
Or more likely the criminal mastermind will hack or swindle the data, then auction the data to the highest bidder, as currently happens with stolen credit card numbers, bank details or identity details from social engineering (phishing) and literally hundreds of thousands of infected home computers.
Here's today's example of networking something going wrong - Internet connected light bulbs giving your wifi password away to your neighbours and passers by - http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/07/crypto-weakness-in-smart-led-lightb...
Post edited at 22:30
In reply to tony:
And you will not be charged for fitting it, but you will still pay for it, as the funding is to come from the customers bills.
> No they're not. There's no legal obligation to have one.
And you will not be charged for fitting it, but you will still pay for it, as the funding is to come from the customers bills.
In reply to andy:
Not 'charged' , but the customers pick up all the costs. Go figure, you may not get one, but you will pay for everyone else that does anyway.
> Not compulsory and you're not charged.
> Next...
Not 'charged' , but the customers pick up all the costs. Go figure, you may not get one, but you will pay for everyone else that does anyway.
In reply to Jim C:
But we're all already paying for old ladies to have their lofts insulated, aren't we - the eco stuff in your bill is dishonest imo - in Germany you pay an explicit green tax to the government, here they get energy companies to collect it so direct taxes look lower.
> Not 'charged' , but the customers pick up all the costs. Go figure, you may not get one, but you will pay for everyone else that does anyway.
But we're all already paying for old ladies to have their lofts insulated, aren't we - the eco stuff in your bill is dishonest imo - in Germany you pay an explicit green tax to the government, here they get energy companies to collect it so direct taxes look lower.
In reply to mypyrex:
You're definitely missing something. Taxes for one. We pay for things the government wants all the time not what we want.
> Surely, if I have to pay for something I should have a choice as to whether or not I have it. Or am I missing something?
You're definitely missing something. Taxes for one. We pay for things the government wants all the time not what we want.
In reply to andy:
And then charge VAT on it too!
> But we're all already paying for old ladies to have their lofts insulated, aren't we - the eco stuff in your bill is dishonest imo - in Germany you pay an explicit green tax to the government, here they get energy companies to collect it so direct taxes look lower.
And then charge VAT on it too!
In reply to Philip:
Personally, I think all the things we need as a society as a whole should be paid for by a sustainable, sensible level of income tax, getting rid of other taxes except a small number of "vice" taxes. We can then be honest and transparent about what society costs.
It's a shame there isn't a decent way to stop income tax being a political pawn, as was done with interest rates. Or could it? Government sets spending, but Bank of England sets income tax and borrowing levels to sustainably deliver it?
Neil
Personally, I think all the things we need as a society as a whole should be paid for by a sustainable, sensible level of income tax, getting rid of other taxes except a small number of "vice" taxes. We can then be honest and transparent about what society costs.
It's a shame there isn't a decent way to stop income tax being a political pawn, as was done with interest rates. Or could it? Government sets spending, but Bank of England sets income tax and borrowing levels to sustainably deliver it?
Neil
In reply to stp:
Yes, but they are done via taxation which, amongst other things, is based on ability to pay. Rolling it into the electricity bills of every consumer is a very regressive form of taxation, in that it gives little to no consideration to the wealth of those being stealth taxed. The irony being that the regressive tax to fund the subsidy-farming wealthy types via windmills was introduced by a Labour government. It even works on a small scale - well off upper middle class family can install Solar-PV and get a guaranteed income that outstrips ISAs, largely funded of back of the less wealthy bill payers.
> You're definitely missing something. Taxes for one. We pay for things the government wants all the time not what we want.
Yes, but they are done via taxation which, amongst other things, is based on ability to pay. Rolling it into the electricity bills of every consumer is a very regressive form of taxation, in that it gives little to no consideration to the wealth of those being stealth taxed. The irony being that the regressive tax to fund the subsidy-farming wealthy types via windmills was introduced by a Labour government. It even works on a small scale - well off upper middle class family can install Solar-PV and get a guaranteed income that outstrips ISAs, largely funded of back of the less wealthy bill payers.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...