<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Green Building Forum - Just say â€œNoâ€ to the cloud</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 22:53:36 +0100</lastBuildDate>
			<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3</generator>
			<item>
		<title>Just say â€œNoâ€ to the cloud</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=13711&amp;Focus=238582#Comment_238582</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=13711&amp;Focus=238582#Comment_238582</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 10:22:49 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Ed Davies</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[<blockquote ><cite >Posted By: Simon Still</cite>They could have/should have open sourced the softwareâ€¦</blockquote>Or, at least, published the protocol. Don't know for sure but I get the impression they haven't.<br /><br /><blockquote >Bricking the hardware remotely is unbelievable.</blockquote>Again it's not clear but I think what they're doing is just turning off the servers but, without an alternative, that comes to much the same thing.<br /><br />Whatever, having the functioning of your house dependent on a working internet connection is daft [Â¹] however good a service contract you have. If it was just the ability to monitor and control remotely which was disappearing but you could still control the thing via your own LAN (or, if you're into that sort of thing, your own VPN) then that'd make a lot more sense.<br /><br />[Â¹] Relying on a working electricity distribution network is a bit dubious.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>