Seems like he didn’t like our answers. Six hundred or so people wanting a feature on a forum isn’t generally enough interest to justify it considering how few users actually visit the forums in many cases.
Well, his first post was threatening to refund something. I’m not sure he realizes this is open source and we don’t get paid. No loss in my book for people who like to throw money threats around to get their way.
Because circuit interruption based lighting controls are very limiting and don’t allow full exploitation of the capabilities of modern lighting.
Having modern PWM controllers built into bulbs and keeping the control in the bulb makes far more sense, especially in light of integrations like Siri/Google Home/Alexa, smart watches, etc.
Most of the lighting in my home is no longer controlled by circuit interruptors. I hardly ever open an app on my phone, instead merely lifting my wrist and uttering “Hey Siri, please set the master bedroom lights to 60%” or “Hey Siri, sunset lighting in the Living Room” or such. This allows me to control the color and intensity of the lighting as well as on or off with simple voice commands.
It also allows me simple things like “Hey Siri, all lights off” when turning in for the night or “Hey Siri, all lights on” or “Hey Siri, all exterior lights on” in appropriate situations.
It’s kind of silly (IMHO) that people in this forum spend so much time telling others what they should want or how absurd their desires are instead of looking into ways to achieve their stated goals.
I’m happy to entertain your thoughts on why I shouldn’t want something or even explain why I do in considerable detail, if necessary. But telling me what I should or shouldn’t want is a bit presumptuous, don’t you think? Especially when it’s based on erroneous assumptions such as the need to open an app to turn on a light without a wall switch.
1 Like
OK, it’s clear from the responses by @petro and @daywalker03 that there likely isn’t any interest in addressing this issue going forward, so I guess I will again give up on HA as a base platform and go off in search of something else.
Tragic, because it really is a nice base to work from and has a lot of the features I want, but this one defect is a deal breaker for me.
If there was hope for it to get resolved, it’d probably be worth sticking it out, but since there’s clearly no interest whatsoever from the developers in addressing it and a strong preference, instead, to tell people what they should or shouldn’t want, meh, you all have fun with that.
1 Like
What are you even talking about? I haven’t said anything about this being added or not, do I have to repeat myself?
1 Like
I don’t want to further divert the context of this thread, but just quickly: Actually you can control lights with circuit interrupting devices in terms of on/off/brightness, just not colour. In my case I don’t even need to speak and lights turn on/off and have the correct brightness for the time based on me simply walking into a room and only if it’s dark enough to require the light to be on.
I won’t continue this discussion in this thread.
2 Likes
I get your frustration with this, but I think you misunderstand the situation. I think even HA developers agree that we should have role based access control, as they have implemented first steps toward this system already several years ago. Plenty of people voiced support for the idea here as well. It’s just not finished and other things seem to take priority for now.
Also, on a side note - a light switch on the wall really does not have to be circuit breaker. It could be either a smart light switch or dumb one connected to a smart relay in the wall behind it.
Check the roadmap: Roadmap 2024 Mid-year Update: A home-approved smart home, peace of mind, and more!.
2 Likes
It in indeed in there!!
I for one would love to see this moved up in priority, but at least they are acknowledging it.
5 Likes
As it was said above… authorization is hard.
And I agree.
Not everyone finds itself or the needs in a concept. RBAC there, ACLs here, CBAC (context based access control) somewhere else.
Would it be acceptable, to leverage a framework that specializes on authorization?
In my eyes, this could provide the flexibility of authorization models while providing a solid backend.
Several templates for HA setups could be provided in a drop down - like “family with children” or “office” or even provide the case of a user defining the access controls themselves.
Even Integrations and Addons can serve their own declarations to be integrated in HA. So a complex integration can serve own authorization structures, without upping the main complexity in HA.
Providing sensors for CBAC would be great - like “only allow user X to view camera Y if rain sensor Z has status = true”
As I was setting up my home assistant I got to a stage where I was going to start adding users and selecting what kind of access each has… only to find out that whoops. controlling access is not a thing.
This completely cripples home assistant, without restrictions home assistant is only suitable for a bachelor living alone.
1 Like
This is because it was designed initially to react to input from sensors and automate repetitive actions, not as a means to remotely control lights and other things.
Agreed, but this is still great news!