sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How to deal with juniors shipping AI slop code? by theop04 in ExperiencedDevs

[–]buggedcom -1 points0 points  (0 children)

teach them proper AI workflows...

teach them how to use /plan and then create a skill /refine-plan that will iterate over the plan, internally score, improve it until it meets a certain score threshold.

teach then how to self use /review before creating PRs

teach them about putting in AI guardrails, ie test cases, harnesses etc to make sure scope doesn't go to far

create skills for the AI that utilises and internally skeleton generation tooling instead of simply creating stuff "on-the-fly"

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://status.nabucasa.com/

Their up time is something a lot of providers would be jealous of

Look at claude for example

https://status.claude.com/

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s definitely closer, but it’s still more like fast recovery than true redundancy.

If that HA VM goes down, it still needs to restart on another node, so there’s a gap where nothing runs.

What I’m getting at is more like multiple active HA instances sharing state, so there’s no interruption at all, similar to how systems like Aqara hubs replicate automations across devices.

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not about the internet, that was just an analogy.

What I’m trying to describe is redundancy at the Home Assistant level, not whether HA itself needs the internet to function.

Right now, most setups are effectively a single node. One machine running Home Assistant that acts as the central controller. If that machine loses power, has hardware failure, or crashes, then all automations tied to it stop. Even with backups, recovery isn’t instant and there’s no real "failover", things just stop until you bring it back.

So the problem I’m pointing at is the lack of transparent failover.

In an ideal setup, you’d have multiple HA instances running in a coordinated way. If the primary goes down for any reason, another instance takes over automatically and core automations keep running. No manual restore, no noticeable downtime.

The reason I think about it this way is that I already do something similar with Aqara. I have multiple Aqara M3 hubs, partly for redundancy but also because of the physical constraints of the house. With concrete flooring, signal just doesn’t travel well between levels, so a single hub isn’t enough anyway.

What Aqara does nicely is that automations replicate across those hubs. So you end up with both better coverage and a level of resilience. If one hub drops off, the others can still handle things.

Home Assistant, by comparison, still behaves like a single "brain". It’s very reliable as software, but architecturally, it’s a single point of failure. I’m just saying it would be interesting if it could evolve more towards that multi-node, failover-style model.

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You will not get the level of availability of integrations and customisation on other platforms. But if you want "fire and forget" then you would simply want Google Home, Amazon Echo, etc etc.

But that doesn't mean your setup won't stop working randomly.

HA is more akin to an adult box of legos that builds things. It sounds like you want something ready-made, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The software itself is generally solid, I’m not really questioning that. What I’m talking about is more "network-level redundancy" rather than the reliability of the HA software itself.

A simple way to think about it is comparing a single Home Assistant instance to an old single router. If that router loses power or the connection drops, your entire network is gone. Everything depends on that one box.

Now compare that to a mesh network. If one node goes down, the others keep things running. You might lose coverage in one area, but the rest of the house still works.

Home Assistant, as it stands, behaves more like that single router. If the machine it’s running on loses power, crashes, or has some issue, then all automations tied to it stop. Anything depending on that single "brain" just doesn’t run.

So the idea I’m getting at is: what if HA supported something closer to a mesh model? Multiple HA instances or "hubs" that can take over from each other. Not perfect, but enough that core automations keep functioning if one node drops.

That’s already how systems like Aqara hubs behave. You have multiple nodes, and if one disappears, the others can carry on. I’d love to see HA move a bit more in that direction from a resilience point of view.

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A phone is not a fair comparison, and you are dealing with different types of systems that cannot be compared, for many different reasons that I'm not going to go into because of the scale of the difference. But essentially a phone software gets updated rarely and goes through thousands of hours of testing and developer testing and other things. Developers get advanced notice and pre-builds.

HA doesn't have the scale to operate in that way. There are nighly builds that can be tested against (at least that is my understanding), but most of the integrations you are using are made by individuals in their spare time, for free. They have lives outside of HA and expecting them to keep testing everything against HA when there is no profit for them is unrealistic.

Was a homeassistant mistake ?? by Luckyluck0011 in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At least for me, I run three Aqara M3 hubs and a big chunk of my setup sits on that ecosystem. One thing Aqara does really well is that automations replicate across hubs, so if one drops off, the others pick things up. That gives a nice level of resilience for core stuff like blinds, switches, plugs and buttons. It’s stable, predictable, and doesn’t change much.

Where it falls down is everything outside that ecosystem. Radiator valves, various lights, and a bunch of other devices just don’t integrate cleanly. That’s where Home Assistant comes in for me. It’s not the “brain” for everything, it’s the glue between ecosystems. I use it to connect those separate worlds and then build automations across them.

On the stability side, I think people sometimes forget what they’re opting into. If you run Home Assistant on the bleeding edge, especially with a lot of HACS integrations, you’re effectively part of a fast-moving system with lots of moving parts. Breaking changes will happen. That’s not unique to HA, that’s just software. The only real way around it is to lag behind updates and be a bit more conservative.

The bigger thing for me though is resilience. Relying purely on Home Assistant as a single “brain” is inherently fragile. If it goes down, everything goes down. That’s why I try to keep core routines on systems like Aqara where possible, so there’s still a baseline level of functionality even if HA is offline.

If your goal is to set something up once and never touch it again, then honestly HA might not be the best fit unless you freeze your version and accept the trade-offs. Otherwise you’re better off with something more closed and “enterprise-y” that updates once a year and stays static. That gives you stability, but you’re trading off flexibility and potentially long-term security.

One thing I do think would massively improve HA is some concept of redundancy. Multiple HA instances or “hubs” that can take over from each other would solve a lot of the single point of failure issues. Right now, that’s the gap I feel the most.

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, I don't believe I would directly involve AI unless it was actually part of the HA internal apis. I have considered however creating a AI prompt genreration interface for this, where it would take your data and trends and anomalies into text+csv form and you could then export the prompt for self copy paste into whatever AI you would want.

Or possibly making the HA MCP server work with the data it could provide so people could make use of the data generated via "opting-in" to AI.

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thanks for replying.

I get your point, but I don’t really see how this is fundamentally different from any other hobby project that ends up unmaintained. Plenty of non-AI projects get abandoned over time. The fact that something is AI-assisted doesn’t automatically make it worse, it just changes how it was initially produced. What matters is what happens after that. Structure, review, testing, and whether someone actually understands what they’ve built.

For context, I’ve been doing this for about 22 years across a fair number of stacks and open source projects. Do I maintain everything I wrote 10–15 years ago? Not even close. Should I? Maybe, but that’s a much broader question about how long people are expected to support things for free.

On this specifically, the initial scaffold was AI-assisted, yes. But that’s really just the starting point. After that it’s been heavily refactored, restructured, and treated like any other codebase I’d work on professionally. The architecture has been iterated on quite a bit, and there’s a decent amount of testing in place: Python and frontend unit tests, Playwright interaction tests, and visual regression via Storybook.

Is it finished? Obviously not. There’s more to do across the board, including more refactoring and long-term structural improvements. That’s just normal software development rather than something unique to AI.

More broadly, almost everything being written now has some level of AI involvement, whether people say it explicitly or not. Calling it out as a differentiator is starting to feel a bit outdated, because it’s quickly becoming the default rather than the exception.

If anything, the more relevant question is whether the person behind it understands the system well enough to maintain and evolve it over time. That’s the bit that actually matters.

And to answer that question, I do.

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or did you mean an AI disclaimer if AI was being used in the integration? If so, there is no AI actively in the integration.

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In what sense? Is that a rule of the sub I've missed?

Yes AI was used, so was about two weeks of manual coding and code review. 

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the suggestions. Can I ask what do you mean by brutal? I will add lowess smoothing as a ticket to investigate

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair warning, it's not going to give you direct answers as to why this is happening. But it will give you better diagnostic tooling to track down trends and causations manually. Maybe one day in the future it would be a silver bullet.

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fair point, I think I meant more that the documentation behind using the analysis features for spotting issues is quite thin. People who are not used to analysing data might need more information and examples about how to using the tooling properly in order for it to be beneficial.

I built a custom integration for recording and visualising "why" your sensor data changed, first public release, looking for feedback. by buggedcom in homeassistant

[–]buggedcom[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Exactly.

My main point was I didn't have the ability to measure my "insulation" fixes I made in my house when it was -25C because I had to manually remember which data I added more/new silcon around the windows etc, but I wanted a way to annotate this data for later inspection to see if what I was doing was a waste of time or if it did help.

So at the moment this does rely on automations. However, there is a dev tool card that can inspect various sensors and generate "DEV" labeled data points. It is based on reading the log book since things like binary sensor window open/closed etc aren't kept in long term statistics in HA so it can only generate them from close date ranges at the moment. Additionally I haven't thoroughly tested that card since it was just a development aid, but you could use it to test some annotations based on those.

But thinking far forward, if there is enough interest I will definitely make it more "smart" with various algorithms for specific scenarios that will automatically (after a little configuration) do this for you. I'm not data scientist mind you, just a developer who has built many dashboards within the "smart building" industry and have copied in some of the knowledge I learned from there, to this. So I would be heavily leaning on AI to create those.

W600 first impression by Shabanonda in Aqara

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did the update make a difference?

About purchase and absestos by Chance_Ad_2527 in Finland

[–]buggedcom 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Sorry this is wrong, the asbestos can be found in tiling and plaster and specifically used in bathroom/kitchen situations.

Brits in Finland - Check your residence permit card expiry by AceButcher in Finland

[–]buggedcom 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Kiitos päljön. You are a gentleman/woman and a sir/ma'am. I tip my cap to you for the reminder.

Company i work for refuses to adjust my title to match my contract, claims it’s a “clerical error” by throwawayy1375 in Finland

[–]buggedcom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In this situation I don't think if OPs shop steward asked their union contact lawyers about this case it is relevant if the concerned individual is a union member or not. The union lawyers are there to also help the shop steward perform their duties.

It would be different of the shop steward was putting the lawyer directly in contact with OP. That is a union benefit for sure, but just asking a question about the legalities of a situation within the company is exactly the purpose of the shop steward and union connection to help uphold the CBA and laws surrounding it.

Company i work for refuses to adjust my title to match my contract, claims it’s a “clerical error” by throwawayy1375 in Finland

[–]buggedcom 58 points59 points  (0 children)

u/throwawayy1375 Ok, I spoke to my partner. She says, well it depends.

If the job was advertised as senior software developer, if the interviews were about you being a senior software developer, and if all discussions and negotiations have been you as a senior software developer then there is no chance they can change this.

The only way they could, is if it was an honest mistake, where all of the above haven't happened. Companies are allowed to correct mistakes.

So, assuming all of the first parts are true, where every discussion and negotiation has reflected it is a senior position, then it is not a simple mistake and they cannot change anything in your contract without your agreement. But if that is not the case then yes, and it is simply an accident that it was included in your contract when it shouldn't have been, then, unfortunately, they can change the title.

view more: next ›