Seriously folks, are you listening to what they are blatantly declaring?? Do you think they are kidding? I cannot believe they can state their justification for what they are doing with a straight face.
You better believe that these people are SERIOUS about the Objectives. Their completion date is just around the corner. You should be able to tell by the graphic below that they have taken all factors into consideration and are convinced that they have everything in place to accomplish their goals. SOURCE
spacer
December 15th, 2023.
spacer
Now scientists say BREATHING is bad for the environment: Gases we exhale contribute to 0.1% of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions
- Two greenhouse gases – both more potent than CO2 – are in human breath
- One is methane which is famously also emitted from livestock such as cows
Whether it’s eating less meat or cycling instead of driving, humans can do many things to help prevent climate change.
Unfortunately, breathing less isn’t one of them.
That might be a problem, as a new study claims the gases in air exhaled from human lungs is fueling global warming.
Methane and nitrous oxide in the air we exhale makes up to 0.1 per cent of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say.
And that’s not even accounting for the gas we release from burps and farts, or emissions that come from our skin without us noticing.
Whether it’s eating less meat or cycling instead of driving, humans can do many things to help prevent climate change. Unfortunately, breathing less isn’t one of them (stock image)
The new study was led by Dr Nicholas Cowan, an atmospheric physicist at the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Edinburgh.
‘Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming,’ Dr Cowan and colleagues say.
‘We would urge caution in the assumption that emissions from humans are negligible.’
As most of us remember from science classes at school, humans breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide.
When we inhale, air enters the lungs, and oxygen from that air moves to the blood, while carbon dioxide (CO2), a waste gas, moves from the blood to the lungs and is breathed out.
With plants, it is the other way round; plants use CO2 to create oxygen as a by-product (the process known as photosynthesis).
Every person breathes out CO2 when they exhale, but in their new study, the researchers focused on methane and nitrous oxide.
These two are both powerful greenhouse gases, but because they’re breathed out in much smaller quantities, their contribution to global warming may have been overlooked.
When we inhale, air enters the lungs, and oxygen from that air moves to the blood, while CO2, a waste gas, moves from the blood to the lungs and is breathed out
What’s more, plants essentially soak up all the CO2 that’s emitted in human breath, so ‘CO2 contribution in human breath to climate change is essentially zero,’ Dr Cowan told MailOnline.
The same cannot be said for methane and nitrous oxide, as plants don’t use these gases in photosynthesis.
For the study, the researchers investigated emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath from 104 adult volunteers from the UK population.
Participants were required to take in a deep breath and hold it for five seconds, then exhale into a sealable plastic bag.
A total of 328 breath samples were collected and every participant had details recorded such as age, sex and dietary preference.
After analysing the samples, researchers found nitrous oxide was emitted by every participant, but methane was found in the breath of only 31 per cent of participants.
Researchers say those who do not exhale methane in their breath are still likely to ‘release the gas in flatus’ – in other words, by farting.
Interestingly, people with methane in their exhaled breath were more likely to be female and above the age of 30, but researchers aren’t sure why.
Concentrations of the two gases in the overall samples let the researchers estimate the proportion of the UK’s emissions are from our breath – 0.05 per cent for methane and 0.1 per cent for nitrous oxide.
Dr Cowan stresses that each of these percentages relate specifically to these respective gases, not all of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions as a whole.
Researchers didn’t manage to find any link between gases in the breath and diets – although meat eaters are known to fuel the climate crisis in other ways.
The experts stress that their study only looked at greenhouse gases in breath, and so it does not provide an overall estimate of a person’s emissions footprint.
In experiments, all participants breathed out carbon dioxide (left). Nitrous oxide (right) was also emitted by every participant, but methane (centre) was found in the breath of only 31 per cent of participants
According to the authors, emissions of methane and nitrous oxide are ‘generally ignored in most environmental monitoring’ as they’re considered negligible.
However, further study of human emissions of these gases – not just from our breath – could reveal more about ‘the impacts of an ageing population and shifting diets,’ the team say.
Inside the human body, methane gas is produced by microorganisms called methanogens, which colonise our digestive tract.
The methane crosses into the blood and is carried to the lungs where it can be exhaled in breath.
Meanwhile, bacteria in the gut and oral cavity turns nitrates in food and water to nitrous oxide, which also escapes in human breath.
The study has been published in the journal PLOS One.
spacer
spacer
Think about what life without chickens or egs would be like. Eggs are required in so many recipes, besides being quite delicious on their own in so many forms. Chicken like wise provides so many options.
A no-beef diet is great — but only if you don’t replace it with chicken
Let’s not swap one moral disaster for another.
Most people have heard it by now: Our meat habit is bad for the world. Polling suggests that tens of millions of people are taking this message seriously: One in four Americans said they tried to cut back on meat in the last year, and half of those cited environmental concerns as a major reason. The popular food site Epicurious recently announced they’ve stopped publishing recipes with beef in them, because of beef’s climate impacts, setting off the latest round of discussion on meat’s effects on the environment.
Cutting meat consumption is as smart an idea as advertised. Industrial farming — the source of 99 percent of the meat Americans eat — provides the world with cheap meat, but it does so at a terrible environmental and moral cost.
Where it gets complicated is when people decide which meat, exactly, they’ll be cutting back on. Often, it’s beef that loses out in that calculus. And often, the messaging is that we can save the world by switching out our beef consumption for chicken.
The problem with this message is that switching beef for chicken basically amounts to trading one moral catastrophe for another.
The environmental reasons for cutting beef from one’s diet are clear. Most of the climate impact of animal agriculture comes from raising cows for beef. Cows produce methane, a greenhouse gas that is a major contributor to global warming; it’s much more potent than carbon dioxide. Transitioning away from eating beef to eating other factory-farmed animal products undoubtedly reduces the carbon impact of a person’s diet.
But the transition away from beef can end up being a Pyrrhic victory if it drives up the world’s rapidly rising chicken consumption. That ends up swapping one disaster — the climate crisis and beef farming’s role in it — for another: the moral disaster of industrial chicken production.
To put it simply, it takes many, many more chicken lives than cow lives to feed people. Cows are big, so raising one produces about 500 pounds of beef — and at the rate at which the average American eats beef, it takes about 8.5 years for one person to eat one cow. But chickens are much smaller, producing only a few pounds of meat per bird, with the average American eating about one whole chicken every two weeks. To put it another way, each year we eat about 23 chickens and just over one-tenth of one cow (and about a third of one pig).
Giving consumers better choices
Consumers who are reconsidering their meat consumption — for the sake of animals, the planet, or both — are doing a courageous thing, and the point of observing the added complications of this choice isn’t to discourage them. Fixing our broken food system is going to require substantial policy and corporate changes, as well as consumers making better choices. The beef versus chicken conversation is part of how we get there.
But what the dilemma lays bare is that there’s no meat consumption that will save the world. Meat is one of the most popular foods, and yet building a better world is going to require inducing consumers to switch away from it — and not just switch between different categories of meat as they weigh the different environmental and moral catastrophes it causes.
That’s why some animal advocates in the last few years have switched from convincing consumers to go vegan — which can be too big of a leap for many — to advocating for plant-based meat products. These plant-based products are already difficult to distinguish from the originals, while having a lighter carbon footprint and no impact on animals. If you avoid beef by switching to plant-based meat products, you really are improving the world and improving conditions for the humans and animals that live on it.
But despite all these complications, when prominent food sites take beef out of their lineup or when Americans tell pollsters they’re trying to cut back on beef, it’s cause for optimism — even though in the short term, depending what they replace it with, it could make things worse. Our food system delivers meat cheaply at an awful price. Starting more conversations about that price and how we can mitigate it is a good thing, even if it’s a conversation a long way from a satisfying resolution.
spacer
38.4K subscribers
The Gist:
-
People collect rainwater for various uses, such as gardening and cleaning.
-
Before filling up your rain barrel, make sure your area doesn’t have any restrictions in place.
-
When legal, collecting rainwater is an excellent way to practice sustainability.
Humans are made up of 60 percent water, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, which is why access to fresh water is a precious and necessary resource. Yet, in some places, it can be illegal or severely restricted to collect rainwater.
Why is it illegal to collect rainwater? Well, depending on where you live, it might not be. Some U.S. states have restrictions in place, but others allow you to fill rain barrels as you please.
Before harvesting rainwater, it’s important to determine whether or not your state is one with regulations. Keep reading to learn more about rainwater collection, its purpose, and where it’s illegal.
Is it illegal to collect rainwater? Technically, collecting rainwater isn’t against the law.
There are no federal laws stating that it’s illegal to collect rainwater. However, that doesn’t mean that there are no rules surrounding the activity — it just means that these regulations are determined state-by-state, according to the Department of Energy.
It might seem odd to restrict such a seemingly random practice in the first place, but there’s a logical reason behind it all. Most of the locations with rules in place state that they are to help protect the natural cycle of rainwater, according to WOOD-TV. The main concern is that if too much rain is collected, it could disrupt the process of seeping back into the ground.
: Governor’s Water Policy Council recommends rural groundwater framework (ABC15 Phoenix, AZ)
WATCH THE VIDEO ON THE WEBSITE 
Despite restrictions, many people still collect rainwater for watering plants, cleaning (only items not used for eating or cooking), and even flood management. According to ScienceDirect, if your backyard is prone to flooding during periods of heavy rainfall, having a rain barrel can help catch some of that precipitation.
When using the water you’ve harvested, it’s essential to take steps to prevent illness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Rainwater isn’t exactly clean — it’s filled with germs and other contaminants like asbestos, smoke, dust, and more.
Where is it illegal to collect rainwater?
To make information more accessible, the Federal Energy Management Program created a map that details each state’s rainwater collection rules. The map also explains whether or not harvesting is encouraged or incentivized.
States like Colorado and Nevada are considered “very limited.” This means that people are allowed to collect rainwater, but only under specific circumstances.
On the other hand, in Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, and Maine, there are no regulations or information regarding rainwater harvesting whatsoever.
Some are free of restrictions, but unlike the previously mentioned areas, they provide resources that educate and encourage citizens to collect. The following states follow this framework: Montana, Iowa, Missouri, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, New Hampshire, Massachusets, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, and Florida.
Plenty of locations are without restrictions, but a few still implement rules. However, this doesn’t mean that these states are against rainwater harvesting — in fact, many of these areas provide incentives and even encourage participation. For example, Washington is willing to reduce stormwater management fees, and Georgia offers a tax credit.
spacer
Government urged to ban wood-burning stoves by 2027
Despite having more than 19,000 complaints about toxic wood smoke in the last six years, local authorities have issued just 19 penalties, according to campaign group
An air pollution campaign group has urged the government to ban wood-burning stoves by 2027.
Mums for Lungs which is described as “a group of parents seriously concerned about the dangerous impact air pollution is having on children’s health”, say in a six-year period British councils issued only 19 penalties for wood smoke despite having more than 19,000 complaints.
In a letter sent to Health Secretary, the campaign group wrote: “We know that having a wood-burning stove inside a home can triple the amount of harmful particulate matter in the air, which is particularly dangerous for children and the elderly.”
Particulate matter is associated with illnesses ranging from asthma, heart attacks and lung cancer.
Mums for Lungs added: “We believe the government’s current approach and legislation to mitigate pollution from wood burning is not effective. Despite a network of smoke control zones introduced after the Clean Air Act of 1956, the use of wood in domestic combustion activities has been growing in recent years, making it an ever-larger proportion of air pollution.
“We ask you to take leadership on this matter and implement effective measures to address this source of toxic pollutants as a matter of urgency.”
A Mums for Lungs spokesperson told ELN: “We are at real crossroads at the moment in the UK on so many levels, we are heading into winter and fuel prices are already soaring, but we are also in a respiratory pandemic and air pollution if further adding to making residents in England sick.
“And, we are in a climate crisis of course. All of this must be tackled together and it requires Government to take action, to make sure that everyone can afford a warm winter this year, and where possible do so without burning wood, as to not pollute themselves or their neighbours.”
A Defra spokesperson said: “Air pollution has reduced significantly since 2010, with emissions of fine particulate matter falling by 11%
“We are taking steps to cut air pollution from household burning by introducing legislation which restricts the sale of the most polluting solid fuels, such as wet wood and coal – and encouraging the use of cleaner fuels in the home.
“Our landmark Environment Bill contains measures which will make it easier for local authorities to tackle pollution from domestic burning by providing powers to issue civil penalty notices for smoke emissions.”
Make sure you check out the latest Net Hero Podcast episode:
When the European Union on Tuesday approved a law that will ban the sale of combustion engine cars in its member states from 2035, a whole list of countries received a deadline for how long new gasoline car will still be available from dealerships. This includes Germany and Italy, two countries whose current governments have already spoken out against the ban—calling into question the timeline of the phase-out that climate scientists call absolutely necessary, but that could also face many delays and opponents.
Other European Union countries had already embraced the phase-out of gasoline cars. The Netherlands, Belgium’s Flanders region, Sweden, Greece and Slovenia had previously set themselves the goal to end the sale of new gas-powered cars even earlier – in 2030 or 2029 in the case of Slovenia. The only country in the world beating this is Norway, an electric mobility pioneer from outside of the EU, where around 80% of new cars sold are already fully electric and 100% are scheduled to be in 2025. Several EU nations and other countries around the globe have also signed a COP26 declaration on a gasoline car phase-out which sets a deadline for 2040, as seen in the chart below.
This chart shows approximate official targets for the complete phase-out of the sale of new internal … [+] / STATISTA
Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Hungary are other countries for which the EU decision is now dictating a first deadline for the sale of gasoline-powered cars. While member countries are technically bound by laws the EU parliament passes, countries have in the past gone against decisions—risking fines in the process. A divisive issue like the gas car sales ban could trigger more deviant behavior.
Similarly, voluntarily formed blocks of uniform vehicle standards could be dissolved in the U.S. over the issue. California was the first state back in August to set a phase-out date for new combustion engine car sales, also for 2035. While there are 17 states that have tied their vehicle standards to California’s under the Federal Clean Air Act, several of them now want out as a full phase-out date has been set. The states which are already going along with California’s decision (or are expected to do so shortly) are Washington, Oregon, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont and Delaware—so far not even half of California’s former allies.
Many exceptions or even a full road ban?
More confusion is arising over the question if hybrids will still be available under the new rules. Californian standards were initially expected to phase them out along with traditional gas cars like most global sales bans also do. However, some advanced hybrids with large battery power will now be allowed. Other nations treating hybrids favorably in their phase-outs are Canada, Slovenia, Singapore and Japan.
Sri Lanka, on the other hand, has been setting tougher goals than any other country, issuing not just a phase-out of new gasoline car sales, but a full road ban for combustion engine cars, tuk-tuks and motorcycles by 2040. The government fleet will already be free of them by 2025, according to media reports. For some smaller countries without their own carmakers or their subsidiaries, a gas car phase-out can actually be easier to implement in some ways than for larger nations. Cape Verde, which signed the COP26 declaration to ban the sale of new combustion engine cars by 2040, internally set the goal to achieve this feat even earlier, by 2035. To do so, it would merely have to ban the import of gas-powered cars by that date.
spacer
“The illusion of freedom will continue for as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will take down the scenery, move the tables and chairs out of the way, then they will pull back the curtains and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.” – Frank Zappa
“The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth.” – George Orwell
“There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.” ? Frank Zappa
“A single person who stops lying can bring down a tyranny” Alexandr Solzhenitsyn
TURN OFF YOUR TELEVISION!!!
THROW AWAY YOUR SMART PHONE!!!
1 year ago
spacer
5) If NIH, Pfizer only had a computer code ‘pseudo’ genetics of a virus for EUA vaccines; then they have never previously ‘Isolated’ SARS COV2 from all other things; otherwise, they would have used the original isolate. Alien mRNA Vaccines w/ Mutant Spikes man-made with computer code! It has been shown there is no evidence of SARS COV2, nor any other virus, ever being Isolated from a human. Covid vaccine manufacturers claim the synthetic spike protein from the vaccine “is the infection”. A “toxin”. Is “long covid”. Spike protein “fairy tale”; a self-adjuvant? Therefore, PCR test could show positive if vaccinated. mRNA “Vaccines” are Gene editing and Gene Therapy by combining synthetic recombinant DNA, Often with undesirable on target and off target mutations ala GMO; run by DARPA, CERN for CRISPR gene editing for humans and animals and foods in bio-labs run by the “scientific technocratic elite” at MIT, Harvard & Koch Institute. NACI admits the bi-valent vaccines have “no protection” only “immune response” or a “strong” poisoning. FDA: “formation of antibodies does not necessarily create immunity.” Warnings of adverse effects from Covid vaccines on female fertility spontaneous abortion risk of sterilization, miscarriage, birthing, menstrual irregularities, period delay, concentrate in ovaries, blood clots, myocarditis & pericarditis and heart damage. CDC & Pfizer admits and previously posted that they did not test their vaccines on the elderly, pregnant women or children nor pregnancy nor babies not approved for newborn nor men’s reproduction nor sperm counts nor birth rates dropping or stem cells; covid vaccines made from fetal cell lines. They ‘didn’t have the data’ by March 28th 2021 until a first NIH clinical trial on just 20 pregnant women began on June 24th 2021. EU-Pfizer document shows mRNA vaccines contain bacterial endotoxins and manufactured using E. coli bacterial with 50% junk mRNA creating random proteins and autoimmune disease ala Cov-AIDS. Changes gene expression or re-engineering of proteins and blood cells coming from the liver. ala Telomere Terminator causing cancer and aging. Covid vaccines contain NIH: Sodium Chloride drive autoimmune disease. NIH: Tromethamine, a Melamine, in drive sterilization. Toxic SM-102 ethanol w/ Chloroform. Novavax Animal mRNA. Animal Venom, Viper Venom. Pharmacia means Poison. Vaccine-Induced Spike Proteins damage the brain and cause cancer. 1600 athletes collapsing and “died suddenly”. Luciferase etc. for bio-tracking.
1 year ago
August 11th, 2023.
They are about to ban old more “Natural Lights Bulbs” in order to force everyone into “Smart LED Bulb” in which have an insane amount of terrible health effects….
spacer
Updated April 7, 2022
LOOKING BEHIND THE MARKETING HYPE
What’s in a name? “Smart” has become a marketing buzzword. If a product is “smart,” the implication is that it will make life better in some way for the user than its “dumber” counterpart. But looking beyond the feel-good higher tech fuzzies, just what is smart technology?
DEFINING SMART TECHNOLOGY
So, what is smart technology? Surprisingly, pinning down a definition can be difficult. Is it connectivity with the Internet? Is it artificial intelligence? A built-in capacity to learn from the environment? Is it app driven? Or is it a combination of all those aspects?
Netlingo offers this definition of smart tech:
The term “smart” originally comes from the acronym “Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology” but become widely known as “smart” because of the notion of allowing previously inanimate objects—from cars to basketballs to clothes—to talk back to us and even guide our behavior.
An article on Medium.com by Yogesh Malik defines three basic kinds of smart tech.
- Smart devices have some automation and can be easily programmed through an intuitive user interface. For example, think a simple microwave, coffee maker, or toaster. However, more and more are now connected to a network, helping to blur the line between a smart device and a connected device. Examples are smart coffee makers, smart bulbs, smart speakers, and smart security cameras.
- Smart connected devices are remotely controlled and monitored via Bluetooth, LTE, Wi-Fi, and cellular connectivity. Apps or voice are the gateway. In the real world, most people equate smart with connected. And as more automated devices are redesigned, it could well mean there will no longer be a distinction.
- IoT devices are software-defined products that are a combination of product, application, analytics, and the Internet/networking. Think of smart cities, smart factories, and smart homes. IoT devices also create more value than smart or connected devices. Examples might be smart locks, AI security cameras, luggage trackers, irrigation sprinklers, and programmable dash buttons.
It’s highly possible that in a few years, everything will be so interconnected that the above three distinctions are no longer meaningful.
spacer
On Being SMART (Surveillance Marketed As Revolution Technology) And Greedy
I love Evgeny Morozov’s (@evgenymorozov) tweet defining the acronym SMART as Surveillance Marketed As Revolutionary Technology. It has provided me with a wealth of material for my alternate storytelling channels, and provides an excellent litmus test to apply to companies I come across during my monitoring of the API space.
As I’m reading do smart devices mean dumb security, out of Defcon this year, I’m reminded of his funny, yet also very troubling definition of SMART. I’m coming across an increasing number of connected devices who have incomplete API programs available. Meaning APIs are present, available on the open Internet, but required documentation, support, and other essential resources are missing–which like mobile, tends to often mean security and privacy considerations are incomplete as well.
This last week I talked about how venture capital investment can provide some incentives that are at odds with healthy, stable, consistent, and secure API operations. You see this play out with mobile devices, where a platform is so focused on the mobile app so heavily, they pretend the web APIs behind are invisible, which is also a practice I am seeing rapidly evolve with the Internet of Things (IoT).
Companies are racing to connect everyday objects to the Internet because they want to convince consumers to buy a new product, that will give them access to the valuable data that will be generated (a precedent set by the mobile evolution). In the race to create this new breed of products that consumers will want, and generate this new, highly valuable data, the willingness to secure these new data streams, and protect the safety and privacy of consumers is often very low on the list of priorities.
As stated in the BBC article out of Defcon, these devices will become a playground, of hackers, whatever their motivations might be. The average person will be unknowingly building out the Internet in this very unstable fashion, giving away their data, privacy, and of those around them. The greed behind the pushing of SMART objects into our personal and professional worlds will happily continue if they are given continued access to this extremely valuable data, and surveillance exhaust.
I’m not convinced that corporations, institutions, the government, or individuals will all be up to the task when it comes to securing all of this tech we are inviting into our worlds, not when there are so many badly behaved, poorly incentivized players willing to build this dystopian version of the Internet out. This will not play out well…
Anything with SMART in the title is bad news. Smart is acronym for something along the lines of Surveillance-Monitoring-And-Residential-Technology. Purposefully designed toxic bulbs to add to the smog of energetic pollution. source
Are Your Light Bulbs Spying on You Privacy Concerns with Smart Bulbs
28 Nov 2023•5 mins to read
Main topics:
- Illuminate with Caution Why Smart Bulbs May Pose a Threat to Your Privacy
- Shedding Light on Privacy Risks The Dangers Lurking in Smart Light Bulbs
- Unveiling the Dark Side of Smart Lighting Privacy Concerns with Light Bulbs
In today’s digital age, we are constantly seeking ways to make our lives more convenient and efficient. Smart home devices have become immensely popular, offering greater control and automation over our living spaces. Among these devices, smart bulbs have gained significant traction for their ability to enhance ambiance and conserve energy.
Illuminate with Caution Why Smart Bulbs May Pose a Threat to Your Privacy
However, as our homes become more connected, it is crucial to consider the potential privacy implications that come with these technologically advanced lightbulbs. This article sheds light on how smart bulbs may pose a threat to your privacy and provides insights into mitigating those risks.
The Rise of Smart Bulbs
Smart bulbs have revolutionized the way we light our homes, offering features such as remote control, customizable lighting schedules, and integration with voice assistants. With approximately 35 billion connected devices projected to be in use by 2021, smart bulbs are becoming increasingly common in households worldwide. However, behind the convenience and energy-saving benefits, there lies a potential dark side.
The Privacy Concerns Surrounding Smart Bulbs
While smart bulbs offer an array of innovative features, they also collect and transmit data, potentially compromising your privacy. Here are some key privacy concerns associated with smart bulbs:
- Data Collection: Smart bulbs often collect information about your lighting preferences, usage patterns, and even your location. This data can be valuable to hackers or third-party companies, potentially breaching your privacy.
- Security Vulnerabilities: As with any connected device, smart bulbs can be vulnerable to cybersecurity threats. Weak or outdated encryption, insecure networks, or unpatched vulnerabilities could expose your home network to unauthorized access.
- Third-Party Access: Smart bulbs often require integration with third-party applications or platforms for enhanced functionality. Granting access to these third parties could mean sharing your data with companies whose privacy policies you may not be familiar with.
Ways to Protect Your Privacy
Fortunately, there are steps you can take to mitigate the privacy risks that come with using smart bulbs. Consider implementing the following measures:
- Choose Reputable Brands: Opt for smart bulbs from trustworthy manufacturers known for prioritizing privacy and security.
- Read Privacy Policies: Always read the privacy policies provided by smart bulb manufacturers and associated apps to understand how they collect, use, and protect your data.
- Secure Your Network: Ensure your home Wi-Fi network is properly secured with a strong, unique password and strong encryption standards such as WPA
- Regularly Update Firmware: Keep your smart bulb’s firmware up to date to address any identified vulnerabilities or security flaws.
- Limit Data Sharing: Review and modify permissions granted to third-party applications that interact with your smart bulbs, sharing only the necessary data.
The Balance between Convenience and Privacy
As with any emerging technology, there is a delicate balance between convenience and privacy. While smart bulbs offer unparalleled control and automation, users must be mindful of the potential risks to their privacy. By being aware of privacy concerns and taking appropriate measures, users can safely enjoy the benefits of smart lighting.
Key Takeaways:
- Smart bulbs provide convenience and energy-saving benefits, but they also pose privacy risks.
- Data collection, security vulnerabilities, and third-party access are among the top privacy concerns with smart bulbs.
- Protect your privacy by choosing reputable brands, reading privacy policies, securing your network, updating firmware, and limiting data sharing.
In conclusion, when diving into the world of smart home automation, it is essential to strike a balance between convenience and privacy. Smart bulbs, while technologically impressive, require cautious consideration due to their potential impact on your personal information. By adopting appropriate security measures and understanding the risks involved, you can confidently illuminate your space while preserving your privacy.
Shedding Light on Privacy Risks The Dangers Lurking in Smart Light Bulbs
But while smart light bulbs may seem harmless, they also pose significant privacy risks that users need to be aware of. Let’s shed some light on these dangers and explore ways to protect ourselves.
The Privacy Risks Associated with Smart Light Bulbs
- Device Vulnerabilities: Smart light bulbs, like any connected device, are vulnerable to hacking and cyber-attacks. Attackers can exploit vulnerabilities in the bulbs’ firmware or gain access through poorly secured companion apps, enabling them to control the lights remotely or gain unauthorized access to your home network.
- Data Collection: Many smart light bulb manufacturers and their companion apps collect data about user behavior, such as usage patterns and preferences. This data collection may seem innocent, but it can pose privacy risks when coupled with other personal information, potentially enabling companies to create detailed profiles of individuals.
- Sharing of Personal Information: Some smart light bulb apps require users to create accounts or provide personal information, such as email addresses or home addresses. This information can be valuable to advertisers or even malicious actors if it falls into the wrong hands.
The Implications and Key Takeaways
- Home Invasion: If a hacker gains control over your smart light bulbs, it is not just a matter of inconvenience. They could potentially disrupt your daily routines, invade your privacy, and even use it as a gateway to access other connected devices, including security systems.
- Unauthorized Surveillance: Smart light bulbs equipped with cameras or microphones can pose a significant privacy risk. It’s essential to thoroughly research and understand the functionalities of any smart light bulb before purchasing it to avoid compromising your privacy inadvertently.
- Data Exploitation: The data collected by smart light bulb manufacturers may be used for targeted advertising, sold to third parties, or even exposed in a data breach. Make sure to read the privacy policies of manufacturers and their companion apps to understand how they handle your data.
Protecting Your Privacy
Choose Reputable Brands:
- Opt for smart light bulbs from trusted manufacturers with a solid track record for security.
- Research the manufacturer’s security standards and whether they release regular firmware updates to address vulnerabilities.
Secure Your Home Network:
- Change default usernames and passwords on your home Wi-Fi router.
- Set up a separate network for your smart devices to isolate potential security breaches.
Keep Firmware Up to Date:
- Regularly check for firmware updates for your smart light bulbs and install them promptly.
- Updates often include security patches that address potential vulnerabilities.
Review App Permissions:
- Check the permissions requested by companion apps and review their privacy policies.
- Be cautious when granting unnecessary access to sensitive data or functionalities.
In conclusion, while smart light bulbs offer numerous benefits, it’s essential to understand and mitigate the privacy risks associated with their usage. By following the recommended precautions and staying informed about potential vulnerabilities, you can enjoy the convenience of smart lighting while keeping your privacy intact. Shedding light on these risks will empower users to make informed decisions and use these devices responsibly.
Unveiling the Dark Side of Smart Lighting Privacy Concerns with Light Bulbs
The Rise of Smart Lighting
Before delving deeper into the privacy concerns, it’s essential to understand the phenomenal rise of smart lighting. In recent years, the global market for smart lighting has witnessed exponential growth, and it is expected to reach $25 billion by 202 This surge can be attributed to several factors such as increased consumer awareness, advancements in wireless technology, and the growing demand for energy-efficient solutions.
However, as smart lighting systems continue to gain popularity, so does the need to address the privacy issues associated with them. Let’s shed light on some of the potential risks:
Data Collection and Privacy Invasion
Smart lighting systems are equipped with various sensors and connected to the internet, allowing them to gather information about our daily routines and habits. While this data can enhance the overall functionality and customization of our lighting experience, it also raises concerns about potential privacy invasion. Consider the following:
- Personal Information: Smart lighting systems may collect personal data, such as location, usage patterns, and occupancy. This information, if intercepted or accessed by unauthorized individuals, can be exploited for malicious purposes.
- Data Security: The transmission and storage of data within smart lighting networks may fall prey to security vulnerabilities. A breach in these systems can expose sensitive information to hackers.
- Third-Party Sharing: Manufacturers and developers of smart lighting systems may share user data with third parties for various purposes, including targeted advertising. This raises questions about who has access to our data and how it is being utilized.
Lack of Encryption and Vulnerability
In many cases, smart lighting systems lack robust encryption mechanisms, making them susceptible to hacking attempts. The potential consequences of a breach in these systems are far from negligible:
- Unauthorized Access: Hackers can gain control over the lighting system, enabling them to manipulate the lights, potentially compromising privacy and security.
- Physical Surveillance: With access to the lighting system, hackers can monitor the users’ activities, tracking their movements and daily routines without their knowledge.
- Network Intrusion: Weakly protected smart lighting systems can become an entry point for cybercriminals to infiltrate the entire home network, exposing not only lighting-related data but also other sensitive information.
IoT Integration and Expanding Attack Surface
As smart lighting systems become part of a broader Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystem, the potential attack surface for hackers increases. The interconnected nature of IoT devices opens up new avenues for privacy breaches:
- Smart Home Integration: Smart lighting integrates with other smart devices, including security cameras, voice assistants, and even home appliances. The interconnectivity between these devices increases the privacy risks, as a compromise in one system can have a ripple effect throughout the entire network.
- Smart Assistants and Voice Commands: Voice-controlled smart lighting systems are convenient but raise privacy concerns. Voice recordings could potentially be stored and analyzed, posing privacy risks if retrieved by unauthorized individuals.
- External Attacks: With the increasing adoption of smart lighting in public spaces and workplaces, the potential for cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructure and commercial buildings also rises.
Key Takeaways
While smart lighting offers numerous benefits, it’s vital to remain cautious about the potential privacy concerns associated with these systems. Here are some key takeaways:
- Understand the information collected by smart lighting systems and the potential risks associated with sharing and storing this data.
- Choose smart lighting products from reputable manufacturers that prioritize data privacy and security.
- Regularly update and secure your smart lighting systems with strong passwords and encryption protocols.
- Consider segregating your IoT devices into separate networks to mitigate the spread of potential breaches.
- Stay informed about the latest security vulnerabilities and updates related to smart lighting systems.
In the age of smart homes and connected devices, it is crucial to strike a balance between convenience and privacy. As consumers, we must remain vigilant and make informed choices to safeguard our personal information while enjoying the benefits of smart lighting.
spacer
He says they’re moving fast in the next five years. Let’s contrast how they tell us to live with the Bill Gates lifestyle! How many people can we fit into his mansion?Maybe THEY need to downsize. Screw them!
TV show clip: Eastbound & Down
1 year, 1 month ago
41.8K subscribers
‘The Great Reset’ is an idea put forward by the World Economic Forum to fundamentally restructure the global economy in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. David Ansara of the CRA speaks with author, Douglas Kruger, about the ideological underpinnings of the ‘Davos agenda’ and the risk it poses to property rights. Website: https://www.douglaskruger.com/ Douglas Kruger on YouTube: 
/ douglaskruger1
spacer
CLOSING COMMENTS:
Do you recognize that everything that they do and/or have been doing has one goal – YOUR DEMISE?
If you don’t, they you have bought into the lies they use to justify their actions. It is all SMOKE and MIRRORS/ BULLSHIT/ DECEIT and LIES. They don’t care about the climate on Earth, they don’t care about animals or rain forests, they certainly do not care about your health, your comfort, your peace, your safety or any other charitable or admirable objectives. They are motivated by GREED and SELFISHNESS.
They really HATE GOD, and everything that belongs to GOD. They especially hate YOU.