What kind of technology are you guys using?
Options
Replies
-
Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.autumnblade75 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I use a Garmin watch. The calendar it keeps is valuable to me. The power and heart data are also useful. At this point, in 43, so it's telling the story of my decline.
Kids these days! SMH. 😉
You could both be right, here. I started running "late" compared to most of the runners I know. So, at 45, I'm still climbing toward my potential. I suppose I run the risk that I will not get as good as I might have if I'd started as a teen. But I'm not rolling down the other side of the hill, yet - even though if it were strictly based on age, I keep hearing that this is likely to be my last "good" decade, and then it's all decline.
I wonder about the truth of that - the other factors. Similar to how "aging" is blamed for the slow creep of the scale, rather than the decrease in NEAT brought about by choosing less physically strenuous jobs.
Mostly, I (65) was intending to gently tease Mr. NorthCascades (43), who is clearly - across many threads - a nice young man.
But yes.
People who do the right things, get nearer their genetic potential earlier in life, are likely going to see decline in middle age, even with continued high training stimulus. People like me, who were dumber when younger (frankly), so started late . . . we have lots of upside potential left, maybe, on reaching middle age. I didn't start being routinely active until my mid-40s; I'm absolutely in better physical condition, can perform better, at 65 than I could at 45 . . . and am in better shape than the average of 65 year old women, I think.
If someone was a higher performer when young, and kept up a high activity level into middle age, they may feel they're sliding . . . but not feel - not so viscerally, at least - how much more capable and better off they are likely to be at most any later age for having had those good habits throughout life. Someone like the long-active 75 y/o friend I mentioned, for example, who keeps up with 30-somethings now . . . even though she doesn't squat as heavy as she could decades back. (Still squats, though.)
IMO, there is a "tyranny of low expectations" when it comes to age. The perceptions about scale creep are an example (some truth in there, but magnitude of effect exaggerated IMO in common imagination), as are popular perceptions of what physical strength/performance can be achieved or continued into later ages. Low self-expectations are the most destructive.
But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.3 -
***snipped a whole bunch of digression***Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.
My bodyweight scale is bluetooth enabled - I like not having to make arrangements to *see* the scale when I step on it. Not that I don't want to know the number, but having to find glasses or contact lenses first is detrimental to actually accomplishing the task in any sort of regular way.But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.
I have specifically disabled voice commands and speech-to-text sort of commands in my phone, so that it doesn't listen to me. Hopefully. I've certainly made an effort to keep it as dumb as is reasonable. I don't like the idea of my devices spying on me. I'll tap icons and type commands rather than speak at my devices. No "okay, Google" or "hey, Alexa" for me.
0 -
autumnblade75 wrote: »
***snipped a whole bunch of digression***Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.
My bodyweight scale is bluetooth enabled - I like not having to make arrangements to *see* the scale when I step on it. Not that I don't want to know the number, but having to find glasses or contact lenses first is detrimental to actually accomplishing the task in any sort of regular way.But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.
I have specifically disabled voice commands and speech-to-text sort of commands in my phone, so that it doesn't listen to me. Hopefully. I've certainly made an effort to keep it as dumb as is reasonable. I don't like the idea of my devices spying on me. I'll tap icons and type commands rather than speak at my devices. No "okay, Google" or "hey, Alexa" for me.
I understand the appeal of the devices' usefulness. I'm sure I'd find them handy, too. (I do have some, like a semi-smart watch, and a smart TV).
The potential problem with internet of things (IoT) appliances is not (mostly) privacy/security risks to the owner. It's that the state of the IoT field is utterly pathetic, security wise. They're slapping internet functionality into devices with zero knowledge/concern about security practices, in way too many cases.
Unbelievably, low-level smart appliances have been compromised through the manufacturers' way-stupid designs, used in various kinds of botnet attacks, used to compromise other (more powerful) devices on the same subnet (such as our home network), etc. The botnet attacks are more a danger to the community, not so much a danger to the device's buyer/user. (If they were used as a path to compromise other devices on the owners' subnet, that's a different story.)
Personally, I wouldn't buy an IoT device without some understanding of its security structure, something I'm probably capable of understanding if the vendor is transparent about it (unlikely), but it's not something I'd find fun to research, so a device would really need to be majorly seductively useful in order to persuade me to go through that effort.
Literally, botnets of things like refrigerators, security cameras, etc., have been compromised by criminals, used in botnets to launch distributed denial of service attacks on important servers/services. I don't want to unknowingly participate in that sort of thing, so I avoid IoT devices as much as possible. (I'm not aware of any cases where scales, specifically, have been compromised - but I can't say that they haven't, either.)
Beyond that, compromised IoT devices can potentially be used in things like phishing attacks on the individual device's owner; the more capable IoT devices (i.e., ones that are technically multifunctional under the covers, in communication protocol terms) can be used as an entry to the owner's subnet, possibly install malware (keyloggers, etc.) on home computers, and do much mischief to the owner that way.
How likely is any of this to affect an individual? Dunno, but it happens, and it's becoming more common.
I'm not saying other people need to avoid IoT devices. I'm just expanding on the thought because I think the risk side of them isn't common knowledge. People think "how dangerous can a scale be, it only knows my weight", ditto for refrigerators, doorbell cameras, etc., etc. Yeah, but no - potentially.
3 -
I just have a Garmin Fenix 6s watch, and simple kitchen and bathroom scales. Actually, if you really want to know: my whole consumer electronics consist of this, a smartphone and an ultrabook laptop. Nothing else. Don't need anything else.
The Fenix watch is cool. I switched to Suunto around when Fenix came out but whenever my Suunto gives I'll give the Fenix a try. Yes, I had the Suunto for quite a while already ....0 -
autumnblade75 wrote: »
***snipped a whole bunch of digression***Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.
My bodyweight scale is bluetooth enabled - I like not having to make arrangements to *see* the scale when I step on it. Not that I don't want to know the number, but having to find glasses or contact lenses first is detrimental to actually accomplishing the task in any sort of regular way.But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.
I have specifically disabled voice commands and speech-to-text sort of commands in my phone, so that it doesn't listen to me. Hopefully. I've certainly made an effort to keep it as dumb as is reasonable. I don't like the idea of my devices spying on me. I'll tap icons and type commands rather than speak at my devices. No "okay, Google" or "hey, Alexa" for me.
One of the lovely things about my old school Dr’s office balance beam scale. The weight is at eye level, and doesn’t turn off when you step off it.0 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »autumnblade75 wrote: »
***snipped a whole bunch of digression***Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.
My bodyweight scale is bluetooth enabled - I like not having to make arrangements to *see* the scale when I step on it. Not that I don't want to know the number, but having to find glasses or contact lenses first is detrimental to actually accomplishing the task in any sort of regular way.But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.
I have specifically disabled voice commands and speech-to-text sort of commands in my phone, so that it doesn't listen to me. Hopefully. I've certainly made an effort to keep it as dumb as is reasonable. I don't like the idea of my devices spying on me. I'll tap icons and type commands rather than speak at my devices. No "okay, Google" or "hey, Alexa" for me.
One of the lovely things about my old school Dr’s office balance beam scale. The weight is at eye level, and doesn’t turn off when you step off it.
Sure, but those things are expensive, and it's bold of you to assume I can remember how much I weighed for the duration of the 30 second trip to the computer from the scale... The hi-tech bluetooth gadget will remember a week's worth of weighings, until I am bothered to carry my phone into the bedroom, where all the data is shared to the various apps I have employed to track such things.
Truthfully, I am giving a good hard think to which bits of data I am asking various gadgets to collect, with the knowledge that *I* am the product (I don't pay for those apps, so I know they're selling my data to someone...) and the willful desire to keep other data private.0 -
I just got myself a new blood pressure monitor from Withings that uploads the readings to the Withings website ... this is to replace an Omron which I used to connect via Bluetooth.
I know that sounds lazy but it is super convenient for me to just do my bp and step on the scale brielly, and not having to write it down somewhere or spend time to download on my phone.
I use the Withings Body+ scale but only for its connectivity; do not really care about body composition. I use dexa scans for that.0 -
autumnblade75 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »autumnblade75 wrote: »
***snipped a whole bunch of digression***Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.
My bodyweight scale is bluetooth enabled - I like not having to make arrangements to *see* the scale when I step on it. Not that I don't want to know the number, but having to find glasses or contact lenses first is detrimental to actually accomplishing the task in any sort of regular way.But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.
I have specifically disabled voice commands and speech-to-text sort of commands in my phone, so that it doesn't listen to me. Hopefully. I've certainly made an effort to keep it as dumb as is reasonable. I don't like the idea of my devices spying on me. I'll tap icons and type commands rather than speak at my devices. No "okay, Google" or "hey, Alexa" for me.
One of the lovely things about my old school Dr’s office balance beam scale. The weight is at eye level, and doesn’t turn off when you step off it.
Sure, but those things are expensive, and it's bold of you to assume I can remember how much I weighed for the duration of the 30 second trip to the computer from the scale... The hi-tech bluetooth gadget will remember a week's worth of weighings, until I am bothered to carry my phone into the bedroom, where all the data is shared to the various apps I have employed to track such things.
Truthfully, I am giving a good hard think to which bits of data I am asking various gadgets to collect, with the knowledge that *I* am the product (I don't pay for those apps, so I know they're selling my data to someone...) and the willful desire to keep other data private.
Define “expensive”
Ours was second hand. Maybe $20? Thirty years ago?
How many electric ones might my family have gone through in 30 years?
Also? I see Amazon has similar for about $100.
Agreed it doesn’t sync to my phone automatically. But I don’t find that to be a dealbreaker. Others have different opinions.
Anyhow, my only fitness related tech is my Apple Watch. Which I adore.0 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »autumnblade75 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »autumnblade75 wrote: »
***snipped a whole bunch of digression***Oh, yeah: In my PP, I should've listed food scale & bodyweight scale . . . neither of them WiFi enabled because, like I said, I think the internet of things is kinda evil, still.
My bodyweight scale is bluetooth enabled - I like not having to make arrangements to *see* the scale when I step on it. Not that I don't want to know the number, but having to find glasses or contact lenses first is detrimental to actually accomplishing the task in any sort of regular way.But this is off-topic to the thread, of course. Apologies, OP.
I have specifically disabled voice commands and speech-to-text sort of commands in my phone, so that it doesn't listen to me. Hopefully. I've certainly made an effort to keep it as dumb as is reasonable. I don't like the idea of my devices spying on me. I'll tap icons and type commands rather than speak at my devices. No "okay, Google" or "hey, Alexa" for me.
One of the lovely things about my old school Dr’s office balance beam scale. The weight is at eye level, and doesn’t turn off when you step off it.
Sure, but those things are expensive, and it's bold of you to assume I can remember how much I weighed for the duration of the 30 second trip to the computer from the scale... The hi-tech bluetooth gadget will remember a week's worth of weighings, until I am bothered to carry my phone into the bedroom, where all the data is shared to the various apps I have employed to track such things.
Truthfully, I am giving a good hard think to which bits of data I am asking various gadgets to collect, with the knowledge that *I* am the product (I don't pay for those apps, so I know they're selling my data to someone...) and the willful desire to keep other data private.
Define “expensive”
Ours was second hand. Maybe $20? Thirty years ago?
How many electric ones might my family have gone through in 30 years?
Also? I see Amazon has similar for about $100.
Agreed it doesn’t sync to my phone automatically. But I don’t find that to be a dealbreaker. Others have different opinions.
Anyhow, my only fitness related tech is my Apple Watch. Which I adore.
I guess the last time I looked, Amazon wasn't a thing, and maybe that was a time in my life that $100 would have been too much. I definitely never stumbled across one for $20 even secondhand.
Today I managed to forget to go back in the bedroom and stand on the scale after I went to the bathroom to pee. That solves the problem of not remembering a couple of digits for 30 whole seconds! ***sigh***3 -
I just have a Garmin Fenix 6s watch, and simple kitchen and bathroom scales. Actually, if you really want to know: my whole consumer electronics consist of this, a smartphone and an ultrabook laptop. Nothing else. Don't need anything else.
The Fenix watch is cool. I switched to Suunto around when Fenix came out but whenever my Suunto gives I'll give the Fenix a try. Yes, I had the Suunto for quite a while already ....
I only have the fenix because I won it. I would not have bought it to be honest. One important thing to realize is that it's a multisports watch. It tries to be good at walking, running, cycling and lots of other things that require gps. One algorithm for all doesn't work, and as a result the watch massively underrecords distance when running, and hence gives me a pace that might be up to 0:30min/km slower. Lots of people complaining about this on the garmin forum. The Suunto watches seem to be much better for running. Actually, most forerunners are better for running (experience for the latest models still missing).0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions