TL;DR
Get the latest gadgets delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
In an October 2026 report, Spencer Kittleson describes a decade-long approach to home automation built around keeping essential functions available when internet service or vendor systems fail. His setup uses locally controlled hardware and preserves physical switches, while cloud services such as Alexa remain optional.
Home automation developer Spencer Kittleson says his household’s core smart-home functions keep working when the internet is disconnected, a design rule he has followed for about 10 years. In a report published in October 2026, he describes a system built around locally controlled devices and physical controls, with cloud services such as Alexa serving as optional ways to operate equipment rather than required links.
Kittleson says his setup runs on hardware he owns, including Tasmota software on ESP boards, an MQTT message broker and Node-RED on a Raspberry Pi. Those components let devices communicate within his home network. He says lights, switches and other core functions do not depend on a vendor’s server being available. His report is a description of his own system, not an independent test of smart-home products generally.
Cloud services remain part of the setup, including Alexa and some AWS services, but Kittleson treats them as additional controls. If Alexa is unavailable, he says, wall switches and a wall-mounted dashboard still work. He also recommends keeping the familiar way of using a device when adding automation: a smart light should not become unusable because someone has to leave its switch permanently on.
His other operating rules include keeping configuration in one place, reviewing automations for conflicts and requiring an application programming interface with logs for cloud-connected devices. He says devices communicate through MQTT publish-and-subscribe messaging, rather than relying only on direct device-to-device connections. The goal, as he describes it, is to make the system easier to alter and troubleshoot.
Keeping Lights and Controls Available
The practical issue is whether ordinary household tasks remain possible during an internet outage or a disruption to a vendor’s service. If a light, thermostat or other essential function relies on a cloud connection, a failure outside the home can affect how people use it. Local control can reduce that dependence, although it does not by itself prevent every outage: a device can still lose power, fail, or be affected by a problem with the home network.
Kittleson’s approach also highlights a trade-off for buyers. Cloud-connected products may be easier to set up, while locally controlled options can require more configuration and technical work. Keeping physical controls and alternate ways to operate a device can make automation less disruptive for other people in a household. His account offers a practical design perspective, but it does not establish how commonly devices fail during outages or how much money or time local systems save.
Products Worth Considering
Apple AirPods Pro (2nd Generation) Wireless Earbuds with USB‑C Charging, Up to 2X More Active Noise Cancelling, Transparency Mode, Adaptive
Samsung Galaxy Tab A9+ 11-Inch Android Tablet, 64GB, Graphite
Amazon Kindle Paperwhite (2024, 16 GB) – 7-inch Glare-Free Display, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Failures Behind the Offline Rule
Kittleson says an earlier integration with Nest stopped working after Google changed an API. That experience shaped his concern about depending on services controlled by product vendors. He also cites a Samsung refrigerator that displayed a TLS certificate error and a Camp Chef grill controller that, according to his account, required Wi-Fi to show its temperature. These are examples from his report; it does not provide product-wide reliability data or a response from the companies.
In talks included with the report, Kittleson describes household projects such as a garage-door and fan automation and a sprinkler controller. He says the garage setup uses sensors and a manual trigger, with a flow that checks whether the door is closed before opening it and turning on a fan. He also recounts finding four scheduled triggers controlling one garden pump, an example he uses to explain why automations need periodic review.
His rules developed as more people lived in the house. Alongside offline operation, he emphasizes changeable setups, multiple ways to control devices, and avoiding batteries that need frequent replacement. The report presents these principles as guidance drawn from his own experience, rather than a formal standard for the industry.
“No internet, no problem. Core stuff has to work with the internet unplugged.”
— Spencer Kittleson, in his report
Limits of One Household’s Experience
The report describes one person’s system and experience. It does not establish how well particular products or protocols perform across different homes, or whether every device discussed has an offline mode. Kittleson also uses cloud services, so the report does not claim that all parts of his household setup work without internet access.
It is not clear from the report how the setup behaves if the local network, Raspberry Pi or another central component fails. Nor does it quantify installation costs, maintenance time, security risks or the frequency of vendor-service interruptions. The examples involving Nest, Samsung and Camp Chef are Kittleson’s accounts; broader product reliability conclusions cannot be drawn from them alone.
Reviewing Automations Over Time
Kittleson’s report describes an ongoing practice rather than a product launch or announced industry change. He says rooms, household needs and devices change, so automations should be reviewed and adjusted. His next practical step, under the rules he sets out, is to keep checking whether scheduled actions still make sense together and whether essential controls remain available locally.
For readers choosing or updating devices, the report suggests checking what functions work without internet service, whether a physical control remains usable, and what happens if a vendor’s app or service is unavailable. Those checks do not guarantee uninterrupted operation, but they can clarify a product’s dependencies before it is installed. The report does not identify a formal follow-up milestone or say that vendors have responded to its examples.
Key Questions
What is the main development in the report?
Spencer Kittleson published an account of a home automation setup designed to keep core functions working without an internet connection. The report describes his own system and rules, rather than a new product or industry standard.
Which parts of Kittleson’s system are local?
He says the system uses Tasmota on ESP boards, MQTT and Node-RED on a Raspberry Pi. He describes these as components for locally controlling devices and connecting automations within the home.
Does his setup avoid cloud services entirely?
No. Kittleson says he uses Alexa and some AWS services, but treats them as optional controls. He says wall switches and a dashboard remain available if Alexa is down.
Why does he recommend keeping physical controls?
Physical switches provide a familiar alternative when voice control, an app or an internet connection is unavailable. Kittleson’s rule is to add automation without removing the old way of operating a device.
Does the report prove that cloud-connected devices are unreliable?
No. It gives examples Kittleson says he encountered, including an API change that affected a Nest integration. It does not provide broad reliability data or independently test devices across homes.
Source: docodethatmatters.com
