In Praise of a Dumb House

The rise of smart homes was once hailed as an inevitable evolution of modern living—control panels in every room, voice-activated everything, and algorithms that allegedly anticipate human needs better than humans themselves. But in a cultural moment where skepticism of Big Tech’s encroachment is sharpening, Jill Kargman’s unapologetic embrace of a "dumb house" is more than a quirky personal choice. It’s a quiet rebellion against the assumption that convenience should always outweigh privacy, autonomy, and the simple pleasures of friction. Kargman’s stance reflects a growing undercurrent of backlash against the Internet of Things, where convenience too often comes at the cost of data vulnerability and the erosion of offline spaces. The broader significance lies in its challenge to the tech industry’s narrative that more connectivity equals better living. For decades, the push toward smart homes has been framed as progress, but critics argue it has prioritized corporate data collection over user agency. A house that can’t spy on its inhabitants—or at least, isn’t *trying* to—offers a rare sanctuary from the surveillance capitalism that increasingly defines digital life. This isn’t just about gadgets. It’s about what we’re willing to surrender in exchange for efficiency. The average smart home device collects vast troves of behavioral data, often without clear consent or transparent use cases. When Kargman opts for analog alternatives—like a manual thermostat or a doorbell that doesn’t upload footage to a cloud—she’s making a statement about reclaiming control. It’s a small act of defiance in an era where even toothbrushes are “smart.” What remains unclear is whether this resistance will scale beyond niche communities. Will mainstream homeowners begin prioritizing analog solutions as data breaches and privacy scandals mount? Or will the convenience of automation continue to outweigh concerns, even as tech giants face mounting regulatory scrutiny? The open question is whether the market will eventually meet demand for *dumb* alternatives—or if the smart home will remain an all-or-nothing proposition. Either way, Kargman’s choice resonates in a cultural moment where people are increasingly wary of tech’s omniscience. Whether as a lifestyle statement or a practical workaround, the dumb house is a reminder that not every problem needs a silicon solution.