The Internet of Things: How to make it a reality

[Brink]

The Internet of Things (IoT) may be one of the most hyped technology trends around right now but to make it a reality organisations need to establish best practice in a long-term strategy.

How will the IoT affect businesses and how can CIOs help their organisations make the most of the trend? Five IT leaders give their views.

Read more: The Internet of Things: How to make it a reality | ZDNet

 

[TVeblen]

By the time they figure that all out the fad will be over.

I need someone to tell me how unlocking your front door from a bluetooth app on your phone is faster or easier than just using your key.
Or is it too difficult to carry keys in skinny jeans?

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

By the time they figure that all out the fad will be over.

I need someone to tell me how unlocking your front door from a bluetooth app on your phone is faster or easier than just using your key.
Or is it too difficult to carry keys in skinny jeans?

Having an active app on your phone that will automatically unlock (even better, also unlatch) when you approach your door with both arms full of groceries or other packages (heck, there are cars and SUVs that do that now) would be one heck of a lot easier than trying to fumble around with a key. I usually make at least two trips from my "little" pickup to avoid the key fumble. At my age, that has gotten rather old.

As the article said, one or more standards need to be set for the so called Internet of Things to be successful. Imagine, besides the door scenario, being able to walk through the house and just tell things to do what they are supposed to do, such as the lights turn on or off, tell the thermostat when you're too cold or hot, have appliances tell you when something is wrong (no more opening the 'fridge and finding everything spoiled because it did several hours before). Many of those things can be set to happen automatically (although I, personally, would not prefer that much of the time).

However, my biggest objections right now are the expense (I won't even spring for the monthly expense of a smart phone) and the lack of security. Like "smart" TVs, everything is too easily hacked. Imagine some hacker in China (or next door) making your lights flash on and off, reset your thermostat to excessively high or low temperatures, telling your fridge to shut off, etc. Even worse, imagine your gadgets being used to spy on you.

 

[eatup]

By the time they figure that all out the fad will be over.

I need someone to tell me how unlocking your front door from a bluetooth app on your phone is faster or easier than just using your key.
Or is it too difficult to carry keys in skinny jeans?

Having an active app on your phone that will automatically unlock (even better, also unlatch) when you approach your door with both arms full of groceries or other packages (heck, there are cars and SUVs that do that now) would be one heck of a lot easier than trying to fumble around with a key. I usually make at least two trips from my "little" pickup to avoid the key fumble. At my age, that has gotten rather old.

As the article said, one or more standards need to be set for the so called Internet of Things to be successful. Imagine, besides the door scenario, being able to walk through the house and just tell things to do what they are supposed to do, such as the lights turn on or off, tell the thermostat when you're too cold or hot, have appliances tell you when something is wrong (no more opening the 'fridge and finding everything spoiled because it did several hours before). Many of those things can be set to happen automatically (although I, personally, would not prefer that much of the time).

However, my biggest objections right now are the expense (I won't even spring for the monthly expense of a smart phone) and the lack of security. Like "smart" TVs, everything is too easily hacked. Imagine some hacker in China (or next door) making your lights flash on and off, reset your thermostat to excessively high or low temperatures, telling your fridge to shut off, etc. Even worse, imagine your gadgets being used to spy on you.

That's already happening. That's why laptops come with webcams and fingerprint sensors. The FBI probably has facial profiles of everybody that's ever sat in front of one of these. They probably made the laptop manufacturers record the identities of each purchaser and obtained this list as well.

But, there is more to come.

When Intel finally implements kill switch, which your laptop will be constantly sending an RF homing signal. They'll be able to track down anybody in real time whose facial profile matches the person they want to target, especially execs with business secrets who are constantly on the move with their laptop...

 

[Bertison]

In the UK, we would be better off with a situation whereby our political leaders, educators and senior management personnel understood the IT technology that we have now. Anything else will see those people make like a threatened tortoise.

Our lovely old Queen can use the internet with greater success than the politicians.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

By the time they figure that all out the fad will be over.

I need someone to tell me how unlocking your front door from a bluetooth app on your phone is faster or easier than just using your key.
Or is it too difficult to carry keys in skinny jeans?

Having an active app on your phone that will automatically unlock (even better, also unlatch) when you approach your door with both arms full of groceries or other packages (heck, there are cars and SUVs that do that now) would be one heck of a lot easier than trying to fumble around with a key. I usually make at least two trips from my "little" pickup to avoid the key fumble. At my age, that has gotten rather old.

As the article said, one or more standards need to be set for the so called Internet of Things to be successful. Imagine, besides the door scenario, being able to walk through the house and just tell things to do what they are supposed to do, such as the lights turn on or off, tell the thermostat when you're too cold or hot, have appliances tell you when something is wrong (no more opening the 'fridge and finding everything spoiled because it did several hours before). Many of those things can be set to happen automatically (although I, personally, would not prefer that much of the time).

However, my biggest objections right now are the expense (I won't even spring for the monthly expense of a smart phone) and the lack of security. Like "smart" TVs, everything is too easily hacked. Imagine some hacker in China (or next door) making your lights flash on and off, reset your thermostat to excessively high or low temperatures, telling your fridge to shut off, etc. Even worse, imagine your gadgets being used to spy on you.

That's already happening. That's why laptops come with webcams and fingerprint sensors. The FBI probably has facial profiles of everybody that's ever sat in front of one of these. They probably made the laptop manufacturers record the identities of each purchaser and obtained this list as well.

But, there is more to come.

When Intel finally implements kill switch, which your laptop will be constantly sending an RF homing signal. They'll be able to track down anybody in real time whose facial profile matches the person they want to target, especially execs with business secrets who are constantly on the move with their laptop...

Wow! And I thought I was conspiracy paranoid!

 

[z3r010]

I think he's copy and pasted that from one of your earlier posts

Edit - my mistake, I've re-read it and there was no mention of backups so it can't be.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I think he's copy and pasted that from one of your earlier posts

Edit - my mistake, I've re-read it and there was no mention of backups so it can't be.

My comment was based on his reasons for web cams and fingerprint readers being installed on laptops (although I do admit permanently disabling the web cams—delete software and put tape over the lens—on every machine I've ever owned that had one).

 

[Layback Bear]

John you make me :roflmao:

 

[eatup]

I think he's copy and pasted that from one of your earlier posts

Edit - my mistake, I've re-read it and there was no mention of backups so it can't be.

My comment was based on his reasons for web cams and fingerprint readers being installed on laptops (although I do admit permanently disabling the web cams—delete software and put tape over the lens—on every machine I've ever owned that had one).

Lol. I thought I was the only one in the world who has a piece of paper taped over my lappy's web cam.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I think he's copy and pasted that from one of your earlier posts

Edit - my mistake, I've re-read it and there was no mention of backups so it can't be.

My comment was based on his reasons for web cams and fingerprint readers being installed on laptops (although I do admit permanently disabling the web cams—delete software and put tape over the lens—on every machine I've ever owned that had one).

Lol. I thought I was the only one in the world who has a piece of paper taped over my lappy's web cam.

Nope, you are in good company.

 

[groze]

Dumb question. When I turned my webcam on my all-in-one computer, a indicator light is shown. So, wouldn't a virus, spyware, malware turn on the indicator light as well? The indicator light to my knowledge is not controlled by the operating system. The indicator light comes on when the webcam is activated. I have not seen it active unless I use a webcam program. The government wouldn't do that way, much easier way is facebook profile picture and I think it has been reported some do that. Mine has no profile pic. I do have pictures of our cat.

 

[lehnerus2000]

As the article said, one or more standards need to be set for the so called Internet of Things to be successful.

The US Government won't set any IoT Standards, as that would be an onerous burden on the poor mega-corporations.

 

[Indianatone]

As the article said, one or more standards need to be set for the so called Internet of Things to be successful.

The US Government won't set any IoT Standards, as that would be an onerous burden on the poor mega-corporations.

Corporations are people too you know/sarcasm.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there

Slightly off topic but as you near retirement you will be glad some of these corporations ARE (or have made) huge pots of money -- pension funds often hold stock in these corporations.

I'm sure just relying on Uncle Sam or any other Govt to pay a decent pension while won't make you starving certainly won't give you a lot of fun in retirement.

We also need corporations to make money to fund future research / projects as well as being able to donate money to decent charitable causes. Whatever people think of Ms here there's no doubt that in the Gates foundation Ms has contributed billions to charity and Windows apart from providing 100,000's of jobs over the years has vastly improved lives in so many ways of countless millions of people.

Imagine the Internet or things like phones without a simple and accessible easy to use GUI that almost every piece of hardware ever invented can connect to. Imagine not being able to buy online, no GOOGLE, no plane / train / hotel reservations, standing in line for HOURS at Banks or airport terminals etc.

Whether you use / like windows or not I can't imagine any other piece of universally used computer software that has probably changed so many people's lives and mainly for the better too.

(Someone might well eventually have invented a Windows like GUI - like Apple but Windows allows anybody to connect anything to it whereas Apple still keeps all its stuff totally under wraps).

Cheers
jimbo

 

[Indianatone]

Jimbo. There was a good Windows GUI before Windows...It was Workbench on the Amiga.
Amiga - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I know as I had 3 of them and still have the full emulator Amiga Forever - Amiga Emulation, Games, History and Support Since 1997 on my machines.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

As the article said, one or more standards need to be set for the so called Internet of Things to be successful.

The US Government won't set any IoT Standards, as that would be an onerous burden on the poor mega-corporations.

:roflmao:

 

[lehnerus2000]

Slightly off topic but as you near retirement you will be glad some of these corporations ARE (or have made) huge pots of money -- pension funds often hold stock in these corporations.

I'm sure just relying on Uncle Sam or any other Govt to pay a decent pension while won't make you starving certainly won't give you a lot of fun in retirement.

I have to rely on the Government pension, as I won't be getting a cent from superannuation.
My balance has just dropped to below $100 (due to insurance costs and fee gouging).

I've never expected to be having any fun when I'm retired.

In any case, how is making IoT devices secure going to reduce profits by even a single cent?
The baseline price of any product includes the development cost.

I expect that instead of regulating IoT corporations, the Government will actually mandate the installation of their shoddy products (e.g. every house needs remote opening doors, because getting a warrant is too much trouble).

 

[Layback Bear]

We need corporations. They hire people. When was the last time a poor person hired people..

Things I don't want to see happen.

I don't want the Oboma internet plan.
I don't want any E.U. internet plan.
I don't want any U.N. internet plan.

Their are already enough crooks using the internet. I see no need for more.
A bunch of do gooders under the title of some government will do nothing but screw things up and then tax us for screwing things up.

 

[lehnerus2000]

No Difference

We need corporations. They hire people. When was the last time a poor person hired people..

I don't what happens in the US, but here the majority of employment is generated by small business ("Mom & Pop" businesses).
Apart from Retail, corporations actually employ less people and pay less tax relative to profits made.

Small businesses actually pay tax to the Government, whereas corporations dodge it.

Their are already enough crooks using the internet. I see no need for more.
A bunch of do gooders under the title of some government will do nothing but screw things up and then tax us for screwing things up.

As opposed to the corporations, who charge top dollar for shoddy goods and services.

You do realise that the US Government basically built the Internet (using tax dollars)?
Once it was up and running, the private sector moved in and started extracting profits.

Here's the difference between Corporations and the Government in the US.

​