Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Why the Internet of Things Is More 1876 Than 1995

Unknown Lamer posted about 8 months ago | from the wait-until-the-singularity dept.

The Internet 142

An anonymous reader writes "Some folks would like you to think that 1995 was the year everybody was brought online and that, starting this year, we'll bring everything else along for the ride. If that seems far fetched to you, Glen Martin writes about how the Internet of Things has more in common with the age of steam than the digital revolution: 'Philadelphia's Centennial Exposition of 1876 was America's first World's Fair, and was ostensibly held to mark the nation's 100th birthday. But it heralded the future as much as it celebrated the past, showcasing the country's strongest suit: technology. ... While the Internet changed everything, says Stogdill, "its changes came in waves, with scientists and alpha geeks affected first, followed by the early adopters who clamored to try it. It wasn’t until the Internet was ubiquitous that every Kansas farm boy went online. That 1876 Kansas farm boy may not have foreseen every innovation the Industrial Revolution would bring, but he knew — whether he liked it or not — that his world was changing."'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214765)

Oh diddly Dice, the smell of your stinking Beta is not nice.

http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=##altslashdot.org [freenode.net]

Typo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214791)

Re:Typo (4, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 8 months ago | (#46215457)

The Internet betrayed us all. The shiny object of our admiration is now a honeypot for our enslavement and a means to monetize the smallest of our private activities.

Let's destroy it, while there's still a chance.

Beta is more crap than 1995 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214781)

And 1995 was pure crap. Fuck beta.

fuck beta (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214799)

Just as the subject says, nobody cares about the beta. Listen to your users, but since it's obvious you delete and mark down everyone with unlimited karma points that speaks ill of the beta, you're no longer interested in us and want to try and tame a broader audience.

altslashdot is now soylentnews. go fuck yourselves dice!

Re:fuck beta (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214981)

You seem to care about the beta, so you should fuck off and join the boycott and let the rest of us get on with reading.

Re:fuck beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214995)

MOD DOWN FLAMEBAIT

Re:fuck beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215079)

You seem to care about the beta, so you should fuck off and join the boycott and let the rest of us get on with reading.

If it bothers you that much, adjust your beta page to not view comments moderated at zero or less. Oh wait; alpha geek forgot beta boys can't do that.

Re:fuck beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215161)

You seem to fail to realise someone can hate beta and hate stupid 'fuck beta' comments too. Not mutually exclusive.

Re:fuck beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215225)

Keep sitting on you're fat ass and do nothing while they ruin the site. Smart one buddy, good idea.

Fuck beta

Re:fuck beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215335)

You know what's ruining the site much faster than beta? 'Fuck beta' posts.
At least with beta the site will keep working for close to a month. In contrast, the 'fuck beta' posts are ruining the site right now.

You say fuck beta? I say fuck you.

Alpha geek? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214807)

Does Alpha geek really need to be a thing?

Beta geek? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214841)

Fuck beta and the horse it rode in on.

Re:Beta geek? (0)

gnoshi (314933) | about 8 months ago | (#46214989)

Go fuck the horse you rode in on.

Re:Beta geek? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215121)

MOD DOWN FLAMEBAITER

Re:Beta geek? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215237)

Go fuck the horse you rode in on.

Don't knock it until you've tried it, dude.

Re:Alpha geek? (3, Insightful)

AudioEfex (637163) | about 8 months ago | (#46215153)

It reminds me of a quote from Game of Thrones when young King Joffrey is put in his place - to paraphrase, a "real King" doesn't need to keep telling everyone "I am the King!"

Re:Alpha geek? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46216393)

Shut up , sister-boy.

Down with Beta (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214821)

Fuck beta

Oh, the good ol days (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about 8 months ago | (#46214855)

...when Goatse was real and scared everybody off my lawn. Now that was automation!

Alph Geeks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214883)

But if you want to know the details, you need math. Quantum mechanics is interesting because it's like a manifestation of linear algebra. Why does an operator reduce a wave function to one of the eigenstates of said wave function? That concept is one of the most central concepts to quantum mechanics, yet you wouldn't understand what eigenstates or wave functions are without some knowledge of math. If you explain it using only words, you're still beating around the bush, and basically it's the math that you would be describing.

Re:Alph Geeks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214921)

Deepak Chopra told me everything I need to know about quantum mechanics, thank you very much!

Why the dumb name (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214901)

Can we stop using these ridiculous buzz words/phrases?

Internet of things? Really?

Re:Why the dumb name (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214917)

It's as bad as calling every single motorized glue gun a "3D printer".

Re:Why the dumb name (1)

plover (150551) | about 8 months ago | (#46215159)

What's wrong with Internet of Things? There are many "things" and they are now on the "Internet", even things that we never really expected to be online before. It carries meaning in a few short words.

At least it's not stupidly cute.

Re:Why the dumb name (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215399)

What's wrong with Internet of Things? There are many "things" and they are now on the "Internet"

It's like calling food "organic"...food is already organic...it's redundant. We've had an internet of computers for years now. Computers are things. So, by extension, we've had an internet of things for as long as we've had an internet of computers. If it's truly a new thing, perhaps it should be an internet of non-computers.

Re:Why the dumb name (2, Informative)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 8 months ago | (#46215403)

Can we stop using these ridiculous buzz words/phrases?

The Internet of Things is so 2013... I'm waiting for the Web of Things 2.0 myself.

Re:Why the dumb name (2)

jarle.aase (1440081) | about 8 months ago | (#46215545)

Can we stop using these ridiculous buzz words/phrases?

Internet of things? Really?

How else would you describe items that makes themself profitable by Facebook, Gooogle and the like? Would you call them people?

When people act like things, and becomes the very products sold by Big Corporations, I think the prase is accurate.

Oh.. I just realized that this tread is about the internet of crap [betanews.com] !

I disagree (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214907)

Measurements of the masses (actually, the luminosities and temperatures) of high-redshift galaxy clusters indicate a high fraction of baryonic mass, removing one of the justifications for positing dark matter. This finding is even more fishy-sounding. To understand this, realize that the group in question has deliberately chosen the most-distant and therefore hardest-to-study clusters to study, and adopted temperature-mass relationships that are calibrated in the local universe (and may not apply at these great distances) in order to find that their sample differs from the standard model predictions. Without even bothering to list all the ways in which they might be wrong, let me simply state that even if they are right there is a lot of independent support for the dark matter + dark energy picture that neither of these groups is addressing.

2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (4, Insightful)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about 8 months ago | (#46214911)

The one, single biggest weakness with the whole IoT-movement is the lack of any sorts of standards. Devices from one manufacturer use this protocol to talk to one another, the devices from another manufacturer use another protocol, neither of them can communicate with one another, and to top it off many devices even within a single manufacturer's own line of products don't know how to communicate amongst themselves. This means a huge, tangled mess of dozens of controlling applications and physical control-panels and whatnot, and it's all ripe with security-issues, too. With no standards or anything there's no logical way of controlling all of your IoT-devices in a unified way, let alone to control their security and updates.

On a similar note, there was recently talk on Ars Technica about this subject when the CEO of WIFI Alliance tried to make the case that all IoT-devices should simply use WIFI, but that would be folly. His primary argument was that even though WIFI uses more power than e.g. Bluetooth-LE it provides more bandwidth and that the amount of power WIFI uses is irrelevant. That argument obviously ignores the fact that if, on average, every household in the future had e.g. approximately 50 IoT-devices in their homes we would then see the power-drain on the electric-networks increase by 50 * 117M ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] ) * WIFI-power-drain just within the United States alone -- a definitely non-neglibigle amount. Also, your fridge, coffee-maker and the likes have absolutely zero need for all the bandwidth WIFI would bring, so Bluetooth-LE or something similar would be the saner choice -- less power-usage, still more than enough bandwidth for the small amount of data being transferred. However, you'd again need some sort of a bridge for bringing the WIFI-devices and Bluetooth-LE-devices together, and again, you'd need sane standards in order to come up with such bridges.

I'm ranting a little, I haven't been sleeping too well and my thoughts are racing, but my point here is that even if the tech was there for the big push for IoT-devices we lack standardisation efforts, we lack the need for such devices, and I'm not sure the environmental costs would be worth the advantages either at this point in time.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46214943)

MOD DOWN OFF TOPIC

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46215207)

BUCK FATE, moron.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

DrPBacon (3044515) | about 8 months ago | (#46215211)

lol +1 Funny

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#46214977)

The one, single biggest weakness with the whole IoT-movement is the lack of any sorts of standards.

The one, single biggest weakness with the whole IoT movement is the lack of any sort of use.

I don't want my washing machine talking to my fridge and downloading malware from the Internet. I don't need to check whether the dryer has finished drying from my tablet. I don't need to turn my lights on and off from a hotel on the other side of the world.

And I certainly don't want all those things open to remote access hacks.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (4, Interesting)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about 8 months ago | (#46215017)

The one, single biggest weakness with the whole IoT movement is the lack of any sort of use.

I did mention that, too. I can't think of much use for IoT-devices myself, either, except for the fridge: it'd be handy if it reminded me of groceries that will be going bad in a day or two. I did read a blog-post from someone who bought a bunch of those smart-bulbs and programmed them to follow a specific schedule, like e.g. slowly rising in brightness when it's time to wake up in the morning, turning off automatically during work-hours, automatically setting a specific mood in the workroom and so on, but all that really works only for people who have very strict schedules. It's hard to think of cases where all the hassles of keeping the things working, updated and secure is worth the trouble in our daily lives.

And I certainly don't want all those things open to remote access hacks.

That's the thing I worry the most about. With lax security someone could just drive by your house, turn everything on, crank your thermostat to max. and so on, resulting in possibly burned-out machines, higher electrical bills, terrible nuisance when you're trying to sleep and so on. If IoT-devices were ever to become mainstream these kinds of things should first have to be solved in a standard, global manner.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46215215)

I did read a blog-post from someone who bought a bunch of those smart-bulbs and programmed them to follow a specific schedule, like e.g. slowly rising in brightness when it's time to wake up in the morning, turning off automatically during work-hours, automatically setting a specific mood in the workroom and so on, but all that really works only for people who have very strict schedules. It's hard to think of cases where all the hassles of keeping the things working, updated and secure is worth the trouble in our daily lives.

Or you could do like I do and buy a few outlet timers at Clas Ohlsson for about 8 bucks a pop.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

smelch (1988698) | about 8 months ago | (#46215241)

Why on Earth would your refrigerator have to be online to keep track of food expiration dates? Can't you use a tablet, phone or PC to keep track of that?

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

donaldm (919619) | about 8 months ago | (#46215325)

Why on Earth would your refrigerator have to be online to keep track of food expiration dates? Can't you use a tablet, phone or PC to keep track of that?

Err! wouldn't it be easier to write on the packages or containers if they don't have expiration date. Or just take a tentative smell on a regular basis and throw-out the foodstuff that has gone off or has mould growing on it ;). Having a policy of cleaning and checking your fridge at least once a month can save an embarrassing trip to the toilet or in severe cases the Doctor and it definitely beats maintaining a database/spreadsheet of your fridge.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Holi (250190) | about 8 months ago | (#46215597)

No shit, do we really need computers to take over for our common sense?

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 8 months ago | (#46215667)

The premise with the refridgerators keeping track of experation dates is that they would use and RFID type technology in the food product packaging, so you wouldn't keep a database of your food. The database would happen automatically.

"Reply to comment" (1)

indeterminator (1829904) | about 8 months ago | (#46215885)

I think the smart fridge thing is more interesting for inventory management at your local grocery store, than for an individual person. It would be worth a lot to them to be able to track when people are going to run out of specific items, so they can have the right amount of inventory at right time.

OTOH, almost every time I go grocery shopping, I buy something I wouldn't have needed yet, simply because I didn't remember if I had it or not and get one just in case. So being able to check your fridge contents while at the store might also be useful.

Btw. Before trying it, I thought the beta hate might be just nerd rage, but I'm starting to understand.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 8 months ago | (#46215659)

Is someone wants to destroy your home or property, they don't need a computer hack to do it.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Rob Simpson (533360) | about 8 months ago | (#46215959)

No, but it makes it fun and easy to do for a random jerk living anywhere in the world.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | about 8 months ago | (#46216299)

Home automation is getting there in terms of standardization, ease of use, and maintainability (not quite there yet, though!). I've built a setup that is affordable and has actual use in the form of comfort, convenience, and energy savings. But the main stumbling block is that you still have to tell the system what you want, i.e. there's some programming involved if you want to go beyond a remotely controllable home towards an automated home. That's not just about schedules, but also about logic: "don't turn off the heating in the guest bedroom if someone is sleeping there", "don't set off the lawn sprinklers if it's going to rain", "warn me if the back door is still unlocked when I hit the 'go to bed' button", that sort of thing. It's a little bit like the better universal remotes: a bloody hassle to set up, but once you have them working the way you want, they are convenient and you can just leave them alone. Nest tries to do the hard work of programming for you but it only works for HVAC applications and not always all that well.

Smart Homes go a bit beyond that both in usefulness and in the need for standardization, and this is only just recently getting off the ground. The idea is that smart homes will tie into a smart power grid, and negotiate for flexible energy rates. The house can turn on the AC or charge your EV when the clouds break and the grid has a lot of surplus solar power available, or you ask it to dry the laundry before 5pm, letting the house or power company decide what the most economical time to run the machine is, in return for a good rate.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215059)

I don't need to check whether the dryer has finished drying from my tablet.

Unlike you I've got better things to do than spend my day leaning against the dryer while it rumbles. I'd appreciate a message letting me know it's done. Goes the same for preheating the oven, but most people don't get off on that.

The question is if I'm willing to pay a multi-hundred-dollar premium for these alerts, especially in light of the fact that none of the equipment is compatible or secure. Right now, that answer is no. I'll wire an arudino to a vibration sensor to sit on the dryer, or into the "oven is on" light to let me know when it turns off.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215169)

Start dryer, do something else, come back an hour later. If it's done, good, if it's not done, go do something else. You don't have to lean against the dryer the whole time.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

msobkow (48369) | about 8 months ago | (#46215281)

Or, if you're in an apartment, start dryer, sit and wait there regardless of what the internet can do because someone might steal your undies. :P

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (2)

Delusion_ (56114) | about 8 months ago | (#46215763)

Tangental story:

I lived in an apartment complex with other residents who were NOTORIOUS for leaving stuff in the dryer overnight. After it happened multiple times, I put their clothes in a bag, did my own laundry, and then when I came to get mine out of the dryer and the bag was still there, I sorted out all the women's undies and carefully and neatly folded them and put them in a pile.

Problem solved, it didn't occur again until months later when a new resident moved in and started doing the same thing. The same approach worked again.

I don't have a stranger underwear fetish, but I figured it would creep people out without actually doing them any harm, to the point where they might not let their stuff sit overnight (or even over TWO nights), and apparently it did.

Re: 2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Dzimas (547818) | about 8 months ago | (#46215263)

I'm not sure what decade you're from, but my washer and dryer both have digital countdown timers and chime when they need attention. Same goes for the oven. I most certainly don't need an appliance that's designed to last 20 years to be infested with a wireless communication standard that will be hopelessly outdated in five years.

Re: 2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215973)

I don't konw about you, but my washer and dryer have chimes that are barely audible from another floor, let alone when th TV is on or the kids are making a racket. If I'm in the second floor or the attic, I'll never hear the chime from the machine in the basement!

dom

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (2)

AudioEfex (637163) | about 8 months ago | (#46215297)

The person you replied to, though - has a great point regarding the general acceptance and "need" of such things. You obviously aren't the "general audience" when you talk about installing vibration sensors on your dryer and installing hardware onto your stove.

I don't "spend my day leaning against the dryer", for example, as I don't have time for that, either - if I set it for 50 minutes, I go back 50 minutes later. If I don't feel like looking at one of the many clocks in my home, I can set an alarm with two flicks of my finger on my phone or tablet. Or, since I don't have 17 kids I am doing laundry for, I just go back down to the dryer when I am ready - which can be six hours later.

Regardless, I agree with your point of paying premium prices for these devices - but I think that point extends to the person you replied to - if they cannot convince you, someone who does want these alerts, etc. - there isn't a chance in hell they will ever convince John Q. Public to do so.

This whole thing smacks of the "3D TV" fad. A bunch of manufacturers got together, trying to figure out what the "next step" was for their product to get the folks who already bought their equipment to re-buy it. The home theater community at large seemed to believe that suddenly 3D on TV was the "next big thing" and that by now (2014) every television would just have it as standard. The opposite has happened - big box retailers like Wal-mart and Target don't even carry them in store anymore (you can order online but they don't stock them), and while in 2011 it seemed like this was some big breakthrough that everyone would want - the public responded with a resounding "no" by not purchasing the products. People still buy 3D TV's, but they failed to go mainstream - which is why the manufacturers are all talking about "4K" now - again, selling to that niche of folks who have to have the newest best shiniest - who are willing to upgrade perfectly good equipment because buying electronics is their hobby.

All of the "problems" that any of these devices solve are already solved as much as most people care them to be. Want your coffee maker to have your coffee ready when you wake up? Plenty have timers just for that use. Washing machines, stoves, etc. already have timers built in. Sure, it takes a second or two of thought - but very few have a life so complex that such things are overwhelming, if they feel they "need" them to begin with. If you have home security needs, it's quite easy to view video feeds from far away these days. Very few people have all these needs, and in the end it really only appeals to super "gadget" folks with large disposable incomes. That's why home automation will always be a niche product - most people just do not need (or even want) that level of "control".

Finally, that brings it back to the essential problem the person you replied to posted - the lack of standards. Even if everyone did want this much interaction with the devices in their home, the lack of standards coupled with the lack of practicality to most folks makes this all DOA. It isn't any more going to happen now than it happened in the 50's and 60's (think: Jetsons) where they predicted we'd all be automated by the 80's.

We seem to fall for this stuff once a generation, at least. For a funny comparison, watch Back to the Future II - a film made in 1989. A large portion of the film takes place in 2015 - which is now less than a year away. Our world really resembles the 1985 depicted in the film much more than the 2015 - the only difference is we have smart phones. It's because we seem to think we are on this great cusp of automation and innovation when, in fact, for everyday tasks - it's just not cost effective to begin with, and it never will be because people simply don't care enough to make it mainstream. For most folks, looking in their fridge is enough to know they need milk - and, even if your fridge did have the feature of letting you know, you'd have to buy certain brands of milk that it could read it's barcode, etc. (I buy milk in glass bottles from the grocery store made locally, what are the chances they know that barcode?). I supposed they could be "taught" - but It's all so convoluted and complicated for something that really isn't very hard to deal with in the first place (look, shake, or remember).

I can leave you with an example - my phone has all kinds of apps for tracking groceries, etc. and I've found them all excessively complex and unnecessary when it's just as easy to do the "note pad on the fridge" route that has been in use since the dawn of refrigerators. It's just easier to scribble something down when you notice it is getting low because you are standing right there, you don't have to go get a device, navigate to the correct app, etc. But, because pieces of paper can be forgotten or lost, when the list gets big enough, I snap a picture of it on my phone so I can see it when I am at the store. That's an example of a simple, effective way to use advances in technology - it wasn't broke, didn't need fixing - but a new technology allows me to do it just a little smarter. Very few people have any "real" problems that are addressed by these automation systems, which is why they will remain in the den of super-gadget lovers and never be the mainstream cash cow that a few companies are banking on.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

jrumney (197329) | about 8 months ago | (#46215511)

Or, since I don't have 17 kids I am doing laundry for, I just go back down to the dryer when I am ready - which can be six hours later.

That works for the dryer, but not so well for the washing machine, unless you don't mind your clothes smelling a bit moldy.

Depends on where you live (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 8 months ago | (#46215643)

That works for the dryer, but not so well for the washing machine, unless you don't mind your clothes smelling a bit moldy.

I've accidentally left the wash in the washing machine for a few days, and it was fine... that's in Denver.

But I know exactly what you are talking about since I also at one point lived in Houston.

Anyone, not everyone has washed clothes needing critical attention.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Sentrion (964745) | about 8 months ago | (#46215773)

Last I checked my wet laundry didn't start to mold after just six hours. But I guess the IoT could be helpful for people with early state Alzheimer's,

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

able1234au (995975) | about 8 months ago | (#46215675)

I think the main value will be in the interface. My dishwasher, washing machine etc have rudimentary interfaces. Just as TV's used to have controls which moved to the remotes (some TVs do not operate without a remote), the same thing will happen to devices. Those interfaces on the device are expensive so there is a saving there.

The other, perhaps more useful thing, is to make them better at power saving. The smarter the device, the easier it is to intelligently reduce power consumption. That is something that could pay for itself.

In our house we have light bulbs controllable from an iphone because.... well, i dunno. But as we start to do this stuff, people will come up with ideas on how things can work together more intelligently, eg, letting the airconditioner know i am home and adjust accordingly. It could be like 3D TV or it could not. Sometimes you work out the full use after you build it.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215479)

Unlike you I've got better things to do than spend my day leaning against the dryer while it rumbles. I'd appreciate a message letting me know it's done. Goes the same for preheating the oven, but most people don't get off on that.

Really? Just how large is your house? 29000 sqft, be glad you're not like some of us who have such a small house that there isn't room for a washer and dryer combo and still have to go to these places call "laundry mats" I know...shocking right? And really if you're already in the kitchen to preheat an oven you're probably already doing something on the stove in terms of prep. Unless of course you're one of those people who survive on TV dinners.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (2)

Sentrion (964745) | about 8 months ago | (#46215801)

But that's where IoT can change the world. Imagine TV dinners that cook themselves and text you to remind you to eat. I'll be able to focus on Slashdotting all night instead of putting my box dinner in the 1980's TV shaped box just to make my food warm. Now if I could just wire my muscles to the IoT to get some scheduled EMS workouts while I'm slashdotting all day I wouldn't be so fat from those boxed dinners. This is what progress is all about. Smartphones, texting, Facebook, iTunes, TeVo, etc. have all liberated us from those horrible times when people had to lug around heavy machinery and walk all over the place just to get things done. Imagine how envious primitive man would be to see how we live today rather than spending all of our time outdoors running around, hunting, fishing, putting up with multiple wives, making our own music, and sleeping under the stars.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Holi (250190) | about 8 months ago | (#46215609)

Don't all dryers have a buzzer that goes off when the cycle is done? And if your not home, hwat are you going to do, drop what your doing a run home because your dryer finished?

Really all I can see this doing is increasing the cost of appliances while offering no actual benefit.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215177)

>Also, your fridge, coffee-maker and the likes have absolutely zero need for all the bandwidth WIFI would bring
"640k ought to be enough for anybody"

But on a more serious note, we have a _GREAT_ standard for small low powered devices: ZigBee [zigbee.org]

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

iamwahoo2 (594922) | about 8 months ago | (#46215323)

There are standards in place (or at least in mature draft form), but I agree with your general sentiment.Those predicting that we will see an overnight transformation (I think Cisco predicted $14 Trillion in value creation of the next 10 years?) are probably not being realistic. Bridging Bluetooth-LE to the internet - see IETF draft spec for 6LoWPAN for BTLE (6LoWPAN = IPv6 for low power personal area networks). Wifi works in some use cases. If the device only connect once every 10 mins, then it does not consume a lot of power to cycle on the wifi, perform transfers, and then cycle off. When it comes to low power wireless, duty cycling is pretty much the key. Technologies like BTLE just have built in duty cycling and with Wifi or 802.15.4 you have to manage it via the software. Networking companies like Cisco are already moving in the direction of directly integrating 6LoWPAN 802.15.4 radios into industrial Wifi access points, so that is how I see this playing out on the consumer side as well. Its not like your 802.11 router has only a single radio anyhow, so if a router also shipped with an 802.15.4 radio + 6LoWPAN bridge, then having low power IP is feasible.

Authentication and Security are the two really big issues that will have to be tackled.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (3, Interesting)

bkmoore (1910118) | about 8 months ago | (#46215601)

....CEO of WIFI Alliance tried to make the case that all IoT-devices should simply use WIFI...Also, your fridge, coffee-maker and the likes have absolutely zero need for all the bandwidth WIFI would bring, so Bluetooth-LE or something similar would be the saner choice....

Not a troll, but a genuine question. If all these devices are connected to AC power, why not some simple protocol over power line? A lot of home automation used some form of RS-232 over power line to control lighting, etc.

Had the same thought (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 8 months ago | (#46215635)

Powerline ethernet seems to be an established standard (I think you can use endpoints from different manufacturers?), it seems a way better network transmission source than WiFi, which has to be configured to access.

I would say perhaps they should consider light fixture networks, but often things like a fridge are not in an area where a light would be on when you'd want an alert from it (like the temperature had increased over a threshold).

But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215827)

It might be the year of Linux on the Desktop.

Re:2014 won't be the year of Internet of Things (1)

Quinndexter (1089401) | about 8 months ago | (#46216225)

The recent alliance of the Allseen and Qeo ecosystems is trying tp reach just that: a single standard:

https://allseenalliance.org/an... [allseenalliance.org]

so, there is hope yet :-)

Steam (4, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 8 months ago | (#46214959)

"Internet of Things has more in common with the age of steam than the digital revolution"

Look, I don't know what you kids are using these days, but I still buy all my games on Steam just like they did in 1876.

Re:Steam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215165)

there's no one left to read your comment, now move along

What's with the "fuck beta" posts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215015)

I thought all the betatards were going on strike or boycotting or something?

Re:What's with the "fuck beta" posts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215037)

YOU'RE THE BETATARD

Re:What's with the "fuck beta" posts? (4, Funny)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 8 months ago | (#46215191)

I think slashcott turned into trolldot when everyone realised that they could not stay away for even a single day.

Re:What's with the "fuck beta" posts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215269)

Right, we should all just get out of DICE's way while they take a site that only EVER was successful because of the userbase it had, ignore the users entirely, and possibly (lol, right) even make a few bucks off it? Sorry...I'd rather see them made an example of. Besides, why let them have all the fun dancing on Slashdot's grave? May as well make a party of it.

oh, and FUCK BETA.

Re:What's with the "fuck beta" posts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215389)

Do I really clarify whose way you're getting in with your persistent whining?

I'm not into trains (1)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 8 months ago | (#46215043)

Can I have that in a car analogy instead?

Re:I'm not into trains (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215105)

The car analogy guy is not here, he is protesting the beta. Sorry.

Re:I'm not into trains (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215109)

Yes I can, Beta sucks.

I'm not into trains (1)

David_Hart (1184661) | about 8 months ago | (#46215651)

Can I have that in a car analogy instead?

.
Yeah, it's like us realizing the inevitability of NASCAR turning into robot wars as Google perfects the self-driving car....

Re:I'm not into trains (1)

zsau (266209) | about 8 months ago | (#46216273)

In the beginning, everyone walked about on foot. People liked it; most stuff you needed was close enough, and if it occasionally rained on you, well, you needed to sleep more often, so what if you can't do everything all of the time.

Someone invented the train and it was well regarded; now even common people could travel far.

Then one day some reckless person thought of putting a train engine on a waggon and getting around without horses or tracks. It didn't appeal to most people; it was too expensive and didn't solve any real problems most people had. Plus it was dangerous and killed people. Some even more reckless person developed a way to make them cheap enough lots of people could afford them, but they were still dangerous and didn't really solve any real problem, so only avant gard people bothered to buy them.

[This is where Internet of Things is up to.]

So the most dangerous group of people—marketeerscame up with an evil plan to take over the world. They'd convince everyone that people who walked across streets without looking were backwards, and they'd mock memorials of children who idiot car drivers killed. They'd also make them a status symbol; girls wouldn't go for guys who walked, they were far too pedestrian!

Eventually the world became a completely different place because these people convinced us we wanted something that wasn't helpful—in fact, nowadays it takes people longer to get places with cars than it took to get there before cars—and kills people both directly (through, ahem, direct hits), indirectly (via side-swipes), via the pollution that the poor sods breathe in, and probably through climatatological effects.

[This is where Beta is up to. Slashdot destroyed a perfectly good letter of the internet, and all for what?]

1876 and 2014 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215091)

1876 in the U.S.A.

What a marvel!

The "conflagrations" of the War Of 1812 had passed, with the death of many of those (North America Colonies and English Empire) involved!

The Centennial International Exhibition of 1876, the first official World's Fair in the United States, was held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from May 10 to November 10, 1876, to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia (wikipedia.org).

February 2014. Obama, under pressure from Party Democrats caves, orders, killing of U.S.A. citizen by drone missile strike, with the killing of 90 "collateral damages", i.e. humans killed by the missiles of the drone.

During March 2014, Obama will meet with Pope Benedict XVI in order to receive absolution of killing U.S.A. citizens.

Fact: Barak Hussein Obama is not a member of the Roman Catholic Faith!

Pope Benedict XVI will deny.

Obama will retaliate by ordering a U.S.A.F. thermo nuclear weapons strike on Rome, Italy, in order to kill all human life across the peninsula.

The "Murder Ok Kabul" has no equal.

Re:1876 and 2014 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215129)

Kind of shot off topic there... God wants us to figure out the universe. (contrary to what many troglodyte bible-bashers want their followers to think) The problem most geeks have with religion, I suspect, is that the dipsticks of the rank and file see the English language KJV translation of a hebrew text that itself wasn't written down until a few dozen generations after the "religion" was "organized" and presume that the limited observations of a spoiled prince convert are actual scientific observations. The bulk of scripture has nothing to do with science, but rank-n-file thinks it does, turning off most geeks who might genuinely want answers to questions and are rather put off by the vehement bible-thumping of narrow-minded...

Re:1876 and 2014 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215179)

Fact: Barak Hussein Obama is not a member of the Roman Catholic Faith!

Who really cares? He's the President, not the Pope.

Re:1876 and 2014 (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46215265)

The "conflagrations" of the War Of 1812 had passed...

That's about as relevant as saying "The conflagrations of WW1 had passed..." in a piece about the US Bicentennial.

THE BETA OF THINGS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215131)

I'm anxiously awaiting a beautiful time in the near future when BETA becomes the word on everyone's lips. What a glorious day it will be! I hear the word BETA but in my mind I see the sun!

missing tag: (1)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | about 8 months ago | (#46215137)

steampunk

Steely Dan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215147)

Nuf said.

Speaking of the internet (0)

swampfriend (2629073) | about 8 months ago | (#46215163)

What would be the point of continuing to read/use Slashdot after Beta becomes mandatory?

Beta is more 1876 than 1995 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215235)

And if it's not killed quickly, Slashdot will return to the state it existed in during both years.

On a happier note: A replacement is in the works [soylentnews.org]

O'Reilly has nothing useful to say on this. (2)

Animats (122034) | about 8 months ago | (#46215249)

The article is just blithering without much useful content. They couldn't even get the right illustration. The steam engine shown is just some random engine with Corliss valve gear. This is the engine that powered much of the 1876 exhibition. [gutenberg.org] It was big, impressive, and inefficient, even for that exhibition.

The "Internet of Things" may be the Next Big Thing from the industry that brought you 3D TV.

Re:O'Reilly has nothing useful to say on this. (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 8 months ago | (#46215681)

3DTV is nice. The only really problem with it is that the TVs won't automatically merge two different inputs into a single "3D" feed so that I can wear a left only set of glasses while my wife wears a set of right only glasses.

They're still pushing this over-rated concept? (2)

msobkow (48369) | about 8 months ago | (#46215293)

When are they going to accept the fact that there is absolutely no need for 99.999% of the population to ever check the internet for the status of their dryer, their dishwasher, their fridge, their freezer, or their toaster oven and microwave.

It is the single most over-rated, over-sold, over-hyped, and absolutely useless concept ever brandished by the technocrati. The only ones who care about the concept at all are people who want to sell you stuff that is "internet aware."

One useful thing is clock-setting (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 8 months ago | (#46215653)

Generally I agree with you that most things do not need to be "Connected".

But I have to admit a microwave with a self-setting clock would be nice. And I also wouldn't mind a fridge that would alarm on component failure (as I just had a fridge go out).

But the degree to which they are connecting these things, is way over the top.

Re:One useful thing is clock-setting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46216425)

Software updates and service calls with fault prediction would be nice for anything that has rapidly moving parts. Optimal cooking and washing programs are also something best delivered trough the net. As more sensory and computing elements are integrated so increases the need for networking.

Re:They're still pushing this over-rated concept? (2)

Sentrion (964745) | about 8 months ago | (#46215837)

But if I want to impulsively spend $0.99 to download the new pulse based toasting algorithm that leaves the surface extra crispy while leaving the bread beneath soft and chewy, that is my right and darn you for standing in the way of progress. Plus, I need IoT to give me ideas for stuff to post on Twitter and Facebook. "I downloaded my new toasting algorithm" is going to be way cooler than "I'm eating another veggie delight - guess where I am!".

What everyone misses... (2)

gmhowell (26755) | about 8 months ago | (#46215307)

What everyone misses is the magic of Kansas City. Everything's up to date in Kansas City. They gone about as fer as they can go. They went an' built a skyscraper seven stories high. About as high as a buildin' orta grow.

The Return of the Son of Troll Tuesday! (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46215359)

I've a dozen eggs, true
But they're all cracked
My Frigidaire
A subtle hack
BURMA SHAVE

(Your turn, Smitty...)

19th century information technology (3, Interesting)

JazzHarper (745403) | about 8 months ago | (#46215473)

My great-grandfather graduated from Milwaukee High School in 1878. He first attended a "normal school" with the intent of becoming a teacher, but found the opportunity to learn stenography and to operate a writing machine. The Scholes & Glidden machine had been developed in Milwaukee in 1874, and the manufacturers set up schools to teach students how to use them. These were very temperamental machines and were tricky to use. (At that time, you could not see the text that had been typed without lifting the platen). His first professional job was as a type-writer for the Winchester Repeating Arms Company in New Haven, Connecticut. Meanwhile, his long-time pen-pal in Chicago had learned how to use the machines at her father's office. They began exchanging letters in type-written form, which must have been considered, for that time, as high-tech as any Internet romance would have been in 1995. They were married in 1883. My great-grandfather and his brother-in-law went into business together, selling the machines across the Midwest.

Re:19th century information technology (1)

mjwx (966435) | about 8 months ago | (#46215519)

But did they have an onion tied to their belts, which was the style at the time

Re:19th century information technology (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 8 months ago | (#46215657)

in fact, this article really suits the 'old man yells at cloud' motif!

cloud. heh.

Re:19th century information technology (1)

mjwx (966435) | about 8 months ago | (#46215859)

I feel like I need to get off someone's lawn.

Re:19th century information technology (1)

Sentrion (964745) | about 8 months ago | (#46215927)

Onions? Those weren't onions, son, those were balls. Men used to have those back before Twitter and nerd camp. It took a real man to type 80 WPM on a mechanical typewriter, or one sturdy broad. That is nothing like a wimpy keyboard or even an electronic typewriter like your hippie father used to fondle. And you had to pay attention to what you were doing or you could lose a finger! Today's brats might lose a finger from atrophy since they only use their thumbs now on a piece of touch sensitive glass. Now they're talking about an internet of things were you don't use any fingers at all. That's like asking your horse to do your taxes--Which I did in 1998. Now fingers aren't just for typewriters. I used my fingers as a boy to wash my turkey, which in those days was known as a walking bird. We'd always have walking bird on Thanksgiving with all the trimmings: cranberries, injun eyes, and yams stuffed with gunpowder. Then we'd all watch football, which in those days was called baseball.

Usefulness (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215627)

What is, really, clearly and terribly useful about "the internet of things" to begin with? At most, it seems mildly more convenient. Would I like to control my thermostat via my phone? Sorta, kinda, a little. Would I like to check in my fridge via webcam for milk while I'm at the store? I guess that's a little neat. Would I like to control my toaster via my smartphone? Unless I can control the bread, and jam, and the knife spreading it, then no.

It's mild convenience at best. Don't know why people are getting so EXCITED! over it.

Beta of things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46215791)

Hope they don't chose the beta route first!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?