TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why Tech’s Best Minds Are Very Worried About the Internet of Things

46 点作者 relampago大约 11 年前

11 条评论

jasontsui大约 11 年前
One of the points they touch on is a &quot;world where many things wont work and nobody will know how to fix them&quot;. As I understand it, we already live in this world. Some new cars dont come with dipsticks, and I cant look inside my iPhone.<p>In the case of the car and the phone, they&#x27;ve added complexity (a service layer) and I think its worked out well. The user gets to do what users should do and businesses grow doing what they do best. When it comes to IoT, my first thoughts always drifts towards &quot;will this make things better, or could we muck up what once &quot;just worked&quot;?<p>We&#x27;re entering a time where we have the technology, capital and reach to create and distribute new products and services at massive scale. Now that ideas are less constrained by &quot;how&quot;, and compete on the &quot;what&quot;, do we need to stop and ask ourselves not &quot;Can we do it?&quot;, but &quot;Should we do it?&quot;<p>We can see this in many disrupted industries now, where new ideas, innovation and competition have shook up traditional business models. Whats left in their wake is not always better than what preceded it.<p>Ill use the social media ad driven business epoch as an example, was that a net positive for us as people? Or did we add a layer of complexity to the web that is now dedicated to delivering Upworthy blog posts, selling our personal information and a constant stream of Coca Cola ads? Is that a good trade off for pictures of Grandma, news from friends and Likes from everyone?<p>Do we already evaluate technology on these terms, or has our current state driven us to cobble together any business model that works?
评论 #7768880 未加载
评论 #7771753 未加载
kator大约 11 年前
I recently got approached to help build an IOT related business.<p>Some of the questions that come up for me are what happens to all these Lithium coin cell batteries, the PCB boards and chips as all these $5 devices die and are discarded? We already hear sad stories about where cell phones and other electronics go to die. It seems like these devices will be cheaper and thus the population of the devices will outstrip cell phones and other electronics by orders of magnitude. As much as we can worry about “potential” security and misuse issues there is a clear need for stewardship of all these devices that will be pumped out en masse into our world. I don&#x27;t think RoHS[1] was developed with this level of scale in mind and density of devices.<p>Often I imagine being Geordi La Forge[2] with electromagnetic vision and how all these devices will be cramming our lives with more electromagnetic noise. It&#x27;s not clear to me we understand the effects of this on everything from health to un-intended side effects to other technology.<p>I’m not saying I won’t do something in IOT, I’m saying we should all be thinking more about the overall effects of these types of technology as they scale.<p>IMHO nothing will stop the development and deployment of IOT devices. The smartphone is a perfect example, if people find usefulness in a technology it’s adoption is almost guaranteed.<p>Perhaps we need an open dialog on IOT best practices and how each of us can contribute to some level of thoughtfulness around these technologies as they develop in our world.<p>[1] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restriction_of_Hazardous_Substances_Directive" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Restriction_of_Hazardous_Substa...</a> [2] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geordi_La_Forge#Appearances" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Geordi_La_Forge#Appearances</a>
评论 #7768260 未加载
评论 #7768589 未加载
peterwwillis大约 11 年前
Originally, IoT was an idea based on RFID: tag everything, track everything, and somehow, good things will happen. Now instead of RFID the focus is on low-power radio (&quot;Chirp Networks&quot;). But as before, there&#x27;s still no discussion about <i>what it&#x27;s for</i> or <i>why we need it</i>.<p>Remember that there&#x27;s a difference between &quot;The Internet&quot; and &quot;The World Wide Web&quot;. The WWW is now basically just a user interface platform for internet-enabled applications. The Internet is all the things that make the WWW work. So how will the IoT affect the WWW? In theory, once your toaster is Internet-capable, you could schedule toast every morning from your iPhone (has anyone yet patented a slot-loading bread box&#x2F;toaster? probably.). Very Jetsons.<p>From ideas like this we get the broad-reaching declarations that &quot;The IoT will change everything!&quot; But being realistic for a moment, think about all the devices you have now, and how they work. Does it all come together magically? Or do you still have five remote controls for all your entertainment equipment? Do you pay rent in apartments that have 15-year-old bargain-bin appliances? Is your watch synced to the USNO clock? Does your car even have bluetooth?<p>I don&#x27;t know about you, but I still live in a pre-Internet world. All my devices and appliances are still completely independent mechanisms. Even the devices that are Internet-capable don&#x27;t communicate with one another; they&#x27;re made by independent companies for independent purposes, and nobody&#x27;s even attempting to find ways to combine them; that would probably require whole separate R&amp;D divisions just to create add-ons.<p>What would be nice is if somebody started by identifying the major problems in our lives that actually <i>need</i> an Internet of Things solution. But then we&#x27;d expose the true identity of the IoT: a hammer looking for a nail. I&#x27;m pretty sure that it&#x27;s only purpose now - as an idea - is to serve as a marketing platform to get people to spend money on things that don&#x27;t do anything.
评论 #7768727 未加载
ChuckMcM大约 11 年前
Pretty content free, new tech could be scary kind of thing.<p>By and large, the good things that come out of IoT will be larger in number to the not so good things, by virtue of the fact that folks are generally designing these things to do useful things. We know that because every technology that has been developed, its intent leads to a skewed distribution of &#x27;good&#x27; or &#x27;bad&#x27; uses. For example &#x27;cars&#x27; many more &#x27;good&#x27; uses than &#x27;bad&#x27; uses, &#x27;bombs&#x27; many more &#x27;bad&#x27; uses than &#x27;good&#x27; uses. Some things which are just a basic discovery like &#x27;plastic&#x27; about an equal number of good and bad uses.<p>I am completely not persuaded that &quot;developing nations won&#x27;t benefit&quot; as a stand in for &#x27;bad&#x27;. There are two ways that argument fails for me, if this stuff is going to be a huge enabler, why is the article so glum? If its going to be a huge problem isn&#x27;t not having access to it a benefit? That there will be groups where it will be structurally impossible for them to get this technology at the same time is probably a good thing from a future planning perspective.
评论 #7768361 未加载
评论 #7768844 未加载
评论 #7768083 未加载
ChuckFrank大约 11 年前
I was interested in the new ICANN nominated member, Dr. Lanfranco, take on the issue - specifically in regards to the idea that the data field created by the IOT will be used to set risk assessment for health insurance, car insurance and other risk services. This may turn out to be the most significant form of social engineering that we ever embark on, and it might not necessarily be a bad thing. Though his point is that it&#x27;s a discussion that we have to have before we enable those rights to the corporate-sphere.<p>&quot;With IPv6, the explosion of the Internet of Things, and all the data generating apps that are there for smart phones, and coming for smart cars, smart refrigerators, etc, each and every person (and object) will begin to be surrounded by a datasphere of archived data. That datasphere will be mined by what I call the &quot;The Invasion of the Data Snatchers&quot;. This is beyond government surveillance, and the rules and regulations about (a) privacy of one&#x27;s datasphere, and (b) the terms of access (much given away via the &quot;I accept&quot; button on apps) are not in place. We are not even sure how they should be fashioned, and who (at what level) should administer them. The most problematic area here is service providers who have to assess risk (car, health, house insurance). We are already seeing denial of service to individuals, based on access to one&#x27;s personal datasphere (e.g. cardio wrist band data resulting in denial of travel insurance). What happens when health insurance engages in health surveillance via one&#x27;s networked refrigerator, and car insurance via one&#x27;s vehicle? &quot;<p>Relevant part of the interview here: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6vacuBHYVE" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=D6vacuBHYVE</a>
Eduardo3rd大约 11 年前
It&#x27;s good to see this discussion happening. Last summer I gave a talk to a non - technical audience where I tried to capture some of the pros and cons of the IOT in an easy to digest way. It&#x27;s a PechaKucha talk so the format is a little weird, but I&#x27;ve had some good conversations based on it.<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpHNSzC2sm4" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=lpHNSzC2sm4</a>
评论 #7767832 未加载
coldcode大约 11 年前
Thinking about the future is always interesting. But the future itself is usually nothing like what people thought it would be.
jgalt212大约 11 年前
I really hope I don&#x27;t own a GE* Brand internet connected refrigerator when they accidentally re-image my machine and all my food spoils.<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7757708" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=7757708</a><p>*GE is a just a stand in here.
rmrfrmrf大约 11 年前
A more practical &quot;worry&quot; is that the IPv4 address space has been exhausted and most consumer-grade routers have hard-coded limits as to how many devices can be simultaneously connected. Shame on me for thinking that Wired would include any technical discussion, though.
评论 #7768774 未加载
partomniscient大约 11 年前
I am going to assume that the TL;DR is &quot;The inmates are extending the asylum further and faster than ever.&quot;<p>How close are we to the point where you can&#x27;t buy a &quot;non-internet enabled&quot; TV?
andrewtbham大约 11 年前
this is pure FUD<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt</a>