Connecting all our devices to the internet might be more easily said than done.
INTERNET OF AND FOR THINGS
REGISTER NOW
21 APRIL
08:30 – 11:30AM
A perfect idea, almost
On the face of it, the Internet of Things (IoT) seems like the perfect idea, the kind of techno-utopia (or nightmare) we’ve so far only read about in sci-fi novels or seen in films depicting a fully techno-enabled future.
The basic idea of connecting all manner of devices to the internet and controlling them remotely has seemed to make intuitive sense. It’s seemed like the next logical step in the evolution of technology and everyday life.
That is, until people actually started trying to make it a reality.
Security update not available
The basic problem of the IoT is the upgrade cycle (or if you like: the downgrade cycle). In today’s consumer electronics world, new and ‘improved’ products are released almost yearly and old products are no longer supported.
Be it a security update or a functionality patch, or buying a new product, the average life-time of any internet-connected gadget in the 200 pound price-range, is about 2 years, and that is generous.
Now picture this: You’ve bought a new smart fridge that can be connected to your phone via the internet (you want to know if you’re out of milk, right?). Usually a fridge is the kind of thing you buy once every ten years, if that. Now, after a year of slightly buggy running you find out that the company that sold you the fridge is no longer collaborating with the company that installed the internet-enabling sensor in the fridge. And now someone has hacked into your fridge and tells you you’re always out of milk. Security update not available.
Reality meets techno-dream
In other words: a fully functioning Internet of Things would only work in a totalitarian type of state where a fridge manufacturer was not allowed to change its fridge’s internet-sensor provider just like that.
Competition, vendor choice, hardware vs. software-producers – all the elements we like to cherish as fundamental to techno-capitalism’s growth, are potential barriers to a smoothly working Internet of Things.
As of now you have the futurists, the code-writers and techno-dreamers on one side of the imagined future and the brick and mortar crowd on the other. And they’re not really talking to each other, and if they were they would not be speaking the same language.
The problem with any type of utopia is that it has to move from dream to reality in order to deliver on its promise. And that’s where the devil waits in the details.
Not scaremongering
And this is not scaremongering. Only last week there was a big row when a blogger found out that his smart-home hub Revolv, sold to him by a Google affiliated company (Nest), was going to be shut down soon.
The case is probably only one of a hundred similar ones that have gone unreported. Because: the problem isn’t specific to these companies and this device. It is a systemic flaw.
The problem arises when a fluid network (the internet) must be forwards- and backwards-compatible with a jungle of different more or less basic devices.
Is bio-technology the answer? Fridges that intuitively evolve with the network over time?
For an in-depth view of the problem, read this interview with Linux founder Linus Torvalds, done by ZDNet.
Want to find out more about the internet of things? Make sure you sign up to the DSMLF meeting in April and join your peers for a lively debate on the matter.