IoT standards? We've got 'em. And if you don't like those, we got more Cities are tired of being the "guinea pigs" caught in the middle of the Internet of Things' ongoing standards bunfight, London's LPWA conference was told this morning. "They want to see something that actually works. So far, they haven't seen much," shrugged Silver Spring Networks' Itai Dadon during a panel discussion about …
It also sounds like no one has actually come up with a problem or even got close.
What exactly can IoT bring to a city?
Smart traffic lights? Already have them. They work on timings and sensors as is it.
Smart electricity distribution? Nope, it's pretty much as is. It's not like you can send more to one part of a city.
Smart Toilets? Why?
Smart Elected Officials that don't waste money on vanity projects like smart cities? I tried not to laugh at the banality of that as I typed it.
I may have missed something here, maybe smart public transport? Nope set up on GPS already.
I give up.
This...so many many times.
As a teenage apprentice I made the mistake of declaring to a real engineer that the connector he wanted to use was not a standard RS232 connector. He politely sent me to the companies Tech Library to read said standard and I was humbled. Who knew you could have a 1 conductor '232 cable? I did after reading the manual.
On my return he explained that a standard was a banner raised in battle to identify the knight holding it and each knight had his own standard. Since those days standards have proliferated
The Gov' should appoint a parliamentary committee who can put out tenders for 'Industry Experts' to consult with them as to the probable uses of IoT, then, based on those probabilities the Comittee could write a white paper on the subject outlining proposals for standards and controls. Then invite commentary from various sectors of industry that are or may be involved with IoT, compare the commentary with the proposals, revise where necessary, go back to the consultants.................
By the time they make a decision with a bit of luck IoT will have died a death.
Note: This only applies to the UK, all of the other countries need to implement a similar process.
but I don't see a need for a high level of security wrapped around a device with sensors sending me data on my own network. I have a device, I decide the protocol and usage. This is a class of device that does not need a cloud connection, nor worldwide remote access. I have a device, and it has a sensor, I get the data and process it. The notion that something like that is suitable to track big, nasty, shipping containers is cute, but not practical. And I'm not paying for a level of connectivity and security that a device suitable to track said shipping container, worldwide, would provide. There's a need for different levels of service between the home quality IoT knickknacks and a enterprise class data gatherer. I think the industry and consumers will figure this out as the need arises. And look at the priority; shipping container tracking? very high level of usage and quality of data. tracking the temperature of the side of the yard where the cats like to hang out? not as much. But don't ask an IoT vendor, or you'll get the "but in our cloud you can easily load your micro controller with X" and other complete hogwash solutions better left to a sturdy USB cable.
And what this has to do with cities wanting to get some more money is beyond me. There's the city. I roam about and collect data, it's hobby level stuff, now they want some money for that? How about no, idiots? Flying commercial drones through the city? NOW, you've got something! Me flying a drone at the park? Good luck with that, idiots! Local governments on a pledge drive. Abort, Retry, or Ignore.
If you depend on a cloud, you're an idiot. If you build out a worldwide mesh network free from government access, you're a genius. See how that works?
"This is a class of device that does not need a cloud connection, nor worldwide remote access."
Pound to pinch of the proverbial that the class will have cloud and world wide access. This is because:
The manufacturer wants to collect profile information (for service optimization obviously).
The "engineers" just got it wrong.
The PHB curtails development at the first opportunity.
Why does the tech world get an automatic pass on talking total sh1t. It can't all be the fault of the MSM and their black widow fatal love for Fakebook, Googhoul et al... The tech industry is the most self-serving manipulative and lying industry since banksters and banking, no...???
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
