Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Internet of Way Too Many Things

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 266 posts

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#21

Post by rollback »

Commentary about the silliness of the avalanche of IOT devices being created right now aside (99% of consumer internet startups are based on dumb ideas and fail, but that doesn't mean there is no market or trend!), it's inevitable that this stuff is going to get traction in the market and it's a vast market. I doubt it's going to happen based on a bunch of edge-case $99 devices though.

The big trend here is the cost of wifi enabled microprocessors dropping down to nearly nothing. Last year we were excited about raspberry pi dropping prices down to $30 for sensor-enabled hardware on the network.

This year you can buy a wifi-enabled microcontroller for _$3_ (search esp8266). And that's not even in volume. At that price, pretty much anything consumer electronics companies build can be addressable on the network.

Add to that voice control, which is crude but usable and built into every phone already and improving quickly. The idea of walking into your house and looking for a light switch is going to feel like walking up to your TV to change the channel did 30 years ago when the remote went into wider use.

I find the economic arguments about not saving money using IOT devices a little amusing, on HN especially. My guess is that almost everyone reading this forum spends a shitload of money buying techno gadgets for reasons beyond "it saves me money."

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#22

Post by awjr »

nacnud wrote: post #9
awjr wrote: post #3

For anyone not familiar with the Hype Cycle http://www.gartner.com/technology/research/methodologies/hyp... we're still in the "Peak of Inflated Expectations". I would have hoped we'd have hit the "Trough of Disillusionment" by now but it seems to be powering along quite nicely. One of the big problems with IoT is the cost of the connectivity bit of the hardware. You want these things to be low powered but that costs…

Interesting - what software are you using to do the recognition (if I may ask)?

This at the moment https://github.com/openalpr/openalpr

If you give me a vehicle database, I can tell you how many red cars are used on a route :) The more interesting calculations are based around CO2 emissions. I have the make and model and average speed between two points. I know roughly your emissions outputs.

Accuracy is an issue but as long as ALL your ANPR devices read a number plate exactly the same it doesn't make too much of an issue.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#23

Post by tinco »

antr wrote: post #17
hessenwolf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=infant-child-and-teen... Looks to me like infant mortality (under age one) has halved between 1977 and 2013. I understand the argument of "it worked fine for me", but, well, on a portfolio basis, you and I were dying a bit faster back then. Outpatient care is a big field these days. Something that, with extremely little effort, can reduce the odds of death or disability, is quit…

Maybe you are right... but a onesie that "knows that when a baby wakes up, the parents will, too -- so it turns on lights and music and even makes the coffee." ... is of no use to fight infant mortality.

That's not all it does, you just picked out the ridiculous part. If you'd quote the entire piece on that onesie you'd see that it actually has a bunch of features that very well might reduce infant mortality.

The author also invokes 'helicopter parenting' as if it applies to taking care of babies. Helicopter parenting is when parents disrupt other caregivers during the care for their child, it has nothing to do with being sure about whether your baby is dying. I am confident parents themselves can configure and determine when and when not to wake up when their baby is awake.

As a non-parent, do parents really drink coffee in the middle of the night when their baby wakes up? That seems like a terrible idea..

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#24

Post by robmcm »

antr wrote: post #17
hessenwolf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=infant-child-and-teen... Looks to me like infant mortality (under age one) has halved between 1977 and 2013. I understand the argument of "it worked fine for me", but, well, on a portfolio basis, you and I were dying a bit faster back then. Outpatient care is a big field these days. Something that, with extremely little effort, can reduce the odds of death or disability, is quit…

Maybe you are right... but a onesie that "knows that when a baby wakes up, the parents will, too -- so it turns on lights and music and even makes the coffee." ... is of no use to fight infant mortality.

Mimo monitors breathing, temperature and sleeping position. All of these are factors in cot death according to easily searchable research.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#25

Post by jhallenworld »

rollback wrote: post #21

Commentary about the silliness of the avalanche of IOT devices being created right now aside (99% of consumer internet startups are based on dumb ideas and fail, but that doesn't mean there is no market or trend!), it's inevitable that this stuff is going to get traction in the market and it's a vast market. I doubt it's going to happen based on a bunch of edge-case $99 devices though. The big trend here is the cost…

Well here is an interesting argument for voice control: it's more hygienic. All touch points are potential sources for disease. On the other hand, maybe we are increasing allergies by making the environment too sterile.

What hygienic technology will replace touch screens?

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#26

Post by mreiland »

jhallenworld wrote: post #25
rollback wrote: post #21

Commentary about the silliness of the avalanche of IOT devices being created right now aside (99% of consumer internet startups are based on dumb ideas and fail, but that doesn't mean there is no market or trend!), it's inevitable that this stuff is going to get traction in the market and it's a vast market. I doubt it's going to happen based on a bunch of edge-case $99 devices though. The big trend here is the cost…

Well here is an interesting argument for voice control: it's more hygienic. All touch points are potential sources for disease. On the other hand, maybe we are increasing allergies by making the environment too sterile. What hygienic technology will replace touch screens?

Is that actually a problem?

That sounds like a made up solution. For the vast majority of people, simply touching something that someone else in your home has touched isn't going to cause you any sort of problems.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#27

Post by guybrushT »

antr wrote: post #2

I just bought a home, and just started a considerable renovation. I'm putting in new water pipes, new electrical wiring, etc. I thought of putting "smart" devices (i.e. switches, alarms, thermostats, etc.) given the "advantages" these promise. After considerable research, it's not worth the hussle or money. Let's put aside the fact that these are considerable more expensive, and won't breakeven in years (some devices…

One of the companies that is solving this very problem is Xiaomi. Their method is quite crude - that is, they make everything themselves. But the end result is that everything they make - from an air purifier to a TV - is connected and operated via a similar / familiar OS called MIUI.

They give away their phones for very cheap, because the phone is the Trojan horse - it is the remote control for all the other devices it makes.

Xiaomi is the largest and fastest growing IoT company on the planet, and worth keeping an eye out for.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#28

Post by octo_t »

mreiland wrote: post #26
jhallenworld wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well here is an interesting argument for voice control: it's more hygienic. All touch points are potential sources for disease. On the other hand, maybe we are increasing allergies by making the environment too sterile. What hygienic technology will replace touch screens?

Is that actually a problem? That sounds like a made up solution. For the vast majority of people, simply touching something that someone else in your home has touched isn't going to cause you any sort of problems.

Possibly not in the home, but in the office or public places? Definitely.

Re: The Internet of Way Too Many Things

#30

Post by antr »

robmcm wrote: post #24
antr wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you are right... but a onesie that "knows that when a baby wakes up, the parents will, too -- so it turns on lights and music and even makes the coffee." ... is of no use to fight infant mortality.

Mimo monitors breathing, temperature and sleeping position. All of these are factors in cot death according to easily searchable research.

I thought that a cot death meant that this remained unexplained. Now a baby monitor reduces cot deaths? I'm really interested to read about that claim.
Post reply on HN