Live data from Hacker News

The unsexy IoT

deepstream.io

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: The unsexy IoT

#21
> IPv6 has massively increased the number of available IPs, allowing every sensor and relay within a system to be addressable from the public internet

That's a really scary idea from the security point of view and something that bothers me about the IoT craze. Every consumer device visible on the Internet should quickly and reliably self-update its software if a security issue is found and remote updates are still a bit tricky to implement in embedded devices (little storage, diverse hardware).

Re: The unsexy IoT

#22
post #21

> IPv6 has massively increased the number of available IPs, allowing every sensor and relay within a system to be addressable from the public internet That's a really scary idea from the security point of view and something that bothers me about the IoT craze. Every consumer device visible on the Internet should quickly and reliably self-update its software if a security issue is found and remote updates are still a…

Firewalling them is probably a better idea. For most applications, connecting to a central server/hub that's better secured is just fine.

Re: The unsexy IoT

#23
post #15

IoT has many other problems... as pointed out by the popular twitter account against it: https://twitter.com/internetofshit?lang=en Some of the most amusing posts: - Nest not being able to function while there is service outage (e.g. can't change temperature if server is down) https://twitter.com/Jenthulhu/status/688918036791840768 - Tried to install an Spotify update for the car, ended disabling brakes. https://twit…

"The internet has many other problems. Just a few days ago, Dropbox was down."

Re: The unsexy IoT

#24
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a library to enable secure communications over insecure channels for IoT, maybe it'll be useful to you: https://stringphone.readthedocs.org/en/latest/

Interesting. I actually run a web-server, and I only control my stuff through a web-API's, but that could also be useful.... Thanks

It doesn't really matter how you get messages to clients, the library just makes sure that each participant is who they say they are. For example, a rogue client could connect to your API and start sending commands, but with this library, they'd have to know the key.

That said, it's definitely not useful everywhere, e.g. if you use TLS and the application is only for stuff at home, you're probably fine.

Re: The unsexy IoT

#25
post #14

I work for a company doing unsexy IoT and I've been dreaming about writing this article for months now. We're a tiny company in New Jersey whose been around in some form or another for the last 25 years, supplying remote telemetry units (RTUs) to the industrial assets industry. Helium, oxygen, nitrogen, whatever, on boats, trucks, and static sites. We also provide a monitoring platform which is where I come in. We're…

Sounds like you found a good niche. Your work is solving real problems and you can make real money from your product, instead of just creating another VC subsidized ad platform that gets breathless hype in TechCrunch. I'd consider sitting tight for now, there is a sea change going on in the tech world and money is getting tighter. In the not too distant future you might find it easier to attract better talent.

Re: The unsexy IoT

#26
post #19
post #14

I work for a company doing unsexy IoT and I've been dreaming about writing this article for months now. We're a tiny company in New Jersey whose been around in some form or another for the last 25 years, supplying remote telemetry units (RTUs) to the industrial assets industry. Helium, oxygen, nitrogen, whatever, on boats, trucks, and static sites. We also provide a monitoring platform which is where I come in. We're…

C#? Quite interesting. Anything that you can share about it? The language geek in me loves the use of C#, Java and similar safe stacks in the IoT domain. :)

We don't program the boards in C#, just the services/Silverlight. The communication methods between the boards is well abstracted - most of our devices are reached via phone number. They have a SIM card with a carrier and services essentially make a phone call to get the data. There's a lot to do with communication protocols (i.e. bytes 0-8 are the configuration, 9-12 readings, etc.) but .NET has nice support for binary constructs. Some RTUs are difficult to work with because they have conversations with our server, and the lifetime of that call must be maintained while a million other things are going on.

I wasn't here when the C# decision was made, but it's worked out really well for us so far, Silverlight notwithstanding. Microservices work out really well for us too because there's a lot of code written for specific RTUs which will not (and should not) be shared, and having them explicitly separated keeps everything tidy. Microservices communicate via a centralized publisher using WCF, which uses MSMQ as the underlying transport method. Our #1 priority is to never loose data so these technologies are a pretty safe bet. Like I mentioned before, C# has good support for low-level stuff, but we don't do as much low-level as you think. Our greatest challenge is handling several distinct protocols with as much as the same code path as possible, and C# has really great generics support which makes our lives easy. We don't require the performance a C++ platform would bring.

To elaborate a bit more, our basic control flow goes something like:

Poll unit -> get data -> push data -> translate data -> assign data to business objects -> operate on data -> present data

Each step usually involves a save to the database of critical info at that stage.

Re: The unsexy IoT

#27
post #15

IoT has many other problems... as pointed out by the popular twitter account against it: https://twitter.com/internetofshit?lang=en Some of the most amusing posts: - Nest not being able to function while there is service outage (e.g. can't change temperature if server is down) https://twitter.com/Jenthulhu/status/688918036791840768 - Tried to install an Spotify update for the car, ended disabling brakes. https://twit…

"The internet has many other problems. Just a few days ago, Dropbox was down."

The solution is federated, P2P-like systems. But, unfortunately, there is no money to be made with such solutions.

Re: The unsexy IoT

#28
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there are any valid use cases for a widely distributed network of any kind of personal item that make sense for consumers. Consumers don't continuously manage large repetitive processes. They don't own items that remain distributed, or are being redistributed on any regular basis. They simply don't have the minimum threshold of Things that would benefit from the Internet.

How about the various "where are my friends" tracking apps, dating gadgets that light up when a person with shared interests is nearby, body metrics scanner that help health services create a map of say areas with an increased amount of people having hay fever?

[deleted]

Re: The unsexy IoT

#29
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The internet has many other problems. Just a few days ago, Dropbox was down."

The solution is federated, P2P-like systems. But, unfortunately, there is no money to be made with such solutions.

No one's making money of BitTorrent, and yet it functions. I think that P2P Dropbox or even youtube (without ads) is a pretty good idea.

Re: The unsexy IoT

#30
post #29
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is federated, P2P-like systems. But, unfortunately, there is no money to be made with such solutions.

No one's making money of BitTorrent, and yet it functions. I think that P2P Dropbox or even youtube (without ads) is a pretty good idea.

You are completely right, those are very good ideas... except if you want to make some money with your coding efforts.

The sad thing is, these days you only seem to be able to make money by holding your customers hostage in your online systems (cloud) or ecosystems. I miss the days where developers could make money selling just software.

Post reply on HN