3 ms·

You can not possibly compare IoT -- I work in the space -- and server as utility appliances. IoT is designed to work in extreme edge conditions: low power; int

You can not possibly compare IoT -- I work in the space -- and server as utility appliances. IoT is designed to work in extreme edge conditions: low power; intermittent connectivity; constrained local storage; limitations on embedded code, etc. Further, there is currently NO financial incentive for anyone to tackle the issues necessary to take these bits of technology and make it 'home' techonlogy. We've done this for all sorts of things, including controlled combustion in the basement for heating. You also have two strawmen here that you attack: 1 - I did not say anything about the "evil" of corporations. Simply that it is not acceptable. 2 - A "normal" person in a modern multi-residence is hardly bothered with "fixing the boiler", or "the network connection", or "the fire alarm system", any other utility tech. If you are asserting that this is "impossible" for "networking and hosting" (!!) please make the case. The solution space is fairly permissive, with various business models to consider. It should definitely be explored.

ozim 6y ago
Main point is not about IoT, it is about how many vendors would be needed to provide plurality in the market. With multiple vendors quality will be low. If we go the other way around so for example we take Synology and Qnap to provide solutions for this it will be not much different than FB and Google owning all the data. Those companies have know how to do "server appliances" but then they will basically have an ownership of software and hardware and updates for those. Which in the end achieves nothing because what is the point of having local servers running proprietary hardware and software when you have the same currently, only that servers are somewhere else.
- eternalban 6y ago
  The barrier to entry is much lower on the edge side. The end result you predict is certainly possible, but only if elect to sleep through this phase like we did in the past 20 years and trust in Googles of the world. Even if a whole slew of crap products lead the gen 1, the societal mindshift on its own is worth the effort, imo.

ozim 6y ago

Main point is not about IoT, it is about how many vendors would be needed to provide plurality in the market. With multiple vendors quality will be low. If we go the other way around so for example we take Synology and Qnap to provide solutions for this it will be not much different than FB and Google owning all the data. Those companies have know how to do "server appliances" but then they will basically have an ownership of software and hardware and updates for those. Which in the end achieves nothing because what is the point of having local servers running proprietary hardware and software when you have the same currently, only that servers are somewhere else.

eternalban 6y ago
The barrier to entry is much lower on the edge side. The end result you predict is certainly possible, but only if elect to sleep through this phase like we did in the past 20 years and trust in Googles of the world. Even if a whole slew of crap products lead the gen 1, the societal mindshift on its own is worth the effort, imo.