4 ms·
I know a bit about "ubiquitous computing", or ubicomp. Ubicomp researchers seek to blur the lines between hardware and software. Computations (as we typically
by waterheater 6y ago
I know a bit about "ubiquitous computing", or ubicomp.
Ubicomp researchers seek to blur the lines between hardware and software. Computations (as we typically view them) are modeled as mathematical functions. Typically, computer scientists implement these mathematical functions in software with code. Ubicomp people will certainly do that, but they're also trying to design hardware which performs computation as well.
Significant amounts of work go into making ubicomp systems as energy efficient as possible. Inevitably, you design specialized hardware which doesn't operate under normal paradigms and does indeed appear to be magic.
Take SATURN [1], for example. It's a microphone powered by ambient speech. Energy is harvested though triboelectric nanogenerators (TNGs).
Or take Serpentine [2]. It's a special cord which contains TNGs. Interactions with the cord (pluck, twist, flick, etc.) can be uniquely identified in hardware simply by the generated waveform. There's also no power source here.
The reason things like SATURN and Serpentine come off as magical is because energy-harvesting technologies are not the present standard. We expect to need a power source for our electronics. However, every real-world interaction imparts forces. With clever and efficient hardware, the energy imparted by these forces can be captured and utilized.
That said, this new paradigm also introduces new challenges. How do you ensure one of these devices is off? You can't just unplug the power cable anymore. A possible solution is clearly delineating between the sensor and communication portion and placing a physical switch between these two elements. Since someone here mentioned privacy concerns, I'll just say that any privacy concern will need to be addressed at the hardware/physical level with ubicomp devices.
[1] https://www.sigmobile.org/grav/research-highlight/saturn https://www.sigmobile.org/grav/research-highlight/saturn
[2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3290605.3300775 https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3290605.3300775
- dougmwne 6y agoI greatly enjoy learning about this area of research, so thanks for your insights. There is something very sci-fi about it. My intuition also tells me that "off" doesn't naturally apply to unpowered devices and that the states are "active" or "asleep". I get the privacy concerns, though we are rapidly entering a world where that doesn't exist at all, so maybe it won't be relevant once these devices exit the lab. The walls have ears, indeed.
- waterheater 6y agoThe walls will have more than ears: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=175LB2OiMHs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=175LB2OiMHs
- zitterbewegung 6y agoAnother issue I could think of with ubicomp is that not only do you have to make sure if the device is off another issue would be someone introducing a ubicomp device in your home to spy on you.
- davidgay 6y ago> Take SATURN [1], for example. It's a microphone powered by ambient speech. Energy is harvested though triboelectric nanogenerators (TNGs). Unpowered (passive) microphones are far from new, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbon_microphone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbon_microphone ("In the early 1920s, ...")
- dougmwne 6y agoHere is an even more interesting example which was wireless as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device)
- waterheater 6y agoIndeed, though the energy transfer mechanism is very different. Also, the form factor of SATURN is far flatter than traditional microphones.
- vsskanth 6y agoIt looks like the sensor doesn't use power but the data transmission still does ?
- Answerawake 6y agoI was actually dreaming about this the other day! I dreamed of a dress a dancer would wear that would have ultra efficient LEDs embedded every inch along with a power harvesting component and as the person danced, the LEDs that moved fast enough would harvest enough power to light up! I also wanted to add basic communication between LEDs so they could somehow be aware of their surrounding LEDs. Probably too futuristic for today's tech. It was originally inspired by this talk[1] that Tesla's AI chip team referenced regarding the minimum amount of energy needed to perform a calculation. [1]:https://youtu.be/Ucp0TTmvqOE?t=5197 https://youtu.be/Ucp0TTmvqOE?t=5197
- waterheater 6y agoA walking pedestrian produces 5 watts per step [1]. A dancer would almost certainly exert more energy, so let's optimistically double that to 10 watts per step. Let's also assume the dancer steps an average of two times a second, for a total of 20 watts of power. Finally, let's assume you're able to harvest all energy from the step. Adafruit recommends 20mA as rule-of-thumb for estimating NeoPixel energy usage at 5V [2], so let's say a NeoPixel requires a little under 1W. You could probably run 20 LEDs during a dance routine in this. While the wireless part is more exotic, it is likely doable. Of course, the form of dance will determine how many LEDs you can include. Perhaps your dancer outfit is best suited for Riverdance... [1] https://pavegen.com/ https://pavegen.com/ [2] https://learn.adafruit.com/adafruit-neopixel-uberguide/powering-neopixels#estimating-power-requirements-2894486-11 https://learn.adafruit.com/adafruit-neopixel-uberguide/power...
- perilunar 6y agoWatts per step doesn't make sense. It should be Joules per step, or Watts continuously (averaged over time).