New products, Conferences, Books, Papers, Internet of Things

From The Web of Things:

WOT is not a technology. It is not a standard either. WOT is a vision and a community.

This is maybe the most important aspect of WOT. We tend to radically position our work on a higher level than the current Internet of Things and alike. For us, the Internet of Things is to connect devices together over the Internet. Great! Wow! So what? Why should we care?

Networked objects have never been (and should never be) about just connecting things together. It’s about why we need to connect things, and most people ask us “but why do you guys want to connect your fridge with your toaster, what’s the point? Why would you want to do that?“. I seriously don’t know, and I really don’t care! And if somebody asks me that again, I’ll slap him in the face, I promise! That’s as simple as that. I also have no idea of why would anybody connect a dildo with the RSS feed of the vibration sensor on a volcano in Vanuatu. But I’m sure there’s a lucky girl (or boy) out there who knows! And if she can’t hack it herself, then she’ll never have a volcano-linked dildo, and that’s no good. That’s exactly the kind of people we care about (not the sex freak, but the average Bob or Alice), people who want to connect something to something else! That’s what the Web of Things is all about! People who know just a little bit about of computers and would like to do much more with them to create new things that nobody thought of before without a PhD in computer science. Technology today just sucks because people who build things are too selfish to care about the users, and because of that, in the end most things out there are way to complex to do what they were supposed to. Technology is so not plug & play, and we can change that because the technology to do it is out there and works well enough for my parents (but maybe not for guys playing with the LHC).

You can read the entire post here.

Comments on: "Towards the WOT Manifesto" (2)

  1. Thanks for the repost, but I think it’s a little harsh taken out of the context 🙂

    The important point I was trying to make is that sometimes the bigger picture makes more sense than a fully customized solution which is too rigid to be re-adapted for new applications. I sometimes have the feeling that such a bigger vision is missing in the WSN community and I hope we’re going in this direction (which is basically what is happening with IP on sensor networks 🙂

    That’s what we’re hoping to bring: more flexible, open, and reusable sensor nets deployments!

    And I never said that’s easy to do 🙂

  2. Antonio Lignan said:

    Hear hear!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: