@Luddy0. More to come in the next blog. Some of it is described in my book, specifically the importance of a self classifying "chirp" protocol. Open Source communities will maintain and manage the chirp taxonomy but in organic fashion as in Nature, see the presentation made at the IOT world event, and on my linked in page (cannot post URL) And it will be covered in next blog entry and looking forward to your comments then. Thanks for posting your comments. Francis
I'd love to be optimistic about this, but I just don't see how it works from the point of view of the consumers of this data. How can I operate on a stream of data whose format and meaning I learn dynamically, by discovery?
It reminds me a little of the premise of XML: by adopting a 'universal' format whose syntax is self-describing, we can share information from all kinds of sources easily. But has this promise really materialized? Are there systems that process XML sources whose meaning (rather than syntax) isn't independently standardized? I don't see it happening, and I don't understand how this case can be any different. The syntax side of XML works well enough, but the dynamic semantic side has gone nowhere.
If I create a device that does something new, takes some kind of reading from its environment and then announces the availability of this data, how can I write a consumer of that data without having prepared ahead of time to receive exactly that kind of data? I guess I can believe that I might be able to adapt to different formats for the data, but different categories of data altogether? I just don't see it. It sounds too abstract to me. That's especially so considering the volume of data which it is claimed will be available.
This is apart from the question of building an infrastructure that is prepared for several orders of magnitude more devices to begin publishing their presence.
I see IOT being successful in restricted environments where a changing population of devices with very tightly prescribed capabilities either operates in concert or under the control of a server(s). This more abstracted vision of vague capabilities announcing themselves: hard for me to believe.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.