The Internet Of Things

Roosta writes "BBC News has an article by Bradley Horowitz, responsible for novel technology development at search giant Yahoo, looking ahead to the 'internet of things'. He discusses the importance of the 'W4' problem, the four 'W's' being who, when, what and where, and how to bring together metadata to make the world a more searchable place. 'All entities - everything from the particular chair I am sitting on to objects like the Lincoln Memorial monument should have a unique digital identifier. As an example - let's start with people. I don't know if darren@yahoo.com is the same as darren@gmail.com. There is a problem of managing identity across the internet, so when I say Darren Waters I mean this person and all of the manifestations and representations and personas of that person. The ability to knit those together is a huge challenge and opportunity for us as an industry. That's what I mean by resolving people - I mean this person and not the likely thousands of other people who share your name.'"

Comments

you forgot the 5th "w"

[griffjon]

...Why?

I'm all for spimes/blogjects/fountains that respond to stock prices, but for crissakes why does my inanimate chair need an IPv6 address?

Revelation 13:16-17

[riskeetee]

16) And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand or in their foreheads,

17) that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark or the name of the beast or the number of his name.

Who knew it would be an IPv6 address?

Umm, No.

[Irvu]

All entities - everything from the particular chair I am sitting on to objects like the Lincoln Memorial monument should have a unique digital identifier.

Why? Seriously, why should my chair have some unique identifier, and why should you need to search it? It is a physical entity that I sit on. If it is physically present then I can sit there, if not then I'll hunt for it myself. I don't need google to find it.

As an example - let's start with people. I don't know if darren@yahoo.com is the same as darren@gmail.com. There is a problem of managing identity across the internet, so when I say Darren Waters I mean this person and all of the manifestations and representations and personas of that person.

Good!

Central management of internet identities and central linking also means no anonymity. No ability to create an identity on a per user group basis. Why should the people I discuss 40wheeling with be able to link to my identity as a campaigner for gay rights? The two are separate worlds and I like them that way. They don't need to interact and I see no reason that you should force them to interact.

The ability to knit those together is a huge challenge and opportunity for us as an industry.

Tough, go join another industry.

When last I checked Yahoo was in the business of searching out information not mapping all things including my chair. I don't want Yahoo to know about my chair, that is why I didn't make a webpage for it.

That's what I mean by resolving people - I mean this person and not the likely thousands of other people who share your name.

Yes well again I'm not wooed by your crocodile tears. Yes when looking up things there is the possibility of confusion but some global numbering system won't change that really. Even if such a system was implemented it would reduce privacy, probably by outing many a closet homosexual, but the people who really wanted to game it still would and even though you matched the serial number for Bob Henderson at 2213 Mockingbird Lane, and found that he likes Monster trucks, and old Judy Garland Movies you still wouldn't be able to believe it. Because someone who wanted to hide their love of Monster trucks may just have been posting under his name.

Even if you put the force of law and economics behind it, say the way that credit card fraud is banned it will still happen. The net result of an internet of things would be 1) My chair having its own fan club 2) Yahoo getting into the ChoicePoint voter-roll purging busines, and 3) people too weak to protect themselves being outed for no good reason.

Lest we forget there is a reason for anonymity in this world. Many people, esp those coping with personally difficult things, want to broach them under different identities for fear of persecution. Others, like me, just value our privacy as a matter of course and feel that more information only benefits others, not us. Finally dangerous or unpopular ideas (say phamplets advocating for the American Revolution, democracy, and the rights of man) cannot be published except anonymously for fear of violent reprisal. That's why Benjamin Franklin used the name 'Mrs. Silence Dogood'.

Re:I like my privacy, so please, no email ID

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Today, only your IP address is associated with downloading a copy of Shrek 3. IPv6 is going to make sure that your cable modem, your computer, your RAM and your hard disk are all associated with downloading a copy of Shrek 4.

One way or another, no it's not.

I am becoming increasingly conscious of my on-line footprint, the sheer scale of collection of data about me in real life, and the ways it is being used to my disadvantage. Some of those are sinister, but most are simply businesses or government departments using their greater resources to screw me out of things. Either way, I am personally damaged as a result.

I have always challenged things like asking for all my contact details in a shop when they have no need of them, and I'm sure a lot of people simply lie on various sign-up web pages that ask for information that isn't necessary to provide whatever feature or service is being requested. Now I've got to the point of actively disconnecting from social networking sites that are harvesting information about me, and I'm considering filing formal complaints with my representatives about certain well-known organisations who are obviously storing my credit card details in their databases beyond the end of our transactions.

I care enough about this issue — and more to the point, I suspect enough other people do as well — that if the pressure keeps ramping up, and damaging incidents like losing a whole database of credit card numbers keep happening, I think pretty draconian pro-privacy laws will gain political will long before universal tracking is a reality. All the lobbying and campaign funding in the world won't buy the law back once enough voters have personally been hurt by someone screwing this up.