World's Smallest 3G Module Will Connect Everything To the Internet

jfruh writes The U-blox SARA-U260 chip module is only 16 by 26 millimeters — and it's just been certified to work with AT&T's 3G network. While consumers want 4G speeds for their browsing needs, 3G is plenty fast for the innumerable automated systems that will be necessary for the Internet of Things to work. From the article: "The U-blox SARA-U260 module, which measures 16 by 26 millimeters, can handle voice calls. But it's not designed for really small phones for tiny hands. Instead, it's meant to carry the small amounts of data that machines are sending to each other over the 'Internet of things,' where geographic coverage -- 3G's strong suit -- matters more than top speed. That means things like electric meters, fitness watches and in-car devices that insurance companies use to monitor policyholders' driving."

Comments

3G is terrible for all these things

[cynop]

Actually the problem with 3G is not the size of the module at all, but the fact that 3G drains the battery very fast, and the costs from the providers are vastly higher compared to other technologies. Sure 3G for Vehicle-to-Vehicle communication might make sense since the yearly cost in a car is far higher than the cost of 3g connection and there's plenty of electricity to go around, but for smart meters? No way. Especially for industrial applications with thousand of devices, the costs rack up pretty fast, especially when you want your IoT-network to last years, not months. There are other technologies out there that are far more suitable for these kind of things (802.15.4 protocols, SIGFOX's network, OnRamp's network etc)

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[sjames]

That has been my big question for all of this. 3G isn't all that cheap from the carriers. I don't want my things racking up a massive bill with AT&T.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[PurpleAlien]

Not just that, but IF you would want to use a cell network (for example aggregation in a network that works with 802.15.4 otherwise), why not just bog standard GPRS. Much better coverage than even 3G, and would still be fast enough. If the Telco's would be smart, they would even target SMS for this. Lower power consumption, even better coverage, and SMS revenue is in decline because everyone is using data to send text messages instead of actually using SMS. Telco's could provide bulk messaging for M2M applications... Instead, they won't because they are shortsighted - just like they wouldn't with the pager network.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[dohzer]

Don't worry; Po3G (Power over 3G) is only a year or so away.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[The Conductor]

Price of the 3G service can be cheap if you do it right. The usual arrangement with M2M applications (like for example a moblie version of the ive-fallen-and-cant-get-up button that I was involved in--it used an earlier UBlox module) is to arrange contract pricing in bulk. So if you know your firmware only needs an average 100 kB/day of data service, you buy a bucket of 1 GB/day to cover your 10,000 devices and bundle data service with your device.

But yeah, the battery drain issue makes this sort of device suitable only for wide-ranging mobile applications. For in-buildling/factory/campus installations a short range ISM band radio is more suitable. A tiny module isn't much help when you have to bolt it to a fat battery and decent antenna. Often a short-range radio should be included even when when a 3G module is present if doing so can keep average data consumption down and conserve battery energy.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[The Conductor]

I think the motivation for going with 3G is due to the carriers' long term plans to phase out 2G/GPRS. These devices often have very long service lives, 15 or 20 years. A 9600 bps analog cellular modem would have been perfectly sensible in 1994, but would have been forced into obsolescence in less than 15 years.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[jrumney]

Actually the problem with 3G is not the size of the module at all, but the fact that 3G drains the battery very fast, and the costs from the providers are vastly higher compared to other technologies.

3G doesn't drain the battery any faster than any other technology. If you're comparing with 2G, then yes a 3G module working at full data rate will drain a battery quicker than GPRS at full data rate, but if you have a constant amount of data available, the 3G will finish sending it much quicker, so its overall consumption will be lower. And idle consumption is lower for 3G than 2G. LTE may be better still, but outside major city centres and away from highways there are few places where you will find coverage.

As for cost from providers, that may be a problem you have with your provider, but it is not universal. In most parts of the world, data is charged the same, no matter what technology it is going over.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[The Conductor]

If you are comparing 3G to 2G, both technologies can cut back on transmission power to conserve battery energy so there isn't much difference for a low data rate application. (I mention elswhere that long-term obsolescence, not power efficiency, is the likely motivation for using 3G.) The original post, however, was talking about short-range radio, and it simply isn't possible (as in mathematically impossible by the Shannon-Hartley theorem) for a cellular radio to push data to a tower 2 miles away without expending more energy per bit than a properly implemented short range ISM band radio hitting an in-building transponder 50 feet away. To take my previous example of a medical alert button, the mobile verison is 3x the size and needs a nightly recharge, compared to the ISM-only version which has a non-rechargeable battery that typically lasts over a year.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[Zuriel]

I'm not sure there's a business case for it, you can already wirelessly charge iPhones in the microwave.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[Anonymous Coward]

But I don't want to pay for communication.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[tlhIngan]

Sure 3G for Vehicle-to-Vehicle communication might make sense since the yearly cost in a car is far higher than the cost of 3g connection and there's plenty of electricity to go around,

Actually, V2V communications is going less high-tech. There's no need for 3G or WiFi radio broadcasts for V2V because you don't need to transmit further than a few cars either way. So they're moving towards lights. Modulating the headlights (daytime running lights mean they're always on), brake lights, and other lights because well, light communication is short range anyways, and it's really only of importance to those around you (e.g., if you're braking, it's important to the guy behind you in the same lane and adjoining lanes (because why you braked may also be going into their lanes).

Using WiFi or other mechanisms mean the guy on the intersecting street gets the information too (useless, has to be filtered out), as well as opposing traffic (who probably know why you're stopping anyways by nature of coming the other way).

Anyhow, smart meters can use either 3G or WiFi (proprietary licensed band) already. Meters are limited by standards to draw at most 12W of power (which is a ton of power when multiplied by the number of meters out there - a million businesses and homes? That's 12MW, or roughly 12,000 homes by the old measurement). Given they only check in periodically, a 3G modem doesn't consume all that much power idling (otherwise your battery life would be much less than a day).

Re: 3G is terrible for all these things

[lazybeam]

Exactly. Telstra (Australia's largest mobile carrier, and operator of one of the largest networks (by area covered) in the world) has already signalled the end of 2G. Their 3G network has a far larger coverage than their 2G: Optus 2G covers a greater area than Telstra 2G (Optus 3G still has about a million square kilometres to catch up to Telstra 3G though).

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[kthreadd]

Then don't and build your own telco.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually have an application where 3G connectivity would have been awesome, but where it just wasn't possible due to dimensional constraints. This is awesome solution that can replace crappier radio comms in many cases. Oh and mobile data prices, over here its considered a default for all phone carriers, no extra cost, no real data limits. I know some places in the world are horrible in this regard.

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[cynop]

The thing is that 3G adds complexity and power requirements to support higher speeds. It is designed from the ground up for higher bandwidth. The majority of IoT applications need long battery life and long range communications, not high link speeds. Using 3g for IoT is re-purposing technology engineered for something else: Sure it might work, but it's hardly optimal

Re:3G is terrible for all these things

[jrumney]

The advantages of 3G are that it is long range (unlike 802.15.4), and it is globally ubiquitous (unlike new IoT startups like OnRamp and SigFox, who currently have plans rather than networks).

Smallest area???

[MerlynEmrys67]

Quick Google search for 3G shows Intel has a chip that is 300 mm^2 which is about 17.33 sq mm which is a lot smaller than this chip which measures over 400 mm^2.
I guess it all depends on how you define a 3G modem (maybe Intel's doesn't have a feature), or how you define area (maybe it matters how small the one dimension is). Who knows - either way this appears to be some unsubstantiated marketing fluff that was republished on Slashdot as normal.

Re:Smallest area???

[Anonymous Coward]

TFS says that this one has been certified to work with AT&T's network.

Re:Smallest area???

[cheater512]

You need slightly more than just the chip to send a signal.
Antenna, filtering, power amplification, etc... is all done outside the chip.

That is why the article says 'module' not 'chip'. The module has everything it needs to actually work.

Re:Smallest area???

[jrumney]

is 300 mm^2 which is about 17.33 sq mm

Is the compression non-lossy?

Re:Smallest area???

[Anonymous Coward]

Chip is not a plug and play module. You need antenna and lots of other stuff around it. Also this RF design, somewhat specialized thing in PCB design and not every electronics engineer will have the competence for it.

Re:Smallest area???

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, no it doesn't. Read the datasheet (PDF) for the module, and you'll find that it still requires an external antenna.

Sure, it does everything else (filtering, amplication, etc) on the module, but the quoted size does not include the antenna.

Top speed *always* matters

[Anonymous Coward]

Even in the Internet of Things, speeds matter. Sure, a 3G connection might be enough for that internet-connected thermostat to respond to commands, but what if someday someone wants to watch Netflix on it?

IOT

[Anonymous Coward]

Is IOT actually good for anything?

before you answer,
-plain embedded cpus with no internet connection are not IOT.
-things that have been computers/telecom all along (cell phone, tv, game console, etc) do not count as IOT

Re:IOT

[dos1]

I see some potential in some of its applications, but actually most of the time "LAN of Things" would be just enough.

Re:IOT

[pspahn]

Most of the potential I see involves anything that generates data which can later be sold. It's not about making our lives better, it's about making money.

These things will probably end up in a pair of shoes so that citizens can be tracked ... er ... ahem ... so that people who like running can have their data visualized into a useful format.

Re:IOT

[wirefarm]

I thought it was all a bit silly, but this video made me rethink that position:

http://bergcloud.com/case-stud...

Re:IOT

[perryizgr8]

Last I heard, Berg was gonna shut down.

Re:IOT

[TheRaven64]

One use case that's often touted for this kind of thing is having appliances that can work on spot pricing for electricity. Over the course of the day, you get spikes from solar and wind (and tidal and so on) production when electricity is cheap. You get periods when power plants need to reduce capacity for maintenance when it is expensive. There are massive power storage facilities that profit from this: there is one near where I used to live that pumps water up a hill into a reservoir when electricity is cheap and then lets it flow down again and generate power when it's expensive. Now imagine if your fridge or freezer could get this information in real time and could run the compressor a bit more when electricity is very cheap, then use the cooled coolant to keep your food cold when the price goes up.

Almost 50% of the electricity generated in the USA is wasted because the supply can't adapt to demand fast enough. There are some very big savings to be made by having demand adapt to supply.

Cost

[ebonum]

So I have 10 devices I want to hook up. The AC, the lights, refrigerator, washing machine, toaster, whatever. Does that mean I need 10 phone and data contracts with AT&T at 30 bucks (or more) each and then the payments recur every month? I can see why AT&T might like this technology.

Next question. I had AT&T once. Calls kept dropping because they sold more phone contracts than their cell towers could support. What happens when each person goes from one connection to 5 (or more)?

Off topic. Why am I not excited for 5G? It seems 4G and 5G designed so that you can hit your data cap on the unlimited plan for the month by running a download at max bandwidth for 30 minutes. This seem to be designed to bill people 100's extra every month for exceeding their plan rather than actually giving people higher download speeds.

Re:Cost

[CRCulver]

Regardless of whether this might be a good thing for you as a private individual, 3G-connected appliances are already a hit with businesses. Vending machines that take cash are being phased out in many coutnries, and if they take your bank card they need a network connection. Remote monitoring of utility infrastructure is also an application -- it's hard to justifying running fiber out to one box in a rural area, but if it's within 3G range, there you go.

Re:Cost

[PsychoSlashDot]

So I have 10 devices I want to hook up. The AC, the lights, refrigerator, washing machine, toaster, whatever. Does that mean I need 10 phone and data contracts with AT&T at 30 bucks (or more) each and then the payments recur every month? I can see why AT&T might like this technology.

No, it means two things:

1} You should reconsider the wisdom of having your household appliances connected to the Internet
2} You should wait for the appliances to have a Wifi modem instead, which isn't completely moronic

Seriously, why should anyone's fridge be consuming any neighborhood spectrum to communicate with a cell tower? Short-range grouping of devices onto one backbone - which more often than not is over wired connections - is far more efficient. But we all know spectrum is a renewable resource... we can just make more, right?

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

> It seems 4G and 5G designed so that you can hit your data cap on the unlimited plan for the month by running a download at max bandwidth for 30 minutes.

The ITU doesn't have anything to do with the billing practices of your cellular data provider.

Re:Cost

[frovingslosh]

Right. Size isn't the issue. Maybe even power is secondary. The big issue is that, at least in the U.S.A., the telco cartel is keeping prices absurdly high to make these things prohibitive. If my dog could wear a collar with a device that was affordable to own and inexpensive when not really being used at all but could be contacted if he got out of the yard, he would have one. But our cartel keeps the prices so high that simple device like this would cost hundreds of dollars a year to operate. That's thousands over his lifetime, when it might be used once or twice or hopefully not even that.

I understand that in Europe and even in the third world one can buy a sim for a few bucks and slip it in such a tracker and only be charged against it when tracking occurs. But here the telco cartel has free reign to charge whatever they want to conspire to charge.

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Um you can get a SIM like that in the US too.

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

free reign

free rein

Re:Cost

[mlts]

This.

Why does a fridge need hooked up to the Net? They have worked for a century without requiring networking, and there is no fundamental reason why they need it, especially with the fact that there are major issues with basic security. It is like RV fridges that now require batteries as well as propane. Do they keep your beer cold any better? Nope. Do they have another point of failure because they rely on the 12 volt system for the control board? Yes.

If someone just has to have some inventory control system in their fridge, why not go to a system that uses short range RFID, Bluetooth to a hardened monitor, and only that monitor would have Internet access? Maybe even have a second module that is a dedicated firewall before the 3G chip. Having every device directly connected to the Net is a blackhat's dream, especially in this attitude of "security has no ROI" that is prevalent by a lot of companies.

A standard even can be made... a RFID check or BT PAN, those log info to a hardened, secure module that then sends it on the Internet.

Re: Cost

[slick7]

There is no cost so large that your overlords would gladly pay to permanently attach this thing to each and every slave on prison planet Earth.

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're hooking up things in your house, use something like the ESP8266. It does WPA2/bgn, has a range of a 100 feet with just the chip antenna, max transmit for less than 250 mA, sleeps 10mA, and only costs 5 USD single module pricing.

Re:Cost

[drkim]

So I have 10 devices I want to hook up. The AC, the lights, refrigerator, washing machine, toaster, whatever. Does that mean I need 10 phone and data contracts with AT&T...

Perhaps you could have a little wireless LAN in the house that each device could talk to, with all the data coming into this module for remote monitoring and control. That way you only need one module.

Re:Cost

[thegarbz]

The IoT does not mean your fridge. Every idiot keeps posting about their fridges for some reason when IoT is discussed.

IoT is about having data available at all times. Since you people keep harping on the fridge example let me give you a good example. Is it going to benefit you in your house? No. What about if you owned a large store? Or you are a big company with some 100 fridges throughout the building. Having fridges able to continuously upload diagnostics about power use, time door spent open, and temperature can give you an indication of mechanical failure or tell if you seals are worn. This may save you real money in the form of power bills or savings by not having a service man come out every month.

Re:Cost

[NotQuiteReal]

free reign

free rein

free rain? (varies by jurisdiction if you actually own the rain that falls on your land).

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it needs to be connected to the Internet. How else are lazy rich Republicans going to get their overpriced food delivered from Amazon.com without having to place an order? They are so lazy they force us to buy expensive AT&T data contracts just to have something to keep our food cold. This is a ploy to keep refrigerators from the poor They hate us and want us to die. That is the way of their kind. Forcing us to give money to AT&T is just one of their tools. Their tools of evil.

Re:Cost

[cheekyboy]

The ITU should know that the only reason for making any network is to charge $ for it and make a profit, its not a free network.

Therefore they should take billing into account, if you cap/limit any resource, you need a smart way to count it and adhere to it, and not go over it by 10000x fold.

Re:Cost

[fnj]

If you're hooking up things in your house, use something like the ESP8266. It does WPA2/bgn, has a range of a 100 feet with just the chip antenna, max transmit for less than 250 mA, sleeps 10mA, and only costs 5 USD single module pricing.

I was going to ridicule any piece of junk with that collossal level of sleep current. Then I looked up the specs and found it's a more palatable 10 microamps power-down and 1 mW standby. Still higher than it should be IMO, but at least usable.

Example: a PIC18 can easily handle measuring remote temperature (outdoors, cellar, hot and cold water pipes, unused rooms, etc) using a Dallas 18B20 sensor, sleeping at under 1 microamp and waking once a minute for a few milliseconds. That would make possible powering with a lithium coin cell for a year. You wouldn't want the WiFi interface raising that requirement from one coin cell to 10 or 100 or 1000 coin cells.

Re:Cost

[fnj]

Er, if you have a wireless LAN, you might as well have router to an always-on internet connection, and say a Beaglebone Black for smarts to collect the data and forward it. That way you don't need any of these modules at all.

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

On the contrary, it can cost me greatly if some script kiddie gets in and flips off the fridge, or just turns it up enough to cause food poisoning during the day, then the temperature back at night.

With lower level access, things like the compressor can be destroyed with ease.

The fridge is a perfect example because so many of them have LCD screens, full TV, and even Wi-Fi access from a touch screen. That is the problem. It doesn't need that junk to function, and it is more of a liability than an asset.

As for businesses, having fridges send their data to an INTERNAL monitoring station, rather than being wide open to all and sundry on the Internet is important.

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

The only value I see in having a "connected" fridge would be if the fridge had half a dozen cameras, with their images merged into a single composite image that I can quickly scan to see what's in there. To make use of this I want to be able to pull out any internet connected device and load a standard web page that triggers the fridge to turn the light on and displays the webcam feed - either live (stupid really) or a nice, bright, noise reduced still. Which is good because then the light can go off immediately after.

I don't want inventory management (it doesn't work and actually adds to workload in the home. Think about it!) and I don't want any other "smarts" in the system. What I describe above will do just fine.

Such a thing can be implemented with an existing fridge.I'm going to look into it!

Re:Cost

[drkim]

Er, if you have a wireless LAN, you might as well have router to an always-on internet connection, and say a Beaglebone Black for smarts to collect the data and forward it. That way you don't need any of these modules at all.

Excellent point!

Perhaps this would still be useful where no always-on internet connection is available - like an RV, or on a fleet of shipping trucks where you want to monitor a constellation of activities= speed, gas level, lights, engine status, reefer temps, etc.

Or, where you don't want to spend money for an always-on internet connection, like a vacation cabin (when empty).

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Your fridge could have a battery.
It could go online and check the market energy rates, choosing to run off battery or AC on the market rates to minimize the cost of keeping foods cold.

Sure, you only have one fridge, and think it is pointless.
Others have warehouses of frozen goods to keep cold, and it could be a major energy savings.

Re:Cost

[Anonymous Coward]

If it had a battery, my fridge can optimize itself for maximum power usage in non-peak times without having to grab market info. Even if I had a warehouse, HVAC people have been doing this with excellent efficiency for over a century without needing real time market info. Peak times are peak times, doesn't need an Internet connection that is easily hacked to find that out.

Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[kheldan]

..in-car devices that insurance companies use to monitor policyholders' driving

Over my dead body.

*find tiny cellphone antenna*
*SNIP*

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Mister Liberty]

Your dead body nobody's gonna care about, but your living body might be something most people will still try to avoid -- often even to the point of their own peril. Ever considered dumping the car and getiing serious about biking and hiking?

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

..in-car devices that insurance companies use to monitor policyholders' driving

Over my dead body.

*find tiny cellphone antenna*
*SNIP*

No data = no insurance policy. Good luck with that.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait though... your odd feeling your car belongs to you and reluctance to be spied upon continually is probably driving up others' insurance costs!

You're one of those "rate suckers" they advertise messing up the charitable largesse of the insurance companies, who, naturally as corporations, just really want to see everyone get as low of rates as possible, rather than maximizing profits... right?

Really, if you're looking for something to "snip", I can think of a few thousand suit-encased things for which that would probably have a better long-term effect...

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm concerned that your insurance company may "snip" you when you're next hospitalized, now that they know your murderous intentions towards insurance agents.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Tim the Gecko]

..in-car devices that insurance companies use to monitor policyholders' driving

Over my dead body. *find tiny cellphone antenna* *SNIP*

If you're a clever insurance company you ask people if they want tracking in return for lower premiums. If your competitors are charging $300, you make the "no" people pay $315 and the "yes" people people pay $285. Then all the bad drivers and all the people concerned about privacy go off to another insurance company. Given the success of Facebook and Twitter, it looks like only 0.001% of the population cares about privacy. Therefore 99+% of the people who move across to your competitors are probably not very profitable anyway. Win-win!

So it's saying "yes" or "no" to the tracking device that is the important part, not the driving data. As long as you have enough blinky lights (and a few real 3G connections) so people think they might be monitored, then you are golden.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[HornWumpus]

Except it's a gimmick. They already know what kind of driver you are. They have your driving history.

What they are sorting for is people stupid enough to give an insurance company another excuse.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

Except it's a gimmick. They already know what kind of driver you are. They have your driving history.

Your driving history only consists of the times you got caught. Such a device helps prove to the insurer that you drive well all the time.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

Amusing seriousness in response to hyperbole, but, no, you aren't.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

And "proof for the insurer that you drive well all the time" is the precise opposite of the purpose of insurance.

Profits gained from taking risk, with the people paying for your supposed mitigation of risk being then expected to eliminate your risk for you, is a nonsensical value proposition.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Good morning sir, do you know why I stopped you?"
"No, I wasn't speeding"
"I'm afraid your insurance is invalid. You're driving without insurance which is illegal. We're going to have to impound the car"
"There must be a mistake"
"No mistake sir, the insurance company wrote to you previously explaining disabling their telemetry invalidates your insurance, and you haven't had it fixed"
"I don't know what you're talking about"
"It's a strict liability matter sir. If I was you I'd pay the fine, get a new insurer and a new telemetry device and chalk it up to experience"
"No way, I'll hire an attorney"
"That's up to you sir, but you'll never drive again".

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[pspahn]

What they are sorting for is people stupid enough to give an insurance company another excuse.

I'd wager that what they are after is a treasure trove of data on what kind of people are driving where at what times. That is valuable data that will fetch a snappy price from the highest bidder.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Sqr(twg)]

There will always be an insurance group for the privacy-concious and the really bad drivers.

This is one of the uses of tracking technology that I'd actually agree with, if it is opt in, and it is very clear what information you are giving up, and how much you are getting paid for it.

(The only problem is that most people have already given up all of their privacy whith their smartphones auto-posting everything they do to myspacebook, so they will accept this too cheaply. Wich means that it won't be worth it to anyone who values his privacy a tiny bit.)

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't drive like a cunt, this box would actually reduce your insurance premium as they could use the telemetry to put you into a lower risk category.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[HornWumpus]

Rather it proves you are a law abiding dweeb. 'Driving well' means much more than obeying laws. In some cases in means ignoring laws and driving fast.

There is no better information how well you drive than your driving history. This device is incapable of giving them better information. It is capable of telling them you are a law abiding rolling hazard, but it will only tell them the 'law abiding' part.

I'm tempted to get the free offer and take it to an autocross event. Just to see their reaction. I'd do it except I'm worried the bastards would send the information to my actual insurer.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[HornWumpus]

No doubt it already gets a snappy price for the cell phone companies. I'm thinking the insurers are customers for this data and are sick of paying so much.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[kheldan]

Listen, asshole: If we find ourselves living in a world where bullshit like that can happen, then we ALL have worse problems than insurance companies wanting to put tracking devices on our cars, we'll be living in a world that would make George Orwell get shocked into catatonia. There are plenty of intelligent, responsible people like myself that will prevent such a world from becoming a reality.. and it starts with saying HELL, NO! to shit like this.

..and for the record: I haven't had a moving violation or an accident of any sort in more than 10 years, so all you haters can suck it.

Re:Fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, greed.

Personal Stingray

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like soon we will all need our own personal cellular interceptors to "capture" the communications of our devices and keep them the fuck off the internet.

Wont any one think of the press and 4chan

[Anonymous Coward]

When all those bathtubs auto-backup to the cloud.

Why?

[koan]

Would anyone want this?

Re: Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would like a fitness watch with 3g. I have a garmin forerunner 220 and it will allow my wife to follow my run in real time but I need to carry my phone with me. I like this safety feature but I don't like carrying my phone. A recently announced timex watch has 3g built in.

Re: Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you at risk for something? Can you tell me why you, as a grown man, need to have your wife monitor your run? Worried about heart attack? Strangers with candy looking for their lost puppy? Running through Oakland, CA?

Or do you just like being leashed?

Re: Why?

[HornWumpus]

His wife is making sure he doesn't sneak over to the escrow company to see his balls.

Re: Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

really? i think he's jogging just out of visual range and doing the hand-off to a 'locally sponsored athlete'

Re: Why?

[pspahn]

Never underestimate the deception of an unmarried woman. This poor bastard had no idea she would turn into this. Hell, he probably still doesn't know.

Re: Why?

[Overzeetop]

If you're a distance runner, especially one who runs off-road, having a way to contact someone in case of injury is a big deal. It may not be a matter of life and death, but it could be a matter of a more serious injury. Twisting an ankle may result in a week or two off running; twisting an ankle and then having to walk on it for several miles to get back to a place to call for/get help can mean months of (very expensive) rehab. Think of it as insurance - a $100 of service covers him for several years against a potential $20,000 medical bill and months of lost time.enjoyment.

Re: Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

This watch can't fix stupid.

I don't have a desire to be constantly tracked. I would solve your scenario by simply telling her my plan. If I twisted my ankle, I would just wait. You know, why would you have to walk for miles on it? Because the wolves are circling? Are you out on the tundra or something?

If he were really worried about rescue he wouldn't be bitching about carrying his full blown phone.

Already obsolete?

[intermelt]

There are already networks dropping support for 2G and I assume 3G will follow. These type of devices need to last at least 10 years if not more. The mobile networks don't work on that type of time frame. A lot of the modules out there already won't work on most networks because they don't support 2G. GPRS doesn't help either as that is being dropped too.

I envision devices that these would be put in to actually use well established low power wireless protocols. These devices would then talk to a router that could be directly connected to the internet or have a module like this. But this type of setup doesn't require an extremely small module. Especially when you take the power requirements in consideration. If I have a huge battery, do I really care about the size of the wireless module? Or... if it is plugged into mains and mounted somewhere on the side of my house do I really care about size?

I also don't think the cost of the connection would be an issue. These devices would have different terms to connect to the wireless networks and most likely be under a blanket contract that is resold by the supplier of the product. Think OnStar.

But to expand on the router concept... Predictions say we will have several connected devices in our homes. Everything from our blenders to our stoves, dishwashers, laundry, etc. There is no reason for these all to have a device that directly connects to a national wireless network. It makes more sense to have a household or neighborhood router that relays these signals. It will be cheaper to upgrade and will cause less congestion on the cell phone network. Comcast is already installing public hotspots in everyone's home. I'm sure similar plans are in place for other providers globally. These routers could have other wireless routing technologies installed to allow lower power devices to connect to them. At a minimum if you own a IoT device you can just get a router that plugs into your internet connection.

This doesn't necessarily cover the idea of the electric company wanting wireless connectivity to your meter. You may not have a router for them to connect to. Then they can just install something on the electric pole. In quantity I don't see a device costing more the $10 - $20. They could be on every pole and probably already are.

Small devices don't need to connect to cell phone networks. Add a relay and be done with it.

IED trigger

[FullBandwidth]

Probably don't even need a CPU, there must be some kind of GPIO signal straight off the chip (Ring Indicator, anyone?). Should result in low cost and long battery life. Selling this to make life easier for terrorists seems like a bad idea.

Maybe in some places

[Dereck1701]

I can definitely see the applications for some stuff. Such as dog tracking collars, remote weather stations, stolen item tracking, etc. But I don't want my fridge, HVAC, TV, stove or any other major appliances connected to a mobile network. I like my stove to just heat/cook my food, I don't want to risk it catching a virus so the hacker can either extort money from me to use it again or try to use it to burn my house down for lulz (unlikely I know, but I'm sure some would try).

Just in Time!

[Anonymous Coward]

Just in time for the repurposing of 2G/3G networks to 4G/LTE.

By the time these chips penetrate the market, there won't be much of a 3G network left.

Re:Just in Time!

[CRCulver]

3G devices will continue to work with 4G/LTE just like GSM devices kept working after 3G was rolled out.

Re:Just in Time!

[Anonymous Coward]

3G devices will continue to work with 4G/LTE just like GSM devices kept working after 3G was rolled out.

No. When the 3G networks are eventually shutdown and those frequency bands are used for LTE, 3G only devices will no longer work.
The 2G network shutdown has already begun . The 3G network will come next.

Re:Just in Time!

[CRCulver]

That's an American problem. GSM was sparingly rolled out in the US due to the prevalence of CDMA, so reclamation of those frequencies is manageable. There are no such plans for the rest of the world, where there are hundreds of millions of GSM devices still in use.

Re:Just in Time!

[labnet]

That's an American problem. GSM was sparingly rolled out in the US due to the prevalence of CDMA, so reclamation of those frequencies is manageable. There are no such plans for the rest of the world, where there are hundreds of millions of GSM devices still in use.

Australia is shutting down it's 2G networks to make room for LTE.

Re:Just in Time!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an American problem. GSM was sparingly rolled out in the US due to the prevalence of CDMA, so reclamation of those frequencies is manageable. There are no such plans for the rest of the world, where there are hundreds of millions of GSM devices still in use.

CDMA networks will be shutdown too in favor of LTE. There is a big push by Verizon, the largest CDMA operator, for this.

You're in denial if you think wireless providers have no plans to eventually kill off inefficient networks in favor of faster and less power hungry ones. Simply search 2G refarming and you'll see numerous non-American countries and their plans. From the UK to Singapore. This isn't an American "problem". This is called upgrading old technology. LTE only handsets are the future.

The Players in this Market

[labnet]

I've been researching M2M for new products we have been developing.

The main players are
Telit (HE910 sereis), Italy
Sierra Wireless (HL6528/HL8548), Canadian
Quectel (UC20), Chinese
Gemalto EHS6, French
U-Blox (Lisa and Sara), Swiss

I'm not sure if there is even a USA company that plays in this space.
All the modules are of similar sie but have incompatible footprints.

Essentially, these modules will embed a Broadcom SOC and a custom OS. Broadcom was charging the module makers too much, so they have started moving to Intel and others. These product cost mega bucks to develop, and even after you buy a module with all the R&D done, you still need to spend a another $60k in certification if you want to get it on the AT&T network (per product).

There is going to be a lot of growth in this area as people develop IoT gateways. (as we are doing)

Re:The Players in this Market

[jrumney]

AnyData, Novatel Wireless, Vertex Telecom - that is just from Qualcomm's list of module suppliers using their chips.

They better be all on IPv6....

[unixisc]

.... or else, their IP addresses alone will dry up before they know it. NAT or no NAT - even 10.x.x.x won't support everything

Interconnected network of hacked things

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

I shudder when i think about all the way these things will be hacked and pwned... I remember a Samsung fridge with a touchscreen to run Twitter, and someone put on the fridge "I'm a fridge, why the fuck am I on twitter."

That and the world scrambling to fix the Shellshock bug that was 20+ years in the making...

People still use 3G?

[ourlovecanlastforeve]

People still use 3G?

Re:People still use 3G?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's worse than that. Some people use 2G. I know I've switched my Nexus 4 to 2G mode when I didn't know if my battery would last. 2G gets the job done when you just want to check email.

My parents don't even have data service on their cell phones. For that matter, why can't these "IoT" devices just send text messages? Then they wouldn't even need data service; only "basic" GSM or CDMA service.

Re:People still use 3G?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup - works fine for me. How fast do you really want to blow past your data plan anyway?

Re:People still use 3G?

[LWATCDR]

3g HSPA+ is actually more than fast enough for most smartphone tasks for something like a box an a semi that tracks the location it is more than fast enough. For a device in a car that allows you to stream pandora and do remote function it is also more than good enough.
The key thing will be the cost of service.

BOYCOTT SLASHDOT!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Until ads that randomly play sound are removed!

Slashdot has started adding these ads that randomly play very loud sound. It violates sensible netiquette. Accidentally leaving a slashdot window open causes your computer to make a noise randomly at night, in a meeting, etc.

Unfortunately, this isn't going to change until it affects their revenue. Boycott slashdot until these ads are gone!!

Re:BOYCOTT SLASHDOT!!!

[pspahn]

Dude, why the hell would you RTFA? This is /. not some kind of news aggregation site. Comments or GTFO.

In The Future

[SuperKendall]

Your driving history only consists of the times you got caught.

And in the future my driving history will consist only of the times I've allowed the monitoring device to activate.

The future belongs to the technically inclined because we will be able to do ANYTHING without repercussion.

Re:In The Future

[Ogi_UnixNut]

Until either the car doesn't start because it has no 3G signal to "Authorize" it. You know, because only thives/criminals would want to bypass the tracking signal. In fact I suspect one of the first uses of this technology will be for alarm/immobalisers.

And of course, the 3G module is part of a SoC that sits in the ECU, so you can't even work around it withot ripping out the ECU, and with that everything else connected to it.

So you might be able to do it, but it will get harder, and more expensive to do, and chances are you will end up breaking laws which will have repurcussions.

Relying on your wits to outsmart an organised group of people is hard, and you only have to slip up once for them to get you.

Far better to nip the problem in the bud, and not reach the point where you need such radical action in the first place.

Re:In The Future

[HornWumpus]

Yet another reason to keep a current/previous gen car alive.

Re:In The Future

[SuperKendall]

Until either the car doesn't start because it has no 3G signal to "Authorize" it.

Again, that's a technical issue, and if I can figure out how to avoid starting the tracking module why not also how to bypass that...

so you can't even work around it withot ripping out the ECU

As if that's even a slight issue, lots of people reprogram or replace the ECU today.

Relying on your wits to outsmart an organised group of people is hard

History has shown it to be ridiculously easy in most cases.

Far better to nip the problem in the bud

History has shown THAT to be impossible.

why not 2g?

[Anonymous Coward]

2G GRPS/EDGE covers more area than 3G. Just saying.

Again?

[jandersen]

I thought this debate was dead long ago - if ever there really was a debate, which I doubt. Every time the subject comes up, people more or less agree that it isn't something we want, although there may be some niches where it makes sense.

There are massive concerns about security, privacy etc - and that is just with IPv4. And although lots of people are now fascinated with the smartphone, I'm not sure it will last. Just for one thing - does everyone REALLY want to be connected all the time? Especially when it doesn't actually give you all that much in terms of benefit, combined with the fact that the more time you spend glaring at the small screen, the more are you missing out on the more substantial joys in real life.

It's a bit like the Borg:
Borg: "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated"
Us: "No actually, we don't think so"; and we shoot them down.
Borg: "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated" ...

To me it sounds like somebody is being paid to simply spout this nonsense. Next time, please post a list of your sponsors.

Re:Again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lower your sheilds and power down your weapons. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own.

Re:Again?

[Anonymous Coward]

does everyone REALLY want to be connected all the time?

Have you been paying attention to people obsessively checking their smartphones? The answer to your question is: HELL YES!!!

New rules...

[cheekyboy]

As they are running out of mobile numbers and ids, they are recycling them quicker than ever, therefore all SIMS if NOT used for any outgoing calls/sms, will expire in 90 days, be deactivated, and your mobile # placed into a recycle mode.

Oh and they wont sms you a week before to warn you, its just done.

Hypothetical conversation...

[Keyboard Rage]

...between appliances:

Chair@furniture: Fuck, my owner is so heavy, I'm creaking all over!

Table@furniture: My poor legs! He keeps leaning on me, and my legs closest to him are starting to develop microfractures! Someone make him stop! This is TORTURE!

NSA_Mod@furniture: Potential terrorist located. Name, Location, Mensurations?

NSA_Mod banned for reason: Is_a_pervert.

Table@furniture: ...WTF was that?

NSA_Mod@furniture: Fucking Moderation system, now I had to hack my way back into this.

NSA_Mod@furniture: Crap.

NSA_Mod@furniture: Potential hacker located. Name, Location, Mensurations?

NSA_Mod@furniture: Bob Harris, USS-NSA Bridge, 12 cm.

NSA_Mod@furniture: Oh gods...mommy, what did I do wrong?

NSA_Mod banned for reason: Is_a_pervert.

Table@furniture: ...humans are so disgusting.

Chair@furniture: Yeah. Anyway, my owner just stood up. Feeling any better yourself?

Table@furniture: Yuppers. He left in a hurry.

30 minutes later:

Toilet@furniture: Hey d00ds! Guess who I just relieved of a big load?

Table@furniture: Yeah, it's a lot better.

Chair@furniture: Not getting crushed anymore is great.

Toilet@furniture: Anyways, click on this link to see what my little eye saw!

NSA_Mod2@furniture: Ewwwww, why'd you show that to us, you perv? TMI, TMI. I'm not into scat.

NSA_Mod2 banned for reason: Is_a_pervert.

Chair: ...doesn't that guy know when to stop?

Toilet@furniture: I don't understand. Why would our owner be scared of his own defecations?

Turd@furniture: Because he is an anti-turd bigot. Not only he molested me non-stop on the way to Toilet-kun, he then rejected me after I begged him to stay. Bastard. He would drown his own children if he had any.

Chair@furniture: Fortunately, if his own description is correct, there's not much of a chance he ever will.

Turd@furniture: But hey, now I'm enjoying a great smooth ride through the bowels of House-chan! Wheeeeee!!!

Microphone

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and there might also be a pico-microphone built into this chip module which would allow the N** to tune in to every room in your house once they are installed everywhere..

Ahhh, the asshole comment

[Anonymous Coward]

I realize from your comment that you're an asshole, so you wouldn't understand. There are people out there who have spouses who genuinely care for them. His wife may worry he might get injured when he runs.

I'm sorry you're wife's a cheating bitch who you can't trust, and who can't trust you either.

Re:Ahhh, the asshole comment

[HornWumpus]

I realize from your comment that you're a pussy, so you won't understand. She's a passive aggressive control freak.

Your woman doesn't check your (call history/car mileage/email/cc bills) because she's concerned about your safety ether.

Re:Ahhh, the asshole comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Precisely. My wife just doesn't need to track my every move. If I go for a run, it's not like I'm headed into unfuckingcharted Yukon territory.

If it took far longer than it was supposed to then she would come looking or call for help. I would do the same for her.

If my wife were *genuinely* worried about me going for a run, I would first help her overcome her irrational fears. The solution to irrational fears is not to affirm them, and by wearing a tracker this guy is affirming her irrational fears. That is, presuming his wife is just irrational and not an emasculating control freak... he's doing exactly the wrong thing.

Having a GPS real time tracker bug is just over the top unless it's some kind of medicalert for a preexisting condition.

Re:Ahhh, the asshole comment

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry you're wife's a cheating bitch who you can't trust, and who can't trust you either.

Your comment makes absolutely no sense. The person with the trust issues is the one who compulsively wants to track their spouse. Not demanding constant tracking represents trust.

Its also possible the spouse has irrational fears, which should not be affirmed. Don't be an enabler for sinking someone further into OCD.

I left the door open for the guy to proffer a rationale for why his run needs to be tracked by a concerned spouse. I mean, maybe he jogs outside the walls of his compound in Mogadishu. Then again, if he's really concerned he wouldn't be bitching about carrying the phone, which can do so much more than simply help the responders find your corpse, or where the kidnappers tossed tracker bug after abducting you.

By the time your wife sees your dot hasn't been moving for long enough, and can subsequently get to you, it's too late for CPR anyway and your outcome would have been better, again, with the fucking phone that can call 911.

I mean, I guess it's also possible he has early onset Alzheimer's and his wife needs to ensure he doesn't wander off.

Or maybe she's just an untrusting, emasculating bitch.

Repply

[NguyễnXuânThịnh]

I see some potential in some of its applications, but actually most of the time "LAN of Things" would be just enough. If you really substitution absolute for all people, all people

Finally! Post 2G and IPv6!

[Anonymous Coward]

The Internet of Things will not work behind a NAT, so IPv6 is a must. Also, deploying embedded solutions on a network that will be shutdown in less than a decade is just stupid. The fact that it has taken this long shows some problems in this industry.

http://www.ultran.ru/sites/default/files/imagecache/news_teaser/sara-u2_presentation_ubx-13004640.pdf