Slashdot Mirror
Eric Schmidt: Our Perception of the Internet Will Fade
Esra Erimez writes: Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt on Thursday predicted a change in how we perceive the internet. Schmidt says, "There will be so many IP addresses, so many devices, sensors, things that you are wearing, things that you are interacting with that you won't even sense it. It will be part of your presence all the time. Imagine you walk into a room, and the room is dynamic. And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room."
Or, without your permission, they are interacting with you.
Imagine you walk into a room, and the room is dynamic. And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room.
Wow. Does he realize how completely out of touch with reality that sounds? He says *imagine* when in the future, with [my] technology, you will be able to "interact with the things going on in the room."
NEWS FLASH! I can now, Eric Schmidt. And anyone can. All you have to do it turn off your cell phone and begin interacting!
What happens when two people enter the room, and they have different preferences?
Spouses already fight about the thermostat; who's preference is "the house" going to pick?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
I'd like to interract with my room, and having dynamic shiny new technologies in my house.
But I don't want any of it connected to the internet if it doesn't have a screen and a keyboard.
The advertising and government snoop won't really ASK for permission. It will be a Hobson's choice. Refuse to give permission and your devices stop working or you wind up on a watch list or worse.
"...with your permission..."?
As if. We aren't prompted to allow the various tracking/privacy violations NOW, how will that change for the better in the future?
Yawn, whatever there, Eric ... more bullshit futurism about how the wealthy will live.
I don't think people really want the internet of things, and every time someone says "ZOMG, look at teh future" I mostly think they're talking out of their ass.
It makes a great sales pitch, but generally futurists are snake oil salesman and marketers claiming their pet technology will change the world, but which would require zillions of dollars and some massive fundamental changes to everything around us.
And the rest of us will have plain old lamps and sofa which aren't telling everything to Google about our daily lives.
The petty ramblings of billionaire technologists really is mostly drivel.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
And with your permission and all of that
Because google is known for this approach, of course.
*cough*Glassholes*cough*
What happens when two people enter the room, and they have different preferences?
Spouses already fight about the thermostat; who's preference is "the house" going to pick?
Definitely not Dave's.
shouts, "STOP Singing Daisy you fucking retarded computer!"
You have to take everyone's perspective into account. He wants all the info he can get, for free.
Oh, that's an easy one. The person who knows the admin password to the home router. Generally this is only one resident of the house and that person has the power of internet god as they can block any device. What "smart device" that wants to be part of the IoT is going to risk the wrath of the local internet god and risk not being able to be a thing on the internet?
Since it's Eric Schmidt and all that:
"And WITHOUT your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room."
-s
...with your permission and all of that...
It does not appear that the internet providers are all that concerned about obtaining the users' permission to track them.
.
Coming from a google exec, the statement is laughable, and ominous.
With your permission...
Google+...
Drops mic.
Captcha reads: "consent" ROFL
To think of useless crap. Of course they pour money on it and make it their way. But still what a useless thought. The truth is most people have no awareness of those things and as time goes on they will have even fewer thoughts unless it goes down. Then they will respond with anger at the first person they expect to fix it. Its already that way, no need for more time to pass.
And with your permission and all of that
Could you be more of an asshole?
First off, when did Google start asking permission BEFORE it just did privacy invading shit?
Second, how many times have you (Schmidt) basically said you didn't give a fuck about peoples privacy or their wishes and that you were going to get your way eventually anyway?
Lets be realistic here Schmidt, you don't mean a word of what you just said. What you mean is that you want devices in every room analyzing everything everyone does in an attempt to figure out how to sell them to advertisers for a higher rate. THAT IS WHAT YOU MEAN.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Obviously, Middle Eastern Terrorists are use to hot climates and so the Nest thermometer readings can be data-mined for possible terrorist activity by the NSA.
And pot growers, they must have the house hot, so the DEA wants in on that data, a hot house is a pot house!
Lone gunmen? Don't they live in the dark with the curtains closed? That smart lighting had better report all the data to the FBI!
And I can't wait till the sensors all report back to Google, so it can link all that data to its advertising ^h^h^h^h my forced Google+ account!
Let's fix the basics first before going to these expensive and complicated cyberworldz additions. At the end of the day, most people would be happy if their landlord just adjusted the basic heating and ventilation to work properly.
mexico and canada may be hit with very high roaming fees.
Mr. Schmidt has visions of massive profits for Corporation's billions of ubiquitous products feeding Google data. This is Google's version of VIKI, with the State and Corporations vying, or cooperating, for ubiquitous access to our lives.
I imagine a nightmare.
I imagine it will be resolved the same way that fights over the TV and computer work. Either you compromise, or buy two.
Cue joke about two houses being kinda expensive...
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
And we will have all the data, he continued. People who read 1984 know that people WANTED the way it happened. They GAVE away their privacy to big brother.
Just as we are now giving it away to Google.
Unfortunately it is like giving away your virginity. You can't get it back. What is worse is that you don't have a real option. Others are giving it away in your name.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Two houses walk into a bar. Bartender says, "Aren't you guys kinda expensive?"
You didn't say it had to be a good joke.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
Who asked for this?
The industry eagerness to bug and track everything is universal. Why? The first answer is always: money. The second, and most accurately stated: power. Knowing where everyone is, and what they are doing, is power. But that power is not for schmucks.
Pity we didn't have this universal eagerness to limit population growth, or control suburban land conversion, or to colonize free space with habitats. But power over others? No fucking limits.
Power, by the way, means Occupies are impossible to pull off. Protests. Contrary political movements, ultimately. Other words, any challenge to seated power is gonna be nearly impossible.
Hell, in England, they're already starting dossiers on kintergarteners. Just monitor what they read and do all their lives, and soon there won't be a population that even thinks of rebellion of any sort. Or could talk about it without systems monitoring and integrating the information for future suppression. And yes, I'm aware that that sounds "paranoid". But once again, I'm not predicting, I'm telling you what's already happened.
To take this back to the point of the article, there is no WAY that this eagerly sought supersaturated net of bugs - and that's what they are - will not be used for surveillance and control. I really don't need to know what is in my refrigerator that much.
I can already interact with things in the room. When I want the lamp to come on, I walk over and turn a little knob. When I want the TV to come on, I press a button on a remote. Behold! The future is now!
Proverbs 21:19
Soon you'll have to Google him.
I think the giveaway is this "all of that".
Please, Eric: tell us more about this "all of that". Also about the non-standard usage of "and", meaning "throw away the result of the first operator ("your permission" in this case) and use only the magic second operator "all of that".
google won't be happy until they have more data on all of us than the NSA
Mr Schmidt! Please go to Room 101 for your interrogation.
I've been in the tech world since the 80s and I'm not finding this vision of the future enticing at all. Now fully in middle age, I'm starting to regret the days and years of my life that have been wasted staring into a monitor or playing with the next gadget. I'm not convinced that having the internet seamlessly integrated into my life would be a desirable thing. I'm discovering that there's more pleasure and contentment in the reality that exists outside of the world of pervasive connectivity. I don't want to be constantly "interacting" with devices, nor do I want Mr. Schmid's company to have more opportunities to analyze my behavior and target me with more marketing messages.
Embrace the analog world.
Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
Whenever someone tries to predict the direction technology will take, they always miss the not-as-obvious-at-the-time revolution in technology that makes society take a sharp turn. In the 70's, a prediction wouldn't have included personal computers in everyone's home. In the 80's, it wouldn't have predicted the Internet. The 90's wouldn't have predicted the rise of smartphones or social media. Of course, all of these developments seem obvious in hindsight.
My guess is that something will come out that will completely change how we think of computers/Internet and all of these predictions will appear as idiotic as the ones in the 50's that predicted we'd have personal atomic power plants powering our appliances.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
or so
I chuckled :)
Hill points out that one of the times we actually do notice technology is when it breaks. He also has a rather clever blog, Revealing Errors , in which he and other contributors "reveal errors that reveal technologies" so as to learn how they affect our lives.
And the future of humanity will be to be Borgs, always connected to the global network, without individuality and everything public, people is not resisting this change enough, and not is not futile. Not a nice future.
Because once you pass the half way point, you realize you need to start eliminating the trivial and the bullshit big time, as there is little time left.
No, if I enter a room and it starts "reacting", then I'll trash it with a baseball bat. That's how future goes down.
The internet is nothing more than a tinder platform and a fucking netflix delivery system. Look at all the bullshit about net neutrality. All these ignorant idiots have no idea what they're supporting or why. They have no concept of an open internet external to the constraints of government. They just think "I want corporations to be able to deliver content to me, as a consumer of things, way faster!".
It's fucking destined to be a piece of shit, ultimately. The golden days of the internet are already a thing of the past.
Rooms full of stuff that yell "Eat Me!" and "Drink Me!".
But I doubt that you'll be shrinking from any of those.
And with your permission and all of that
Interesting attitude there.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
This is a meaningless post.
If the internet is just a collection of ip addresses, then of course people are not going to give a crap about the internet that connects themselves with their iphone connected multicolored light bulb or netflix streaming television. The real question is if humanity has become so vegetative that we allow the internet to become locked down to the point where internet access just consists of the top ten social media websites and consumer webpages like Amazon. Is the internet going to just be a balance of how much privacy advertisers are going to allow vs. how much content and resources consumers would be demanding in exchange for their lack of privacy?
The ways we connect to the internet have become very defined and limited. I don't know much about networking, but (help me here with the tech bit) haven't port commands been clamped down to limit the ability of people to connect to computers and things and install malware and viruses/worms? I remember having a Unix account once. I mostly connected to the server via PPP to pull down mail. My mail program was a bit messed up once, so I logged in and used telnet to connect to the mail server, and it let me read my mail with "Mail". My account was then deactivated and I was accused of being a spammer by the administrator. I guess nobody told me the rules had changed and that connections were now only allowed via PPP sessions and no log–in's were allowed anymore. It was a sad day.
while that may sound a little bleak, it's true. It's also true when you're in your 20's, you just don't realize it yet.
Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
"Imagine you walk into a room, and the room is dynamic. And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room." Interacting with things going on in a room? It's hard to imagine.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
In the future you will die.
Be seeing you...
My kids range in age from 5 to 9. This is already how they see the world.
Their first hint that the internet is a thing that you have to think about was when they got wifi devices and tried to use them in the car as we drove away from the house.
Before they made that realization, it was just something that things did. Part of the expected infrastructure of existence.
The internet of things is getting to be scary crazy. Here's what worries me. Once you put things like your door locks into the internet of things, you're allowing some outside agency to decide whether or not you can enter your home, or worse, leave it. Fail to pay a parking ticket? Get confined to your home. Your ex accuses you of something nasty? Get confined to your home. Fail to make your Visa payment on time? Get confined to your home.
This is an article from 1998. Scott McNealy liked to show off his Java ring at that time and talk about how it would be used to allow someone to walk into a hotel room and have sensors detect the person and their wishes such as music and mood lighting and it would also store your crypto keys on it. It will be interesting to see if people are read to wear tech as new devices enter the market.
http://www.javaworld.com/artic...
picture
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...
In fact, it has already.
Schmidt is an arrogant douche.
A guy I know fucked his wife when she was visiting Martha's Vineyard.
She needed some good dick, because she was tired of Schimdt
and his little tiny cock.
Mundane comments from famous or powerful people, sold as visionary. We've all had these thoughts on our way to work, or in the shower. No magazine will publish my predictions, but my mother thinks they're pretty cool, so...
"Spouses already fight about the thermostat; who's preference is "the house" going to pick?"
The one who named his dog "Sudo"
Control over our own residence, etc is to be given over to Google or whoever. Really? Could this be any more wrong. Wrong on so many levels and in so many ways that I need not explain them all. Common sense shows us what a CF this idea really is.
I don't want a smart home.
I don't want a smart car.
And with your permission and all of that,
What a joke...
As others have pointed out, "all of that" will be having this nonsense foisted on us without any real choice.
I don't want to have to pay for this, to monitor it, to have to constantly upgrade it, etc;
Look at the sad state of security with home routers, wifi, etc.
Do we want to have our oven, fridge and toilet be connected to the internet?
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Look Eric, the internet, like electricity, will fade into the back of people's minds and everyone takes it for granted. Until . . . it fails. When the electricity is out for only a couple of hours, you become keenly aware of how much you depend upon it.
Comcast pledges to keep the internet at the forefront of people's minds.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
The pole are setting up to reverse. the exact date is unknown but they are wandering (the poles, not your thoughts) at about 100 kilometers a year I believe and the movement is accelerating rapidly and noticeably. At that point your presence will be about your presence of mind and not at all about all that useless electronic crap.
Welcome to evolution 101, evolve or die trying.
Marshall McLuhan was talking about this stuff in the late 60s when talking about how we lose perception of our context. “We don't know who discovered water, but we know it wasn't the fish.” I highly recommend "Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man"
People have a hard time understanding the methodology of the probe v.s. the argument but if you can wrap your head around it, it is a breathtaking vision.
It even talks about online news feeds like Slashdot..again in the 60s.
There is another book called "The Laws of Media" that explains that book.
http://www.dailydot.com/politi...
Hers, always hers.
What a nightmare. Clear boundaries, please.
Google is Microsoft in "we want your life".
Does he mean the kind of "permission" Google has to rifle through my personal data in that my choices are to allow them or Apple to do so, or not have a smart phone?
i just threw up a little in my mouth.
And all the things in the room start attacking you! Or spamming you with ads. Or demand a ransom in Bitcoins before they let you leave.
(T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
It will display the temperature preferred by the woman, but control the air handler based on the man's preference. Because the man wrote the software for the thermostat.
At least that's how mine works.
See that "Preview" button?
Blather like this, and rather quixotic investments like SpaceX and a 90's style broadband satellite network suggests Google has a growth problem. It isn't surprising. Google is a gargantuan company. But even after all the rhetoric, they make money dishing out ads by spying on you. If you made money on Google stock in the last 10 years, good for you. The next 10 years won't be as heady.
It's really great that someone can get press for shooting rainbows out his behind (yes, you too, Elon).
The reality is that this is still science fiction-- and may forever be. If we were to make a genuine internet of things, the use amount of plastics, rare metals, and toxic batteries would need to be absolutely immense. Like, apocalyptically immense.
This fantasy world that Schmidt presents is one of extravagant waste and irrationally exuberant spending that it can only be done for one reason-- PR for new or continuing tech. He's probably just out pounding the drum for Android-based smartphones and their "potential" to be used as life-control devices.
you must be new here.
Apparently the writer of this article and the relayer never walked into a Starbuck's.
I laughed out loud when he said "Imagine everything is dynamic."
Hmm. Status quo for my life. I must not be in the same world as you.
Hahaha, you can just hear the disdain and scorn in his voice. He might as well have just said "and all of that other privacy bullshit"
Paint it all white and use no decoration at all and wear augmented reality glasses which put whatever you want everywhere obviously.
and taking quite some bullshit. Oh well, news at 11.
Good one, Google.
Yea in 60 years. Right now things can interact with you and do.
PS Targeted advertising is still creepy and blatant.
I'm sick of these big-headed tech companies that think they have the right to own the world in exchange for changing it.
If you want the Internet to become unnoticeable and fade into the background of life, get rid of all these goddamned centralised services, and the relationships of power and control that they create, and replace them with something which better maps onto the relationships that exist at small scale in real life. There's no way I'm ignoring the Internet if Google is party to literally everything I do. That would make it feel like there is a Google employee standing silently in the corner of every room, occasionally scribbling something down in a notepad, in the same way that carrying a phone makes it feel like you're being tailed at a distance by an employee of the phone network. I could only ignore the Internet if only the people who are explicitly present (physically or virtually) know what's going on.
Pervasive Networking will become like electricity and only be noticed when it is absent.
A lot of the things they are proposing I don't really need. I don't need my dishwasher or laundry machine to tweet me when they are done. Why? Because I run them in the middle of the night when the electricity is cheaper. I don't care when they finish. Besides if I did care they have this feature called a beep or chime. The Nest had a bit of attraction to me until I found out that all of the information was being sent to a central server. Surely processors are powerful enough that the predictions could be calculated on the thermostat itself. It's bad enough that I'm stuck with a smart meter. I don't need my habits being tracked by another organization. Besides my non-connected programmable thermostat is more than good enough.
I could see a smoke detector with some sort of thermal scanner that would only detect fires that would contact the fire department in emergencies being quite handy. But for the most part I see the Internet of things as doing stuff because we can do them and not because we need them.
All those devices requiring updates, acting flaky (bugs), and hackable. Nice - yeah, that's the future that I want. NOT.
asd
Google's. That is until the thermostat function is discontinued.
It should pick whoever prefers the cooler temperature, because the other person can button up and then both are comfortable.
In practice it will pick the woman's, even though that makes the guy less comfortable most of the time, because of the way interpersonal dynamics play out between most couples.
Ah, wouldn't it be wonderful to have AI Minds a la Iain M Banks to look after us humans and stop us from coming to harm through the stupid shit we do... Meanwhile, back in reality, we're looking at a world where our overlords are entities such as Eric Schmidt - a shuddering, sobering, depressing thought.
I'm glad to see that Google is taking the issue seriously.
I am continually amazed that every time Schmidt talks about the internet, he says something that is simultaneously very creepy and very scary.
Sorry, Schmidt, there is literally no way in hell that I'm going to allow all these devices in my home to talk to the internet. The risks are simply far too high, from corporate and governmental surveillance all the way through the risk of being hacked, and there is almost no benefit in exchange.
maybe for a billionaire it will fade but for the rest a
$100+ a month soon reminds me the Internet is still there, more proof that the rich live in their own bubble and have no idea how most people live
" you are interacting with the things going on in the room." In Socialist America the room interacts with YOU comrade.
Your right and this is why "Peeping Eric" has such a hardon about it. Look at all the data he can collect. I saw a video where Google is working on technology that will map the inside of a building. It will see all the furniture and people in the room. They say it is for dymanic gaming. They take photos of out homes from space and drive by in cars and take photos but that isn't good enough now they want to know what is going on inside your home. Just like the TVs that watch you back.
At work I was asked to do a security aduit on Android and Chrome. It was appaling the data Peeping Eric collects. I used to have a smart phone after seeing the data collected like my email from a PRIVATE server through its email app I went to a flip phone.
I really think we need a nerd war on this guy and gather and publish is personal data to the world. We should all refer to him by "Peeping Eric" after all he is the world's biggest Peeping Tom. Then see how he likes it.
Sorry Peeping Eric but your world of Internet Crap will not invade by private space. I will do everything to block you and feed you mis-information. You see that last gmail account I had well I hate to tell you but I am not a very weird 17 year old girl but Alice did that you down the mis-information highway.
Typed on a Acrer Cromebook running Ubuntu. Guess what it now runs twice as fast. Why? It not sending huge chunks of data back and forth to Google.
Its not just Peeping Eric either. was helping a friend load and app from CBS.com to watch tv shows from. It ask for premission to scan the contacts, scan the wireless netowrk for other devices and a ton of other access a video app would never need. You cannot watch show from Android without the app using the browser throws an error and says just the app download here. Yet on this now sanitized netbook I can go there and watch show with firefox. The app from A&E wants access to the friggin cameras! Who's is watching who here??
Peeping Eric if you want to watch me jack off the least you could do is come over and give me a reach around and a clean up afterwards.
Neal Asher has tapped into this type of idea with the Polity Universe he created. I specifically recommend the Agent Cormac series (Starting with Gridlinked)
I am continually amazed that every time Schmidt talks about the internet, he says something that is simultaneously very creepy and very scary.
I'm not amazed what else would you expect to come out of a pevert's mouth? He may have a ton of money but it doesn't change the fact he IS A PERVERT. Just like the guy looking in the women's bathroom and jacking off. Instead of a Peeping Tom we have a Peeping Eric.
You are right in the fact that EVERY time I read something he says it is VERY creepy and very scary.
Aren't they suppose to lock up perverts?
We should only refer to him as Peeping Eric from now on. Think about it. how much it would piss him off if every where he saw his name the word "Peeping" was connected to it. We can't attack his money but we can attack his pride and creds. We can expose him for the perverted sociopath he is.
http://www.nagaiah.com/google....