From the University of Washington:
University of Washington engineers have designed a new communication system that uses radio frequency signals as a power source and reuses existing Wi-Fi infrastructure to provide Internet connectivity to these devices. Called Wi-Fi backscatter, this technology is the first that can connect battery-free devices to Wi-Fi infrastructure.
"If Internet of Things devices are going to take off, we must provide connectivity to the potentially billions of battery-free devices that will be embedded in everyday objects," said Shyam Gollakota, a UW assistant professor of computer science and engineering. "We now have the ability to enable Wi-Fi connectivity for devices while consuming orders of magnitude less power than what Wi-Fi typically requires."
(Score: 3, Funny) by Subsentient on Wednesday August 06 2014, @04:52AM
Who here doesn't want to live in a world where my salt shaker broadcasts radio signals?
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 4, Funny) by Linatux on Wednesday August 06 2014, @05:03AM
or Google knowing I'm running low and serving ad's for Monster gold-plated salt?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday August 06 2014, @05:31AM
Exact same thought was going thru my mind.
There are plenty of ways you can harvest enough energy to send a packet or three, but why would we need that level of interaction just to know another milk carton hit the recycle bin?
In fact this whole internet of things seems to be something companies are tripping all over themselves to develop, but I can't see any buyers demanding any of this stuff.
There may be demand for this stuff in industry, but it isn't going to make anyone's life easier, and is more likely to choke full of security holes.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by lhsi on Wednesday August 06 2014, @07:26AM
There will probably be a market for it. There is apparently a market audience of people who are not only too lazy to cook something, but too lazy to decide from more than two choices of pizza; Push for Pizza [pushforpizza.com] [warning: autoplaying video] is an app that automatically finds your nearest pizza delivery company and presents two buttons for your choice of pizza.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday August 06 2014, @12:56PM
This seems like a business model that could be expanded into alcohol, illegal drugs, and escort services. Preferably all at the same time.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Wednesday August 06 2014, @04:20PM
"Tap screen anywhere for blackjack AND hookers"
(Score: 5, Funny) by nightsky30 on Wednesday August 06 2014, @12:41PM
If they cause tinfoil hats to broadcast, how will we be safe?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 07 2014, @02:19PM
Put a tinfoil hat on top of your tinfoil hat. Duh.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday August 06 2014, @05:51PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 06 2014, @05:56AM
It's because I own SmartyPants™ that suck out the signals...
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 06 2014, @08:27AM
But thanks to your SmartyPants™ Google will always know when you shit in your pants.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 06 2014, @12:43PM
Those poor pants know they've been shat in?! Their smartness is the bane of their existence...how awful!
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Wednesday August 06 2014, @04:29PM
This.
Anytime someone mentions Smart Objects, I instantly think of Marvin. But stuck in place.
How depressing would it be to be my milk container?
"Cold and dark"
"Cold and dark"
"Light! but not for me..."
"Cold and dark"
"Cold and dark"
"Light! yay, I get to serve someone! Now Half-Full!"
"Cold and dark"
"Cold and dark"
"Yay, I get to serve someone! Now 90% empty, and starting to smell old"
"Cold and dark"
"Light! Please don't finish me. yes, you want a yoghourt. Still 10% FULL"
"Cold and dark"
"Light! Please, you want cream! You really want cream! Don't you finish me! Noooo! I'm empty! Someone help! Not the trash! I belong in the recycle biiiiiiiiiiin..."
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Wednesday August 06 2014, @06:09AM
"If Internet of Things devices are going to take off, we must provide connectivity to the potentially billions of battery-free devices that will be embedded in everyday objects"
Which sounds like a great argument to avoid those battery-free devices. Why, exactly, do we want this "Internet of Things"?
Anyway, power. They essentially manage a ping over a distance of two meters. The antenna of a tag is tiny, and sensitive to particular frequencies. They don't say, but you can bet that they broadcast at the "right" frequency" using a directional antenna focused on the tag. This is nothing new, RFID readers have been around for ages that can do exactly that. Sitting in an average office, or walking down an average street, there just isn't very much power to harvest, and it's all over the RF spectrum.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Wednesday August 06 2014, @06:36AM
RF is in fact everywhere, and some of it is in inconvenient RF bands, but you don't need any specific frequency when you just want to harvest energy to drive a micro transmitter. If you are trying to get an RFID chip to re-radiate, or modulate the the static re-radiator, (both methods have been used), you have to tune your RF.
But to simply gather enough RF to generate a small voltage, almost any RF will do. TV, Radio, even the wifi access point you are trying to communicate with radiates energy everywhere. You gather what you can, charge a capacitor, and you have enough over time to generate a few packets.
Look up energy harvesting or energy scavenging:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_harvesting [wikipedia.org]
http://rfenergyharvesting.com/ [rfenergyharvesting.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Horse With Stripes on Wednesday August 06 2014, @07:53AM
(Score: 1) by Adamsjas on Wednesday August 06 2014, @08:09AM
That seems to be what the tin foil hatters think, but that is a long way to go to get
more spying info to sell more things to people who have just spent all their money on
useless internet of things gear. Those guys already extract all the money they are going to
get anyway. Why build something bigger and more expensive than the advertising networks they already have?
I think frojack is right for once, that industry wants it, but people don't and people have trouble even thinking up more than 5 things this would be good for.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Horse With Stripes on Wednesday August 06 2014, @10:35AM
I don't wear a tin foil hat. But I do understand advertising, marketing and the end goal of getting that last dollar so the competition can't. And that is what this is about.
If you or I have finite financial resources, and we are unable to spend more than we already do, then the competition in the market is to get your dollar first. Why are there back to school sales in mid July? Why edge Black Friday up to Thanksgiving ... and then a few hours more? To get the consumers' limited dollars before the competition does. By 2020 you'll see Black Friday moved up before Thanksgiving, maybe even up to the preceding weekend.
So if you or I are already tapped out of money the advertisers want the first shot at your next dollar.
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Wednesday August 06 2014, @09:17AM
So it's what the smartphones were a couple of years ago.
And then, tablets. At least they had the decency to say that "they didn't know what it's good for, but they'd let us know".
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 06 2014, @10:20AM
No more password entry because your computer recognizes your pants. ;-)
(Score: 2) by Ryuugami on Wednesday August 06 2014, @01:28PM
For that, you first have to be wearing pants.
If a shit storm's on the horizon, it's good to know far enough ahead you can at least bring along an umbrella. - D.Weber
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday August 06 2014, @04:33PM
> No more password entry because your computer recognizes your pants. ;-)
>For that, you first have to be wearing pants.
No more password entry because your computer recognizes your paRts.
(Score: 1) by MajorTom on Wednesday August 06 2014, @07:03PM
...next your girlfriend/wife will be uploading Trojan into your pants so that she gets a text if you get aroused looking at other woman.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday August 06 2014, @08:41PM
Still better than keeping the other girls away with a Virus.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by RaffArundel on Wednesday August 06 2014, @12:46PM
For the same reason we, the brilliant and talented of Soylent, want any technology - to make our lives better. Technology is a tool, it can make our lives more convenient, more rewarding/entertained, make us better at doing something...
Now your actual question isn't why we want it, but who controls it. To extend the "tech as tool" to a hammer analogy - you want to be at the handle not the head when a hammer is in operation. Embedding this in everyday objects - well I'm good letting the market sort that out. Stupid ideas won't sell. Home automation - good (IMO), my pantry/fridge tracking when I am low on something - okay (assuming the data doesn't leave my control), toilet paper roll phoning home its status (BAD), but all of that should be my decision.
So, I "want" IoT standards so I can pick what devices I want, security standards I want, and integrate them into my network the way I want. I would prefer not to do that over 3 different protocols, 10 different API's and a horrible mismash of WEP/WPA/BT secured access points bridged to coax on one side of the house and CAT5 on the other. So, continued research (and interest) makes it more likely I will get what I want.
I'm not sure how much no-power devices would actually help the overall ecosystem, but perhaps I could see it used as "super-sleep" mode. The device, while normally powered, can draw zero current until the "no-power" switch is flipped using this technique.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 06 2014, @03:19PM
Did you take a course in politician speech? :-)
Of course the question actually means: How, exactly, would the internet of things make our lives better?
(Score: 2) by RaffArundel on Friday August 08 2014, @12:55PM
That must have been why someone hit me with an "Overrated" mod. I'm not going to put words in anyone's mouth, but when I see "why do we need X technology?" it often actually means - "I have no need for it so no one does!" The line was a firmly tongue-in-cheek reminder that it is a tool and if nothing else somebody somewhere will find a use for it.
The IoT answer for me is: easy and secure automation and monitoring. Assuming you had control (covered in my original post) and not a third-party, life would be more convenient. If you were to check my post history here you would find that I am very interested in making home automation my next major project around the house, so options like this provide me one more tool in the toolbox. Would I use it - no idea, but I do not dismiss it. I can see this specific technology providing me with switches/devices that have no external power requirement, saving me money (on electricity since the device doesn't need a standby/sleep mode drawing current) and possibly provide easier installation (may not need to run power and data to everything).