Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:54AM   Printer-friendly
from the he-should-demonstrate-by-personal-example dept.

Ars Technica has a good write up on James Clapper's (the Director of National Intelligence) public comments about the Internet of Things (IoT), and how they may be used.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/02/us-intelligence-chief-says-iot-climate-change-add-to-global-instability/

Considering that many IoT devices are intended for in-the-home devices, will citizens push back against this type of deeply intrusive monitoring?

Will people reject convenience that has the feature to be monitored in real time across many toys, products, and "smart" devices? How long will the data be retained, and can any of the collection be turned off?

What if it becomes a social construct in that tampering with an IoT device because it may contain or transmit something embarassing becomes tantamount to concealing evidence? Or if can cause an obstruction of justice if you disable the reporting functionality by blocking DNS or any other means of keeping the traffic inside the home?

What will the public let the government do with IoT data to foster better protection of civilian freedom from terror and tyranny?


[Update: James Clapper is the Director of National Intelligence (not the US FBI chief). -Ed.]

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:05AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:05AM (#302654)

    Just set up an extra wireless access device - using the best encryption - that doesn't connect to anything except your IoT devices.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by physicsmajor on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:52PM

      by physicsmajor (1471) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:52PM (#302721)

      Or - and I know this might be shocking - you could simply not connect them to any network, at all.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @06:23PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @06:23PM (#302852)

        You could also not buy garbage like that to begin with.

      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by djh2400 on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:40PM

        by djh2400 (725) on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:40PM (#302990)

        I've actually been wondering about this. Can IoT devices be trusted to *not* seek out any open WiFi connection and connect from there?

        What I mean is, say you flawlessly lock down your network with outgoing firewall and whatnot. Then, say your next-door neighbor has an open WiFi — even for just a short time. Couldn't the IoT devices just happily connect to that and phone home from there? Is there anything stopping them? Sure, maybe you can specify the network you want it connecting to, but can they be trusted to connect only as specified, especially considering Clapper's comments?

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by Marand on Friday February 12 2016, @12:42AM

          by Marand (1081) on Friday February 12 2016, @12:42AM (#303036) Journal

          I've actually been wondering about this. Can IoT devices be trusted to *not* seek out any open WiFi connection and connect from there?

          They can if you wrap your house in tin foil :)

          Jokes aside, there are paints that are made to do the same thing. Could serve dual purpose, keeping outsiders from accessing your wifi and keep your devices from accessing other wifi. Might be worth it just to block interference from other APs in your home...

        • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday February 12 2016, @07:59AM

          by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Friday February 12 2016, @07:59AM (#303126)

          You can be more confident in it if it runs 100% Free Software. If it doesn't respect your freedoms, it cannot even be slightly trusted and isn't worth using.

  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:17AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:17AM (#302660) Journal

    What if it becomes a social construct in that tampering with an IoT device because it may contain or transmit something embarassing becomes tantamount to concealing evidence?

    What if I'm building my own devices, which I can control?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:32AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:32AM (#302668)

      What if I'm building my own devices, which I can control?

      That looks like a bomb-making component! *blam* *blam*

      • (Score: 2) by nukkel on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:56PM

        by nukkel (168) on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:56PM (#302772)

        But it was a clock ...

        • (Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday February 11 2016, @09:55PM

          by edIII (791) on Thursday February 11 2016, @09:55PM (#302977)

          It *is* a bomb-making component! *blam* *blam* *blam*

          --
          Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
          • (Score: 3, Funny) by linkdude64 on Friday February 12 2016, @07:04AM

            by linkdude64 (5482) on Friday February 12 2016, @07:04AM (#303115)

            *blam* *blam* *blam* It *is* a bomb-making component!

            ftfy

            (Much like the classic "*blam blam blam* FREEZE!" observing the Official Law Enforcement Order of Operations is critical!)

    • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:10PM

      by linkdude64 (5482) on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:10PM (#302751)

      "I don't need to support the Merchant. I am a Free, Intelligent, Creative inventor who can make my own way."

      Anti-American Communist detected.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday February 11 2016, @08:20PM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 11 2016, @08:20PM (#302937) Journal

        "I don't need to support the Merchant. I am a Free, Intelligent, Creative inventor who can make my own way."

        Add to this the "American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN CHINA" except those made in China are much cheaper than those one can buy locally....

        Anti-American Communist detected.

        ... and you can detect a Globalized Anti-American Communist (... or is it called Internationalized?)

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 1) by Demose on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:57AM

    by Demose (6067) on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:57AM (#302677)

    -Smart bulb: Are proximity sensors really that unreliable?
    -Smart fridge: A smartphone app that tracks what you bought and when it will go bad doesn't need an internet connection.
    Not a comprehensive list, I don't look into things like this often. Am I missing some revolutionary use case that is worth enabling yet more companies to stalk me?

    • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:14PM

      by Gravis (4596) on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:14PM (#302682)

      there are plenty of networked devices:
      - Network Router
      - Computer
      - Printer
      - Car
      - Video Game Console
      - Cellular Telephone
      - Television
      - Refrigerator
      - Watch
      - Media Player
      - Light Bulbs
      - Thermostat
      - Coffee Maker
      - Electric Toothbrush
      - Barbie Doll

      • (Score: 1) by Demose on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:59PM

        by Demose (6067) on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:59PM (#302695)

        -Network Router: That's its sole purpose.
        -Computer: Existed before networking, Significantly enhanced by it.
        -Printer: You're going to need to go to the location of the paper anyway.
        -Car: I'm not a big fan of entertainment systems distracting drivers.
        -Video game console: Someone else fill in for me on this one? I'm tend to play solo.
        -Cellular Telephone: Fair enough.
        -Television: Putting the computer in the Television will significantly cut its lifespan (Planned obsolescence)
        -Refrigerator:I did in fact mention the refrigerator.
        -Watch: The only reason I want a smart watch is because I'm a Fallout fan.
        -Media Player: I seed this one to you.
        -Light Bulbs: Another one I mentioned.
        -Thermostat: I see the potential, and the only downside I can see is someone knowing when you're going to be home. There aren't exactly a lot of door to door salesmen anymore.
        -Coffee Maker: How would an internet connection improve this?
        -Electric Toothbrush: An app to shame you on Facebook if you busy and forget to brush?
        -Barbie Doll: This seams dangerous.

        • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:08PM

          by maxwell demon (1608) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:08PM (#302702) Journal

          -Thermostat: I see the potential, and the only downside I can see is someone knowing when you're going to be home. There aren't exactly a lot of door to door salesmen anymore.

          Well, the scary ones are those who are interested in when you are not at home.

          And no, I do not see the potential. A closed system where all the data stays inside your local network would be completely sufficient. If anything, have a central unit connected to the internet, which allows you to remotely set one of several locally programmed profiles.

          Data should be kept as local as possible.

          --
          The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
          • (Score: 1) by Demose on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:14PM

            by Demose (6067) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:14PM (#302704)

            I was thinking ask for your location from your phone (already connected to a network) and turn the heat up to more tolerable temperatures when you get close. Could save a bit on your electric bill.

            • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:30PM

              by maxwell demon (1608) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:30PM (#302712) Journal

              Err, you don't know for yourself when you're going home, so you can manually ramp up the heating? And you really need your heating ramped up when you're at your neighbour's place for an extended time?

              Anyway, I guess if you want to reduce your heating bill, better heat insulation would be much more effective anyway. ;-)

              --
              The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:48PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:48PM (#302718)

                I've found it best to just leave the heat at the same setting 24/7: there was no significant savings from having it fluctuate during the day/night cycle, only annoyance when you need to go to the bathroom in the middle of the night. If we weren't going away for more than a day or two there was no advantage to lowering the heat setting. The air conditioning in summer was the only time where the programmable was actually saving money every day.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:59PM

        by maxwell demon (1608) on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:59PM (#302696) Journal

        - Network Router

        Sure, that by definition is networked.

        - Computer

        Not necessarily, although of course today most are. And I agree, having your computer connect to the internet is quite useful.

        - Printer

        The majority of home printers are still not networked. Anyway, it should be easy to block that from the internet on your router. Printers on the local LAN are useful. Printers on the internet aren't.

        - Car

        As of now, most cars are still not networked. And frankly, I don't see a need for them to be networked.

        - Video Game Console

        Only needs to be networked if you play online games (or games with DRM that requires internet connection). I'm not into game consoles, so I can't tell how relevant that is.

        - Cellular Telephone

        Yeah sure, that's the other device that only makes sense when networked.

        - Television

        Only if you feel the need to buy a "smart" TV. I don't.

        - Refrigerator

        He didn't forget that. He mentioned it explicitly.

        - Watch

        The vast majority of watches are still not connected. And most are only working together with a smartphone anyway, so they don't really add much to the collectable data. Most people can live witzhout a smart watch (and quite a few without a watch at all, actually).

        - Media Player

        My MP3 player certainly doesn't connect to the internet. Nor does my DVD player. Or my tuner. Obviously there's no need for them to connect to the internet.

        - Light Bulbs

        Again, he explicitly mentioned those.

        - Thermostat

        No need to have them connected to the internet either.

        - Coffee Maker

        Dito.

        - Electric Toothbrush

        Dito.

        - Barbie Doll

        Well, IMHO there's no need for that even if not networked ;-) But then, there's certainly no need to have it networked.

        But then, maybe the point of the parent post was completely lost on you. It wasn't about internet-enabled things the industry happens to produce, but about internet-connected things that are actually useful enough to justify that connection. And from your long list, only few survive that filter:

        • Network routers
        • Computers
        • Cell phones
        • Possibly game consoles
        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
        • (Score: 1) by Demose on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:02PM

          by Demose (6067) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:02PM (#302698)

          I've been upstaged, not only did you make a similar comment to mine in a better quality, you kept the original thread of my logic when I personally lost it. *applause*

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:35PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:35PM (#302788)

          *media player

          I think this one belongs on your 'useful' list. A lot of media is available online (pandora, amazon, youtube, google play, netflix...). Having a media player connected to the internet does make sense. I can understand choosing not to use one or just using local media, but an internet connection can greatly expand a media player's choices.

          • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:54PM

            by maxwell demon (1608) on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:54PM (#302800) Journal

            I don't know. I play online media using my computer, and I'm happy with it.

            --
            The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
        • (Score: 2) by WillR on Thursday February 11 2016, @06:11PM

          by WillR (2012) on Thursday February 11 2016, @06:11PM (#302843)

          Only if you feel the need to buy a "smart" TV. I don't.

          "Smart" is already ubiquitous on high-end TVs, and it's going to on the cheapo Walmart specials in a few years.

          Sure, you can live without TV entirely after your current dumb screen breaks... but most people aren't going to.

        • (Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:39PM

          by edIII (791) on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:39PM (#302989)

          First off, my biggest problem is not having something connected to the Internet. It's having something connected to the Internet, with binaries/blobs that are likely proprietary that have not been vetted by the community (if that ever worked anyways), that may communicate in plain text, and then likewise share information with hostile 3rd parties (every corporation in existence is a hostile 3rd party).

          Basically the Internet is pretty cool man... except the rest of you are on it too. Hence the problem; We can't have nice things because assholes are everywhere.

          - Printer

          That depends on how much you like paper and reading things printed. I find paper and pen much more useful and easier to use than a tablet. Tablets just aren't there yet for ease of use, and certainly not big enough for me yet. Too damn tiny.

          WAN connected printers are extraordinarily useful in business use cases. It's nice being able to print something to a branch office in Chicago, from California, without having to actually email anything. Moreover, it's pretty useful in general to have a bunch of local networks routed together with secured external access. Printers are part of that usefulness. I can print something to home to read later, archive it, etc.

          - Car

          These are *desperate* to be networked together. Just recently I recall an article about traffic and how it can be caused by the simplest of ripples from a single driver braking on the highway. Humans SUCK at driving, or specifically, many humans SUCK at driving. Certain cities in China are practically inhuman with their hive capabilities. I'm stuck in the US with a bunch of stupid assholes comparatively.

          Cars benefit to an insane degree from networking WRT safety and speed when they are are traveling in close quarters (any road). Again, the problem is not that they are networked, is that we can't trust each other with the information and capabilities.

          - Video Game Console

          I'm right there with you. I refuse to have a video game console that is owned by Microsoft or Sony, with them constantly taking advantage of my hospitality by shitting on me in my home. That happens anytime they dare to tell me I can't make or play with backup copies, that I need to be connected to play anything, play advertisements and rape me for my demographic information.

          That being said, most people seem to want to play video games together, and don't go for the solo dungeon grinds I grew up with. I like playing with other people occasionally, but the days of private game servers are over. Your only choice is to give up completely and become Sony or Microsoft's information/economic slaves if you want to play with other people. I take it both of us just choose not to play? I know my last game played with others was Duke Nukem across a private VPN network. That was some time ago....

          - Television

          All Televisions are effectively networked. Whether its the TV, or set-top cable box, there is plenty of information being exchanged on that network. Traditional TVs are a dying industry and technology. Increasingly, especially with myself, the Television is a Internet only device. It doesn't even work without the Internet, or what it leaves me with, is access to local media servers to play existing stored content. In fact, all the Televisions that I own are exclusively used to connect to networked devices like my computer, Western Digital Live, etc. I haven't had a set-top cable box in operation for over 10 years now.

          Maybe right now you can consider certain instances of it to not be on the Internet proper, but it's certainly networked by any definition.

          - Refrigerator

          Again, I can't see this for myself, but I can imagine a couple of use cases already. While I wouldn't invite Amazon into my home, I would invite a refrigerator that was aware of the few things I need to still get from the store on a regular occasion. Would be awesome to have a RSS feed service from my fridge that I could possibly share with a local grocer. He/She would already know what I wanted before I came to the store to pick it up.

          The only thing wrong with the fridge on the Internet, is again, who might have access to it.

          - Watch

          Do they still exist? I haven't worn one now for a few years. I suspect they've fallen out of both style and utility. That being said, I want my cellphone to morph back into my watch. Much easier to carry around, and easier to quickly access for information.

          - Media Player

          Obviously no need? Speak for yourself :)

          I might not always have access to my home, but in most cases I have access to my data center. What's wrong with having your own private 500GB music repository available for streaming to your devices?

          - Lightbulbs

          Plenty of use cases for the private LAN, but I do have a hard time figuring out why I would need to secure purely remote access to light bulbs.

          - Thermostat

          Hugely useful to have on the Internet, but not for the consumer. In Nevada they already use a separate communications channel to control opted-in thermostats during the day. Helps with preventing brown-outs by letting the power company actually control some aspects of consumer power usage. Controversial to be sure.

          - Barbie Doll

          You're not a little girl are you? A Barbie Doll that could speak back to the little girl with Siri like AI would be huge. A Barbie Doll that knew where your child was, could actually tell the child you were looking for them?

          No, you need to be more imaginative. There are use cases for almost everything you listed, but the question really is can then networks be secured, can the information be secured, and basically, can we secure anything for one fucking second?

          Out of all the use cases I listed, the biggest problem is people knowing things we didn't want them to know. That's not a problem with how we use the technology, but a problem with our own cultures and behaviors.

          In other words, everything you can see in Star Trek is part of the IoT. Everybody you see in Star Trek is mature enough to handle it.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @03:11AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @03:11AM (#303065)

            These are *desperate* to be networked together. Just recently I recall an article about traffic and how it can be caused by the simplest of ripples from a single driver braking on the highway. Humans SUCK at driving, or specifically, many humans SUCK at driving. Certain cities in China are practically inhuman with their hive capabilities. I'm stuck in the US with a bunch of stupid assholes comparatively.

            Cars benefit to an insane degree from networking WRT safety and speed when they are are traveling in close quarters (any road). Again, the problem is not that they are networked, is that we can't trust each other with the information and capabilities.

            There are too many privacy issues with networked cars. All calculations should be done locally. Relying on a network is foolish.

            You're not a little girl are you? A Barbie Doll that could speak back to the little girl with Siri like AI would be huge. A Barbie Doll that knew where your child was, could actually tell the child you were looking for them?

            Something like this already exists, and it's a privacy nightmare. It sends voice data back into The Cloud, where the company is able to make use of it.

            • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday February 12 2016, @04:07AM

              by edIII (791) on Friday February 12 2016, @04:07AM (#303080)

              Relying on a network is foolish.

              Who's more foolish? The fool, or the fool that follows them? Hint: Neither of them can figure that out without communicating.

              In order to reap the benefits, nearly all cars (for at least 20 miles I think) need to be able to communicate. The more communication you have, the better that stream of traffic can be manipulated and guided without slowing down.

              The Internet is probably not needed, but ad-hoc wireless capabilities most certainly are. I'm not saying there aren't serious issues to discuss, especially concerning the privacy and government abuse, but we're just not getting the jobs done without the assistance of computers and advanced algorithms.

              So it's either smart vehicles that can drive for us, or 100 billion immediately spent on a Interstate Highways 2! The Widening.

              As for the Barbie Doll, I already prefaced my whole comment with the lamentation that the Internet is full of untrustworthy assholes. Yes, that doll is probably really nice for that little girl. Unfortunately, we have some true pieces of shit alive on this planet that we need to worry if they have Internet access to our children. Which also includes worrying about sociopathic executives that don't give two shits about your little girl and her well being.

              Again, the use cases exist and are reasonable. Humanity exists, and is unreasonable. Therefore we can't have nice things.

              --
              Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @07:53AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @07:53AM (#303123)

                Who's more foolish? The fool, or the fool that follows them? Hint: Neither of them can figure that out without communicating.

                As a human being, I can use my senses to avoid crashing into other cars. I don't need to be part of a network. If a car cannot do that or something similar, then it is unfit to be on the road. You can't trust the other cars to communicate truthfully.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:15PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:15PM (#302683)

      Am I missing some revolutionary use case that is worth enabling yet more companies to stalk me?

      Well, it's not worth it to you (or any of us, really) but it is worth it to <insert name of large data tracking mega corporation here> and/or <insert name of large unregulated and out of control government agency here>. It all depends on which side of the data/evidence and tracking you're on.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:17PM

      by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:17PM (#302684)

      They're useful for making your entire house spy on you for corporations and the government. Any other 'benefits' people may get out of the IoT do not outweigh the negatives of being spied on and having to use software that does not respect your freedoms. Oh, and let's not forget that these proprietary software companies don't care one bit about your security, so you'll also have criminal hackers to worry about. There are many benefits to the IoT, but not many benefits for the actual users

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:50PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:50PM (#302796)

      You are looking at IoT thru the lens of a household consumer.

      Look at thru the lens of a guy who has to pay someone 100 bucks an hour and turn off 10000 customers just to go read something off a panel and to tell if some tank is low or not or the voltage on some line is wrong. With an IoT device I can have the guy show up with the right part if needed. Instead of standing around for 4 hours for someone to find the right part. Then I can use him on another site that does need work instead of writing down numbers and calling them back in to tell me that site is fine.

      IoT in the home is pretty non starter. It is just home automation re-wrapped up with a new name. It will fail for the same reasons it always does. There will be some standouts but mostly failure. They even added a new reasons not to own it, privacy concerns, and monthly fees.

      IoT in the industrial sector though? Doing very well. I know of companies that save millions of dollars a year just because of IoT. Not even very sophisticated uses of it either and I have seen some pretty wild ideas and projects in this area.

      • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday February 12 2016, @03:57AM

        by edIII (791) on Friday February 12 2016, @03:57AM (#303075)

        I haven't heard of MRTG, RRD, SNMP, and proprietary APIs referred to as IoT, but okay ;)

        Yeah, you're pointing out that network management in the industrial sector is alive, well, and evolving. That does include CPE equipment.

        What I do like though is that you've pointed it out. All of this IoT bullshit is just industrial management technology applied to consumer devices to effectively turn all of them into CPE, even though the consumer doesn't understand it like that, and may not agree to it.

        However, in the consumer use cases, it's not about saving money but finding new revenue streams instead. Google and Facebook prove beyond any doubt about the value of your data. Hence, every CEO with billionaire ambitions is trying to figure out how to create data based revenue streams from current operations.

        Perhaps *that's* why a refrigerator needs to be networked.... it's not contributing to the bottom line after the point of sale!

        --
        Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 1) by isj on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:10PM

      by isj (5249) on Thursday February 11 2016, @10:10PM (#302981) Homepage

      Smart bulbs: I have seen a few bulbs with built-in proximity/motion detection.They work mostly ok.
      What most people don't realize is that they don't need a smart bulb. They need a dumb bulb that can be controlled remotely. When combined with sensors and remote switches and programmable logic it opens up new possibilities:
        - scheduled on/off that takes holidays into account
        - motion-triggered light, which only goes up to20% brightness in the night
        - outside light 17-22, which only turns on when it is actually dark (using light sensor and/or almanac)
        - dynamic light level, so when you at your computer desk it ensures that there are X lumens, which would take into account in influx of sunlight
      The point is that when a simple light becomes remotely controllable you can do something you couldn't do before.

      Now imagine what you can do with remotely controllable:
          - skylight (use it for temperature control when it is not raining and the outside temperature is suitable)
          - thermostat (take occupancy, expected arrival-from-work time, and humidity into account).
          - dishwasher (start it when you're away)
          - washing machine (start it when electricity is cheap and the noise won't annoy you)
          - growth lamps in your greenhouse (some plans grow best in a narrow range of lumens)
          - window blinds (close them when the sunlight gets to strong, including the reflection from another building)
          - valve controller on a sprinkler system (water the garden when the earth moisture gets too low and it is night)
          - air duct vents in a house with central heating/cooling (close them in unoccupied rooms)

      None them are particularly fancy but will save you time and annoyance (and sometimes money). Neither are they particularly intrusive.

      Don't get me wrong - traditional "dumb" devices are useful and in many situations that is all that is needed.
      But when you start considering smarter devices, such as the light-with-proximity-sensor you should consider that you are buying a device with a fixed set of features and you may want more that such a device cannot possibly do on its own.

      I'm working on, uhm, building automation and to some extent smart devices. We use a colleague’s parents as guinea-pigs for a simple setup. Just remotely controllable sockets/outlets and remote switches. It turns out that they find it really useful to be able to switch off all the lights in the living room (several floor lamps, standard light and christmas decorations) with the press of a single button. Why? They are getting old and don't like to bend down to switch things off. We didn't foresee that.

      Now for the internet-connected fridge, I'm not convinced it would be useful. Sure, I can see busy families wanting to check remotely if they are all out of milk, but I'm not sure if the convenience outweighs the cost.

      I don't like the term "IoT". It is mostly a buzzword.

      • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday February 12 2016, @10:27AM

        by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 12 2016, @10:27AM (#303142) Journal

        A single Raspberry Pi can do all of this for a home and still have processing power to spare.

        • (Score: 1) by isj on Friday February 12 2016, @05:31PM

          by isj (5249) on Friday February 12 2016, @05:31PM (#303318) Homepage

          Yes, it doesn't require a lot for processor power.

          I suspect the reason why it hasn't caught on more in the consumer market yet is that there are two types of people:
          1: the geek who can see the benefits makes it himself. When the house is sold the new owner rips out that Rube Goldberg machine.
          2: the normal consumer cannot see the benefit and won't buy it, and because they won't buy it they won't see the benefits.

          It doesn't help that IoT is hyped with ridiculous examples such as internet-enabled fridges, thermostats with facebook support, or tweet-triggered light bulbs. Those are solutions looking for a problem to solve.

  • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:58AM

    by Gravis (4596) on Thursday February 11 2016, @11:58AM (#302678)

    what if your questions are paranoid bullshit and you need to get your meds adjusted?! ಠ_ಠ

    • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:24PM

      by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:24PM (#302687)

      Yes, because we've never seen corporations or the government spy on or abuse people before. Neither businesses nor the government would ever exploit a technology in order to spy on you. Mass surveillance, Stringrays, DRM, backdoors, rootkits, and other such things are mere paranoid fantasies that never happen in the real world.

      Just Trust these proprietary devices to act in your best interests. What could possibly go wrong?

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:42PM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:42PM (#302691) Journal

        Just Trust these proprietary devices to act in your best interests

        Only if they are going to give them to me free, you know, like a gmail or FB account.

        (grin)

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 2) by ticho on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:07PM

          by ticho (89) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:07PM (#302701) Homepage Journal

          Really? That's when I would trust such devices the least.

          • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday February 11 2016, @08:21PM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 11 2016, @08:21PM (#302939) Journal

            Really?

            No.

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:04PM

        by Gravis (4596) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:04PM (#302699)

        you seemed to have missed the "what if..." prompt.

        What if it becomes a social construct in that tampering with an IoT device because it may contain or transmit something embarassing becomes tantamount to concealing evidence? Or if can cause an obstruction of justice if you disable the reporting functionality by blocking DNS or any other means of keeping the traffic inside the home?

        • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:54PM

          by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:54PM (#302771)

          you seemed to have missed the "what if..." prompt.

           
          That does happen a lot when you start your sentence in the subject line :/.

          --
          "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
    • (Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:35PM

      by Hyperturtle (2824) on Thursday February 11 2016, @01:35PM (#302713)

      Considering the "betteridge law of headlines" is often more accurate than not, I had thought that most people would consider the questions posed to be on the side of unrealistic -- as unrealistic as Snowden's accusations, or Trump's mannerisms.

      The latter two examples have proven to be mostly true despite how unrealistic they are, and as such, I had hoped to have a discussion. This is a message forum.

      If I didn't ask questions to prompt discussion, I'd be better off writing just the facts as journalist somewhere.

      In any event, I was hoping that there would be more meat to the responses of people like yourself.

      Can you explain why you're not concerned? I can go off to the loony bin and leave you alone, most certainly -- but do me the favor and let me know why you believe that with several examples of bad security practice by children's toy vendors, by smart tv vendors, and by smart appliance vendors, that you should view this all as paranoid? Or is it only paranoid if the same accusations are aimed at a government that had an official come out and bluntly say that they are looking into ways to monitor those very things?

      I'd at least wonder what my toys and appliances are doing.

      It's not enough to think "oh I will disable wifi on it" if I wanted to disable the ability for these things to speak.

      There is power line networking
      there is the "smart grid"
      There's syncing with local appliances (like an onhub sort of thing) that doesn't allow for granular control
      There's ISP related voip and security systems that send audio and video over the internet
      Baby monitors and even search engines for people to watch video streams of camersa online that were not secured properly by the professionals and regular people that installed them

      Why is it paranoid to think that this data won't be tapped by some other party--anyone besides the owner and service provider--for their gain? And wouldn't you want to take basic efforts to stop it? Would you call me paranoid if I said eastern european hackers were exploiting these things, or low paid chinese workers were found to be accepting bribes to load malware onto many of these devices on the assembly line; or would you shrug and say that it's a cost of doing business and that in Communist China, low prices cost you!

      Please realize that the questions could have gone wildly over the top if I exercised no restraint. To generate conversation here... a discussion of academics doesn't always get people to partcipate, but if that's what most people want, I can certainly ask academic questions.

      • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday February 11 2016, @09:18PM

        by Gravis (4596) on Thursday February 11 2016, @09:18PM (#302965)

        Can you explain why you're not concerned?

        because these concerns don't even hold up for regular computers.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @07:56AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @07:56AM (#303125)

          You may want to check your sources on that one bub.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @02:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @02:36PM (#302732)

      what if you had seen that his name is "HYPERturtle"?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:10PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @04:10PM (#302781)

      You are an idiot, if you think corporations and law enforcement and other law breakers will just let all these IOT devices to sit there just being helpful to people. It's a huge source of data. Even though i have no idea what that data is useful for, because i'm not a twisted asshole.

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:49PM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday February 11 2016, @12:49PM (#302693) Journal

    I would submit this but we are probably starting to get crypto fatigue:

    New Survey Suggests U.S. Encryption Ban Would Just Send Market Overseas [theintercept.com]

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by looorg on Thursday February 11 2016, @02:11PM

    by looorg (578) on Thursday February 11 2016, @02:11PM (#302724)

    One would think that from a consumer point of view this would be the kiss of death all things IOT, but I doubt it will change anything. As noted people only seem to care about being spied upon when they write about Snowden and not when they login to Facebook to cry about it, just as they won't care about that their future refrigerator (or other appliance) is, potentially, spying on them to. After all it's "good" spying and it's doing it for your benefit.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:50PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 11 2016, @03:50PM (#302763)

    Those who use IOT stuff may deserve to have their activities monitored? And hopefully evolution will kill them off?

  • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Thursday February 11 2016, @06:28PM

    by shortscreen (2252) on Thursday February 11 2016, @06:28PM (#302855) Journal

    Clapper is not the 'FBI Chief' (that would be James Comey), he is the director of national intelligence.

    • (Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday February 11 2016, @08:13PM

      by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 11 2016, @08:13PM (#302933) Journal

      Clapper is not the 'FBI Chief' (that would be James Comey), he is the director of national intelligence.

      Yes, yes, he is. Updated the story accordingly. Thanks for the correction!

      --
      Wit is intellect, dancing.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @04:39AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 12 2016, @04:39AM (#303086)

    Yeah, he sounds like a totally reliable dude!