After watching “The Great Hack” on Netflix I am appalled by the absence of any moral compass at Cambridge Analytica, which transformed Big Data into a political weapon. Other disturbing examples are Uber’s former corporate culture and Facebook’s collusion with CA in abusing our privacy. These cases are prima facie evidence of the crucial need and the opportunity to integrate the Humanities and ethics with deep technology development. I began my career as a Humanities graduate at Intel Corporation working closely with Ivy League MBA’s and senior engineers. We shared our knowledge and learned together to enable the company to excel. The best companies are those grounded in an appreciation of human values, companies that seek out Humanities graduates with a passion for technology to balance out their teams.
Human Oversight of Deep Technology Development Is Playing Catch-up
Systems Similar To Those In Place for Medical Science Are Urgently Required
After watching “The Great Hack” on Netflix I am appalled by the absence of any moral compass at Cambridge Analytica, which transformed Big Data into a political weapon. Other disturbing examples are Uber’s former corporate culture and Facebook’s collusion with CA in abusing our privacy. These cases are prima facie evidence of the crucial need and the opportunity to integrate the Humanities and ethics with deep technology development. I began my career as a Humanities graduate at Intel Corporation working closely with Ivy League MBA’s and senior engineers. We shared our knowledge and learned together to enable the company to excel. The best companies are those grounded in an appreciation of human values, companies that seek out Humanities graduates with a passion for technology to balance out their teams.
After watching “The Great Hack” on Netflix I am appalled by the absence of any moral compass at Cambridge Analytica, which transformed Big Data into a political weapon. Other disturbing examples are Uber’s former corporate culture and Facebook’s collusion with CA in abusing our privacy. These cases are prima facie evidence of the crucial need and the opportunity to integrate the Humanities and ethics with deep technology development. I began my career as a Humanities graduate at Intel Corporation working closely with Ivy League MBA’s and senior engineers. We shared our knowledge and learned together to enable the company to excel. The best companies are those grounded in an appreciation of human values, companies that seek out Humanities graduates with a passion for technology to balance out their teams.
Five years ago, I wrote a post on this blog disparaging the state of the Internet of Things/home automation market as a “Tower of Proprietary Babble.” Vendors of many different home and industrial product offerings were literally speaking different languages, making their products inoperable with other complementary products from other vendors. The market was being constrained by its immaturity and a failure to grasp the importance of open standards. A 2017 Verizon report concluded that “an absence of industry-wide standards…represented greater than 50% of executives concerns about IoT. Today I can report that finally, the solutions and technologies are beginning to come together, albeit still slowly.
The Evolution of These Technologies Is Clearer
The IoT Tower of Proprietary Babble Is Slowly Crumbling
The Rise of the Intelligent Assistant
Five years ago, I wrote a post on this blog disparaging the state of the Internet of Things/home automation market as a “Tower of Proprietary Babble.” Vendors of many different home and industrial product offerings were literally speaking different languages, making their products inoperable with other complementary products from other vendors. The market was being constrained by its immaturity and a failure to grasp the importance of open standards. A 2017 Verizon report concluded that “an absence of industry-wide standards…represented greater than 50% of executives concerns about IoT.” Today I can report that finally, the solutions and technologies are beginning to come together, albeit still slowly.
One of the most important factors influencing these positive developments has been the recognition of the importance of this technology area by major corporate players and a large number of entrepreneurial companies funded by venture investment, as shown in the infographic above. Amazon, for example, announced in October 2018 that it has shipped over 100 Million Echo devices, which effectively combine an intelligent assistant, smart hub, and a large-scale database of information. This does not take into account the dozens of other companies which have launched their own entries. I like to point to Philips Hue as such an example of corporate strategic focus perhaps changing the future corporate prospects of Philips, based in Eindhoven in the Netherlands. I have visited Philips HQ, a company trying to evolve from the incandescent lighting market. Two years ago my wife bought me a Philips Hue WiFi controlled smart lighting starter kit. My initial reaction was disbelief that it would succeed. I am eating crow on that point, as I now control my lighting using Amazon’s Alexa and the Philips Hue smart hub. The rise of the “intelligent assistant” seems to have been a catalyst for growth and convergence.
The situation with proprietary silos of offerings that do not work well or at all with other offerings is still frustrating, but slowly evolving. Amazon Firestick’s browser is its own awkward “Silk” or alternatively Firefox, but excluding Google’s Chrome for alleged competitive advantage. When I set up my Firestick, I had to ditch Chromecast because I only have so many HDMI ports. Alexa works with Spotify but only in one room as dictated by Spotify. Alexa can play music from Amazon Music or Sirius/XM on all Echo devices without the Spotify limitation. Which brings me to another point of aggravation: alleged Smart TV’s. Not only are they not truly “smart,” they are proprietary silos of their own, so “intelligent assistant” smart hubs do not work with “smart” TV’s. Samsung, for example, has its own competing intelligent assistant, Bixby, so of course, only Bixby can control a Samsung TV. I watched one of those YouTube DIY videos on how you could make your TV work with Alexa using third-party software and remotes. Trust me, you do not want to go there. But cracks are beginning to appear that may lead to a flood of openness. Samsung just announced at CES that beginning in 2019 its Smart TV’s will work with Amazon Echo and Google Home, and that a later software update will likely enable older Samsung TV’s to work with Echo and Home. However, Bixby will still control the remote. Other TV’s from manufacturers like Sony and LG have worked with intelligent assistants for some time.
The rise of an Internet of Everything Everywhere, the recognition of the need for greater data communication bandwidth, and battery-free wireless IoT sensors are heating up R&D labs everywhere. Keep in mind that I am focusing on the consumer side, and have not even mentioned the rising demands from industrial applications. Intel has estimated that autonomous vehicles will transmit up to 4 Terabytes of data daily. AR and VR applications will require similar throughput. Existing wireless data communication technologies, including 5G LTE, cannot address this need. In addition, an exploding need for IoT sensors not connected to an electrical power source will require more work in the area of “energy harvesting.” Energy harvesting began with passive RFID, and by using kinetic, pizeo, and thermoelectric energy and converting it into a battery-free electrical power source for sensors. EnOcean, an entrepreneurial spinoff of Siemens in Munich has pioneered this technology but it is not sufficient for future market requirements.
Fortunately, work has already begun on both higher throughput wireless data communication using mmWave spectrum, and energy harvesting using radio backscatter, reminiscent of Nikola Tesla’s dream of wireless electrical power distribution. The successful demonstration of these technologies holds the potential to open the door to new IEEE data communication standards that could potentially play a role in ending the Tower of Babble and accelerating the integration of AI, IoT, and Big Data. Bottom line is that the market and the technology landscape are improving.
My IEEE Talk from 2013 foreshadows the development of current emerging trends in advanced technology, as they appeared at the time. I proposed that in fact, they represent one huge integrated convergence trend that has morphed into something even bigger, and is already having a major impact on the way we live, work, and think. The 2012 Obama campaign’s sophisticated “Dashboard” application is referenced, integrating Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile was perhaps the most significant example at that time of the combined power of these trends blending into one big thing.
READ MORE: Blog Post on IoT from July 20, 2013
The term “Internet of Things” (IoT) is being loosely tossed around in the media. But what does it mean? It means simply that data communication, like Internet communication, but not necessarily Internet Protocol packets, is emerging for all manner of “things” in the home, in your car, everywhere: light switches, lighting devices, thermostats, door locks, window shades, kitchen appliances, washers & dryers, home audio and video equipment, even pet food dispensers. You get the idea. It has also been called home automation. All of this communication occurs autonomously, without human intervention. The communication can be between and among these devices, so-called machine to machine or M2M communication. The data communication can also terminate in a compute server where the information can be acted on automatically, or made available to the user to intervene remotely from their smart mobile phone or any other remote Internet-connected device.
Another key concept is the promise of automated energy efficiency, with the introduction of “smart meters” with data communication capability, and also achieved in large commercial structures via the Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design program or LEED. Some may recall that when Bill Gates built his multi-million dollar mansion on Lake Washington in Seattle, he had “remote control” of his home built into it. Now, years later, Gates’ original home automation is obsolete. The dream of home automation has been around for years, with numerous Silicon Valley conferences, and failed startups over the years, and needless to say, home automation went nowhere. But it is this concept of effortless home automation that has been the Holy Grail.
But this is also where the glowing promise of The Internet of Things (IoT) begins to morph into a giant “hairball.” The term “hairball” was former Sun Microsystems CEO, Scott McNealy‘s favorite term to describe a complicated mess. In hindsight, the early euphoric days of home automation were plagued by the lack of “convergence.” I use this term to describe the inability of available technology to meet the market opportunity. Without convergence, there can be no market opportunity beyond early adopter techno geeks. Today, the convergence problem has finally been eliminated. Moore’s Law and advances in data communication have swept away the convergence problem. But for many years the home automation market was stalled.
Also, as more Internet-connected devices emerged it became apparent that these devices and apps were a hacker’s paradise. The concept of IoT was being implemented in very naive and immature ways and lacking common industry standards on basic issues: the kinds of things that the IETF and IEEE are famous for. These vulnerabilities are only now very slowly being resolved, but still in a fragmented ad hoc manner. The central problem has not been addressed due to classic proprietary “not invented here” mindsets.
The problem that is currently the center of this hairball, and from all indications is not likely to be resolved anytime soon. It is the problem of multiple data communication protocols, many of them effectively proprietary, creating a huge incompatible Tower of Babbling Things. There is no meaningful industry and market wide consensus on how The Internet of Things should communicate with the rest of the Internet. Until this happens, there can be no fulfillment of the promise of The Internet of Things. I recently posted “Co-opetition: Open Standards Always Win,” which discusses the need for open standards in order for a market to scale up.
A recent ZDNet post explains that home automation currently requires that devices need to be able to connect with “multiple local- and wide-area connectivity options (ZigBee, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GSM/GPRS, RFID/NFC, GPS, Ethernet). Along with the ability to connect many different kinds of sensors, this allows devices to be configured for a range of vertical markets.” Huh? This is the problem in a nutshell. You do not need to be a data communication engineer to get the point. And this is not even close to a full discussion of the problem. There are also IoT vendors who believe that consumers should pay them for the ability to connect to their proprietary Cloud. So imagine paying a fee for every protocol or sensor we employ in our homes. That’s a non-starter.
The above laundry list of data communication protocols, does not include the Zigbee “smart meter” communications standards war. The Zigbee protocol has been around for years, and claims to be an open industry standard, but many do not agree. Zigbee still does not really work, and a new competing smart meter protocol has just entered the picture. The Bluetooth IEEE 802.15 standard now may be overtaken by a much more powerful 802.15 3a. Some are asking if 4G LTE, NFC or WiFi may eliminate Bluetooth altogether. A very cool new technology, energy harvesting, has begun to take off in the home automation market. The energy harvesting sensors (no batteries) can capture just enough kinetic, peizo or thermoelectric energy to transmit short data communication “telegrams” to an energy harvesting router or server. The EnOcean Alliance has been formed around a small German company spun off from Siemens, and has attracted many leading companies in building automation. But EnOcean itself has recently published an article in Electronic Design News, announcing that they have a created “middleware” (quote) “…to incorporate battery-less devices into networks based on several different communication standards such as Wi-Fi, GSM, Ethernet/IP, BACnet, LON, KNX or DALI.” (unquote). It is apparent that this space remains very confused, crowded and uncertain. A new Cambridge UK startup, Neul is proposing yet another new IoT approach using the radio spectrum known as “white space,” becoming available with the transition from analog to digital television. With this much contention on protocols, there will be nothing but market paralysis.
Is everyone following all of these acronyms and data comm protocols? There will be a short quiz at the end of this post. (smile)
The advent of IP version 6, strongly supported by Intel and Cisco Systems has created another area of confusion. The problem with IPv6 in the world of The IoT is “too much information” as we say. Cisco and Intel want to see IPv6 as the one global protocol for every Internet connected device. This is utterly incompatible with energy harvesting, as the tiny amount of harvested energy cannot transmit the very long IPv6 packets. Hence, EnOcean’s middleware, without which their market is essentially constrained.
The Brave New World of Internet privacy issues relating to this tidal wave of Big Data are not even considered here, and deserve a separate post on the subject. A recent NBC Technology post has explored many of these issues, while some have suggested we simply need to get over it. We have no privacy.
Stakeholders in The Internet of Things seem not to have learned the repeated lesson of open standards and co-opetition, and are concentrating on proprietary advantage which ensures that this market will not effectively scale anytime in the foreseeable future. Intertwined with the Tower of Babbling Things are the problems of Internet privacy and consumer concerns about wireless communication health & safety issues. Taken together, this market is not ready for prime time.
This IEEE Talk discusses the three biggest trends in online technology and proposes that in fact, they represent one huge integrated trend that is already having a major impact on the way we live, work and think. The 2012 Obama Campaign’s Dashboard mobile application, integrating Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile is perhaps the most significant example of this trend, combining all three technologies into one big thing. A major shakeout and industry consolidation seems inevitable. Additional developments as diverse as augmented reality, the Internet of Things, Smart Grid, near field communication, mobile payment processing, and location-based services are also considered as linked to this overall trend.
11. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
20. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
27. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
33. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
36. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
The term “Internet of Things” (IoT) is being loosely tossed around in the media. But what does it mean? It means simply that data communication, like Internet communication, but not necessarily Internet Protocol packets, is emerging for all manner of “things” in the home, in your car, everywhere: light switches, lighting devices, thermostats, door locks, window shades, kitchen appliances, washers & dryers, home audio and video equipment, even pet food dispensers. You get the idea. It has also been called home automation. All of this communication occurs autonomously, without human intervention. The communication can be between and among these devices, so called machine to machine or M2M communication. The data communication can also terminate in a compute server where the information can be acted on automatically, or made available to the user to intervene remotely from their smart mobile phone or any other remote Internet connected device.
Another key concept is the promise of automated energy efficiency, with the introduction of “smart meters” with data communication capability, and also achieved in large commercial structures via the Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design program or LEED. Some may recall that when Bill Gates built his multi-million dollar mansion on Lake Washington in Seattle, he had “remote control” of his home built into it. Now, years later, Gates’ original home automation is obsolete. The dream of home automation has been around for years, with numerous Silicon Valley conferences, and failed startups over the years, and needless to say, home automation went nowhere. But it is this concept of effortless home automation that has been the Holy Grail.
But this is also where the glowing promise of The Internet of Things (IoT) begins to morph into a giant “hairball.” The term “hairball” was former Sun Microsystems CEO, Scott McNealy‘s favorite term to describe a complicated mess. In hindsight, the early euphoric days of home automation were plagued by the lack of “convergence.” I use this term to describe the inability of available technology to meet the market opportunity. Without convergence there can be no market opportunity beyond early adopter techno geeks. Today, the convergence problem has finally been eliminated. Moore’s Law and advances in data communication have swept away the convergence problem. But for many years the home automation market was stalled.
Also, as more Internet-connected devices emerged it became apparent that these devices and apps were a hacker’s paradise. The concept of IoT was being implemented in very naive and immature ways and lacking common industry standards on basic issues: the kinds of things that the IETF and IEEE are famous for. These vulnerabilities are only now very slowly being resolved, but still in a fragmented ad hoc manner. The central problem has not been addressed due to classic proprietary “not invented here” mindsets.
The problem that is currently the center of this hairball, and from all indications is not likely to be resolved anytime soon. It is the problem of multiple data communication protocols, many of them effectively proprietary, creating a huge incompatible Tower of Babbling Things. There is no meaningful industry and market wide consensus on how The Internet of Things should communicate with the rest of the Internet. Until this happens, there can be no fulfillment of the promise of The Internet of Things. I recently posted “Co-opetition: Open Standards Always Win,” which discusses the need for open standards in order for a market to scale up.
A recent ZDNet post explains that home automation currently requires that devices need to be able to connect with “multiple local- and wide-area connectivity options (ZigBee, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GSM/GPRS, RFID/NFC, GPS, Ethernet). Along with the ability to connect many different kinds of sensors, this allows devices to be configured for a range of vertical markets.” Huh? This is the problem in a nutshell. You do not need to be a data communication engineer to get the point. And this is not even close to a full discussion of the problem. There are also IoT vendors who believe that consumers should pay them for the ability to connect to their proprietary Cloud. So imagine paying a fee for every protocol or sensor we employ in our homes. That’s a non-starter.
The above laundry list of data communication protocols, does not include the Zigbee “smart meter” communications standards war. The Zigbee protocol has been around for years, and claims to be an open industry standard, but many do not agree. Zigbee still does not really work, and a new competing smart meter protocol has just entered the picture. The Bluetooth IEEE 802.15 standard now may be overtaken by a much more powerful 802.15 3a. Some are asking if 4G LTE, NFC or WiFi may eliminate Bluetooth altogether. A very cool new technology, energy harvesting, has begun to take off in the home automation market. The energy harvesting sensors (no batteries) can capture just enough kinetic, peizo or thermoelectric energy to transmit short data communication “telegrams” to an energy harvesting router or server. The EnOcean Alliance has been formed around a small German company spun off from Siemens, and has attracted many leading companies in building automation. But EnOcean itself has recently published an article in Electronic Design News, announcing that they have a created “middleware” (quote) “…to incorporate battery-less devices into networks based on several different communication standards such as Wi-Fi, GSM, Ethernet/IP, BACnet, LON, KNX or DALI.” (unquote). It is apparent that this space remains very confused, crowded and uncertain. A new Cambridge UK startup, Neul is proposing yet another new IoT approach using the radio spectrum known as “white space,” becoming available with the transition from analog to digital television. With this much contention on protocols, there will be nothing but market paralysis.
Is everyone following all of these acronyms and data comm protocols? There will be a short quiz at the end of this post. (smile)
The advent of IP version 6, strongly supported by Intel and Cisco Systems has created another area of confusion. The problem with IPv6 in the world of The IoT is “too much information” as we say. Cisco and Intel want to see IPv6 as the one global protocol for every Internet connected device. This is utterly incompatible with energy harvesting, as the tiny amount of harvested energy cannot transmit the very long IPv6 packets. Hence, EnOcean’s middleware, without which their market is essentially constrained.
The Brave New World of Internet privacy issues relating to this tidal wave of Big Data are not even considered here, and deserve a separate post on the subject. A recent NBC Technology post has explored many of these issues, while some have suggested we simply need to get over it. We have no privacy.
Stakeholders in The Internet of Things seem not to have learned the repeated lesson of open standards and co-opetition, and are concentrating on proprietary advantage which ensures that this market will not effectively scale anytime in the foreseeable future. Intertwined with the Tower of Babbling Things are the problems of Internet privacy and consumer concerns about wireless communication health & safety issues. Taken together, this market is not ready for prime time.
This is another in my occasional series on Big Ideas. Last night I had my first opportunity to watch Particle Fever, the acclaimed 2014 documentary on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle. This followed my reading of a much more recent New York Times Op-Ed, describing a crisis in physics resulting from the discovery of the Higgs Boson. Essentially, the science of physics has no ability any time in the foreseeable future to experimentally go beyond the Higgs Boson. Physics is unlikely to be able to find The Holy Grail: a unifying Theory of Everything tying Einstein and the Higgs Boson into one simple elegant explanation.
This is another in my occasional series on Big Ideas. Last night I had my first opportunity to watch Particle Fever, the acclaimed 2014 documentary on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle. I recommend it to everyone. This followed my reading of a much more recent New York Times Op-Ed this week, describing a crisis in physics resulting from the discovery of the Higgs Boson. Essentially, the science of physics has no ability any time in the foreseeable future to experimentally go beyond the Higgs Boson. Physics is unlikely to be able to find The Holy Grail: a unifying Theory of Everything tying Einstein and the Higgs Boson into one simple elegant explanation.
A debate has erupted among physicists around the World, regarding the fundamental scientific imperative to empirically verify theories through experiments like those at LHC. But with the scale and complexity of the experiments required outstripping human capability, the question is being raised, “Can we explicitly set aside the need for experimental confirmation of today’s most ambitious cosmic theories — so long as those theories are “sufficiently elegant and explanatory.” The emergence of this debate can clearly be seen in the Particle Feverinterviews with various LHC physicists. While I do understand the quandary we have, my fear is that science could potentially descend into competing belief systems, and give comfort to religious groups who believe the Earth is only 6000 years old. That would be an even greater catastrophe. Any comments or thoughts on this?
Particle Fever, the 2014 award winning documentary on the Large Hadron Collider and the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle.
DO physicists need empirical evidence to confirm their theories?
You may think that the answer is an obvious yes, experimental confirmation being the very heart of science. But a growing controversy at the frontiers of physics and cosmology suggests that the situation is not so simple.
A few months ago in the journal Nature, two leading researchers, George Ellis and Joseph Silk, published a controversial piece called “Scientific Method: Defend the Integrity of Physics.” They criticized a newfound willingness among some scientists to explicitly set aside the need for experimental confirmation of today’s most ambitious cosmic theories — so long as those theories are “sufficiently elegant and explanatory.” Despite working at the cutting edge of knowledge, such scientists are, for Professors Ellis and Silk, “breaking with centuries of philosophical tradition of defining scientific knowledge as empirical.”
Whether or not you agree with them, the professors have identified a mounting concern in fundamental physics: Today, our most ambitious science can seem at odds with the empirical methodology that has historically given the field its credibility.
How did we get to this impasse? In a way, the landmark detection three years ago of the elusiveHiggs boson particle by researchers at the Large Hadron Collider marked the end of an era. Predicted about 50 years ago, the Higgs particle is the linchpin of what physicists call the “standard model” of particle physics, a powerful mathematical theory that accounts for all the fundamental entities in the quantum world (quarks and leptons) and all the known forces acting between them (gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces).
But the standard model, despite the glory of its vindication, is also a dead end. It offers no path forward to unite its vision of nature’s tiny building blocks with the other great edifice of 20th-century physics: Einstein’s cosmic-scale description of gravity. Without a unification of these two theories — a so-called theory of quantum gravity — we have no idea why our universe is made up of just these particles, forces and properties. (We also can’t know how to truly understand the Big Bang, the cosmic event that marked the beginning of time.)
This is where the specter of an evidence-independent science arises. For most of the last half-century, physicists have struggled to move beyond the standard model to reach the ultimate goal of uniting gravity and the quantum world. Many tantalizing possibilities (like the often-discussed string theory) have been explored, but so far with no concrete success in terms of experimental validation.
Today, the favored theory for the next step beyond the standard model is called supersymmetry (which is also the basis for string theory). Supersymmetry predicts the existence of a “partner” particle for every particle that we currently know. It doubles the number of elementary particles of matter in nature. The theory is elegant mathematically, and the particles whose existence it predicts might also explain the universe’s unaccounted-for “dark matter.” As a result, many researchers were confident that supersymmetry would be experimentally validated soon after the Large Hadron Collider became operational.
That’s not how things worked out, however. To date, no supersymmetric particles have been found. If the Large Hadron Collider cannot detect these particles, many physicists will declare supersymmetry — and, by extension, string theory — just another beautiful idea in physics that didn’t pan out.
But many won’t. Some may choose instead to simply retune their models to predict supersymmetric particles at masses beyond the reach of the Large Hadron Collider’s power of detection — and that of any foreseeable substitute.
Implicit in such a maneuver is a philosophical question: How are we to determine whether a theory is true if it cannot be validated experimentally? Should we abandon it just because, at a given level of technological capacity, empirical support might be impossible? If not, how long should we wait for such experimental machinery before moving on: ten years? Fifty years? Centuries?
Consider, likewise, the cutting-edge theory in physics that suggests that our universe is just one universe in a profusion of separate universes that make up the so-called multiverse. This theory could help solve some deep scientific conundrums about our own universe (such as the so-called fine-tuning problem), but at considerable cost: Namely, the additional universes of the multiverse would lie beyond our powers of observation and could never be directly investigated. Multiverse advocates argue nonetheless that we should keep exploring the idea — and search for indirect evidence of other universes.
The opposing camp, in response, has its own questions. If a theory successfully explains what we can detect but does so by positing entities that we can’t detect (like other universes or the hyperdimensional superstrings of string theory) then what is the status of these posited entities? Should we consider them as real as the verified particles of the standard model? How are scientific claims about them any different from any other untestable — but useful — explanations of reality?
Recall the epicycles, the imaginary circles that Ptolemy used and formalized around A.D. 150 to describe the motions of planets. Although Ptolemy had no evidence for their existence, epicycles successfully explained what the ancients could see in the night sky, so they were accepted as real. But they were eventually shown to be a fiction, more than 1,500 years later. Are superstrings and the multiverse, painstakingly theorized by hundreds of brilliant scientists, anything more than modern-day epicycles?
Just a few days ago, scientists restarted investigations with the Large Hadron Collider, after a two-year hiatus. Upgrades have made it even more powerful, and physicists are eager to explore the properties of the Higgs particle in greater detail. If the upgraded collider does discover supersymmetric particles, it will be an astonishing triumph of modern physics. But if nothing is found, our next steps may prove to be difficult and controversial, challenging not just how we do science but what it means to do science at all.
SUMMARY:Advances in quantum computing can have countless applications from drug discovery to investment and health care. Lockheed Martin’s collaborations with the University of Southern California and D-Wave Systems continue to push science and technology boundaries, recently quadrupling qubit capacity in the D-Wave Two machine.
There are a few defining moments of innovation that we can point to that changed the future. Quantum computing may be that next big moment.
“Computationally, quantum computing is the equivalent of the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk,” said Greg Tallant, the program manager at Lockheed Martin.
Nearly everything around us, from cars and airplanes to smartphones and watches, has software. Debugging millions of lines of code for these increasingly complex systems is a big data problem that could cost big bucks.
“With quantum computing it’s not that we can solve problems that we cannot solve classically, it’s just that we can solve things faster,” said Daniel Lidar, the Scientific and Technical director at the University of Southern California Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center (QCC).
Unlike regular computers, quantum computers can simultaneously test all possible input combinations because they are not limited to just zeroes and ones (i.e., bits). Quantum bits, or qubits, can be both zero and one and all points in between, all at once.
A joint effort of Lockheed Martin Corporation and USC, the QCC recently upgraded to the D-Wave Two quantum computer designed with 512 qubits, increased from 128 in the original D-Wave One, both built by D-Wave Systems. The D-Wave Two is the largest programmable quantum information processor built.
“The QCC is a perfect example of industry and science coming together to advance our knowledge and quantum capabilities, pushing the boundaries of information science and technology,” said Bo Ewald, President of D-Wave Systems U.S.
There are a few defining moments of innovation that we can point to that changed the future. Quantum computing may be that next big moment.
“Computationally, quantum computing is the equivalent of the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk,” said Greg Tallant, the program manager at Lockheed Martin.
Nearly everything around us, from cars and airplanes to smartphones and watches, has software. Debugging millions of lines of code for these increasingly complex systems is a big data problem that could cost big bucks.
“With quantum computing it’s not that we can solve problems that we cannot solve classically, it’s just that we can solve things faster,” said Daniel Lidar, the Scientific and Technical director at the University of Southern California Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center (QCC).
Unlike regular computers, quantum computers can simultaneously test all possible input combinations because they are not limited to just zeroes and ones (i.e., bits). Quantum…
U.S. National Security Agency global surveillance of virtually all Internet traffic has been devastating for Google’s international business. At the exact time when Google has launched a strategic initiative to expand as an Internet Service Provider (ISP) in foreign countries, the NSA revelations have torpedoed its efforts.
Google sees its future growth being dependent on emerging new markets that either do not have Internet connectivity or it is very limited. Google has been experimenting with low orbiting satellites and stratospheric balloons as a means to expand Internet coverage to the most remote corners of the globe. Last March, Schmidt visited India to meet with government officials and to discuss his vision for the Internet. At the same time, Schmidt also wrote an editorial in The Times of India arguing for a Google future in India. The response of the Indian government was to ban Gmail use in all government agencies. ICANN, the organization that manages the Internet globally, is based in the United States. ICANN has also realized the huge damage to its credibility, and is scrambling to distance itself from any relationship with the U.S. government. I would expect that as the International Telecommunication Union, a sister global organization, is based in Geneva, Switzerland, ICANN may be expected to relocate to Switzerland.
The potential damage of the NSA revelations of snooping on foreign leaders, breaking encryption and pinpointing cellular users locations, is incalculable. It’s implications extend far beyond Google, to Yahoo, Facebook, LinkedIn and virtually any other big social media site you can name. The cost to the U.S. economy, it’s reputation, and to the standing
Devastating Damage To U.S. Global Internet Leadership
SUMMARY:Google’s chairman says the NSA’s tapping of its and Yahoo’s fiber-optic cable data traffic probably violates the law.
Google, a company that’s taken some lumps itself for treading heavily on users’ privacy, is not at all amused by reports that the National Security Agency tapped fiber-optic cables running between its data centers. Google Chairman Eric Schmidt registered that disapproval to CNN and other news outlets early Monday.
“I was shocked that the NSA would do this — perhaps a violation of law but certainly a violation of mission … This is clearly an overstep,” Schmidt told CNN.
Schmidt was responding to recent revelations from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that the NSA was not only harvesting some customer data from big U.S. internet companies with their knowledge but also collecting data flowing in the fiber optic cables between them unbeknownst to them. Those allegations that the NSA tapped both Google and Yahoo cable links were first reported in the Washington Post, which cited Snowden-supplied documents. The documents said the NSA collected hundreds of millions of records over a month and held it for 3 to 5 days while deciding what to keep.
The NSA told the Post in a statement that it focuses on “discovering developing intelligence about valid foreign intelligence targets only.”
Whatever, Schmidt is not happy. He told CNN: ”From a Google perspective, any internal use of Google services is unauthorized and almost certainly illegal.”
Google, a company that’s taken some lumps itself for treading heavily on users’ privacy, is not at all amused by reports that the National Security Agency tapped fiber-optic cables running between its data centers. Google(s goog) Chairman Eric Schmidt registered that disapproval to CNN and other news outlets early Monday.
“I was shocked that the NSA would do this — perhaps a violation of law but certainly a violation of mission … This is clearly an overstep,” Schmidt told CNN.
Schmidt was responding to recent revelations from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that the NSA was not only harvesting some customer data from big U.S. internet companies with their knowledge but also collecting data flowing in the fiber optic cables between them unbeknownst to them. Those allegations that the NSA tapped both Google and Yahoo cable links were first reported in the Washington Post, which cited Snowden-supplied documents…
This year’s America’s Cup Defense is a Tour de Force of technological innovation both on and off the water, Read on and I will explain. The America’s Cup events are hosted by the St. Francis Yacht Club on San Francisco Bay, and the defending team BMC Oracle, led by none other than Larry Ellison, Chairman and founder of Oracle in Silicon Valley. The qualifying races on Marina Green and San Francisco Bay. Every aspect of this has been planned in advance to showcase bleeding edge technology, and to turn the yacht races themselves into the spectator event The America’s Cup has never been,
This year’s America’s Cup Defense is a Tour de Force of technological innovation both on and off the water, Read on and I will explain. The America’s Cup events are hosted by the Golden Gate Yacht Club on San Francisco Bay, and the defending team BMC Oracle, led by none other than Larry Ellison, Chairman and founder of Oracle in Silicon Valley. The qualifying races are being held on San Francisco Bay. Every aspect of this has been planned in advance to showcase bleeding edge technology, and to turn the yacht races themselves into the spectator sport The America’s Cup has never been, IMHO, it is all classic Larry Ellison.
In 2003, I had just agreed to join New Zealand Trade & Enterprise to operate its high tech incubator facility in Redwood City. My first official event was a head to head America’s Cup yacht race on San Francisco Bay. Larry Ellison with his boat, Oracle, had challenged the Swiss team of Alinghi to a head to head race on the Bay. In what became known as the “Fiasco in Frisco,” Alinghi lost miserably to BMW Oracle. But the background story was even more interesting, and that 2003 race on the Bay can be looked back on as Ellison “beta testing” the idea of holding an America’s Cup Defense on San Francisco Bay.
Alinghi was skippered by Russell Coutts, a Kiwi, and a number of other Olympic class sailors from New Zealand. In the midst of the previous America’s Cup Defense in the Hauraki Gulf off Auckland, New Zealand, Coutts had jumped ship from Team New Zealand to skipper the Swiss boat, which caused unprecedented uproar in New Zealand, where only two things matter: rugby and sailing. When Coutts and Alinghi arrived in San Francisco for the Oracle race, New Zealand decided to officially “bury the hatchet” with Coutts. New Zealand’s Ambassador to the U.S. at that time, John Wood, came out to San Francisco from D.C., and we threw a classic Kiwi party at the Maritime Museum to honor Coutts and his Kiwi mates. In my first official event for New Zealand, I got to see all of the Kiwi traits and the politics played out.
Fast forward to 2013. Coutts was fired by Alinghi in 2004, and now skippers BMW Oracle for Ellison. Shortly after it was announced that the America’s Cup Defense by Oracle, would be held on San Francisco Bay, it became clear that Ellison was determined to make every aspect of the yacht races a showcase for the latest Silicon Valley technology.
First, the Bay itself is a stunning backdrop for the event, like no other past America’s Cup venue. Spectators line up from The Golden Gate and Fort Point all the way down to the America’s Cup wharf past Pier 39. No other venue has been able to do this. In an amusing sidelight. Ellison bought a huge Pacific Heights home with a huge window overlooking the Bay, with the intent of hosting America’s Cup parties there. The only problem was an elderly couple who lived below and whose trees blocked the view. In California, normally, there is no legal recourse: the owners of the trees are safe in the right to leave them as they are. But Ellison hired a Marin County attorney, a “tree” specialist, in an effort to force the neighbors to cut down their trees. I believe the jury is still out.
Second, the new 72 foot catamarans are completely new technological marvels. Capable of speeds in excess of 37 knots, the cats employ huge kevlar wings rather than sails. A professional Kiwi sailor and friend, described these America’s Cup boats as “man killers.” Indeed, my friend was right, as a famous British sailor was killed in May when his boat turned “turtle” in the Bay and he drowned. Numerous additional safety measures have since been implemented. These catamarans also employ “foils” which enable them to rise up out of the water completely and sail on their tiny wings, enabling the amazing boat speeds. Foiling is the key to winning this America’s Cup.
Finally, the television technology has already been nominated for an Emmy. Years ago, when the America’s Cup was held in San Diego, Silicon Graphics experimented with advanced animated graphics for television, and there was live video from the boats, but it was only a small glimpse into the technology being employed for this year’s America’s Cup.. If you have not yet watched a few minutes of the racing, do yourself a favour and do so. You will become hooked on America’s Cup yacht racing. That has never happened before because it was nearly impossible to convey what was going on, and to make it exciting. No more. As you watch a race on the Bay, you will see colored lines and arrows on the water, making the progress understandable. Even more amazing, there are arrows showing the airflow over the boats wings, and arrows on the water displaying the treacherous tidal flows in and out of San Francisco Bay as the boats race. Now I know why no one ever escaped from Alcatraz.
The Italian Team, Luna Rossa beat Sweden’s Artemis to lead up to the finals, but the smart money is on Emirates New Zealand and BMW Oracle as the boats to watch.. Grab some popcorn and watch the fun on your HD TV, wishing you were down on the Bay, watching the races live.
The term “Internet of Things” is being loosely tossed around in the media. But what does it mean? It means simply that data communication like the Internet, but not necessarily Internet Protocol packets is emerging for all manner of “things” in the home: light switches, lighting devices, thermostats, door locks, window shades, kitchen appliances, washers & dryers, home audio and video equipment, even pet food dispensers. You get the idea. All of this communication occurs autonomously, without human intervention. The communication can be between and among these devices, so called machine to machine or M2M. The data communication can also terminate in a home compute server where the information can be made available to the homeowner to intervene remotely from their smart mobile phone or any other remote Internet connected device.
The term “Internet of Things” (IoT) is being loosely tossed around in the media. But what does it mean? It means simply that data communication, like Internet communication, but not necessarily Internet Protocol packets, is emerging for all manner of “things” in the home, in your car, everywhere: light switches, lighting devices, thermostats, door locks, window shades, kitchen appliances, washers & dryers, home audio and video equipment, even pet food dispensers. You get the idea. It has also been called home automation. All of this communication occurs autonomously, without human intervention. The communication can be between and among these devices, so called machine to machine or M2M communication. The data communication can also terminate in a compute server where the information can be acted on automatically, or made available to the user to intervene remotely from their smart mobile phone or any other remote Internet connected device.
Another key concept is the promise of automated energy efficiency, with the introduction of “smart meters” with data communication capability, and also achieved in large commercial structures via the Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design program or LEED. Some may recall that when Bill Gates built his multi-million dollar mansion on Lake Washington in Seattle, he had “remote control” of his home built into it. Now, years later, Gates’ original home automation is obsolete. The dream of home automation has been around for years, with numerous Silicon Valley conferences, and failed startups over the years, and needless to say, home automation went nowhere. But it is this concept of effortless home automation that has been the Holy Grail.
But this is also where the glowing promise of The Internet of Things (IoT) begins to morph into a giant “hairball.” The term “hairball” was former Sun Microsystems CEO, Scott McNealy‘s favorite term to describe a complicated mess. In hindsight, the early euphoric days of home automation were plagued by the lack of “convergence.” I use this term to describe the inability of available technology to meet the market opportunity. Without convergence there can be no market opportunity beyond early adopter techno geeks. Today, the convergence problem has finally been eliminated. Moore’s Law and advances in data communication have swept away the convergence problem. But for many years the home automation market was stalled.
The other problem is currently the center of this hairball, and from all indications is not likely to be resolved anytime soon. It is the problem of multiple data communication protocols, many of them effectively proprietary, creating a huge incompatible Tower of Babbling Things. There is no meaningful industry and market wide consensus on how The Internet of Things should communicate with the rest of the Internet. Until this happens, there can be no fulfillment of the promise of The Internet of Things. I recently posted “Co-opetition: Open Standards Always Win,” which discusses the need for open standards in order for a market to scale up.
A recent ZDNet post explains that home automation currently requires that devices need to be able to connect with “multiple local- and wide-area connectivity options (ZigBee, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GSM/GPRS, RFID/NFC, GPS, Ethernet). Along with the ability to connect many different kinds of sensors, this allows devices to be configured for a range of vertical markets.” Huh? This is the problem in a nutshell. You do not need to be a data communication engineer to get the point. And this is not even close to a full discussion of the problem. There are also IoT vendors who believe that consumers should pay them for the ability to connect to their proprietary Cloud. So imagine paying a fee for every protocol or sensor we employ in our homes. That’s a non-starter.
The above laundry list of data communication protocols, does not include the Zigbee “smart meter” communications standards war. The Zigbee protocol has been around for years, and claims to be an open industry standard, but many do not agree. Zigbee still does not really work, and a new competing smart meter protocol has just entered the picture. The Bluetooth IEEE 802.15 standard now may be overtaken by a much more powerful 802.15 3a. Some are asking if 4G LTE, NFC or WiFi may eliminate Bluetooth altogether. A very cool new technology, energy harvesting, has begun to take off in the home automation market. The energy harvesting sensors (no batteries) can capture just enough kinetic, peizo or thermoelectric energy to transmit short data communication “telegrams” to an energy harvesting router or server. The EnOcean Alliance has been formed around a small German company spun off from Siemens, and has attracted many leading companies in building automation. But EnOcean itself has recently published an article in Electronic Design News, announcing that they have a created “middleware” (quote) “…to incorporate battery-less devices into networks based on several different communication standards such as Wi-Fi, GSM, Ethernet/IP, BACnet, LON, KNX or DALI.” (unquote). It is apparent that this space remains very confused, crowded and uncertain. A new Cambridge UK startup, Neul is proposing yet another new IoT approach using the radio spectrum known as “white space,” becoming available with the transition from analog to digital television. With this much contention on protocols, there will be nothing but market paralysis.
Is everyone following all of these acronyms and data comm protocols? There will be a short quiz at the end of this post. (smile)
The advent of IP version 6, strongly supported by Intel and Cisco Systems has created another area of confusion. The problem with IPv6 in the world of The IoT is “too much information” as we say. Cisco and Intel want to see IPv6 as the one global protocol for every Internet connected device. This is utterly incompatible with energy harvesting, as the tiny amount of harvested energy cannot transmit the very long IPv6 packets. Hence, EnOcean’s middleware, without which their market is essentially constrained.
The Brave New World of Internet privacy issues relating to this tidal wave of Big Data are not even considered here, and deserve a separate post on the subject. A recent NBC Technology post has explored many of these issues, while some have suggested we simply need to get over it. We have no privacy.
Stakeholders in The Internet of Things seem not to have learned the repeated lesson of open standards and co-opetition, and are concentrating on proprietary advantage which ensures that this market will not effectively scale anytime in the foreseeable future. Intertwined with the Tower of Babbling Things are the problems of Internet privacy and consumer concerns about wireless communication health & safety issues. Taken together, this market is not ready for prime time.
This IEEE Talk discusses the three biggest trends in online technology and proposes that in fact, they represent one huge integrated trend that is already having a major impact on the way we live, work and think. The 2012 Obama Campaign’s Dashboard mobile application, integrating Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile is perhaps the most significant example of this trend, combining all three technologies into one big thing. A major shakeout and industry consolidation seems inevitable. Additional developments as diverse as the Internet of Things, Smart Grid, near field communication, mobile payment processing, and location based services are also considered as linked to this overall trend.
IEEE Talk: Integrated Big Data, The Cloud, & Smart Mobile: One Big Deal or Not?
This IEEE Talk discusses the three biggest trends in online technology and proposes that in fact, they represent one huge integrated trend that is already having a major impact on the way we live, work and think. The 2012 Obama Campaign’s Dashboard mobile application, integrating Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile is perhaps the most significant example of this trend, combining all three technologies into one big thing. A major shakeout and industry consolidation seems inevitable. Additional developments as diverse as the Internet of Things, Smart Grid, near field communication, mobile payment processing, and location based services are also considered as linked to this overall trend.
11. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
20. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
27. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
33. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
36. Agenda • Some Historical Context • The Emergence of SoMoClo • The Emergence of Big Data • The Emergence of Smart Mobile • The Convergence of ToDaClo • What Do You Think? IEEE UBC Okanagan Big Data, The Cloud, and Smart Mobile: Big Deal or Not?
mayo615 