Tech companies promote the 'internet of things' where our homes, cars and selves are wired, but that has consequences
The annual Consumer Electronics Show is a partial preview of the not-too-distant future. If this year's event is any indication, we will soon be living in what the tech community likes to call the "internet of things"– where not just our gadgets are wired but also our homes, cars and especially ourselves. CES is a celebration, and for the most part deservedly so, of human imagination and ingenuity.
Maybe someone should launch a concurrent event to focus on the not-so-positive ways all of this great stuff will be used. Call it, perhaps, the "Unintended (and Not-so-Unintended) Consequences Show". Given the mind-set of the CES crowd that flocks to Las Vegas every January, however, it might not draw much of an audience.
Technology rolls forward no matter how we feel about it, and the internet of things is at some level inevitable. More and more of what we touch every day has embedded intelligence, via microprocessors. It has memory. And increasingly, it is connected via digital networks.
Our cars are becoming computer networks on wheels, and are more safe and reliable than ever. Thermostats and televisions in our homes are getting smarter and much more useful. Humans are wearing and implanting devices that measure and augment us, helping us be healthier and more productive. And this is just the beginning, if corporate and startup dreams come to fruition.
Yet our cars are also watching us, and reporting back to car makers and insurers – and who knows who else – how and where and when we drive. Our TVs are watching us, closing in on Orwell's nightmarish Big Brother vision. Devices we carry and wear are giving essentially unaccountable companies and governments vast amounts of information about how we live.
I've been tuning in to the CES event from afar this year, taking advantage of voluminous (if almost universally shallow) media coverage and avoiding the horrendous taxi lines and inflated hotel costs that afflict Las Vegas during all big conferences. Remote attendance isn't the same as seeing things and people in person, but it's one of the best uses of technology I've encountered yet.
One of the more notable current trends is a push for "wearable technology", which Intel CEO Brian Kzranich highlighted in his keynote talk. What he calls a "broad ecosystem of wearables"– Google Glass may be the most touted example yet – is indeed on the horizon. In this and other aspects of the internet of things will emerge vast wealth for manufacturers, but even more, most likely, for the armies of programmers who will be writing the software that makes it all work, as individual components and together on networks.
The tech industry is at least aware that it has a perception problem, at the very least, in its push to embed chips and communications into us and our surroundings. According to several reports, panelists at CES fretted aloud about regulation of these new tools and techniques. And at least one regulator, Maureen Ohlhausen of the Federal Trade Commission, made it clear that while no one wants to unnecessarily impeded progress, there's also some serious worry about privacy, security and other issues.
The best way to pre-empt regulation, of course, is to behave in ways that don't prompt it. The tech industry and some of its biggest customers – notably big business and governments – have demonstrated a casual attitude, at best, toward the security and privacy of end users, people like you and me, and in some cases their policies and/or business models have been all about denying our privacy. The recent news that SnapChat was revealing user names and phone numbers – and the diffidence of the company's founder, who had to be prodded before he seemed to care – is only the most recent example of the industry's casual attitude in this arena.
The experts will tell you that true security can't be bolted onto products. It has to be baked in, and constantly improved in an ongoing arms race with malevolent hackers (criminal and governmental). Too often, it's an afterthought, and the bad folks win. Ditto privacy.
Among the most problematic aspects of the internet of things (including our bodies) is who owns the devices and data that will create it. Companies routinely sell us devices that they can alter remotely, and they insist that they, not we, own the data we create as we use them. If we don't turn this around, and soon, the corporate privacy and security scandals we've seen to date will look mild. Is the industry listening, or will it just move blithely ahead? Reported by guardian.co.uk 15 hours ago.
The annual Consumer Electronics Show is a partial preview of the not-too-distant future. If this year's event is any indication, we will soon be living in what the tech community likes to call the "internet of things"– where not just our gadgets are wired but also our homes, cars and especially ourselves. CES is a celebration, and for the most part deservedly so, of human imagination and ingenuity.
Maybe someone should launch a concurrent event to focus on the not-so-positive ways all of this great stuff will be used. Call it, perhaps, the "Unintended (and Not-so-Unintended) Consequences Show". Given the mind-set of the CES crowd that flocks to Las Vegas every January, however, it might not draw much of an audience.
Technology rolls forward no matter how we feel about it, and the internet of things is at some level inevitable. More and more of what we touch every day has embedded intelligence, via microprocessors. It has memory. And increasingly, it is connected via digital networks.
Our cars are becoming computer networks on wheels, and are more safe and reliable than ever. Thermostats and televisions in our homes are getting smarter and much more useful. Humans are wearing and implanting devices that measure and augment us, helping us be healthier and more productive. And this is just the beginning, if corporate and startup dreams come to fruition.
Yet our cars are also watching us, and reporting back to car makers and insurers – and who knows who else – how and where and when we drive. Our TVs are watching us, closing in on Orwell's nightmarish Big Brother vision. Devices we carry and wear are giving essentially unaccountable companies and governments vast amounts of information about how we live.
I've been tuning in to the CES event from afar this year, taking advantage of voluminous (if almost universally shallow) media coverage and avoiding the horrendous taxi lines and inflated hotel costs that afflict Las Vegas during all big conferences. Remote attendance isn't the same as seeing things and people in person, but it's one of the best uses of technology I've encountered yet.
One of the more notable current trends is a push for "wearable technology", which Intel CEO Brian Kzranich highlighted in his keynote talk. What he calls a "broad ecosystem of wearables"– Google Glass may be the most touted example yet – is indeed on the horizon. In this and other aspects of the internet of things will emerge vast wealth for manufacturers, but even more, most likely, for the armies of programmers who will be writing the software that makes it all work, as individual components and together on networks.
The tech industry is at least aware that it has a perception problem, at the very least, in its push to embed chips and communications into us and our surroundings. According to several reports, panelists at CES fretted aloud about regulation of these new tools and techniques. And at least one regulator, Maureen Ohlhausen of the Federal Trade Commission, made it clear that while no one wants to unnecessarily impeded progress, there's also some serious worry about privacy, security and other issues.
The best way to pre-empt regulation, of course, is to behave in ways that don't prompt it. The tech industry and some of its biggest customers – notably big business and governments – have demonstrated a casual attitude, at best, toward the security and privacy of end users, people like you and me, and in some cases their policies and/or business models have been all about denying our privacy. The recent news that SnapChat was revealing user names and phone numbers – and the diffidence of the company's founder, who had to be prodded before he seemed to care – is only the most recent example of the industry's casual attitude in this arena.
The experts will tell you that true security can't be bolted onto products. It has to be baked in, and constantly improved in an ongoing arms race with malevolent hackers (criminal and governmental). Too often, it's an afterthought, and the bad folks win. Ditto privacy.
Among the most problematic aspects of the internet of things (including our bodies) is who owns the devices and data that will create it. Companies routinely sell us devices that they can alter remotely, and they insist that they, not we, own the data we create as we use them. If we don't turn this around, and soon, the corporate privacy and security scandals we've seen to date will look mild. Is the industry listening, or will it just move blithely ahead? Reported by guardian.co.uk 15 hours ago.