Slashdot Log In
The Future of Ubiquitous Computers
Posted by
samzenpus
on Wed Apr 09, 2008 08:05 PM
from the more-than-meets-the-eye dept.
from the more-than-meets-the-eye dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Is there any end to this ubiquitous computing thing?
Plants that send thank you notes, player pianos that follow the dancer's movements, and umbrellas that warn you of upcoming rain are just a few of the
uses of embedded computers described in this article from
the NY Times. Laptops seem so dull when it's easy to embed chips, install a Linux
distro and sew them into your clothes.
Do we really need to wear our computers? Why can't the world be happy with a good old desktop? It was good enough for the PC generation."
Related Stories
Submission: Ubiquitous computers are more ubiquitous by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
This is a stupid article. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is a stupid article. (Score:5, Interesting)
Who wants to call a house? People want to call a person.
The desktop computer is akin to the wired landline.
The laptop may be akin to the car phones or the monster sized cell phones of the past.
I don't want to go to my desk. Not for my phone and not for my computer. But it in my pocket. Bring on the borg.
Parent
Re:This is a stupid article. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:This is a stupid article. (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
This is a stupid post (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
obligitory (Score:2, Funny)
and my laptop, and server and web appliances, and coke^h^h^h^hredbull machine that knows my debit car by heart
Re: (Score:2)
20 years from now (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:20 years from now (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:20 years from now (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do a google search for "laser keyboard". I dare you. Or Ebay. I double dare you. Did you even read my post? Nub.
Lets all go home. (Score:5, Insightful)
Horses were good enough for getting around with until someone came up with the idea of a car. I don't know why the idea that things are 'good enough' is so prevalent - complacency and familiarity maybe? This question smacks of sentiments like "in my day, we only got 3 TV stations - and we were GLAD for it". Some curmudgeon could start this conversation about any topic, really. What about CPUs - aren't they fast enough?
I could go on, but I think my post is already good enough.
Re:Lets all go home. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot IDs still only have 5 digits. What, am I the only one who looks at numbers in the proper sexagesimal [wikipedia.org] format?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Whippersnappers, with their new-fangled math, counting on things that aren't fingers or toes...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course some jerks spoilt it by introducing gophers, and veronicas and wais and then those crazy CERN clowns tipped mosaic onto Mr Clark and young
Compromise, compromise (Score:5, Insightful)
The same advances that give us faster CPUs also allow us to have the same speed CPUs cheaper and using less power. That allows the CPUs to be used in situations that were not possible a few years back.
You can now buy 32-bit single-chip CPUs for less that $1 (including RAM, flash etc), and 8-bit micros for less than 50c. These won't run Linux, but they can still do a lot of useful work.
Low power is a very important consideration in many applications. Some products will live on a single factory installed coin-sized battery for their whole lifetime (5 years +) without needing a recharge. Achieving this requires very careful and frugal coding and is not something you'd try with Linux etc (well not for a long time), and might not even use C for.
Thus there is still a need for the curmudgeons that can build a system that has only 100 bytes of RAM and a 50kHz CPU and always will be.
Parent
Re:Compromise, compromise (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't really see this as curmudgeony as much as I see it as practical. Sometimes all you need is 100 bytes of RAM.
But the submitter seems to be saying flat out that all this ubiquitous computing stuff is useless, and you should all just get a desktop instead. Instead of saying "be practical, use the right tool for the right job", the message seems to be the rather subjective notion that "This ubiquitous computing is nonsense; it can't possibly do anything new of value, or do anything better than a desktop PC, so just get a Desktop PC."
Nonsense. Just like with more powerful processors in home PCs, someone will think of something, if they haven't already.
Parent
Re:Compromise, compromise (Score:5, Interesting)
Embedded space is very different to desktop space. Unless you're a Luddite, your world is full of embedded CPUS: phones, garage door openers, microwave ovens, refridgerators etc etc. People have decided that the price point for a computer is somewhere in the $500-$1500 range and keep trying to sell more and more capability in that price range.
You don't need a very sophisticated CPU to run a washing machine and "enough is enough". An 8-bitter costing less than a buck will do it. As a design engineer I might have the choice to replace the 8-bit micro in the last design with a 32-bitter at the same price, or a new 8-bit part that costs half the price of the old one. Unless we're adding new features that need extra CPU, the 32-bit micro won't make the washing machine work any better so really adds no customer value, so I would choose the cheaper 8-bit micro and the company saves on material costs.
The desk-top software writers might think that Moore's Law will always give them more CPU power, RAM etc and thus efficient coding does not matter. That thinking is OK if you accept that current prices are OK. However Moore's Law can be ridden the other way too: the same resources are getting cheaper and cheaper. We're limited in what solutions we can consider when we have to pay $1 for the micro + battery. But when we can get a micro and battery for 20c or 10c we can suddenly consider using a micro for a whole lot of new applications. To keep riding that wave needs frugal thinking. People who think in gigaHz and gigabytes need not apply.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
So really, this drop tp having cheap 32 bit procs is really Moore's law.
And it really looks like we are hitting a wall in top end speed. 1 GHz was top back at the turn of the century. Now we are still doing only around 3 GHz. Of course, they are now 64 bit and multi core, but I am not sure the effective serial speed has increased at the traditional Moores law pace, although the economic version
Re: (Score:2)
And there's a time, right now, when a 1.25GHz Core2Duo struggles just to run Vista. Yet an ancient 800MHz G4 runs OSX 10.4.x just fine. That sort of suggests that the problem lies not with the hardware, but what we're asking of it - and, perhaps more pertinently, why we're asking it to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
New "uses":
Windows 98
No surprise. Just a couple of Windows' generations ago, 256 MB of system memory was considered wildly excessive. Vista laughs out loud at that spec. Just to run the plain OS!Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Re:Lets all go home. (Score:5, Interesting)
My guess is it stems from the same source - a fear of change, fear of becoming irrelevant and/or having your skills become outdated. Learn to surf or drown, but shut up in either case.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Statement: "It was good enough for the PC generation!"
Answer: "So, why don't you need improvements?"
This calls upon the person making the statement to think about what he said. Because often that's not the case at all.
Re:Lets all go home. (Score:4, Insightful)
-AK-47, built in 1947
-Subsonic passenger jets
-The horse, fastest way to get around for thousands of years.
-C, SQL
-The car, versus the "flying car".
Why development of something plateaus has everything to do with limits to optimization, efficiency, network effect, cost benefit analysis, diminishing marginal returns, return on investment, political and legislative situations. Complacency and familiarity are important, but there are certainly many, many more factors involved.
Sure I'd like an infinitely fast CPU, a commercially viable fusion reactor and a flying car while I'm at it. Some things are hard, and breakthroughs are difficult to schedule.
Parent
I'm looking for a wearable video camera (Score:2)
I'm looking for a wearable video camera. Resolution can be low, as well as frame rate. 320x240 at 6 frames per second would be enough. It should store on an SD or micro SD card. Maybe it can run from a watch battery or a rechargeable battery (recharged via USB maybe). The smaller the better.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
They only have one camera/recorder combination that uses memory cards. And they are limited to SD cards no larger than 2G (e.g. no SDHC cards). Maybe this is because they are doing 640x480 at 30fps. I don't need that much. 320x240 at 6fps will meet my need. But I do need 9 hours recording time (and that long on one battery charge).
Slashvertisment... (Score:2)
While I thought the products listed at sparkfun were interesting, it neither is it an article, nor does it add to the actual article.
If I was more clever, I would find a good pun in that the only thing it did 'add' was an 'ad'.
Desktop? what? (Score:5, Interesting)
BUG ME NOT.... TFA (Score:2, Interesting)
It sounds like magic, but the truth is a bit more mundane. The wand is just a cellphone, said Mr. Ballagas. âoeItâ(TM)s packaged in a shell. Itâ(TM)s got a skin,â he explained.
The cellphone keeps track of tourist
Re: (Score:2)
That's why many of us don't want to embrace new technologies!
Interesting sequence of articles (Score:2)
Here... you decide...
Maybe it will be "Singularity" posts 'Hello, World' to Slashdot.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I've been wondering if we will recognize the singularity when it arrives.
If it comes in through the front door, I'm sure I'll be able to spot it, but what if it sneaks in through the back door, like a botnet of 400,000+ zombies named Kraken? Maybe it is so hard to trace botnets like Kraken and Storm back to their controllers, because maybe they are entirely self-controlled.
In today's world, any sentient AI with the intelligence of an average 6 year old human would have sense enough to stay in deep
Ubiquitous (Score:5, Interesting)
What I really want is a PDA that aggregates everything. The PDA can alert me to incoming rain; I can use it to pay for things; I can use it to check my mail; and of course I can use it as a PDA. A screen and a stylus is the form factor I really want, not an umbrella with a flashing red light.
Your own PDA is a great way to pay for things. It can be much more secure than the current system, where anyone who copies down your credit card number can use it. And I'd sooner trust my own PDA that I carry around to be secure, rather than punching in a passcode to a computer system not under my control. (Google search for "ATM skimmer"; thieves have figured out how to hack an ATM to copy the information from your ATM card, and a hidden camera records your passcode. Then they 0wn your ATM account.)
I read a short story where police wore eye-protecting goggles that had an "enhanced reality" heads-up display. A computer picked out possible weapons and made glowing spots that superimposed over what the cop was seeing; the computer could zoom and give a sort of telescopic vision. I imagine that will happen someday. Even sooner than that, I expect police to start carrying guns that log when they are fired (timestamp, and maybe even GPS coordinates).
If you want a silly take on ubiquitous computing, read some Ron Goulart [wikipedia.org] stories, which include things like a camera that argues with the user: "I don't want to take a picture of that, it's boring, point me at a good looking girl or something."
steveha
Re:Ubiquitous (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
What I really want is a PDA that aggregates everything.
Until you lose/break/forget to backup/gets stolen/virii infected
Then someone has EVERYTHING on you. Not just the $$ in your savings/checking account.
The more you consolidate the bigger the impact when something happens to it. You wonder why mainframes have so much built in redundancy, because when they go down, everybody feels it. You think your $100 (which you no doubt will demand that it costs) PDA will have mainframe reliability?
btw: Don't forget to bring extra batteries.
Re: (Score:2)
You wouldn't? Most people would! Then they'd break or drown the whispering voice on each device and laugh at the manufacturer. Small and cheap, sure. Small, cheap and durable? Hahahahahahaha!!!
Automated Reply (Score:4, Funny)
--
CMACB's toaster
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ask the DVD player. I'm busy finalizing plans with SkyNet.
--
CMACB's toaster
Ubiquitous motors (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do we need little motors in everything?
There used to be just a few big motors in most peoples' houses: the vacuum cleaner, the washing machine, and the refrigerator. Then suddenly they started using them in things like electric drills, blenders, and food processors. And then tiny motors started showing up everywhere.
What was wrong with the old way? What's the fetish with motors, motors everywhere? Just because modern magnetic materials and electronic controls make it possible doesn't mean we should do it.
Ubiquitous, but dumb (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of the "ubiquitous computing" ideas are silly. There's all this information collection, but the systems don't have the actuators or smarts to do much with the information except bother some human.
Something you can buy right now, yet few buildings have, is really good HVAC control. You can get air sensors that sense temperature, humidity, CO, CO2, and particulates. You can get heating units, fans, dampers, and chillers that will talk to a network. You can get control systems that can manage all this to provide an optimal indoor environment as occupants come and go. A system like this will lower HVAC costs. Yet such systems are rare.
We still don't have good cleaning robots. The iRobot Scooba is about as good as it gets, but it's very dumb, frequently gets stuck, and can't refill, clean, or recharge itself.
Most of the "kitchen automation" stuff is just inventory control, not automated cooking.
The "ubiquitous computing" people haven't even been able to deliver a good meeting room automation system, one that gets lights, audio, and projector to play well together.
That is not “ubiquitous computing”. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is an important distinction between independent gadgets responding to simple environmental conditions, and the pervasive information architecture shared across ubiquitous computing devices. The latter can be loosely described as systems that continuously record metrics about you and your tasks, then interact with disjoint systems to establish needs or contribute to goals.
Imagine this hypothetical scenario. Your car measures engine performance, tire wear, oil quality (and so on) to determine when maintenance is necessary. It also learns your route habits and shares that information with automotive shops which may provide the necessary service. Those shops can then respond with offers to win your business and—perhaps—preemptively order whatever parts and materials are necessary. Following acceptance, computers on behalf of both parties will arrange optimal schedule blocks based on previous trends (e.g., where you go and when, spatially proximate tasks, historical service times).
It helps to think of this in terms of “what you see is what you need” as applicable to all actors. Your information is ever-present and optionally shared, with other agents in such an environment doing the same. With intelligent use of that data, interactions may emerge organically and with little or no effort on the part of the participants.
At the moment, this is far outside our technological reach, and goes well beyond gimmicky talking umbrellas.
These underpants have not been washed for 3 days (Score:5, Funny)
"Shut up Linux underpants! I'm on a date!"
OT: Topical movie, can't remember the name (Score:2)
Technology vs. living your own life (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, much as one can fantasize about living in a science fiction world, I can't see that it would be all that good in reality. All these extensions to our abilities are, in a way, extra senses - and we simply don't have enough brain capacity to process it. Take our visual cortex, for example: it has a certain size that matches the visual ability of our eyes. There is no extra capacity in there; it wouldn't make evolutionary sense to build in more capacity than needed, as it would cost resources that could have been used more productively elsewhere. If we add artificial 'sensory apparatus' to our natural set of senses, it will take capacity away from other areas - maybe we would be able to 'see' the internet, but we would not be able to see or hear the physical world anymore, or something like that.
This kind of technology won't make us happier - the way to be happy is by learning to live in the body and the reality that we find ourselves in. We won't escape that until we die.
Re:Transhumanism? (Score:4, Informative)
I fully agree. We are definitely heading in this direction. this progression toward transhumanism may very well lead to a Technological Singularity [wikipedia.org]. At such a point our current definitions of what is human and machine will cease to be valid. Some even argue that this merging of man and machine can lead to immortality [wired.com].
Parent