• Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Maybe the name is the problem. “Internet of Things” implies that “things” are connected to the “internet.”

    I could definitely see the utility of a toothbrush with a three-axis accelerometer that tracks its orientation to make sure I’m getting all of the surfaces of my teeth. But you can do that with Bluetooth, not wifi, and I don’t know why the app needs access to my phone book and a monthly subscription.

    If these things were built on open standards it might be better.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      There are open IoT standards.

      You “can” do these things in a lot of different ways, the unanswered question is what way is best. That’s not just a technical question, it also depends on how easy it is to deploy to the general public. If your toothbrush uses Bluetooth then you need to pair it with something that can speak to it, whereas if it can speak to the Internet then that broadens the ability for various systems to talk to it considerably. You can run a webserver they could visit from any browser, apps for phones, etc.

      There’s no need for a toothbrush to have access to your phone book. But nobody’s saying it should. This whole situation of “hacked toothbrushes” isn’t real.