Computing in a fog

Cloud computing is not always the answer and that’s where fog computing comes in.

One of my favourite IT industry buzz words is fog computing.

Initially coined by Cisco Systems, fog computing also goes by the name ‘distributed computing’ or ‘edge computing’ – never accuse the IT industry of not having enough terms for the same thing.

The idea behind distributed, edge or fog computing is that sometimes cloud computing (another term) is not always suitable for jobs where internet connections are unreliable, sending things to a cloud server wastes valuable milliseconds or lots of unnecessary data is being gathered.

Cisco’s Wim Elfrink discusses fog computing in the interview he did with Decoding the New Economy earlier this year.

For many internet of things applications, edge computing makes sense as it means devices aren’t reliant on being constantly connected and the local computer can filter noise out of the data stream being sent to head office.

Another big advantage is in saving internet costs; rather than having say all the sensors on a car having their own expensive mobile connections they instead report back to a central computer which sends relevant information back to the dealer or manufacturer.

The car is also a good example of needed immediate responses; if the airbags are deployed, the onboard computer system has to make a lot of critical decisions immediately. Waiting for a response from a server on the other side of the world could cost lives.

For computing is not only a good example of how technology vendors make up their own catchy names for concepts, it also shows that there are limits to every solution. In this case, situations where cloud computing is not the answer.

Privacy by design

How can businesses protect customers’ privacy, Intel Security’s Michelle Dennedy discusses how to bake privacy into your organisation

“Know your data” is the key tip for businesses concerned about privacy says Michelle Dennedy, Chief Privacy Officer for Intel Security, formerly McAfee.

“It’s really important to go back to basics,” says Michelle. “We’re trying to do bolt-on privacy, just like we did with security years ago. I think it’s time to take a good look at the policy side, which id called Privacy By Design, thinking about it at early states and being consumer-centric.”

“We at McAfee call it ‘Privacy Engineering’; looking at the tools. methodologies and standards from the past, adding current legislative requirements and business rules then turning them into functional requirement.”

Michelle, who is also co-author of the Privacy Engineering Manifesto, was speaking to Decoding The New Economy as part of Privacy Awareness Week.

A key part of the interview is how Michelle sees privacy evolving in a global environment, “if you’d asked me in 2000 where we’d be today I’d have told you it would be like the 1500s when we were dealing with shipping lanes. We would have treaties, it would harmonised and we’d understand that global trade is a hundred percent based upon sharing.”

“We have instead decided to become a set of Balkanized nations.”

For individual businesses “know thy data,” is Michelle’s main advice. “Know what brings you risk, know what brings you opportunity.”

In Michelle’s view, businesses need to balance the opportunities against the risks and treat customers data with respect as the monetisation policies of many online platforms don’t recognise users’ costs in time and data sold.

As businesses find themselves being flooded with data, protecting it and respecting the privacy of customers, users and staff is going become an increasing important responsibility for managers.

It’s worthwhile understanding the privacy laws as they apply to you and making sure your systems and staff comply with them.

Dropping off the grid

Can you drop off the grid and hide from Big Data? The results of one lady’s experiment aren’t encouraging.

Just how hard is it to hide from big data? ABC Newcastle’s Carol Duncan and I will be discussing this from 2.40 this afternoon.

Princeton University assistant professor of sociology Janet Vertesi decided she’d find out by trying to conceal her pregnancy from the internet.

She describes her experiences to Think Progress and the lessons are startling on how difficult it is to drop off the Internet and business databases.

While it’s easy to tritely say ‘don’t use the internet’, Janet found that using cash to avoid being picked up by bank databases raises suspicions while not using discount voucher or store cards meant she missed out on valuable savings.

For many people though dropping off the internet is not an option – not having a LinkedIn profile hurts most job hunters’ chances of finding work while if you want to participate in communities, it’s often essential to join the group’s Facebook page.

The amazing part of all is that Janet herself became a Google conscientious objector two years ago after deciding the company’s data collection methods were too intrusive. Yet she still found it hard to keep the news of her baby off the internet.

Ultimately her friends were the greatest risk and she had to beg them not to mention her pregnancy on Facebook and other social media channels lest the algorithms pick that up.

For Janet, it proved possible but it was really hard work;

Experience has shown that it is possible, but it’s really not easy, and it comes with a lot of sacrifices. And it requires some technical skill. So to that end, it’s my concern about the opt-out idea. I don’t actually think it’s feasible for everyone to do this.

So can you drop off the net? Do you know if you’re on it at all. Join us on ABC Newcastle with Carol Duncan from 2.40 to discuss these issues and more.

Filing cabinet image by ralev_com through SXC.HU

Heartbleed, kettles and design – ABC 702 Mornings

The Heartbleed bug and the connected kettle are the topics of today’s 702 Sydney segment with Linda Mottram

This morning from 10.20am on 702 Sydney I’m talking to Linda Mottram about the Heartbleed bug, connected kettles and dropping off the grid. It’s crowded twenty minutes and I’m not sure how much we’ll cover.

Heartbleed is the main topic of the segment and it’s a big issue that not only exposes a weakness in secure computing but also points out problems with the Internet of Things and the open source model of developing software.

One of the quirky stories of the last few weeks has been the iKettle, a connected kitchen appliance. Do we need one and what happens to your cup of tea if the internet drops out.

3D printing is changing the world of manufacturing but designers are now looking at 4D printing, what is it and how might it change the world of design.

If we get time we’ll also look at the possibilities of dropping off the all seeing grid with the story of a security researcher who tried to hide her pregnancy from the Internet.

We’d love to hear your views so join the conversation with your on-air questions, ideas or comments; phone in on 1300 222 702 or post a question on ABC702 Sydney’s Facebook page.

If you’re a social media users, you can also follow the show through twitter to @paulwallbank and @702Sydney.

It’s hard copying Silicon Valley

New York City struggles to create its own Silicon Valley, but should it need to?

This site has looked at cities wanting to become imitations of Silicon Valley in the past.

New York, along with London, has been one of the places most likely to create its own Silicon Valley.

The New York Times though describes how that journey isn’t proving easy, with the city boasting few major tech successes.

The question though is does New York really want to be Silicon Valley – or San Francisco for that matter?

Right now the Bay Area is sexy and the centre of the world’s growth industries; but so too were Detroit and Birmingham, England once upon a time.

Perhaps it’s better to work on being the next big thing rather than trying to imitate today’s successes.

Business as a commodity

Becoming a commodity business is not part of the Silicon Valley business model, but it’s the best most startups can hope to become.

What happens when your hot startup turns out to be in a commodity market?

According to Danny Crichton at TechCrunch two of the hottest startups of the last five years, Box and Square may be finding out.

You can make good profits out of a commodity operation – supermarkets around the world have shown you can earn good money from 2c profit on every can of baked beans you sell – but it’s hard work and it’s definitely not glamorous.

It’s also not particularly attractive for investors looking for the next big thing and commodity businesses struggle to justify the massive burn rates

The truth for most startup businesses is this is as good as it gets; no billion dollar buyout, no adulation from the tech press and no buying a yacht to rival Larry Ellison’s. Just a decent return from hard work.

While many of us blinded by the billion dollar success stories of Facebook, Google and Amazon, it’s worthwhile considering that most successful businesses are far more modest ventures.

Leading the disruptive wave

Uber’s fight with taxi regulators is part of a broader business disruption

I’ve a story up on Technology Spectator that pulls together Uber’s fight with taxi regulators around the world with the Australian government’s Commission of Audit.

While the story is written in an Australian context, the key message about business disruption is universal; as barriers to entry fall, no incumbent can assume they are immune from having their business upended.

For Australia, this is a particularly important message as the affluent economy is kept afloat by consumer spending underpinned by a favoured and protected housing market.

The economy though is nowhere near as untouchable as it looks; along with being way over invested in property, Australia’s industries are hopeless uncompetitive and have a cost base similar to Germany’s.

It’s an entire country ripe for disruption, it will be interesting to see if the Lucky Country’s luck holds in the 21st Century.

Microsoft and the Internet of Your Things

Microsoft has come the IoT party with the ‘Internet of Your Things’ tagline

Microsoft has come late to the Internet of Things party, but it is has a good angle with it’s ‘Internet of Your Things’ tagline.

General Manager of Microsoft’s embedded systems division, Barb Edson, spoke with Decoding The New Economy about the company’s strategy with the Internet of Things.

For Microsoft, the emphasis is on the enterprise side of the business with Edson describing their strategy of “B2B2C” where the value in the IoT lies in managing the data for the businesses providing consumer services.

Most notable is the company’s IoT tagline, as Edson says; “from Microsoft’s perspective we view the Internet of Things as ‘the internet of your things.”

“Lots of companies out there talking about the Internet of Everything that there’s 212 billion devices, why do you care as business executive. You care about your things.”

Microsoft’s strategy is based on leveraging their own assets such as Azure cloud services, SQL Server and Dynamics along their customers’ existing infrastructure.

This retrofitting the internet of things to existing infrastructure is illustrated by Microsoft’s using the London Underground as its main reference site.

Connecting all 270 stations of London’s 150 year old Tube network to the IoT is a massive undertaking and one that can only be done by retrofitting existing monitoring and SCADA systems.

Interestingly the case study only look at Phase One of what appears to be pilot project in selected locations, the Microsoft spokespeople were a little unclear on this when asked.

The London Underground is only one example of millions of organisations that will grapple with adding existing equipment to the internet of things in coming years; it’s an opportunity that Microsoft has been smart to identify.

Edson however is clear on how Microsoft intends to help companies deal with the information overload facing managers, “I think the most exciting thing is we’re seeing real business problems being solved.”

4D printing and the quest for elegance

Many of us are still getting comfortable with the idea of 3D printing, but MIT’s Skylar Tibbits is working on a fourth dimension.

Many of us are still getting comfortable with the idea of 3D printing, but MIT’s Skylar Tibbits is working on a fourth dimension that he hopes will move us into a more elegant era of design.

Ahead of Skylar’s visit to Sydney for the Vivid Festival in June, Decoding the New Economy had the opportunity to interview him about what 4D printing is and his quest to create materials that can build themselves.

What is 4D printing

“We called it 4D printing because we wanted to add the ability for things to change and transform over time,” explains Skylar. “Time is the fourth dimension.”

Skylar’s mission at MIT’s Self Assembly Lab is to create materials that assemble themselves. In a TED presentation he demonstrates how these materials may work and the philosophy behind them.

Part of that search involves developing techniques for building large and complex structures from small components. “People know and utilise this in biology, chemistry and material science domains and we’re trying to translate that into larger scale applications.”

Avoiding big machines

“We don’t want to build bigger machines than the things we want to build, we want to build distributed systems,” Skylar continues. “If you want to build a skyscraper, you don’t want to build a skyscraper sized machine.”

Not only does this philosphy offer benefits for manufacturing and building but it may also save energy, transport and labour costs as things can automatically build themselves once they’re delivered to a customer.

“Materials should be able to assemble themselves or at least error correct or respond to active energy. There’s a whole application of packaging and minimising volume after manufacturing and transforming on site.”

Over time they could also adapt to changed conditions Skylar believes: “There’s also how products themselves can transform and be smarter adapt to my demands or adapt to the environment as it’s fluctuating around.”

Redefining the makers’ movement

Worldwide we’ve seen the rise of the makers’ movement as affordable 3D printing and cheap electronics has made it possible to build new things; Skylar sees the Self Assembly Lab as being part of, but slightly apart from this group.

“We make machines that make things, we’re integrated into that theme. We’re arguing that people can collaborate with materials and materials can be collaborative. It’s not just us making stuff and forcing materials into place, it’s materials making themselves.

“A lot of methods are top down, big machines force materials into place and we’re trying to argue you can have bottom up applications in manufacturing.”

So more than just simply printing components, Skylar sees the opportunity for embedding the intelligence into components so they can assemble themselves; the real task lies in programming the materials.

 The internet of elegant solutions

Similarly, Skylar sees the internet of things as being a far more passive, perhaps even friendlier, field than that dominated by machines and plastics.

“It’s not about the number of sensors and electronics and motor and things so that we can make these smart devices, we’re interested in how materials and fundamentally elegant solutions responding to external energy can have the same capabilities.”

“We certainly believe in a connected internet of things, but it’s more a material based internet of things.”

“I think that any solution in the beginning you throw a lot of money, technology and motors at it but over time you find more elegant solutions where materials can do more for you.”

“The wearable space is a good example where people don’t want to wear electronics all over their bodies, they don’t want bulky things that are expensive and hard to assemble and clunky to wear.”

“You want materials that you want your skin to touch, so we’re trying to find elegance in the solutions with smart devices.”

Seeding the forest

The challenge for Skylar, the Self Assembly Lab and those looking at changing the worlds of design and manufacturing is – like many other fields – funding.

Material sciences, particularly those being explored at the MIT, have long lead times that aren’t suited to the current Silicon Valley led model of innovation and Skylar believes we need a different model.

“We need to invest in super, long term radical innovation, to seed the economy and global technology development. We gained substantially in the Silicon Valley model with short term wins – with apps and simple technologies with incremental progress.”

“It’s sort of like we need to seed the forest, we can’t just keep taking all these things from the top like low hanging fruit we need to create a forest effect so that we create many new technologies.”

What comes out that forest of 4D printing and smart materials is anyone’s guess; but if Skylar Tibbits has his way, it will certainly be elegant.

Microsoft’s not like everybody else

The first advert for Microsoft’s Nokia phones is a little mysterious and worrying

“Not like everybody else” proclaims Microsoft’s first ad for its newly acquired Nokia phone division.

In what way the Microsoft-Nokia product isn’t like its Apple and Android competitors isn’t clear from the ad, but hopefully they’ll tell us.

The real concern with the Microsoft ad is that it again appears the business is being left behind in a marketplace shift as Google, Samsung, Apple and all the other smartphone leaders move to integrate their phones with smarthomes, fridges and even football stadiums.

Sadly it might turn out that, once again, Microsoft isn’t like everybody else.

Keep it short and snappy

Charts as the thinking person’s cat video says Kevin Delaney, co-founder of news site Quartz, as he recommends keeping stories short and snappy

“Charts are our version of cat videos” says Kevin Delaney, co-founder of the Quartz news website, in an interview with Richard Edelman, president and CEO of the Edelman PR Agency.

Keep stories short and snappy or long and in-depth with Delany seeing 500 to 800 words as being a ‘dead zone’ for online stories. Interestingly, Edelman’s piece comes in at 760 words.

In future, I’ll be keeping blog posts either very short or extremely long on this site.

Dealing with the demographic dividend

As populations age, training and education become more important than ever.

“In the 20th century the planet’s population doubled twice. It will not double even once in the current century,” states The Economist in a lengthy article on how the world’s aging population is going to affect economic growth.

One of the most overlooked aspects of modern day economics is the changing demographics of the developed world, the aging army of baby boomers has been effectively ignored by policy makers and voters alike and now we’re about the see the consequences.

Japan is the case study as the country is well ahead of the pack with an rapidly aging population and the indicators aren’t good.

Amlan Roy, an economist at Credit Suisse, has calculated that the shrinking working-age population dragged down Japan’s GDP growth by an average of just over 0.6 percentage points a year between 2000 and 2013, and that over the next four years that will increase to 1 percentage point a year.

Despite that drag on growth, the Japanese are still living quite well and could be showing that an economy can grow old gracefully and productively.

The key to doing that is to have a well educated, skilled and productive workforce. An efficient health system that ensures older workers stay fit enough to work doesn’t hurt either.

What The Economist illustrates in its story is that some countries are going to perform better than others as their workforces age. Those who’ve neglected their education systems and workforce skill bases are not going to do well.

One can’t help but think the ideologies that gripped the Anglo-Saxon countries in the 1980s that saw skills being discarded, investment neglected and education cut are going to have a high cost on those nations over the next twenty years.