Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #26162 > unrolled thread

Cloud? IoT? How to start

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded

Contents

  Cloud? IoT? How to start pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:04 +0100
    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Randy Day <randy.day@sasktel.netx> - 2017-03-23 07:41 -0600
    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-03-24 12:04 +0000
      Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 15:35 -0400
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-25 20:10 +0000
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 15:23 -0500
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-03-25 20:28 +0000
      Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start upsidedown@downunder.com - 2017-03-25 22:20 +0200
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-25 19:34 -0700
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-26 07:49 +0100
          Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-26 01:20 -0700
            Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-26 09:17 +0100
              Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-26 02:47 -0700
                Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-03-26 12:46 +0100
                  Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-26 11:31 -0700
                    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-26 21:29 +0100
                      Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-26 16:08 -0700
          Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 09:21 +0200
    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-03-24 14:41 +0000
      Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-24 11:29 -0700
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-03-24 23:03 -0400
          Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start "tim..." <tims_new_home@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-25 09:16 +0000
          Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-25 10:39 -0700
            Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-03-26 05:31 -0400
              Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-26 03:36 -0700
              Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-27 00:22 +0000
                Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-27 16:53 +0100
                  Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-27 18:45 +0000
                    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-27 15:21 -0500
                      Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-28 17:59 +0000
                        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-28 15:01 -0500
                        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 00:09 -0400
                          Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2017-04-05 11:58 +0300
        Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 12:55 -0500
          Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-25 11:01 -0700
            Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 15:25 -0500
              Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-25 19:36 -0700
    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 18:29 +0000
    Re: Cloud? IoT? How to start "Robert Lacoste" <see-alciom-dot-com@none.com> - 2017-03-29 13:33 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#26162 — Cloud? IoT? How to start

I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My 
first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise 
meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.

I want to start from a real simple application.
I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by 
remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.

At first I wanted to connect the smartphone directly to the remote node, 
but I think this isn't the good and modern approach. You need to 
implement a server in the node and you need to have a free channel to 
the server (usually the server running in the node can't be contacted 
from the outside, except you change configurations of network devices).

For sure it's simpler to have a client on the remote node that connects 
to a Cloud server. Even the smartphone connect to the Cloud server.
I think most of those kind of systems use HTTP/HTTPS as the protocol to 
transfer data.

Now the big question. I know I can create myself the Cloud server, but I 
think there are many ready-to-use solutions. Do you suggest something?
At the moment I want to experiment only, so I have only 1-10 nodes with 
just a few data. However I'd like to study flexible solutions that are 
ready to upgrade in the future to more nodes and more data.

Are there some Cloud services available for embedded platforms (IoT)? 
They should have a simple API to implement in the node.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26164

In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...

[snip]

> Are there some Cloud services available for embedded platforms (IoT)? 
> They should have a simple API to implement in the node.


IFTTT? MQTT?

Are those the kinds of things you're looking for?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26204

In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
> 
> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My 
> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise 
> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
> 
> I want to start from a real simple application.
> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by 
> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
> 

Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about 
security first

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/03/16/maker_of_hackable_smart_
vibrator_will_pay_3_5_million_settlement_to_users.html?utm_content=inf_
10_2641_2&wpsrc=socialedge&tse_id=INF_56152ff00e6e11e79b1a07d5f3e08d7d

Yes it is a long link but in some ways it is funny

IoT and Cloud is just naming some random collection of protocols that 
have existed before.

There is a cartoon/meme you can find out there

	"There is no cloud
	 it is just somebody else's computer"

Which is why I refer to IoT as LoT (Lawyer of Things)

-- 
Paul Carpenter          | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/>    PC Services
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/LogicCell/>   Logic Gates 
Education 
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/pi/>  Raspberry Pi Add-ons
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26257

On 3/24/2017 8:04 AM, Paul wrote:
>
> IoT and Cloud is just naming some random collection of protocols that
> have existed before.
>
> There is a cartoon/meme you can find out there
>
> 	"There is no cloud
> 	 it is just somebody else's computer"
>
> Which is why I refer to IoT as LoT (Lawyer of Things)

I know someone who is marketing a product where much of the processing 
is done in the "cloud".  He feels that somehow this will make the 
software immune from ever needing to be ported as OS revisions change 
and hardware is upgraded.  Really?  Is that really possible?  At some 
point won't the environment hosting software require maintenance no 
matter what your host is (assuming they upgrade on a regular basis)?

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26259

On 25/03/17 19:35, rickman wrote:
> On 3/24/2017 8:04 AM, Paul wrote:
>>
>> IoT and Cloud is just naming some random collection of protocols that
>> have existed before.
>>
>> There is a cartoon/meme you can find out there
>>
>>     "There is no cloud
>>      it is just somebody else's computer"
>>
>> Which is why I refer to IoT as LoT (Lawyer of Things)
>
> I know someone who is marketing a product where much of the processing is done
> in the "cloud".  He feels that somehow this will make the software immune from
> ever needing to be ported as OS revisions change and hardware is upgraded.
> Really?  Is that really possible?  At some point won't the environment hosting
> software require maintenance no matter what your host is (assuming they upgrade
> on a regular basis)?

The key is to have everything specified in terms of
an API, and to program against that API and only
that API. A good API is far more valuable than any
implementation.

It can make it a lot easier, /provided/ the architecture
and implementation are /very/ carefully thought through.
The poster child proof-of-concepts are the telecom system
and Amazon Web Services.

None of which changes the concept that cloud processing
is the triumphant re-invention of timesharing systems,
and that it means your data and processing is done on
machines owned by another company.

I remember the relief people felt when IBM PCs arrived,
because then they were no longer held hostage by the
timesharing bureaux.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26262

rickman wrote:
> On 3/24/2017 8:04 AM, Paul wrote:
>>
>> IoT and Cloud is just naming some random collection of protocols that
>> have existed before.
>>
>> There is a cartoon/meme you can find out there
>>
>>     "There is no cloud
>>      it is just somebody else's computer"
>>
>> Which is why I refer to IoT as LoT (Lawyer of Things)
>
> I know someone who is marketing a product where much of the processing
> is done in the "cloud".  He feels that somehow this will make the
> software immune from ever needing to be ported as OS revisions change
> and hardware is upgraded.  Really?  Is that really possible?  At some
> point won't the environment hosting software require maintenance no
> matter what your host is (assuming they upgrade on a regular basis)?
>

Beats me. If it's an interpreted language, then perhaps - although
they seem to have more tools thrash.

-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26265

On 2017-03-25, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

> I know someone who is marketing a product where much of the
> processing is done in the "cloud".  He feels that somehow this will
> make the software immune from ever needing to be ported as OS
> revisions change and hardware is upgraded.

Right, and at home he's got a paddock full of unicorns that fart
rainbows.

> Really?  Is that really possible?

As long as the hosting company never changes anything (or goes out of
business), hardware never fails, software never needs security
updates, protoocols never change, requirements never change, and so
on.

IOW, no.

> At some point won't the environment hosting software require
> maintenance no matter what your host is (assuming they upgrade on a
> regular basis)?

Yes.

You're just pushing some of the maintenance work off on sombebody else
and paying them to do it.  It's still fallible appplications running
on fallible OSes on fallible hardware that's all built and maintained
by fallible people.  [The _hope_ is that "those people" are better at
it than "these people".  In some cases that may be true.  I'm not
convinced it's usually possible to predict which cases those are.]


But now you've made yourself even more dependent on network
connections -- which are (surprise!) fallible.

--
Grant

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26263

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul
<paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
>> 
>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My 
>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise 
>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
>> 
>> I want to start from a real simple application.
>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by 
>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
>> 
>
>Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about 
>security first

Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the
remote control features :-)

After all, the Stuxnet exploit was first used on Siemens systems :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26268

On 3/25/2017 1:20 PM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul
> <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
>>>
>>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My
>>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
>>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
>>>
>>> I want to start from a real simple application.
>>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by
>>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
>>
>> Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about
>> security first
>
> Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the
> remote control features :-)

I think the problem with IoT is that vendors are JUST pitching it
as "remote control".  IMO, there's very little "value added" for most
devices if you just allow the user to control it from a distant location.

(Do you really need to control your washing machine, dishwasher, irrigation
system, coffee maker, etc. from afar?)

But, the real "value added" requires a fair bit more development effort
and "selling"/marketing.

E.g., instead of letting me monitor video from my home via an (insecure! :> )
web app at some remote location, why not have some "smarts" in the
cloud service whereby *it* is monitoring the video and alerting
me to motion detected in the frame?  Instead of letting me turn on
the water for my rose bushes (but NOT the cactus) from my office, why
not make note of the weather in my neighborhood and decide that their
transpirational losses are likely to be excessively high, today, and
turn the water on *for* me?

I.e., provide intelligent AGENTS instead of just a glorified DynDNS service.

> After all, the Stuxnet exploit was first used on Siemens systems :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26271

On 25/03/17 20:20, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul
> <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
>>>
>>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My
>>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
>>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
>>>
>>> I want to start from a real simple application.
>>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by
>>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
>>>
>>
>> Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about
>> security first
>
> Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the
> remote control features :-)

Today's heavily advertised "solution looking for a problem":
https://ring.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26272

On 3/25/2017 11:49 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> On 25/03/17 20:20, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul
>> <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My
>>>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
>>>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
>>>>
>>>> I want to start from a real simple application.
>>>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by
>>>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about
>>> security first
>>
>> Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the
>> remote control features :-)
>
> Today's heavily advertised "solution looking for a problem":
> https://ring.com/

Actually, there have been several "news stories" (typ. "filler" pieces)
here involving this product.  Likely because it generates video (which
is always a boon to TV broadcasters) and is usually sensational
(folks stealing packages off front porches, attempted home invasions, etc.)

Of course, really only applies to a very small portion of the population
(or residences).  And, probably relatively easy to defeat when/if it becomes
more widely used (e.g., wear a mask, whack it with a baseball bat, approach
from "off screen", jam wireless, blind with overbright/laser light source,
interfere with home's internet connection, etc.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26274

On 26/03/17 09:20, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/25/2017 11:49 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
>> On 25/03/17 20:20, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul
>>> <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My
>>>>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
>>>>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
>>>>>
>>>>> I want to start from a real simple application.
>>>>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to control by
>>>>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about
>>>> security first
>>>
>>> Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the
>>> remote control features :-)
>>
>> Today's heavily advertised "solution looking for a problem":
>> https://ring.com/
>
> Actually, there have been several "news stories" (typ. "filler" pieces)
> here involving this product.  Likely because it generates video (which
> is always a boon to TV broadcasters) and is usually sensational
> (folks stealing packages off front porches, attempted home invasions, etc.)
>
> Of course, really only applies to a very small portion of the population
> (or residences).  And, probably relatively easy to defeat when/if it becomes
> more widely used (e.g., wear a mask, whack it with a baseball bat, approach
> from "off screen", jam wireless, blind with overbright/laser light source,
> interfere with home's internet connection, etc.)

Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out
of business or switches to incompatible products.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26277

On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out
> of business or switches to incompatible products.

I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort
of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting
their data and business to The Cloud)!  Either they don't
seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will
magically rescue/protect them from this...  :<

Would you buy a $70 light bulb if it required the continued
operation/availability of a remote server for you to use it?  :<

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26280

In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid 
says...
> 
> On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> > Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out
> > of business or switches to incompatible products.
> 
> I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort
> of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting
> their data and business to The Cloud)!  Either they don't
> seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will
> magically rescue/protect them from this...  :<

Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the 
mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over
substance, or soundbites or marketing hype.

Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix
anything.

-- 
Paul Carpenter          | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/>    PC Services
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/LogicCell/>   Logic Gates 
Education 
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/pi/>  Raspberry Pi Add-ons
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26288

On 3/26/2017 4:46 AM, Paul wrote:
> In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
> says...
>>
>> On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
>>> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out
>>> of business or switches to incompatible products.
>>
>> I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort
>> of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting
>> their data and business to The Cloud)!  Either they don't
>> seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will
>> magically rescue/protect them from this...  :<
>
> Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the
> mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over
> substance, or soundbites or marketing hype.
>
> Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix
> anything.

I think Manglement is just being opportunistic:  hoping/wanting
someone to make *their* problem(s) go away.  Easier to buy in to
something and LATER blame that something for not being what it
*should* have been than to actually tackle the (THEIR) problem
themselves!

      "I trusted <them> ... and <they> let me down (implicit in
      this is that it is not *my* fault... I should be absolved
      even from my poor assessment of their trustworthiness!)"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26292

On 26/03/17 19:31, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/26/2017 4:46 AM, Paul wrote:
>> In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
>> says...
>>>
>>> On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
>>>> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out
>>>> of business or switches to incompatible products.
>>>
>>> I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort
>>> of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting
>>> their data and business to The Cloud)!  Either they don't
>>> seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will
>>> magically rescue/protect them from this...  :<
>>
>> Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the
>> mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over
>> substance, or soundbites or marketing hype.
>>
>> Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix
>> anything.
>
> I think Manglement is just being opportunistic:  hoping/wanting
> someone to make *their* problem(s) go away.  Easier to buy in to
> something and LATER blame that something for not being what it
> *should* have been than to actually tackle the (THEIR) problem
> themselves!
>
>      "I trusted <them> ... and <they> let me down (implicit in
>      this is that it is not *my* fault... I should be absolved
>      even from my poor assessment of their trustworthiness!)"

Half right.

They change jobs every 2 years, which means...

If it worked, they say "look what I started/finished".
If it fails, they say "I was handed a crock", or "the
other guy turned it into a crock".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26293

On 3/26/2017 1:29 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> On 26/03/17 19:31, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/26/2017 4:46 AM, Paul wrote:
>>> In article <ob82it$k4u$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> On 3/26/2017 1:17 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
>>>>> Don't forget the (metaphorical) killer: company goes out
>>>>> of business or switches to incompatible products.
>>>>
>>>> I am surprised at how oblivious people seem to be to this sort
>>>> of thing -- including corporate customers (i.e., trusting
>>>> their data and business to The Cloud)!  Either they don't
>>>> seem to think it can happen *or* they think something will
>>>> magically rescue/protect them from this...  :<
>>>
>>> Unfortunately most people especially the higher you go up the
>>> mamangement chain have long ago been hyptonised by style over
>>> substance, or soundbites or marketing hype.
>>>
>>> Too many people believe in the "Magic Technology Bullet" to fix
>>> anything.
>>
>> I think Manglement is just being opportunistic:  hoping/wanting
>> someone to make *their* problem(s) go away.  Easier to buy in to
>> something and LATER blame that something for not being what it
>> *should* have been than to actually tackle the (THEIR) problem
>> themselves!
>>
>>      "I trusted <them> ... and <they> let me down (implicit in
>>      this is that it is not *my* fault... I should be absolved
>>      even from my poor assessment of their trustworthiness!)"
>
> Half right.
>
> They change jobs every 2 years, which means...

That's not true of all.  E.g., folks who own their own businesses.
I noticed that they genuinely wanted *me* to assume the responsibility
(and risk!) for projects that they couldn't wrap their heads around.
They really wanted to be able to walk away thinking the problem was
"off their desk".

Of course, as it was their money (typically), they ALSO wanted a
successful outcome!  But, what they wanted more (in the short-term)
was NOT to have to worry about it.

A colleague once pointedly asked me, "don't you want your clients
to succeed?".  And, was chagrined when I replied, "Sure!  If they
are pursuing a realistic goal.  I don't want that success to come
on *my* back (because they underestimate the cost, time, complexity,
problems, etc.).  *I* don't want to be responsible for making a
success of something that is inherently a dog..."

Best advice to give someone new to the business is to know when to
walk away from what *appears* to be a "lucrative" job (lots of
billable time) but that you can't envision a successful result.

[I've known lots of contractors/consultants who've lined their pockets
with failed projects:  "I told you about my HOURLY RATE..."  And,
why I much prefered fixed cost projects (because I could see a defined
goal at the onset and know it could be met -- freeing me to move on
to something else with a "win" in my column!)]

> If it worked, they say "look what I started/finished".
> If it fails, they say "I was handed a crock", or "the
> other guy turned it into a crock".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26300

Il 26/03/2017 08:49, Tom Gardner ha scritto:
> On 25/03/17 20:20, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:04:31 -0000, Paul
>> <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <ob09tq$qj2$1@dont-email.me>, pozzugno@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.  My
>>>> first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
>>>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.
>>>>
>>>> I want to start from a real simple application.
>>>> I have some Internet-connected embedded boards that I want to
>>>> control by
>>>> remote with my smartphone connected to Internet.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Before you go ANY further read this short article and think about
>>> security first
>>
>> Over here Siemens is advertising their household appliances by the
>> remote control features :-)
>
> Today's heavily advertised "solution looking for a problem":
> https://ring.com/

Just a curiosity.

The video doorbell connects to home WiFi network. Of course you need to 
select the SSID and write a password to make a WiFi connection. The 
setup guide says this process is done using a smart device (smartphone), 
after pushing a button in the doorbell to put it in Setup mode.

How does it work? How the smartphone sends the WiFi configuration to the 
doorbell that isn't connected to Internet yet (because it isn't 
configured yet)?
Does it use a local connection (Bluetooth, NFC, ...), even if it isn't 
explicit?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26208

On 2017-03-23, pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.

IoT: 

  Take a bunch of small devices with no need for internet access.  Add
  internet access with tons of security holes.  Set up some dodgy web
  sites and write some broken smartphone apps to talk to the "things".

Cloud:

  Put all your data on somebody else's computer and let _them_ lose
  it.

> My first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I have many CHARTS
                                  at               and DIAGRAMS..
                              gmail.com            

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26221

On 3/24/2017 7:41 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2017-03-23, pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd like to start learning the modern paradigm of IoT and Cloud.
>
> IoT:
>
>   Take a bunch of small devices with no need for internet access.  Add

IoT doesn't require access to The Internet.  Remember, *an* internet
just refers to them being able to talk (i.e., to each other).

As to whether they *need* that ability... that depends on the functionality
you want to give them.  Does your automobile *need* a radio?  heater?  etc.?

>   internet access with tons of security holes.  Set up some dodgy web

A closed internet is less vulnerable than one that extends into *the* Internet.

>   sites and write some broken smartphone apps to talk to the "things".
>
> Cloud:
>
>   Put all your data on somebody else's computer and let _them_ lose
>   it.

*Or*, let them extract whatever THEY consider to be of value for their
own needs/gains -- often implicitly at *your* expense!  (of course, they
will try to convince you that this is to your *benefit* using some
perverse logic)

>> My first impression is that they are "empty words" without a precise
>> meaning: you can fill the "word" as you want.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded

csiph-web