IoT plus UAD = less chaos

Will the Universal Access Device make the Internet-of-Things work for us?

Internet of Things: a success in need of users

The Internet of Things (IoT) is usually defined as a network of computers interfacing mechanical and digital machines, provided with unique identifiers (UIDs) and the ability to transfer data without requiring human intervention. At the industrial level, it looks like some evolution of the process automation systems that enabled the big productivity gains in the '90s (still a debated issue among economists). At the consumer level, IoT products target the concept of a "smart home", a network of household appliances (from lighting to dishwashers) that can be controlled from smartphones and smart speakers. In order to get a wider picture, almost any equipment in a modern hospital is already part of an IoT network.

One year ago, Microsoft published a report about the IoT market. 88% of IoT adopters reputed that technology as critical to their business. Also, adopters expected to reach a 30% ROI (Return On Investment) in just two years, even while having security concerns before project kickoff. The worst news of all, 47% of them said there were not enough skilled developers. No wonder that one-third of IoT projects were failing in the proof-of-concept stage, either because implementation was too expensive or benefits were suddenly unclear.

Those facts were hardly a surprise for anyone. In fact, the consumer market for IoT has seen way too much: unbreakable locks that could be opened with a screwdriver, digital certificates buried into the code for everyone to copy, home appliances talking in foreign languages after a software update, thousands of home devices forcedly enslaved into botnets... As the guerrillas say: "Everything that can be put out of service is a weapon".

New solutions for old problems?

Last year, the IOTA Foundation and STMicroelectronics announced an alliance for porting IOTA-provided software into STM's 32-bit microcontrollers. Berlin-based IOTA is a not-for-profit organization delivering a scalable and fully-decentralized distributed ledger technology. STMicroelectronics is an italo-french global semiconductor leader active in the field of consumer-oriented embedded applications.

Many observers think that bringing blockchain technology will help IoT out of its problems. On the contrary, my opinion is that IoT problems are not at the technical level, but at the functional one, and that they cannot be solved by technology alone. At the basic functional level (Identification, Authorization and User Interface), there is very little commonality of effort. As every manufacturer has a different solution, this lowers the overall trust at consumer level.

UAD basics: Infrastructure = Technology + Organization

Where can the Universal Access Device improve the IoT landscape? Just by standardizing Identification and User Interface issues, it could keep down development costs. The real benefit, however, will be market segmentation. Asking some manufacturers to improve their application security is probably hopeless, as they just want a quick profit before switching to some other product. However, the smarter companies understand that leveraging a common infrastructure will improve user perception and acceptance of their products. Also, a common set of tools will help in improving the skill of IoT developers.

The old question of infrastructure vs. capital

This situation is not going to change until people will realize that Venture Capital money is no substitute for infrastructure. If we really want to support product development we should offer a cheap and easy infrastructure.

Let's start with an example from old economy: if you want to improve truck design, you should not finance truck manufacturers. Instead, focus your investments to improve existing roads and build better ones: smarter companies will design new truck models to take advantage of that, and the others will have to follow.

This may look just one step less than planned economy, but it is not. Infrastructure is crucial to market, as it is the best way to control its players and expand its boundaries. Looking again back to history, the GSM standard was crucial in developing a global cellular phone market.

It is true that GSM started in 1985 as a protectionist cooperation agreement on cellular technology between France, Germany and Italy. Also, when ETSI (European Telecommunications Standardisation Institute) was set up in 1987, membership was still limited to European entities. The opening of ETSI to members from outside Europe sent the message that the GSM technology was to be shared and everyone could have their say in the specification of the GSM standard.

It is important to note that Nokia and Vodafone bet heavily on the GSM standard without getting any capital incentive. Also, that very gradual opening of the standard-building bodies is looking more than justified even in the present political landscape.

This article is one of a series outlining a detailed proposal for a pan-European Universal Access Device.

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/universal-access-device-deployment-self-sovereign-identity-barresi

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/toward-pan-european-universal-access-device-rosa-giovanna-barresi