3 Comments

Summary:

Mary Hodder over at Napsterization went to see a highly complex and networked home of the future, and posed a very good question, the sort most sane people who don’t live in Silly Valley would ask. Also increasingly complex systems mean disasters will inevitablly come up […]

Mary Hodder over at Napsterization went to see a highly complex and networked home of the future, and posed a very good question, the sort most sane people who don’t live in Silly Valley would ask.

Also increasingly complex systems mean disasters will inevitablly come up with a corresponding level of the same increased complexity. I’m not so sure the convenience and networked control we gain from a highly connected computerized home will outweight complex disasters, especially if we shift our living paterns due to increased populations, or simplicity or environmental concerns. Because part of the assumption of wanting those sorts of controls and connections is due to the current dream of a large house with corresponding great distances between the people and things in the house, and the distances people must travel to and from the house to other outside activities. If those ways of living shift, the assumptions predicating the networked home system Intel Research is developing must also shift.

  1. Amen. With US population projected to reach 450-500 million by 2050, there is no way we can maintain the current levels of resource profligacy.

  2. 600-700. Amen ;-)

  3. Amen. 600-700. ;-)

Comments have been disabled for this post