// The Next Web explains "Why 2013 will be the year of the Internet of Things" http://tnw.co/TmTcZl
According to WikiPedia, the term describes "a system where the Internet is connected to the physical world via ubiquitous sensors". But at the moment I think there is a confusion on what "the Internet of Things" actually means, or at least how it is used. Or TNW is desperate for a new buzzword.
For example, the author writes:
But as Patil points out, the raw data is not so helpful on its own and this is why people are building products that can help to communicate that information clearly. A good example we’re covered recently is MySugr, the data collection app for diabetics.
Although it doesn’t yet take blood readings automatically, but inputting the data on mood, food and health, people with diabetes can start to work with their own data. The mobile app means they can add information anywhere and even show it to their doctor. At the moment though it’s not compatible with the blood testing kits that are given to patients.
In what was described above, no "thing" produces data or communicates with any other "thing". This is simply an example of "digitized life" (is this a term? can I coin it? :))
Another example involved switching on the lights to your home by your mobile device's GPS signal when you enter the house. If there ever was an example of too much technology being used for a very simple task, that is probably it. Not to mention that GPS signal can be problematic inside a house (signal gone = lights turn out on you?).
Perhaps we need better examples if the idea of "The Internet of Things" is to have any success…
Google+: View post on Google+