1/ I made up the backronym LOLCATS for checklist of minimum qualifying capabilities for a minimally complete IoT system.
-
-
Replying to @vgr
2/ Localized actuation: Edge nodes must have local actuation (eg: a solenoid toggling off/on). Sensing necessary but not sufficient.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
3/ Open peering: System must be open and IP based: anyone can add an edge node/client (Pachube Geiger counters, Uber fail the test)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
4/ Latency: There must be a meaningful latency constraint at least comparable to an MMO for a node to participate usefully in the system.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
5/ Consumer interface: You can go to a site/open an app and do something that no non-LOLCATS system can.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
6/ Affordability: Adding an edge node must be highly affordable to a median adult in the developed world (eg. <$200 Arduino based)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
7/ Teaming: It must be possible to do distributed control over networks using teams of >=2. Eg. 2-drone formation flight negotiated online
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
8/ Single-point of failure resistance. This probably means peering (though not necessarily open) at server layer as well.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
9/ Looking at the examples I know of, there has not yet been a full LOLCATS system built. Most common shortcomings are actuation and teaming
-
-
Replying to @vgr
10/ There are also four nice to have features, which take you into LOLCATS++ territory. These are...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
11/ a) Byzantine fault tolerance. b) Blockchain microeconomy c) Localized mobile ad-hoc networking, d) heterogeneity of nodes (2+ types)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.