When the Internet of Things was coined, every technological artifact, program and vision, got caught up by feelings of general distrust in both Big Tech and Big Government. People felt powerless, having no choice but to pass between Scylla (billionaires harvesting data and creating new addiction-prone applications) and Charybdis (a hollowed-out state going obsessive-compulsive with behavioral control). Everything was supposedly designed to be ‘efficient’ or ‘optimizing’ or creating ‘transparency’. Either Scylla or Charybdis. A decade ago the correct criticism of thinkers like Adam Greenfield and the Transition Town Movement found severe faults with the smart city projects. The smart cities are now showing failure — see Sidewalk Labs. But a viable alternative beyond ‘disconnecting’ is not given. Escape is possible only for affluent individuals and gated communities. I see a plethora of (low fee and fee-less) components from crypto (think of Cardano, IoTa building real use cases). On identity, I see Self-Sovereign Identity schemes on the rise, many local forms of organizing. Think of the massive success of Arduino, Libelium.
Alicia Asín Pérez: The key point in the Sensorial City is that all the data generated must be transparent and available to the citizens. If the city shows pollution levels, decides to apply a congestion toll for accessing downtown and shows the evolution of those levels, then citizens will see the effectiveness of the decision. In the end, citizens will have real time results of the decisions of politicians. Ideally, this will put on them more pressure to make better decisions.
IoT (Cyber) Security and Semiconductor developments