[ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic

[Samantha Atkins]

On 03/10/2011 12:21 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, spike<spike66 at att.net>  wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
>> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
>> ...
>>>>>> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38
>>> ...That video seems to be much more about the interoperability of devices
>> made by, presumably, companies who had little to do with one another, and on
>> the possibilities of touch interface... Adrian
>>
>> Ja.  I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household
>> appliances.  It needs to be some freeware open source universal language
>> that devices can transmit via Bluetooth that will allow it to tell the other
>> appliances what it is doing, how it is feeling, and to issue or take orders
>> from other appliances.  I don't even yet know what that can be used for, and
>> I recognize it carries its own risks.  I still want that capability in every
>> home appliance that has any processors.
> That exists today - in appliances that have implemented it.  Almost none do.
> The problem is, having a refrigerator that can display images on its touch
> screen front, can receive image files from other devices (say, via Bluetooth or
> USB), and support a standard Web browsing experience is of practically no
> extra value beyond just having a refrigerator.
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/47184/what_happened_to_internet_appliances.html
> has more info on that.  Granted, the article is about 10 years old - it's still
> relevant, though http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20009592-56.html
> details progress since then (but note that, even then, the gadgets still have
> a solid value add for having the interactivity; it's still not general purpose
> "computing just because we can").
>
> It's kind of like how, even today, a $100 laptop is just barely possible - and
> that's a dedicated computing object.  A lot of these future additions fall into
> the gap between "Would you use it even once if it was already there",
> "Would you use it regularly if it was already there", and "Would you pay to
> have it added".  People think they want stuff when the first one is a yes, but
> then there's the second (which lots of fitness equipment infamously falls prey
> to) - and if the third isn't a yes, it's too expensive for anyone to make.

Some of these may be cheaper with some kind of projector and fine enough 
grain hand/body position reader.  Cheaper than actual large touchscreens 
at least.

- s