Exploring User Interface, Cable Technology, And IoT Security In The Context Of The Internet Of Things Essay.

The Best Interface for a System is No User Interface

Questions:

1.What does the statement “the best interface for a system is no User interface”? When might this apply and provide examples

2.Compare the bandwidth, distance, interference rating, cost and security of a) twisted pair cable, b. coaxial cable and c) fibre optic cable. Use current data, given specific details for at least 3 types of cable within each category, these should have different specifications, rather than simply different brand of same type

3.The three common ways to obtain information from IOT devices are sensors, RFID,   and video tracking. Compare three technologies by addressing the advantages, disadvantages, key requirements for the things. Provide two applications of each

4.Discuss the Issues associated with Security and Privacy of the IoT

5.How much of its time budget can be saved by redesigning the application to use the Publish Communication model in the lieu of the Command approach?

6.Describe Nielsen's Law. How does it relate to Moore’s law? What are the Implications for the IoT?

1.The term No User Interface or Zero UI refers to the feature that enables users to have a screen-less experience with their devices. According to (), it can be considered as a great interface design that can make a device more user friendly by which people can complete their tasks more efficiently. Nowadays, people have become more app-obsessed and they always try to use best tools for their jobs. No one wants to go back to the age of flip-phone, everyone needs a smart phone to get immediate solution for their job-related problems (Kumar, Stecher & Tamura 2016, p.1870).   

For example: In this context, it can be stated that, the automobile engineers can use this zero UI concept in solving the transportation problems. With the help of the technological progress the engineers can make a touch-screen central control that helps the driver to look at their way while driving. Another application of this screen-based thinking can be the app, by which people can get relief from swiping their smart phones (Al-Fuqaha, et. al., 2015). As Apple has launched a new app through which people can speak can speak to their screens for clicking a selfie or calling someone. This app may help the users to access the things more easily that they care about.

2.

3.

4.There are several issues affecting the security of Internet of Things (IoT) such as, Public perception, which is an important issue that has evolved with the development of IoT as the stolen of smartphone and different electronic devices are recorded around the world which contains the facilities of IoT and thus it is a great problem for the user of the IoT to keep their devices safe and secure; The vulnerability of hacking has also become a great issue in front of the development of IoT. As per Page (2014), Number of hacker hacking different electronic devices by the help of those IoT signals and devices and thus are IoT is facing an obstruction regarding the development of the IoT devices (p.130). This is one of the most important security problem id IoT; Different Cyber security companies are getting much more developed to act as a defence against the ethical hacker but the problem is that the hacker is also developing their ways of hacking and thus creating problem for the cyber security and the development of the IoT as well. One another problem is the lack of true security which is affecting due to the ethical hacker. The hackers at any way are hacking the personal data of different IoT user and thus this is also creating a big issue about the true security of the IoT devices.

Comparison of Bandwidth, Distance, Interference Rating, Cost and Security of Different Types of Cables

The issues regarding the privacy of the IoT are likely, loading too much data in the IoT devices are sometimes getting insecure and are getting public. As per Gubbi, et. Al. (2013), several people are losing their personal data when they keep their data in their IoT devices (p.130). The devices are getting failed for preserving too much private data of the user of the IoT device. One another problem of privacy is unwanted public profile that is trying to get access into the personal data of other and is creating problems to the privacy of the personal data of the user of IoT device. Losing consumer confidence is also a matter of the issues which are related the privacy of the IoT. Due to getting hacked the consumers are radically losing their confidence on the IoT devices and obviously this lose is affecting the trustworthiness if the IoT devices and the IoT as well.

5.As per the given data, Application consumes = 2 ms

Sensor consumes = 3 ms

Round trip propagation delay between the application and the sensor = 12 ms

Therefore, sensor command time = 12 ms – (2 ms + 3 ms)

                                                      = 7 ms

Since, round trip propagation delay between the application and the sensor = 12 ms

Now, time for required delay command = 12 ms

And, time for required delay result = 12 ms

Therefore, Total resultant time = 12 ms + 12 ms + 12 ms

                                                  = 36 ms

Time for conducting 2 cycles = 36 ms + 36 ms

                                                  = 72 ms

Since, 1 second = 100 ms

And, Time consumed by application to trigger a request = 1 second = 100 ms

Therefore, Time left for Buffering = 100 ms - 72 ms

                                                        = 28 ms

However, time for 3^rd cycle > buffering time

Therefore, 3^rd cycle will not be possible.

Hence, if the application id redesigned for 2 cycles in total, it can reduce the time budge by half of what was spent in the previous expenditure, reducing overall expenditure to half (1/2)

6.The dots in the diagram show the various speeds with which have connected to the net, from an early acoustic 300 bps modem in 1984 to an ISDN line (Porambage et al. 2016, p.36). It is amazing how closely the empirical data fits the exponential growth curve for the 50% annualized growth stated by Nielsen's law. 

Comparison of Three Technologies to Obtain Information from IoT Devices and Their Advantages and Disadvantages

In the terms of Nielsen's law, the rate of the internet bandwidth increases and the power of the computer also increase and thus the annual growth of bandwidth of internet is 50% and the rate of increment in the power of the growth of Internet bandwidth is multiple of 57 on the span of 10 year (Kopetz, 2011). According to the study this increment has occurred because the internet providing company is conservative and they used upgrade themselves with the speed of the internet bandwidth. They are investing a lot of money for the betterment of the internet. However, the speed of development of internet and the power of the computer are argued by Moore's Law that says that the power of the growth of the speed of the internet bandwidth is more than that of the speed depicted by the Nielsen's law. According to Moore's law the speed of the growth of the computer is 60% which is 10% more than that of the Nielsen’s Law (Xia, et. al., 2012). It also said in the Moore’s law that the speed if increment in the power of the computer is more than that of the Nielsen’s Law that is which is 100 % in the span of 10 year.

Reference List

Al-Fuqaha, A., Guizani, M., Mohammadi, M., Aledhari, M., & Ayyash, M. (2015). Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 17(4), 2347-2376. Retrieved from https://yaramoozan.ir/download/Internet_of_Things.pdf

Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future generation computer systems, 29(7), 1645-1660. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167739X13000241

Jing, Q., Vasilakos, A. V., Wan, J., Lu, J., & Qiu, D. (2014). Security of the internet of things: Perspectives and challenges. Wireless Networks, 20(8), 2481-2501. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11276-014-0761-7

Kumar, S., Stecher, G., & Tamura, K. (2016). MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Molecular biology and evolution, 33(7), 1870-1874. Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/33/7/1870/2579089

Kopetz, H. (2011). Internet of things. In Real-time systems (pp. 307-323). Springer US.

Page, T. (2014). Skeuomorphism or flat design: future directions in mobile device User Interface (UI) design education. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 8(2), 130-142. Retrieved from https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJMLO.2014.062350

Porambage, P., Ylianttila, M., Schmitt, C., Kumar, P., Gurtov, A., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2016). The quest for privacy in the internet of things. IEEE Cloud Computing, 3(2), 36-45.

Xia, F., Yang, L. T., Wang, L., & Vinel, A. (2012). Internet of things. International Journal of Communication Systems, 25(9), 1101.