HN user

jdhouse4

89 karma

Currently, I am an Objective-C and Cocoa Touch programmer.

In early 2009, I started AmericaSpace.com, a blog about space exploration. Some say that the best way to grow a start-up is for the founder to hire the talent he or she does not possess. In my case, that talent-deficiency list is long. But following that advice, AmericaSpace has evolved into a space news outlet with 15 very talented people. It is they who make it hum and have through their hard work built viewership to 60K unique visits monthly.

I am the founder and co-organizer of CocoaCoder.org, a group founded in 2003 to promote Mac OS X, and later iOS, application development. It has over 420 members. CocoaCoder.org meets weekly and presents on both hard and soft topics.

In 2000-2001, I worked at JPL, Section 312 as a C++ programmer. If I can say I hate a programming language, then C++ would fit that description.

In 1993-1996, I was co-founder of HouseWorks, an Austin, Texas based gaming company. I was the designer of all things, from story board to actors.

Posts3
Comments9
View on HN

If IoT becomes a security or safety nightmare, which I think most of us will concede as possible if not likely, there will be a public outcry that will result in either gov't oversight and regulation or the industry being sued out of existence. So, assuming for the moment that the IoT industry does not want to be suffocated by lawsuits, the real question for it is by whose hand regulations emerge and are enforced; the industry itself or the gov't?

Industry-based regs, e.g. UL.com, will be the least burdensome. But almost always an industry cannot self-regulate because of free riders, et al., or out of a short-term focus over profit maximization. So, in steps gov't regulation. And gov't regulation is very often over-kill, like using a bazooka to kill a fly. Said bazooka does result in a dead bug but also a lot of collateral damage to the industry being regulated. Think the FAA and how it's Part 23 regulations have both guaranteed safe aircraft and stagnated the general aviation industry nearly to death.

With articles such as this one and Gawker's "Why is My Smarthome So Fucking Stupid", it's pretty obvious that the IoT industry as a whole should be embracing and spreading industry-wide security, safety, and UX standards. Yet, for now there seems to be no such industry initiative to do so, leaving the task to Apple and, to a much lesser degree, Google. With HomeKit, Apple is forcing partners to adhere to tight security and usability standards. With its large user-base of ApplePay-enabled, willing consumers, Apple can force its will upon IoT partners going through the HomeKit acceptance process. But as if on cue, some partners, exhibiting short-sightedness, have whined to the press that Apple's process is onerous. While I'm sure Apple is more than happy to let IoT manufacturers not affiliated with HomeKit IED themselves through lax security or UX, for the industry it's a big mistake.

A few massive home hacks and I agree that the gov't will step-in. Personally, I'd rather have the FCC than the NSA regulate wireless security.

There are two things that can break IoT, security and fracturing. But security is a necessary condition for IoT to succeed.

I know Apple has surprised many of the companies that want to work with HomeKit with its security requirements. I heard from one company that, for example, was upset that locks cannot be remotely activated. The last thing anyone needs is their house getting hacked and robbed as well.

People should be happy for Zuck and Pricilla. Any claims by those who don't know Pricilla that this is other than for love should really get a check-up on their humanity. Not that they'll ever read this, but congrads to them both.