The Internet of things: from networked objects to ubiquitous computing

Throughout the article, it specifically mention the term "Blogjects".
It sounds complicated but it is not. Basically, Blogjects is the word which come from the combination of "blog" and "objects". Blog is a website which enable the people to express and share various incident or commenting on a specific topic. Simply, blogjects mean the "objects" have represent the human blogging.

It is interesting that the act of blogjects and human bloggers could be the same, likewise they can create posts or any links. In other words, they have the same act but different approaches. As Julian Bleecker mentioned " The most peculiar characteristic of Blogjects is that they participate in the exchange of ideas. Blogjects don't just publish, they circulate conversations."

Based on this statement, perhaps the blogjects is more lively and active than human bloggers, they can exchange ideas same as the human. Sometimes, human might not willing to exchange idea or pay attention to the post and comments. However, there is a high possibility for the blogjects to exchange the ideas and circulate conversations. Look at the video below, it discuss about the Internet of Things and it is really interesting.

 Here are the 3 keys characteristics which able to differenciate the blogjects from the internet objects in the social web:

1. It is able to do tracking and tracing.
2. Able to record and experience the histories which they encountered.
3. Blogjects is interactive within a group because it enables them to share information.

Therefore, from these 3 characteristic, we can see that they are empirical which is like a camera that able to record the information. In other words, it is able to log and remember their act; meanwhile it is able to share their information with the others.

To conclude, personally I think human blogging would be still better than blogjects. It is because blogjects would be still not as vivid as human and also the intepretation too. What do you think? Do you think blogjects is really that good? Indeed, with the high technology nowadays, there might be still a lot of "things" could be replace the bloggers in the future.

Google versus Apple

Google Android vs IOS

Google Android is the mobile operating system for the netbook, tablet computer and cell phone. As for IOS is also the operating system for the Iphone, Ipad and Ipod Touch. In fact, they have the same technologies but there will be a different approaches for the smartphone users. Don't you agree it? Apple is Google's competitor, Google is Apple's competitor, both are competing in the target market to reach the supremacy and also the trend recently. For example, when Apple recommend a new apps for the smartphone devices, definitely Google would map up a similar apps for its' mobile devices too.

Speaking of both OS, Daniel Roth has stated that "Phones were going to replace PCs as the main gateway to the Internet, and they were going to do it soon. Why would consumers tether themselves to a PC when phones were growing more and more powerful---and were cheaper, too?"

Based on his statement, I personally think that phones have already replaced PCs which is the gateway to the Internet. It is because phones like Iphone or even the Android mobile devices are able to connect to Internet as long as the area you stopped by has the WIFI connection. As for Iphone users, they have used to sign up the 3G plan so that they can online everytime, everywhere as long as there is still coverage. In addition, phones are smaller, lighter and importantly it is portable.

What's more, Daniel Roth has also mentioned that "when Apple unveiled the iPhone last summer, expectations for a gPhone — could it be called anything else? — grew even more feverish." This could be sounds funny, but what do you think if gPhone does exist in the market? Indeed, Iphone nowadays is the big hit and if Google do create this phone called gPhone, probably people might think Google is just take up Apple's idea. As a matter of fact, I would still go for Iphone even gPhone does exist. It is because Iphone nowadays is the trend, everyone hopes to have an Iphone or Ipad due to its' design, colors, functions and features.

As you can see, even the pilots use Ipad!

 Speaking of android, android could run on third party application but Apple can't. No offence, Apple is more on protect the Iphone or Ipad users' privacy. What's more, Iphone's bluetooth is only can work within Apple devices. Thus, people might say this is selfish but it is considered as its' specialties though. In a nutshell, Google Android and Apple IOS each have their own characteristics and also definitely there will be not shortage of people in discussing these two high technology and devices.

Facebook and Twitter are just places revolutionaries go

Simply, social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. They have their own unique features, functions and layout which are able to attract uncountable amount of people to sign up for an account. No doubt, various politicians from different countries have their Facebook account too. For example, Obama and Najib. They have their facebook account, interconnecting with the public. It shows how importance of the social networking nowadays.

 According to the article, it did mention Malcom Gladwell "explicitly stated (no less than three times) that the internet can be an effective tool for political change when used by grassroots organisations (as opposed to atomised individuals). Thus, simply showing that the internet was used to publicise, and even organise protests in the Middle East does nothing to counter his argument (which, by the way, I do not entirely endorse). "

In other words, it means social networking is just a communication channel, a place which the people to express their feelings in words. However, it is not a place to organise any protests. This might sound true, conversely there are many cyber-utopians are angry with Gladwell. Why? It is because this has caused the cyber-utopians have accused Gladwell's suggestion which is "he dared to suggest that the grievances that pushed protesters into the streets deserve far more attention than the tools by which they chose to organse."

As a matter of fact, I think both have the points there but once again it just depend on the people's perspective. There is also another case which happened in Egypt, Wael Ghonim, the marketing manager of Google, he is the one who started off the protest via social networking. He was happy to start the revolution via online and even show appreciation to the creator of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg. In addition, there are still people support Facebook is able to against every unjust. Therefore, compare to the case of Gladwell and Wael Ghonim. The cyber-utopians hate Gladwell for saying those words but the citizens supports Wael Ghonim organize protest via Facebook.

Even the title written, "Facebook and Twitter are just places revolutionaries go", it sounds so stressed up the social networking sites which could turn out the rebellation or unpredictable aftermath.

So, do you think social networking is a place for them to organize the protests?