Governance tips for ecosystems – use your platform as a governance tool

photo-1523886382163-bd684bcc34c6 v2

My new post on LinkedIn gives a few tips on governance. How your special perspective can help you to build a well-organised ecosystem.

Advertisements

How do you get the data you need? Even when you don’t know what’s out there or even if it exists?

abstract-close-up-color-220482

My new post on LinkedIn is about how looking for the right data is like looking for a needle in  a haystack. But we found a way to match data generators with data users – even for unpredictable data needs.

“Data Trusts” are a potential way to get data to train AIs. But how do we shepherd a whole flock of Trusts?

martin-bisof-117043-unsplash sheep

My new blog on LinkedIn is about the organisations which will deal with all the data that our AIs will need to work well. How do we make sure these organisations do not stray?

A blueprint for your Internet of Things ecosystem

blueprintpexels-photo-239886

My new article on Linkedin Pulse suggests how firms that make IoT products and services could build their own IoT ecosystems and how they could persuade other firms to join.

How the car industry is building Internet of Things ecosystems.

DOG IN CAR 1pexels-photo-236452

My new article on Linkedin Pulse looks at the implications of how the sensors on modern cars can tell manufactures where you drive, how you drive and when it might be about to breakdown. This data could be a massive help to car repair garages, insurers and other firms. But manufactures might want to charge for it and this might increase the cost of servicing your car. So how will firms partner together?

My research suggests strategies for building Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystems in the car industry and other IoT product industries.

 

Each IoT device has it’s own ‘umwelt’ – a self-world – and combining umwelts is the key to successful IoT services.

The self-world of an IoT device is made up of all that it senses and all that it can do. All its sensor data and all its capabilities to change the physical world. Each device has different sensors and effectors, so many diverse devices working together can help each other.

The self-world of a single IoT device is very limited, like the self-world of a tick

Jakob von Uexküll’s idea of an ‘umwelt’ is really useful for understanding the Internet of Things (IoT), either for building a single IoT device, or an IoT app, or for building a whole IoT ecosystem.

If you want to design a single IoT device or a single IoT app then you need to know how it fits into one or more ecosystems. It cannot exist on it’s own. An IoT device on its own is just a device. The potential of the IoT lies in the combined capabilities of many devices working together.

If you want to design an IoT ecosystem – maybe because you want to build a platform, a network or something to help lots of people – then you need to understand how the devices in the ecosystem can help each other.

Whether you are wondering how an individual device can work with other devices or how can many devices all work together, then the umwelt idea helps to answer both these questions.

What exactly is an umwelt?

An umwelt is the ‘self-world’ of a machine, a person or an animal. It is a combination of all that it senses by plus all that it can do to change it self-world.

For example, a female wood tick hangs in a bush waiting for a deer or other prey. When it senses the butyric acid produced by all mammals, it lets go of its perch. If it lands on some fur this impact is the input trigger that makes the tick scurry around. If it then senses a warm membrane, like skin, then that input triggers piecing and sucking actions.

The tick’s self-world has three input signals and three output action. Its sensors are so limited that any warm membrane will trigger piecing and sucking. A rubber sheet holding warm glycerine will give the same input signal and generate the same action as skin.

Humans can see that ticks usually pierce and suck mammals’ blood through skin but the ticks’ actual sensors and are more limited that what humans see and understand. Ticks have a very different umwelt to humans, just as every IoT device has its own special sensors and effectors.

Von Uexkull also helps us to understand how every IoT device has its own perspective. He wrote about the ‘magic journey’ of animals. For example, ticks can survive for many years just hanging in wait for the scent of butyric acid; some birds migrate each year from pole to pole; and some insects just move from one end of a cereal gran to another.

The umwelts of animals are different because of their different sensors and effectors. And what they sense and do is strung together into the very different journeys of their lives. So the magic journeys of animals are hugely different in terms of timescale and distance. This gives each species a very different perspective on the same events.

Devices and applications have different sensors and effectors – different umwelts.

What devices and applications sense is subjective and specific to each one. For example, a phone might have special information because it monitors a particular person’s physical activity levels. That phone has the right sensors – accelerometers and a clock – and only that one is in the right place at the right time to record that user.

Also, the things different devices can do are subjective and specific to them because they all have different capabilities. Phones use screens, audio speakers, vibrators and other effectors to influence you. Cars do this as well but they can also move you. Websites can inform and guide you. And rowing machines can simulate different water conditions or just say when your exercise time has finished.

Devices and applications have different sensors and effectors. So if devices work with other devices they can get access to different information and different ways to help a user.

The secret to successful IoT services

No single device has enough information to help you with anything but the simplest of problems. For example, apps are usually highly specific in what they are for and they usually need you to supply most of the information. And no single device has enough capabilities to guide you using multiple ‘touch points’ and to deal with most of the problems itself.

For example, Sat Navs and GPS apps are best when they integrate lots of data sources and they are indispensable when then they can actually do something about the different problems that come up. A sensible shopper commonly looks at several different retailers’ websites using several different devices, plus some in-store checking, in their shopping journey to buy a high value item.

Bigger problems are solved by solving smaller problems one after the other in a sort of ‘journey’. And each smaller problem requires different information and different capabilities. The more complicated the problem is then the more complicated is the service that it solves. But a single device is too limited on its own. It can only know about its own self-world and it can only change it’s own self-world in a small number of ways.

Real-word problems are complicated. The more that devices can combine their information-sensing capabilities and their abilities the change the real world, then the more sophisticated are the IoT services that they can jointly produce.

The IoT offers the potential for ‘personal Sat Navs’ that use information from a network of sources and that employ a variety of ways to smooth and guide each user’s journey. Journeys in shopping, travelling, education, recreation and work – IoT services can solve the collections of serial problems that we call life.

If you want to design a single IoT device or a single IoT app then think about what extra data you need and what extra capabilities would complement whatever your device or app can do on its own. How do these change along the course of each user’s journey?

If you want to design an IoT ecosystem then think about the mix of data and capabilities that you have access to. Do the devices that produce them work smoothly together and how do they combine to fit the needs of the different users? Including the needs of the devices themselves.

IoT paranoia: can your devices trust the other IoT devices that help them?

For the Internet of Things (IoT) to function well then lots of IoT devices need to work together properly. But how can these other devices be trusted? Blockchain technologies might be the answer.

Lego block and chain a

The idea of any device with a chip and a web connection working with any other device has lots of potential. At home your freezer could partner with your cooker to swap ideas for meals and precise cooking instructions that are based on what is actually in your freezer and how your cooker best heats up food.

At work your office devices could work together to help you and your colleagues.  Your car could be operated by your phone and vice versa. The Internet Of Everything means any device could potentially work very closely with any other device.

The trust problem

But what happens if one of these devices has been hacked? Maybe your phone has a virus. Or if you need your car to communicate with someone else’s car – to organise routes or a place to meet up – then maybe the other car will infect yours? So how can we make the IoT secure?

The problem of ‘trust’ is bigger than just avoiding infection. How can you trust a device that you do not own or control? Maybe a toll booth will charge you incorrectly, maybe a person will use a phone app to pretend to be someone else. Maybe an IoT device will just give bad information. The cause might not even be hacking, maybe just a software bug, human error or biases caused by differences in peoples’ taste or perspective.  How can all these be avoided?

The coordination problem

Also, whatever your IoT project is about, the issue is more than just about whether you can trust some device. There is also a coordination problem. The potential of an IoT ecosystem lies in the combined sensors and capabilities of many devices. For example, many cars sharing congestion information is much more valuable than the information from just two cars. So the problem is to get many devices to work appropriately with many other devices. Trust and appropriate behaviour need to be guaranteed for all the devices that work on a particular problem or service.

It all boils down to two problems. How can you trust your own devices not to be hacked and how can you trust devices that you do not control to do what they are supposed to do – in a joined-up way?

How can we be sure of the identities, past behaviours and current permissions of other people and devices? How can we coordinate many devices so that they work in a joined-up way? And how can our devices do this checking automatically?

Fortunately a similar problem has already come up with digital currencies like Bitcoin. Digital currencies also need to be trusted and they need many people to join-up in agreeing that a particular buyer owns the digital cash to be able to pay for something. Buyers want to choose from lots of sellers so all the sellers have to agree that they trust the currency – even though the amount of cash each buyer and seller owns changes each time someone buys something.

Cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin, solve this problem by using a distributed ledger like blockchain . A distributed ledger is a database of transactions that is shared and checked across many computers. And transactions can be money transfers or they can be IoT devices sharing data with each other.

Solution: You are what you do and what you do can be recorded

Blockchain technology is much more than the foundation of Bitcoin. Transaction data can include peoples’ identities, devices’ identities or any other useful data such as how they behave. Recording transactions makes it possible to know the real identity of every device and what it has done in the past.

New transactions are cryptographically recorded into blocks and each block in the chain of blocks is cryptographically linked to the previous block to stop tampering. The data in each block is encoded and part of that code is based on the contents of the previous block. To successfully tamper with this record would mean hacking all the computers in the network simultaneously, whilst at the same time guessing how to decrypt each block and the links between them.

Blockchain technology preserves trust in three ways: multiple copies of a single blockchain are shared and continuously checked; the data in each block is encrypted and to decode one block you need to decode the preceding blocks.

So, the problem of IoT devices trusting each other could be solved by using a blockchain technology to encrypt recordings of past behaviours and current permissions. And the problem of coordinating many devices could be solved by sharing a single blockchain database across a network of devices.

Of course there are many distributed ledger technologies and many types of blockchains. My point is that technologies like blockchain solve the trust problem by continuously checking multiple copies of a database that is securely synced.  And automatically synchronising multiple copies of the same database is also a strong basis for coordinating multiple devices.

Trust and coordination are two things that IoT ecosystems will badly need. So blockchain technology looks like it will be a foundation of the IoT ecosystem and much more.