[Cryptography] "push within the entire IT industry to, make everything "Web-centric"

[Ray Dillinger]

On 10/6/21 8:35 PM, Robert Wilson via cryptography wrote:
>
> For there to be a marketing advantage to a garage door opener
> connecting to the internet somehow, it seems to me that the choice
> between one that does and one that does not has to be visible to the
> prospective purchaser. Adding it as just something this manufacturer's
> opener has doesn't pull me toward buying that model/brand without
> that. I was never offered such a choice, and was not even told in
> advance that my new opener would have that feature so that I could say
> "wait, what does that add to the cost".
>
> Bob W.


At the risk of asking a dumb question, do we suppose there might be a
market for "privacy appliances" or "secure appliances" which are 'smart'
insofar as onboard intelligence can make them, but guaranteed not to
send or receive messages over any computer networks in any way under any
circumstances?

For example, a smart thermostat *can* have infrared sensors that track
people, learn when they are home and what rooms they frequent, and
optimize its operation for providing comfort while controlling heating
costs.  It does not need to report any of that information back to
anywhere.  A smart refrigerator can keep track of how old things are and
what you're supplied with and out of, without connecting to anything
outside your house.  A fitness monitor, including diet log and advisor,
can fit entirely into a wrist band, with a USB-C connection for a
keyboard so you can enter data about your diet.  Cameras, in general, do
not really need to communicate with anything on the web - even if
they're connected to computers.  A tablet for reading books, can be used
for .... reading books, full stop.

Of course you'd have to charge more, even for less capable hardware,
because you'd miss all those commercially valuable opportunities to
monitor, market to, or annoy the user.  But I'd consider it to be worth
the premium.

Bear