# Internet of Things



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 20, 2019)

I'm sure people here have things to say about IoT.
I personally find it mostly useless and the wrong way to go in most cases. It basically takes scripting, which belongs on the command line, to your house - and beyond.

Security is one of the major problems for most people, since they haven't any clue about what security could be about, outside of of installing a deadbolt on their door. This aspect really hit home when it was discovered that people's security cameras were being used for DDoS attacks. I got hit by that one.

Another thing that I find abhorrent is that it simply isn't needed in most cases, and serves no useful purpose for healthy people who might actually _need _the exercise that some device is intended to eliminate. In my artistic house, a lot of modern technology actually would look downright stupid, if not just out of place. I have always tried to cut out plastic objects in my living space because it's just cheap, and I have more self esteem than that. However, I have considered lighting control since I have an awful lot of lights to make the place look nice.

So, what thoughts and concerns do other people have about IoT?


----------



## zirias@ (Jun 20, 2019)

I think it's always good to embrace change and evolution -- you wouldn't want to use a washboard for your laundry nowadays, would you?

Anyways, security should be much more of a concern! I don't have a lot of "things", basically a self-designed system for controlling shutters and two chinese vacuum robots.

I still haven't finished the shutter control properly, but of course, doing it myself, all data will stay in my internal network and if I decide to add some public API, I'll make sure to properly secure it.

The vacuums indeed worried me a bit when it comes to security. They offer great features through a smartphone app (like showing them where exactly to clean, monitoring of all maintenance tasks, cleaning history with maps etc), but for all of this to work, they need to connect to a chinese cloud service. I ended up setting up a new wifi ssid for them, with very long random WPA-PSK, in a network segment that is _only_ allowed internet access and with bandwith throttling to a reasonable value. That way, I feel it is acceptable for me.

I see the point, "normal" people will never do that, they can't even assess what the device could mean security-wise. But like with a lot of other technology that was new some day, I think after a few "major incidents", awareness for risks will be raised and the products will improve.

My cleaning robots already surprised me by refusing to use an unencrypted Wifi (I wanted to do a quick test run on my guest network) -- that's probably a good thing.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jun 20, 2019)

OJ said:


> I personally find it mostly useless and the wrong way to go in most cases.


Most things people buy nowadays are just that.


OJ said:


> Security is one of the major problems for most people


They know nothing about it. They learn how to write enough code--and now they are "coders"(!)--and only cause problems for the rest of us after causing problems for themselves. Then manufacturers put locks on things so they can't hurt themselves but the same people complain about "walled gardens".


OJ said:


> I have an awful lot of lights to make the place look nice.


If you mean you set up your house like "stage lighting" then I'm impressed. If I had the time I'd do the same. The few times I've been to homes where someone has done that it's been just so comfortable and beautiful.


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 20, 2019)

IOT is just a new term for embedded electronics right? So now you can tie your thermostat to the internet.
Truth is IOT is everywhere already. ATM's, Vending Machines, Parking Kiosks.
What I find amusing is that much of the Gen1 gear only used 3G networking due to low bandwidth requirments.
Now ATT is EOL its 3G network... I have seen many commercial  security systems out there run 3G modems for backup network...


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 20, 2019)

OJ said:


> This aspect really hit home when it was discovered that people's security cameras were being used for DDoS attacks. I got hit by that one.


Well at least you admit your problem. What did you do to fix it?
I run opnSense and it handles all that for me. I have no need for my IP cameras to be available to the world.
My camera setup uses an email based alert system. I have motion zones that trigger alerts.


----------



## obsigna (Jun 20, 2019)

Don’t reduce the discussion to IoT for consumers only. Not all devices connected to the internet are IoT ones. A real IoT device communicates autonomously with other devices e.g. for all kind of automation purposes. In this respect, the device as such is innocent like a child, and if it serves the purpose, we want to consider it a good device. That said, the purposes shall be discussed, and we need to take special care for purposes which are not ours.

For example an IoT device which monitors a production process and takes suitable actions together with other devices for maintaining a high quality output, is certainly a good one for a good purpose. An IoT device which would monitor the fuel level of our car and inform the next gas station to adapt the price accordingly, might be a good device but for an evil purpose.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 20, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Well at least you admit your problem. What did you do to fix it?


There isn't much one can do on a public facing resolver since blocking is not possible. However, one can use iptables rules. But for sure, once you get into many requests per second, it's quite disconcerting.

BTW, why wouldn't I admit it? It has nothing to do with me or how I set things up.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 20, 2019)

drhowarddrfine said:


> If you mean you set up your house like "stage lighting" then I'm impressed.


My living room at Christmas. Although that's obviously taken with flash. (You're welcome to look through the rest of the pictures if you want.)


----------



## Birdy (Jun 20, 2019)

I think the Internet of Things stinks.


----------



## PMc (Jun 20, 2019)

It is enablement gone hype.

If it is possible to put an address on a gadget and have it talk to the network, and if this solves problems or makes things possible that weren't possible before, then there is no reason to not do it.

There was something like an urban legend in the 90ies, about some coffee maker with an IP address (and from all I know, that coffee-maker did actually exist). This was cool, this was the vision, and for all the people knowing how the network functions it was obvious that this can be done. So, what is now called Internet-of-Things, is just what I used to promise to people in the 90ies.

The slight difference in matters is just this: in 2000, the Internet was taken over by the money-makers. So today the primary aim is no longer to create improvement, to create cool and great new things. Instead, the primary aim is to make money, and therefore the crap has to be coined "improvement", and the stupid consumer is supposed to swallow it and pay.

What does interest me much more is this: I seem to somehow possess some 1500 sqm of estate property. From the documentation of IPv6 I understand that therefore I am supposed to claim about 2.3 mio. network addresses. How do I get these?


----------



## zirias@ (Jun 20, 2019)

PMc said:


> The slight difference in matters is just this: in 2000, the Internet was taken over by the money-makers. So today _the primary aim is no longer to create improvement_, to create cool and great new things. Instead, _the primary aim is to make money_, and therefore the crap has to be coined "improvement", and the stupid consumer is supposed to swallow it and pay.


According to the theory of capitalism, this _should_ be the same thing. But discussing this will quickly get philosophical.


----------



## PMc (Jun 20, 2019)

PMc said:


> There was something like an urban legend in the 90ies, about some coffee maker with an IP address



And there is RFC2324 describing the protocol...


----------



## PMc (Jun 20, 2019)

Zirias said:


> According to the theory of capitalism, this _should_ be the same thing. But discussing this will quickly get philosophical.



Short answer: the theory of capitalism is not founded on natural law.


----------



## ekingston (Jun 20, 2019)

PMc said:


> There was something like an urban legend in the 90ies, about some coffee maker with an IP address (and from all I know, that coffee-maker did actually exist).



It existed. It was at Cambridge. It was an ethernet connected camera pointing at the coffee machine.








						Trojan Room coffee pot - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				






PMc said:


> And there is RFC2324 describing the protocol...



That was an April fools day joke. There are quite a few RFCs released on April 1st that were jokes. Here's a nice list:


			The Complete April Fools' RFCs book by Thomas A. Limoncelli and Peter H. Salus


----------



## PMc (Jun 20, 2019)

ekingston said:


> That was an April fools day joke.



At that time, yes. 
A couple of years ago I went to buy a new coffee machine. I looked at al the new and fancy stuff available nowadays - and at the price tags: 800€, 1200€, ...
One of the sales people came along, and I asked her, what is the difference between these? Explanation was: this one has a color TFT display. Very well.

Finally I went with a normal coffee maker for 9.99€, that produces just coffee, as computer people are used to. 
The only other option, that could make coffee that really tastes, would be one of the big italian machines as you find in good bars, with tap-water attachment. But these depend on continuous throughput and need real skill to operate.
None of these has a TFT display.


----------



## kpedersen (Jun 20, 2019)

IoT is a toy. Nothing we call IoT that we use today will still be working in a year, let alone become a security risk 10 years later 

Even gimmicky stuff like Alexa or the Apple one will still be running after a couple of generations of the hardware. Apple cannot even keep a 2012 Macbook current, let alone some random speech toy.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 20, 2019)

I'm surprised nobody mentioned Mirai yet. Surely everybody had at least some inconvenience from that. Here is another story about it.


----------



## malavon (Jun 20, 2019)

kpedersen said:


> Apple cannot even keep a 2012 Macbook current, let alone some random speech toy.


Agreed in principle, except for the verb in that sentence. "cannot" should be "don't want to"


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 20, 2019)

OJ said:


> Surely everybody had at least some inconvenience from that.


Nope. This is why it is important to
#1) Update the firmware of any IOT upon arrival.
#2) Change the password for the device. Password is not a real password.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 21, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Nope. This is why it is important to
> #1) Update the firmware of any IOT upon arrival.
> #2) Change the password for the device. Password is not a real password.


It is indeed. Unfortunately most users of things like IoT light bulbs and security cameras have no idea about this sort of thing. 

BTW, I didn't mean inconvenience for the user of IoT, who won't see a difference, but for users of the Internet who would see some slowdowns here and there. And of course, people who run DNS resolvers with public access. I figured there'd be some of those here. Anyway the Mirai attack was  a big deal in the history of the Internet.


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 22, 2019)

I did not mean to be flippant. I was not affected by the DDOS caused my Mirai.


OJ said:


> Unfortunately most users of things like IoT light bulbs and security cameras have no idea about this sort of thing.


Yes but they don't plug themselves in right? Users have some responsibility.
I use good quality Arecont IP cameras in my setup. They are much more expensive than a no brand name China camera.
Problem as I see it is, Arecont produces firmware updates for their cameras. When you buy a cheap no name camera where do you get firmware updates? You don't.
You get what you pay for. Attackers are not dumb and choose the easy targets.


----------



## aragats (Jun 22, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Attackers are not dumb and choose the easy targets


Exactly! I've seen many "dictionary" SSH attacks on devices working (literally) in the wild, and a simple change of port 22 to something else eliminates them all. They don't bother scanning ports: if the port is not standard, hence usernames/passwords are already changed too!


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 23, 2019)

I have been around security cameras long enough to witness their introduction onto the internet.
Panasonic DSS systems from around 2001 with hardware encoders for video feed and a html landing page.
These systems were easy to find with a googe search for the landing page name.
Even these early IOT systems used 'default' passwords and were easily jacked with no-one even knowing.
To make matters worse Panasonic didn't support these units with firmware fixes so they are a fixed target with known flaws.
Panasonic DSS got better after the first generation IOT devices.
I consider anything that can be accessed via the ethernet automatically just by plugging it in to be an IOT.
There really is no fruitful difference. Plug and play internet is not new by any means.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Panasonic-...nterface-4-Channel-Video-Encoder/153317997522


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 23, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> I consider anything that can be accessed via the ethernet automatically just by plugging it in to be an IOT.


Smartphones come awfully close to that, in my opinion.


----------



## George (Jun 23, 2019)

If only I could afford those bluetooth driven socks with integrated heating system..
If only I owned a pair of shoes that tie the shoelaces via the smartphone app.

The internet of things is a security risk, a privacy issue, and it costs energy/electricity.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 23, 2019)

One of the funniest ones I've seen is the Nike smart shoes which connect to your smartwatch via bluetooth. Thus there is a direct connection to Nike via the internet. One can only hope that they don't brick your shoes while you're sprinting to catch a bus.


----------



## ucomp (Jun 23, 2019)

PMc said:


> ...big italian machines as you find in good bars....



IOT was specially developed for programmers with a massive addiction on original Italian coffee.

Good espresso machines need a warm-up time ...., e.g. 1/2 hour, especially in winter. My machine is connected to an ioT outlet and 1/2 hour before I get home, I turn it on with my iPhone remote control.
The iOT- outlet even measures the power consumption,  even pretty much exactly.
So* iOT saves life,* I would die if I couldn`t get my exactly temperatured Espresso- shot immediately  , when I come home.


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 23, 2019)

Any company that sells an IOT device with a factory assigned password that is not randomized should be held accountable.
That should be a bare minimum requirement on anything internet connected.
So the factory has to add a sticker with the randomized password.
This would cut your botnet problem in half.
There has to be some kind of penalty for manufacturing internet devices with poor security practices.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 23, 2019)

The Register (or was it Krebs) did an exposé on some companies and one Chinese manufacturer rose to the occasion and started doing it right. Can't find the article right now, but it's nice to see that at least one company saw a marketing advantage to this.


----------



## rigoletto@ (Jun 24, 2019)

IoT is heavy used in industries to monitor all sort of things, and that made them quite more efficient. I don't see any game changing use of IoT for homes.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jun 24, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> Any company that sells an IOT device with a factory assigned password that is not randomized should be held accountable.


Actually, that wouldn't even be necessary, if vendors set up the "OS" and networking in a sensible fashion. For example, let's take the WiFi-connected light bulb. I would have no problem with the factory default password being "password" on all of them, if the only thing you can do with a password is to turn the light on and off, or change the color. At that point, the worst thing that can happen is that a neighbor plays pranks on you, and after the first time, you will learn to set more reasonable passwords. If the operating system on the lightbulb were configured safely enough that it really can only act as an endpoint, does not have the capability to start a connection, and the only functionality is really to turn the light on and off.

The real problem is actually much worse, and the default password "password" is just the tip of the iceberg: A lot of IP-connected devices are just engineered really badly. Cheap manufacturers find a random OS, don't bother to think through security, don't bother to think through usability in unusual situations and recovery from unusual problems, and ship it.

How many reports are there actually of household IoT devices being used for botnets?

And what rigoletto said is absolutely correct: 99.9% of IoT does not happen in the public eye. Nearly all of it happens in industrial and commercial settings, on networks that are usually completely shielded, and much of it causes no problem whatsoever, and is of high economic utility.

I know that my household is not a good example of an industrial site, but I do have exactly a half-dozen IoT devices around. None of them are even reachable from the world-wide internet (my router won't let packets from the outside get into them unless it is on an existing connection). I know that 2 of them are capable of connecting to the outside, but I do monitor what they connect to, and open just those destinations and ports. I'm quite sure that they are reasonably secure, with passwords complicated enough that I have to look them up everytime I need to actually use them directly.


----------



## reddy (Jun 24, 2019)

OJ said:


> My living room at Christmas. Although that's obviously taken with flash. (You're welcome to look through the rest of the pictures if you want.)



I have no idea why I looked at these pictures, but it was entertaining to look at them (no wonder Facebook is thriving). Nice house!


----------



## rigoletto@ (Jun 24, 2019)

You need to see his kitchen.


----------



## toorski (Jun 24, 2019)

This is HoT  (Home of Things) gadget from the days before IoT – hehe )





						The Clapper, Wireless Sound Activated On/Off Light Switch (Clapper Original) - Wall Light Switches - Amazon.com
					

The Clapper, Wireless Sound Activated On/Off Light Switch (Clapper Original) - Wall Light Switches - Amazon.com



					www.amazon.com


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 24, 2019)

I've got a clapper in my collection of vintage electronics, and indeed when I first heard about these things (I was _much_ younger) I thought it was cool. Now ... not so much.


----------



## toorski (Jun 25, 2019)

I don’t understand why some people are so taken with the current (ToT) Technology of Things 

It’s all about turning Things connected by wires or radio waves ON or OFF with help of physical switches and logical gates that provide audio-visual output - assuming there’s enough AC or DC  to power all those Things . But, if we run out of AC and DC what will you do then?

Personally, I’m trying to learn more about Primitive Technologies than IoT, just in case. Thus far, I found out that I can, maybe, survive without AC and DC extra 30 days before I get killed or eaten by another low-tech homo primate :-(


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 26, 2019)

Bricking IOT devices.








						New Silex malware is bricking IoT devices, has scary plans
					

Over 2,000 devices have been bricked in the span of a few hours. Attacks still ongoing.




					www.zdnet.com


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 26, 2019)

Well that aught to clean things up a bit.


----------



## CraigHB (Jun 28, 2019)

The IoT thing seems more like marketing hype to me than anything else.  I don't have any IoT devices in my home and haven't felt like I'm missing anything.  There are some conveniences IoT devices offer, but I've not seen anything that makes a huge difference in quality of life.

Thing about IoT is it relies on WiFi.  I'm down on WiFi in terms of security.  There are some rather obscure security holes in the WiFi standards.  For example the WPA pin is a big security risk and some routers don't even allow you to disable it.  Took me a while to figure out how to disable it on my own router.  I turn on my WiFi only when I actually need it which is on limited occasion.  All my internet devices are wired and I avoid adding devices otherwise.

Of course WiFi risk depends on visibility.  I live in a densely populated area with many networks in wireless range.  If I lived in the country out of "earshot" I'd be a lot less concerned about it.


----------



## aragats (Jun 28, 2019)

CraigHB said:


> Thing about IoT is it relies on WiFi.


Many devices (especially commercial) use cellular data, not WiFi.


----------



## CraigHB (Jun 28, 2019)

I didn't know that.  So how does that work with your cell provider.  Don't you have to pay for every device connected to their network?


----------



## aragats (Jun 28, 2019)

CraigHB said:


> Don't you have to pay for every device connected to their network?


Yes, but it depends on usage scenario.
For example, the corresponding Kindle models include that in the device price assuming "fair use". When people root those devices and start using that "free Internet", the devices get blacklisted.
Another scenario is a company which buys many IoT devices to monitor remote objects. They have a corporate account with a cellular operator and pay per actually used data.
I believe, there are many other scenarios exist.


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 28, 2019)

I have worked on the mobile internet end of things and I can tell you aragats is right.
Not sure I even agree with IOT meaning Wireless only.
We have wired computers in meeting rooms that get beamed schedules from a server. Real IP Cameras are IOT too.
IOT is nothing more than a buzzword.
How about anything connected to the internet with a webserver embedded.
That is usually the real problem. Vulnerable webservers that do not get updated.
This crap with default IOT passwords are idiots that should have their internet revoked. Go to safe internet school.


----------



## malavon (Jun 28, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> This crap with default IOT passwords are idiots that should have their internet revoked and morality police cane them.


Once the typical politician is in a age range where he/she actually understands technology, things will probably change.
At least in my country, it's illegal (punishable by fine) to leave the doors of a car unlocked in public. Leaving a house door unlocked means that insurance won't pay out in case of theft either.
There are many cases like this where the blame is partly laid on the user and I see the same happening once the legal system understands that unprotected online devices are worse than an unlocked door.


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 28, 2019)

We had this analogy a while back.
I said I would shoot through my physical door if anybody jiggled my doorhandle.
It was extreme statement but kill or be killed. I prefer to not be killed.

But this thread did make me think a little differently. Is this IOT malware really a threat.
Is bricking someones IOT due to no/default password ethical?
Extreme side of me thinks it is OK to brick but there is no doubt, it is intruding on someones physical device.
Do you wait until someone hijacks it with a botnet or take it out with a pre-emptive strike.
It is an ethical conundrum.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Jun 28, 2019)

There is no doubt that running an IoT device in such a way that it can become a threat to others is an irresponsible thing to do. The question is who's responsibility is it?


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 28, 2019)

Oh yea and back to what Aragats was saying I work with large dredges that are vastly automated with AllenBradley controllers.
These are tied to shore via radiowaves. Even the ships engines are tied back to Cat.

I also see rudimentry IOT devices on hopper barges the dredges use for transporting spoil.
They have a blinking light on bow of barge and they now have a pelican hard-case with Sierra modem and cell antenna and embedded PC up there too. It is tied to silt sensors on the bottom of the hopper barge.
When the hopper barge leaks sediment the ArmyCorps of Engineers shuts the permit down and they must replace hopper seals.
All this beamed from solar/battery powered embedded PC. Commercial IOT via 3G. Call it direct reporting needed for ACE permits.
Here is a picture of a very small hopper barge. Our clients use around 200-400ft. long versions.


----------



## Phishfry (Jun 29, 2019)

OJ said:


> who's responsibility is it?


Indeed. We don't have a internet hit squad like some oppressed countries might.
But when I see the legal system mentioned I had to chuckle. No law or system stands a chance.
Perhaps like when you lose your driving license, you go to Saturday Driving School to keep your license.
We need that for mild internet enforcment or re-education if you will.

SS7 been flapping and nobody cares and that is a 30+ year problem that can be solved by government..








						SS7, telecoms’ largest security hole - Panda Security Mediacenter
					

The SS7 protocol was created in 1975, and has hardly been updated since, which means that it lacks sufficient security for those that make use of it.




					www.pandasecurity.com
				



I mean really 2FA over this system. Are you kidding me.


----------



## Birdy (Jun 30, 2019)

Birdy said:


> I think the Internet of Things stinks.


'Here's your playlist, s**thead': Echo Dot owner claims Amazon's Alexa assistant began SWEARING at him after he quit his Prime membership


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Jul 1, 2019)

I have a flipphone without internet access, none of the appliances or meters in my apartment are wireless and don't want Alexa, Alexi or anybody listening to what I say in my own house. We used to call software that monitored your activity Trojans and considered that a bad thing.


----------



## Phishfry (Jul 1, 2019)

Trihexagonal said:


> I have a flipphone without internet access,


Same boat here, but I have bad news. Our fliphones are 3G. ATT is shutting down their 3G network in 2022.
Ruttro.
Enter Locational tracking, E-911 and nice messages from our commander in cheif. All absent on my 3G device.
You see, 3G in US for ATT uses 850 and 1900mhz. They are going bye-bye for 700mhz 4G-LTE frequencies.
The only other competing service is VZN. They are on upper 700mhz too. Their CDMA system is gone too I believe. 




__





						CDMA Network Retirement | Verizon
					

If you're having issues activating a 3G / 4G device, here's info on CDMA network retirement.



					www.verizonwireless.com
				



They were on 850/1900mhz too I believe.

700mhz is cheaper gear to run with lower power requirements for equal coverage. There is alot of incentive for the carrier to switch.

Our days are limited. What do we do......


----------



## CraigHB (Jul 1, 2019)

Yeah I'm not too happy about that.  I'm anti-internet phone as well.  I have two and neither connect.  I already knew about the death of 3G and I'm really not happy being forced into using an internet enabled phone.  Aside from the expense of buying new phones, which are not exactly cheap these days, it will require me to carry two "smartphone" packages adding about eighty bucks a month in fees.

It's just a ploy to squeeze out us low paying customers.  It's always about fleecing the flock, though they mask it under the guise of upgrading technology.  Won't be long till we glow in the dark from radiation exposure to 5G, all so we can upload selfies to Facebook faster.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Jul 1, 2019)

Phishfry said:


> 700mhz is cheaper gear to run with lower power requirements for equal coverage. There is alot of incentive for the carrier to switch.
> 
> Our days are limited. What do we do......



Break out my scanning receivers and see if I can hear anything on 700MHz. That was my passion before computers and I ran a bank of 5 scanners, it's just bothersome noise now. A dual conversion scanner would pick up "images" of transmissions 21 MHz lower than the blocked 800MHz band it took place in. A triple conversion scanner filtered that out as a feature.

The Sheriff Dept. used a scrambler on their radios to talk privately about everything from what they wanted for lunch to high level secret passwords to the State central site, according to the rumor mill. It didn't interest me or I would have bought a descrambler from a magazine to hook up inline between scanner and external speaker.

The police used cellphones when they wanted to speak privately, or so I was told. I heard the wireless mic the Drug Task Force used every time they turned it on and sometimes when people wore it to buy contraband if within a few blocks. A cop sat within distance to record the conversation as court evidence, so it seemed like the thing to do.

I listened to the female astronaut we sent to the MIR Space Station in the mid 90's when she was broadcasting to HAM radio operators using a handheld scanner and dipole antenna. She had to be right overhead. I used a multi-band groundplane for the rest. I taped it and had the Radio Mag with the story about it to go with it

I lived a block from that girl I still hang out with sometime and she used a cordless phone. She was surprised when I walked down and told her what I just heard her say, both parties she had talked to and all the sordid details. Then got mad that I had monitored it but learned from the experience and stopped using it.


----------



## rigoletto@ (Aug 16, 2019)

I think this video make clear how important IoT improved some industries.






Wärtisilä is unkown to almost all people but just to give a glance about 1/3 of the worldwide merchant navy operate with their engines.

*[EDIT]*

This is a Vimeo video. IDK what this is asking for e-mail and such but you can access the video directly HERE.


----------

