The Internet of Things the Language and Practice of Early Iot Adopters 2011-2013
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Internet of Things The Language and Practice of Early IoT Adopters 2011-2013 Ilze Strazdina Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen Mary University of London February 2019 1 ABSTRACT This thesis examines the discourse and practice surrounding the technological development of the Internet of Things, and its expansion at the start of the second decade of the 21st century. The initial motivation for the Internet of Things was a fusion of the physical and digital worlds, enabled by pervasive network connectivity: “anything, anytime, anywhere”. Grounded in a rhetoric of a connected world, future sustainability, and improvements brought by the deployment of innovative techno- socio-economic-environmental systems, claims were made that the IoT would not only deliver solutions to humanity’s ever-growing needs, but would also lead to a shift in the very principles governing such systems. This thesis argues for the need to readdress the dominant IoT discourse, not only by an analysis of discourse, but also by an analysis of the practices that fostered the development of this phenomenon. The study at the centre of this thesis is focused on a community of open source developers, artists, architects and computer enthusiasts who were curious about the possibilities opened up by this next stage of technological development, and who went on to test and re-imagine the use and deployment of the IoT. This ethnographic study follows the development of the first IoT platform, the creation of a community- led air quality network, and the emergence of the Open IoT framework. Through an analysis of practice, and an examination of its conceptual content and organisation in language, this thesis reveals how the space of the IoT was imagined, experienced and lived in. The thesis argues that investigations led by these early adopters and the re- imagining of what Lefebvre called the “dominant space” pioneered the IoT discussion and its development during 2011-2013 in London, Europe, and America. Connecting with the social theorists in the fields of critical theory, phenomenology and social geography, this thesis provides a new viewpoint on technological development, and in consequence, it expands the currently rather technological discourse of the IoT. 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a great deal of thanks to my supervisors Dr. Graham White and Prof. David Pinder for their patients, encouragement and support throughout. Also my examiners Dr. Olga Goriunova and Prof. Ann Light for taking the time to read this thesis and constructive criticism. I would also like to thank Prof. Pat Healey for creating the opportunity and for offering me to undertake this research. Also many thanks to Dr. Nick Bryan-Kinns for understanding and support, and Dr. Matthew Purver for stepping in during emergencies. My gratitude to everyone at Media and Arts Technology programme and in particular to all those from the first MAT cohort for inspirations, creativity and friendship. Dr. Toby Harris, Dr. Sara Heitlinger, Dr. Nicola Plant, Dr. Henrik Ekeus, Dr. Keir Williams, Dr. David Meckin, Dr. Holger Kirchhoff, Grzegorz Sedek, Dominic Freeston, Phillip Martin and Audhild Dahlstrom. Thanks to all inspiring people from Pachube community, and in particular, Usman Haque and Ed Borden. Special thanks to Dr. Christian Nold and Dr. Dorien Zandbergen for inspiring conversations and support. This research was generously funded by EPSRC, AHRC and Media and Arts Technology Centre for Doctoral Training at Queen Mary University of London. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their love, support, encouragement and patience. 3 In memory of Armin 4 CONTENTS List of Images 8 1 Introduction 9 1.1 Research Questions 19 1.2 Chapter Summary 20 Part I: Theoretical framework 2 The Internet of Things: History and Context 24 2.1 Overview of IoT Technology and the Evolution of IoT Discourse 24 2.2 Fuzziness in the IoT Domain 32 2.2.1 The Network Premise 33 2.2.2 The Thing: A Critique 37 2.2.3 The Production of Space and Social Practice 51 2.3 Conclusion 68 3 The Case Study: Community, Language and Practise 74 3.1 Introduction: 74 3.2 The Community 76 3.3 On Methodology 82 3.3.1 Ethnographic Action Research – Participation and Access 85 3.3.2 Virtual Ethnography - Online Space and Action 87 3.3.3 Linguistic Ethnography – Meaning in Action 88 3.4 Organisation of The Study, Data Corpus and Analysis 90 3.4.1 Background and Data Corpus 90 3.4.2 Study Part 1 91 3.4.3 Study Part 2 94 3.4.4 Study Part 3 95 3.5 Conclusion 96 Part II: Empirical Study 4 Sense Making – Mapping The Perception in Language 100 4.1 Introduction 100 4.2 Modes of Identification 102 4.3 Context Framings 111 4.3.1 Open Source Paradigm 111 4.3.2 DIY Culture and the Process of Learning 114 4.4 On Domain Specifics 118 4.4.1 Intelligent Devices 118 4.4.2 The Thing of the Future 121 4.4.3 Sensors as Extensions 126 4.4.4 The Problem of Calibration 133 4.5 Conclusion 141 5 5 Collective Social Practice: The Thing and The Network 144 5.1 Introduction 144 5.2 Air Pollution and Social Awareness 147 5.3 A Community-Led Air Quality Egg Project 151 5.3.1 Prototyping in Public 157 5.3.2 Hacking the Growth: the AQE Kickstarter Campaign 168 5.3.3 Social and Geospatial Alignment of AQE Community Network 179 5.3.4 The Network Device 183 5.3.4.1 'A plastic box with electronics' 183 5.3.4.2 On the Calibration Debate and Care for the Device Network185 5.3.5 AQE Data and Related Consideration 191 5.3.6 The Legacy of the AQE Project 197 5.4 Conclusion 201 6 'Let's not talk about fridges!' - The Emerging Data Paradigm 204 6.1 Introduction 204 6.2 Data Context Frames 210 6.2.1 Technological Context 210 6.2.2 Human Context 214 6.2.3 More Than Human Context 219 6.3 Metaphors that Shape Data 222 6.4 Deep Relationality 230 6.5 On Perceived Value and Ownership 238 6.6 Data Space 246 6.7 Conclusion 249 7 Discussion 253 8 Conclusion 267 8.1 Main Contributions 269 8.2 Future work 271 9 Bibliography 273 10 Appendixes 297 10.1 Appendix I: Recorded Events 297 10.2 Appendix II: List of Interviews 298 10.3 Appendix III: Coding Keys 299 10.4 Appendix IV: Community's Online Spaces 300 10.5 Appendix V: IoT Meetup Genealogy 302 10.6 Appendix VI: Pachube Related IoT Meetup Interfaces 2011-2017 303 10.7 Appendix VII: List of AQE Kickstarter Pledges and Rewards 304 10.8 Appendix VIII: Pachube, COSM, Xively Site Interfaces 305 10.9 Appendix IX: Pachube, COSM, Xively Graph Interfaces 306 10.10 Appendix X: AQE Device Data 307 10.11 Appendix XI: Open IoT Assembly Documents 309 10.12 Appendix XII: Open IoT Assembly Data Corpus 311 6 LIST OF IMAGES 1. Gartner’s Hype Cycle: Predictions for 2013 11 2. Atzori’s et al., Internet of Things paradigm, 2010 30 3. Uckelmann et al., Internet of Things paradigm, 2011 31 4. Wu et al., Cognitive IoT, 2014 32 5. Classes of coded objects, Kitchin and Dodge, 2011 49 6. AQE prototypes at CCS (2012). Image by Dorien Zandbergen. 160 7. AQE unit assembled during the CCC workshop. March 29th 2012. Image by Ilze Strazdina. 165 8. Screenshot of the Kickstarter backers map by Simone Cortesi (August 10th, 2012). 182 9. AQE in physical setting (2013). Image by Ilze Strazdina. 184 7 1 INTRODUCTION As a society, over the last hundred years, we have experienced enormous changes. From an industrial society of the 19th century we have become a networked information society of the 21st century. At the start of the second decade, the dawn of the Internet of Things (IoT) promised the further integration of the physical and digital worlds; it also predicted a deeper shift in the spheres of economics, social life and environmental sustainability. While this thesis will explore several meanings, technological capabilities and the history of the Internet of Things framework, at this point it would be sufficient to say that in the broadest sense, the IoT encompasses a vision where 'anything, anywhere and at any time' is connected to the Internet. Simple sensor devices, home appliances, cars, everyday objects, wearables and the environment, 'things' will gather and share information in an automated system. According to Cisco, the number of connected objects on the Internet had already exceeded the number of humans in 2008, and by 2020 there will be 50 billion devices connected to the Net (Evans, 2011). Today (2019) the term Internet of Things has become more pervasive as more and more internet-connected devices enter the market space. From self-driving cars and connected home appliances managed by Amazon's Alexa to the emergence of industrial IoT, energy IoT and smart IoT, the Internet of Things seems to be everywhere, and business is expanding. Early in 2018, Business Insider predicted that business spending on IoT solutions would be about $6 trillion by 20211. The 2019 predictions see the IoT penetrating deeper into the spheres of manufacturing, 1 See https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2017/12/19/the-top-8-iot-trends-for- 2018/#1f2fa24067f7 8 healthcare and the building industry. Yet, as analysts have noticed: “Despite the huge gains in connectivity, the truth is” the growth and implementation of the IoT is “full of fits and spasms, and everything that goes along with them - ‘fragmentation frustration’, potential data breaches, and security issues galore” (Newman, 2018).