ELEC4740 Internet Of Things

The Statement

The statement “the best interface for a system is no user interface” can be defined as a system with no user interface implementation by which activities can be done in very few time or automatically (Rayes & Salam, 2017). Or it can also be defined as elimination of the user interface system from the whole process of a system in which any technology is being operated. This elimination can reduce many steps during execution of any system using technology which will help in completing the works in less time. With no user interface a user can complete his or her work by escaping several steps and can buy more time in completing that activity. Following are the examples which can be helpful in making this definition clearer (Rayes & Samer, 2017).

Nowadays automobile companies are implementing new and innovative technologies in the cars in which one of the latest implications is the door opening system using mobile application. This implication has several steps due to the involvement of user interface system in the whole system as the user will have to do several steps to open the locked door of the car;

1. User will have to walk near the car
2. Turn his/her phone on
3. Search for the specific application
4. After launching the application, gate will open

With no user interface system this could be done in two steps only:

1. User reaches the car
2. Gates are open

This can be done by implementing sensor in the keys and the car, as whenever the owner reaches to the car with the keys the gate will automatically opens.

Another example which can be helpful in transparency of this topic is the new merchant payment system which is trending nowadays. User generally move to the café or the restaurant and orders the food or beverage then he or she has to again take phone out, search for the application, look into the application make payment procedures and then he can left out the café or the restaurant. Again various steps can be reduced by “no user interface system”, by this user will enter the café, orders whatever he wants and after eating or drinking he can leave that restaurant and the payment will be made automatically.

Comparing Specifications of Cables:

Types of cables	Bandwidth	Distance	Interference rating	Cost	Security
Coaxial Cable	1GHz	500m	Less susceptible to interference than Twisted pair cables	Neither much costly nor cheap.	Not invincible, security moderate but can be breached (Agha, Babiker & Mustafa, 2015)
Twisted Pair Cable	1MHz	100m	Susceptible to interference, however limited to a distance	Most cheaper than others	Security is not at all.
Fibre Optic Cable	75 THz	10km (Single-mode) 2Km (multimode)	Not susceptible to Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)	Highly expensive than both the cables	Security is very high and breaching is almost impossible (Alimam, 2015).

Twisted Pair Cable:

1. STP- Shielded Twisted Pair

Type A: Inherit type 1 with 4 telephone pairs (Sommer and Franz, 2012).

Type B: Features 22-AWG two pairs.

Type C: Features two pairs of shielded 26-AWG.

1. UTP- Unprotected Twisted-Pair

Type A: These can support 4 mps implementation (Lee et al., 2013).

Type B: Used in low speed data cable and telephone lines.

Type C: These cables can support maximum speed of 16 mps but are commonly used at 10 mps speed.

1. Co-Axial Cable:

Type A: 50-Ohm RG-58, applicable with thin Ethernet (Ha et al., 2013).

Type B: 50-Ohm RG-7 or RG-11, applicable with thick Ethernet.

Type C: 75-Ohm RG-59, applicable with cable television.

1. Fibre Optic Cable:

There is only one type of fibre optic cable.

Comparing Three IoT Devices:

IoT Devices	Advantages	Disadvantages	Application
Sensors	· Sensors are not affected by atmospheric dust, rain, snow. · Working is not affected in adverse conditions if proper power supply is given. · Sensing distance is more than inductive or capacitive proximity sensors’ sensing device (Alamri et al., 2013).	· Problem in receiving signals from curved, small, soft and thin objects are the disadvantages with this device.	· Weather monitoring. · Smart sleep system. · Smart lightning. · Smart washing machine. · Smart internet mirror · In medical, Blood Pressure monitoring.
RFID	· RFID used for tagging are completely secured and cannot be duplicated · Messages can be exchanged from long distances · There are various types of RFID which can be applicable for all the conditions (Garrido Azevedo & Carvalho, 2012). · Data base for this device is portable and long read range. · The device is much effective and efficient, means less chances of errors	· Less reliable as it is harder to understand · More expensive than Barcode system. · Longer than the Barcode labels in size. · Mostly can be used for tagging only. · At a particular time more than one RFID can respond	· It is widely used for tracking products in which RFID are implemented to detect the location of the product or item. · Apparel, pharmaceutical jewellery tracking, and baggage tracking (Gubbi et al., 2013). · It has replaced barcode systems in the libraries · It has also application in the museum, school and the universities. · Implantable RFID are used in the animal identification too.
Video Tracking	· Collects information · Automation and control. · Communication between devices. · Monitoring work places and project procedures · Livelihood can be improved.	· Unavailability of international standard compatibility for video tracking equipments. · This system is highly complex as compared to other IoT devices. · Privacy and security issues are related to this implication.	· Augmentation of reality · Human-computer interaction. · Video communication. · Medical imaging.

Security and Privacy Issues in IoT Implications

The new and innovative implications of IoT devices in the technologies are improving the livelihood but also leading towards the security threats of those individuals. Firstly, based on the examples in question one it can be seen that and unauthorized individual can have access to the application and the key which has sensor and use the car for own purpose (Sicari et al., 2015). These implications can be used as a bridge for the unauthorized users or hackers, who can manipulate or compromise the information of and data by certain coding. This new implication involves personal data and information which are vulnerable to the attack and can lead to several privacy issues to the individuals.

Blocking mode:

In this process, the endpoint originated from the operating side request will take a while to get a response of its requested message. The technique used for measuring the water level in this case is a synchronous case which will not allow receiving the asynchronous message (Swetina et al., 2014). In this technology Originator will be responsible for initiating the exchange of the information between both the receiver and the originator sides.

Excess travelling of messages which are not needed are travelling to the reverse direction in this paradigm. Response/Command is a suboptimal response in the monitoring of water level.

Publish/Subscribe paradigm can also be referred as pub/sub paradigm. It is a paradigm that helps in enabling the ‘communication of unidirectional message’ to many subscribers from a publisher side. Thereafter, the subscriber side declares about own interest on the requested message or data that was used in enabling process to the publisher side (Collina, Corazza & Vaneli-Corali, 2012). First evaluation of the requested message is done and after that the availability of the requested message is evaluated it responses to the message originated from the publisher side and forces another message towards the subscribers which are interested on that information.

6ms will be saved in the propagation delay between the sensor and the application and 1ms will be saved in receiving that message. Thus, total time saving will be 6ms + 1ms which equals 7ms.

Nielson’s Law

Based on the data collected on the internet users every year, Nielson stated law, which states that the “growth of bandwidth of users is increasing by 50 % per year” (Nielson, 2014). Nielson’s law states, “A high-end user’s collection speed grows by 50% per year” and proposed the following graph:

Nielson’s law is more established than Moore’s law. Moore stated that “computer double in capabilities every 18 months”, which states that the growth is about 60% means 10% more than Nielson estimated.

The high-end users will lead the vast masses of low-end users by 2-3 years. “Bandwidth is one of the two most important elements in computing these days (together with screen quality)”. Most of the users still save on the bandwidth and preferred a moderate bandwidth at moderate price to the highest-cost option, highest-speed.

Al Agha, M. T., Amin Babiker, A., & Mustafa, N. Applying The Analytical Hierarchy Process To Select The Transmission Lines Type In Telecoms.

Alamri, A., Ansari, W. S., Hassan, M. M., Hossain, M. S., Alelaiwi, A., & Hossain, M. A. (2013). A survey on sensor-cloud: architecture, applications, and approaches. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 9(2), 917923.

Alimam, F. E. R. A. M. (2015). Fiber Optics Access Network Planning(Doctoral dissertation, Sudan University of Science and Technology).

Collina, M., Corazza, G. E., & Vanelli-Coralli, A. (2012, September). Introducing the QEST broker: Scaling the IoT by bridging MQTT and REST. In Personal indoor and mobile radio communications (pimrc), 2012 ieee 23rd international symposium on (pp. 36-41). IEEE.

Garrido Azevedo, S., & Carvalho, H. (2012). Contribution of RFID technology to better management of fashion supply chains. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 40(2), 128-156.

Nielsen, J. (2014). Nielsen’s Law of Internet Bandwidth, 1998.

Rayes, A., & Salam, S. (2017). Internet of Things (IoT) Overview. In Internet of Things From Hype to Reality (pp. 1-34). Springer International Publishing.

Rayes, A., & Samer, S. (2017). Internet of Things—From Hype to Reality. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland.

Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L. A., & Coen-Porisini, A. (2015). Security, privacy and trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead. Computer Networks, 76, 146-164.

Swetina, J., Lu, G., Jacobs, P., Ennesser, F., & Song, J. (2014). Toward a standardized common M2M service layer platform: Introduction to oneM2M. IEEE Wireless Communications, 21(3), 20-26.