Most of the holes we plug with technology can be solved with growing a thicker skin. Toes cold? Tuck them in. Still cold? Get up and crank the heat.
First, which is far more a philosophical addition to my previous point - it's defining a norm. To some extent this is unavoidable; it is essentially saying that to be at a normal functional level you need sight, be able to walk, etc. So the question is - is a more inclusive society one that is setup for a whole spectrum of people or one that enables people's bodies to bring them to a functionally 'equal' footing? It's probably somewhere in the middle.
The other part, which I know I've experienced, is that the more unnecessarily engaged I was with technology -- more so with hi-tech -- the more detached I was with the actual world around me. So, for instance, walking around outside listening to music in headphones; walking around outside with a mobile phone (especially a smart phone). Nowadays, unless I have a damn good reason to take it with me (The only one that comes to mind is playing a set), I go around outside with clothes and maybe bags and leave everything else at home. On the rare occasion I've found that a mobile phone might have been useful, but those occasions are mainly when I've relied on a car to take me beyond walking distance. The cycle of reliance.
Since placing this limit on myself, It's challenged me to be more engaged with the environment around me, more mindful in myself and I've found this has made me much happier and my environment more colourful. Trying to strike the balance is good, and I enjoy walking the tight rope. However cyborg bodies starts entering a whole new domain - the idea of being chained to technology because it's a part of my body seems horrible to me; there would be no relief from it.
If people want society to go that way, fair enough. However, I personally won't encourage unnecessary integration with bodies because that's not the world I want to live in.
For people who tinker with the maddeningly complex systems of software how can the "engineering problem" of sleep be that hard? Just get your ass into bed at a decent time, and then give yourself eight hours. In fact given the flexible schedules of many tech jobs it should be easier for us as a profession to be rested than, say, a baker who has to get up at 3:30am.
But like I said it may be a psychological thing, a mental association between sleep and giving up. "You'll have plenty of time to sleep in the grave" or whatever the saying is. So we want to feel we have control over this aspect of ourselves. Hence the gadgetry smothering a simple idea of just laying down, turning off the phone, and covering up with some comfortable blankets. In fact I think I'm going to go do that right now. Goodnight, HN. :)
One thing that has made a noticeable difference has been exercise though.
I hope that there will be a push by people for local cloud configurations. One should not have to depend on the availability of the Internet in order for things to work.
To wit, the Nest has been completely wonky for me since the last update.
Then I read that the bed will be listening to my wife and me. That's really creepy. Together with all these 'AIs are going to kill us all articles' it reminds me of the Amazon Echo thread [1]... it carefully studies your sleeping habits, switches off the lights, locks your doors, and waits patiently for you to fall asleep...: http://youtubedoubler.com/eqOJ
I am not that enthused about this whole 'quantified self' movement; it strikes me as Taylorism applied to leisure activities and now sleep. I have no confidence that the data will remain fully under user control; rather, incentives will appear that encourage people to grant non-revocable access for consumerist 'rewards,' which in turn will be employed to create consumer anxiety about suboptimal life patterns, which can be assuaged for the low, low cost of only $x/month.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management
I like technology a lot, but I don't care for the idea of being cocooned by it 24/7.
I can use any one of the following tools at my disposal to regulate my sleep temperature: a blanket, a fan, an air conditioner, a heater, a window, less clothing, more clothing. Some people in the world don't have the luxury of ANY of these, much less all of them. The last thing I need is a new device to piss me off and do something poorly that I've managed to do just fine since I was a toddler.
And yeah, the video got creepy toward the end. If at some point in my life I can't be bothered to turn off the lights and lock my door before going to sleep, I've become something I really don't want to be.
Building the Internet of Things is different from what many of us do which is creating technological toys, digital tools, automated business processes, knowledge bases, communications tools, and digital publications. To offset the enormous costs of these types of works, people pioneered monetization of data we presumed to be private, in many cases. We've made this bed and now, with Internet of Things, we literally will lie in it.
But as I read through the feature list, I couldn't help feel uncomfortable. Am I the only one that finds this deluge of technology into every aspect of our lives abhorrent?
Every single day billions of people stare into a screen. You can control your whole life on it. Your lights can come on when you come home (Hue), the temperature indoors is regulated (Nest), and now my partner and I can have regulated heating on either side of the bed. Those who have watched Black Mirror will see where I'm going with this.
I can't help feel that while there is nothing wrong with this product - in fact it's kinda cool - is it really something the world needs?
Anyway, best of luck to the team. It seems like a good product. You can't please everyone :)