Comments on: IBM’s Software Analyst Connect event, Smarter Planet and sustainability

By: Sudhir Kumar

Sudhir Kumar — Thu, 17 May 2012 10:51:26 +0000

I am keen to join IBM Safe City Connect or Smarter & Safer Initiative as I am an Integrated Security Consultant/Designer who can add value to these projects by designing solutions for keeping in mind the best management of civic agencies and monitoring of administration including policing with a back bone of C4I2.It will help safety & security to citizens and will help in minimising the impact of a disaster on a city or nation.Real time detection,survilliance and monitoring will help a quick emergency response.So please let me know how I can join IBM pls.My profile is there on Linkedin.

By: Bruce Baron

Bruce Baron — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:06:25 +0000

The point of Smart Oilfields is the long process to weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. Although not at the event, I would be suprised if the Smart Grid conversations did not disclose that IBM is engaging in the process of helping cities plan for large scale interdependence, and sometimes (see babcock Ranch Example Bleow) net-positive environmental impact, including the use of Solar arrays to support whole cities. I see several are keeping this in context and that is great.

For those who want to see how IBM is building smarter cities, to help wean us all off fossil fuel (in partnership with energy companies) see this keynote from Innovate on building the “worlds smartest city”

http://livestre.am/7glH

By: My interview at IBM’s Connect 09 event — GreenMonk: the blog

My interview at IBM’s Connect 09 event — GreenMonk: the blog — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:32:03 +0000

[...] interviewed me at the IBM Connect 09 event last year. I was coming down with the flu at the time so hence the puffy eyes, and lack of [...]

By: IBMâ€™s John Soyring talks about IBMâ€™s Smart Planet initiatives around water

IBMâ€™s John Soyring talks about IBMâ€™s Smart Planet initiatives around water — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:12:25 +0000

[...] posted my video interview with IBMâ€™s John Soyring previously as part of a round-up of my impressions of the IBM Connect09 event. I have since had the interview transcribed so I thought Iâ€™d post it once more as a stand-alone [...]

By: IBM’s John Soyring talks about IBM’s Smart Planet initiatives around water â€” GreenMonk: the blog

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:16:37 +0000

[...] posted my video interview with IBM’s John Soyring previously as part of a round-up of my impressions of the IBM Connect09 event. I have since had the interview transcribed so I thought I’d post it once more as a [...]

By: monkchips

monkchips — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:13:38 +0000

yes and no Ludovic. not a pollutant in the traditional sense perhaps.. but the EPA for example is now classifying CO2 as a pollutant.

By: Ludovic

Ludovic — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:44:42 +0000

Tom, technically CO2 is not a pollutant, thought it is a greenhouse gas.

By: Adrian Bowles

Adrian Bowles — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:10:35 +0000

Glad to see you and James appear to have recovered from the flu.

It may be semantics, but some of the initiative appear to be branded “Smart” and some “Smarter” – I think the oilfields should be “Smarter”, with the goal of reduction, while cities should be “Smarter” with the goal of leveraging analytics for risk and cost reduction (from food safety to police) and productivity improvement (education, transportation…). Not sure where I’d use “Smart”, which indicates to me that we’re closer to a goal than a problem statement.

For example, I hate “Smart cars” – to me it is like trying to give a discipline – prematurely – credibility by appending “science” or “engineering”. (this from someone who taught “software engineering” long before it was an appropriate course name)

By: Ric

Ric — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:45:38 +0000

USA != IBM … agree completely about (particularly) Iraq (Afghanistan may have other arguments, but Iraq was definitely about oil), and am not arguing against reducing our requirement for oil … but I think it’s a valid market for IBM, AS PART of a larger portfolio of opportunities

By: Tom Raftery

Tom Raftery — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:34:47 +0000

No, I get that Ric. Really, I do.

However, I still question branding anything as Smart which helps suck oil out of the ground more efficiently.

The US has spent over $100bn a year in what some would argue is merely an attempt to secure oil resources in Iraq and Afghanistan with very little to show for the investment. Had that money (or even a fraction of it) been spent on research into renewables, Smart Oilfields might at this stage refer to the efficient shutting down of drilling operations!