
IoT Market Projected to Grow 12x by 2023 - justinucd
https://thetechladder.com/story/iots-market-projected-grow-16b-2016-195-billion-2023/
======
rdtsc
Also remember:

    
    
       The "S" in IoT stands for Security.
    

(Not my line, but applies here).

So security, or rather the usual lack thereof, will be a thing to keep an eye
on.

~~~
petra
Assuming your IOT device only connects to your server on the cloud, isn't it
possible for amazon(or someone else),to just to sell you the communication
module that gives you a secure link to the cloud , including updates etc -
meaning you, as the embedded developer need only very little to none security
expertise ? And you as the purchaser of an IOT product, know that security is
handled by some serious player, and is probably handled quite well ?

Seem this could be valuable for the industrial IOT, at least.

~~~
joezydeco
There are some trying to do this. Shawn Fanning's Helium is one of them.

I looked at Helium. Problem is that when you sell your own design and don't
publish your designs and standards you become a single-source vendor.

As a manufacturer, I can't go with single-source vendors. I need backups and
pricing competition and etc etc etc. So here we are, still writing code for
WiFi radios and leveraging legacy OSS stacks to do the encryption and
transport.

~~~
petra
Helium are interesting, and there's a need for second sourcing, but also, i'm
starting to think that the real problem is about creating percieved value for
the end customer, like i explained in my other comment:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14078560](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14078560)

I wonder what you, as a manufacturer think about it.

~~~
joezydeco
It's an interesting idea, and I've thought about it as well.

My first objection would be that I wouldn't put some black box module from a
company like Amazon or Google on my design. Too many issues about what's
inside and other things like Google's tendency to follow the shiny and
discontinue products for no published reasons.

My idea was more along the lines of Amazon or Microsoft selling AWS and Azure-
enabled hubs or concentrators that did all the backend lifting and presented a
simple REST or MQTT interface on the local network for data ingestion. Then
you could connect any 802.11 radio to it and send data over an encrypted
channel without having to worry about the heavier layers about it (TLS, DNS,
Certs, SAS tokens, endpoints, etc).

~~~
petra
Yes, the router path makes sense. In a way, it's modular security - if the
customer cares about security - he should pay a bit more for the right router,
if not - it's his decision.

Btw, Amazon does some interesting stuff with AWS greengrass, including a
router, it's quite similar to how you view it. And i'm sure they'll take of
telling end users.

~~~
joezydeco
Yeah, greengrass looks interesting. At least until I saw this:

 _Devices need to offer at least 128 MB of memory and an x86 or ARM CPU that
runs at 1 GHz or more_

My devices run on Cortex-M0s. That's not going to work at all.

------
janjongboom
I think the biggest problem of IoT right now is the perception of what's
possible... We've been building internet connected devices for decades, but
that's still what people perceive as IoT ('we put a chip'-movement). However,
I think the true opportunity for IoT lays in the combination of the cost of
sensors going down, the range of sensors going up, and the advent of machine
learning.

With cheaper and longer-range sensors we can create vast sets of data on a
scale that we haven't seen before, and with machine learning we can extract
useful information from this data. With that premise it's also not hard to see
why IoT in the consumer market is not such a big success, but you see big
industrial players pour billions into IoT projects [1].

There's some other concerns of course too, like the impact that all this data
might have on society and that the state of IoT security reflects the state of
web security around 1999. If you're interested in that, I did a talk about the
subject last week at the AMSxTech conference (20 minutes) [2].

[1] [http://tech.newstatesman.com/iot/general-electric-billion-
do...](http://tech.newstatesman.com/iot/general-electric-billion-dollar-iot-
startup) [2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxwWmgbRxwU&t=7s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxwWmgbRxwU&t=7s)

~~~
dovdovdov
True, I'd still start with proper security.

------
Underqualified
I believe in IoT. What I don't really believe in are 'smart devices' as they
are currently being sold.

The major benefit of IoT is for the people able to harvest the data, there is
generally little added value for the end consumer.

I see the first major growth area in industry, and I see this happening now.
Major manufacturers are adding data acquisition to all their processes.

The second major growth area might be the public sector. Smart Cities are
building up hype and I'll think we'll hear a lot more about these kinds of
initiatives in the near future.

As for the consumer sector, I don't see major benefits for the consumers, but
from a producer's viewpoint, adding telemetry to their devices might give them
valuable information. So I think we'll see everything becoming 'smart', but
not for our own benefit (and hopefully not on our bill).

~~~
TheGRS
The thing that I'm not super clear on is how IoT will benefit many of us when
the data will likely be owned and kept close to the various companies that are
harvesting all of it. I see why it would be advantageous of a smart Mr. Coffee
sending data off to its servers so they can collect usage data, then they can
improve their product and marketing.

But the real breakthroughs would be in sharing this data openly. Maybe people
can make connections between coffee consumption and say...obesity, car
accidents, productivity, family spending habits, etc, etc, etc. Like we might
be able to put massive data to a lot of the experiments we hear about all the
time that use a tiny case study of maybe 20 students at some university. And
not only that but people could begin to act on the data and develop new
products, solutions and services to our benefit and continue to get more data
about them in real time. That's the advantage I see to IoT, but I don't see it
doing much for us in its current stage as companies have no real incentive to
share all that data.

Maybe some sort of open IoT is what we need to get things moving the right
direction. But then we all know security is still a major pitfall of IoT to
begin with.

~~~
keithnz
We are an IoT company, and the data generally is owned by the device owner.
There is the possibility some will share data though, potentially in anonymous
form.

------
frik
IoT has it's place. But but the current bread of "Smart(TM) devices" is all
but smart, and in many cases security and privacy threat. A toaster doesn't
need WiFi. Not all IoT devices need a internet connection and phone home by
default. In the end IoT is something which is around for decades. Industry
devices are connected over Ethernet at least for one decade, that's normal.
But the are usually firewalled off the internet, and can only be accessed in
an internal LAN.

So it will be interesting if Smart devices as one area of IoT keep staying in
the current phase or will evolve in 1) more LAN centric, more open industry
standard or 2) sending even more things home and analyse the data in a
datacenter.

------
pravda
I think I am going to brand myself an "IoT Consultant". Get me a share of
those Dollar$/Euroz/Renminbis.

Anyone else done that? Any IoT Consultants out there?

~~~
Heffay626
I bet we're going to start seeing a whole genre of IoT security specialists on
the rise

~~~
icefox
Do iot company want to pay for that? A better question for someone in the
know, what problems are they having that they would pay to have solved?
Updates? Security? Plain old execution and delivery time of a new iot device?

~~~
ktta
That can be more difficult than one can anticipate. This isn't like a desktop
or web app where there's a second layer of security, like firewalls/AV and
sandboxes respectively. IoT tends to be neglected in terms of updates, and
with the new version of the device coming out every couple months, I would
imagine there would be devices that won't receive security updates not long
after they're bought.

In case of IoT they're in charge of the whole device, and the security of
those things aren't looked into a lot. Sounds stupid, but it does need it's
own specialists. Otherwise you're going to end up with a lot more insecure
devices.

Just an example:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/controllablewebcams/](https://www.reddit.com/r/controllablewebcams/)

~~~
icefox
I guess what I am getting at is: do companies not want to pay for security of
these devices because they only sell for a few months before the next model
comes out? If that is the case forming a security company doesn't seem like a
very profitable venture.

Has someone made the equivalent of ruby on rails for these devices? It doesn't
work for everything, but for most it works well enough and gets it the job
done in a fraction of the time that a complete custom job would require?

~~~
pdimitar
This could be a start:
[https://hexdocs.pm/nerves/targets.html](https://hexdocs.pm/nerves/targets.html)

I happen to like Elixir the language a lot, but it does have legitimate
advantages.

------
gjkood
A shameless plug for my recent talk at PyCaribbean 2017 on the topic of
MicroPython, IoT, ESP8266 and MQTT.

It covers broad topics that a beginner to IoT will find interesting. It's a 45
minute talk so it only covers what can be covered in that timeframe.

Please forgive the lack of polish. I am not a natural public speaker.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ctB8VMm6RA&t=9s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ctB8VMm6RA&t=9s)

~~~
pryelluw
I was there and this was a great intro talk. +1

~~~
gjkood
Wow, Small World!!!

Thank you for your very kind feedback.

~~~
pryelluw
You are very welcome. :)

Hit me up at pryelluw@gmail.com to catch up.

------
chx
Every time some research company makes a bold prediction _six years_ ahead I
can only think of this:

> In 1997 Intel was the king of the hill; in that year it first announced the
> Itanium or IA-64 processor. That same year, research company IDC predicted
> that the Itanium would take over the world, racking up $38 billion in sales
> in 2001. Wow! Everybody paid attention.

Six years is an awfully long time in this industry.

------
thedailymail
Does anyone who doesn't stand to profit from high-ball guesstimates believe in
"the market in [A] will grow from [B] billion to [C] billion in just [D]
years" projections?

~~~
fizixer
I do in this specific case. (Haven't read the article. Don't stand to profit.)
Here's a simple argument for only one aspect of IoT:

Take all the electric equipment you use in your household, office, and so on.
Lights, fixtures, fans, kitchen appliances, security systems, on, and on. What
the size of that industry you think is at the moment? Just know that about
2/3rd of that industry would "die" and be replaced by exact equivalent devices
that communicate wirelessly/remotely with your smart-phones and tablets.

Here's the slightly depressing news: likely majority of that market size would
be retaken by giants like GE, Philips, etc, that are already the pre-IoT
monopolies. But not too depressing because that still leaves quite a room for
new players and acquisitions/aquihires.

But again, this is just one aspect of IoT. I haven't even mentioned new
devices, appliances, because it's a little harder to quantify, much less the
coming robotic revolution.

~~~
goatlover
So that means GE, Phillips, etc get to join Google, FB, etc (not to mention
the NSA) in tracking us in ever greater detail? And then your coffee machine,
fridge, etc can push advertisements to you.

Not sure I see the value in this as a consumer. My dumb, unconnected
appliances work just fine.

------
MichaelBurge
If you add an ethernet port to your coffee maker and it doesn't increase any
sales, are these reports counting it as a growth in the IoT market and loss in
the older market?

Who's pushing this stuff? Is everyone trying to hitch a ride on some buzz, or
are there relatively few companies hiring PR firms to trick gullible investors
into giving them money?

It's hard to tell, but it looks like Proctor and Gamble introduced the term.
Their stock price shot up within a year of Google Trends showing increasing
interest in the term. I wonder if they're the ones hiring PR firms, or if it's
all organic at this point.

~~~
Jaepa
> If you add an ethernet port to your coffee maker and it doesn't increase any
> sales, are these reports counting it as a growth in the IoT market and loss
> in the older market?

Actually I think that's kind of the root. It's not that the number of coffee
makers will change much, Mr. Coffee will just start adding "smart"s to more
down range machines. And why not? Its another feature to add to the list to
sound fancy which in commodity market has a lot of value, the cost to do such
is pretty negligible and there are no rules for support.

~~~
flukus
> And why not?

Well for one thing, anyone watching that will miss any hidden growth in dumb
devices, they'll appear to be losing market share.

~~~
Jaepa
But thats not really how markets work. It follows demands. If the ratio of
∂q_smart/∂t > ∂q_dumb/∂t then is what they will try to sell.

Eventually ∂q/∂t will reach near equilibrium, but even then, a smart device
for most things a smart device that is never connected to anything is pretty
much equivalent to a dumb device.

I'm not saying this article is right. I'm simply saying that IoT is less of a
market and more a "feature".

~~~
flukus
That seems to be assuming that the market is perfect, but dumb TV's for one
seem to be getting harder to find.

> a smart device that is never connected to anything is pretty much equivalent
> to a dumb device.

From the consumers perspective, but the still bring risk:
[https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/03/smart-tv-hack-
embed...](https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/03/smart-tv-hack-embeds-
attack-code-into-broadcast-signal-no-access-required/)

~~~
Jaepa
Oh no, I agree full hearty with you. I think the IoT trend is scary a fuck.
Especially since there is no rules for support. Even if the vendor does a good
job building the system, after it stops receiving updates it will become
unsafe to use.

I'm stating why I think IoT stuff will take off. I think its terrible,
unavoidable future. I'm not against the principle of smart devices, but we are
making them just smart enough to be dangerous to our networks, and to sloppy
to be safe.

------
_pdp_
Security will improve as technology improves but the main challenge of IoT is
that unlike traditional software running on common hardware - upgradability
and configuration is difficult due to the small form factor and awkward
interface, hence why many IoT providers are going cloud first which makes
sense from consumer level while it does not make sense from privacy point of
view.

INSERT:

Btw while your toaster does not need to connect to your wifi many people
forget what is the true value proposition here and why these devices need
internet access - software - dumb devices that use the hardware only as
operating shell but uses software to provide the smarts. In other words a
toaster with WiFi connection will not provide you with a better toast but a
toaster on your wifi might be able to serve toasted bread with broken hardware
that is mitigated through a software upgrade.

The toaster example is extreme. I know! However if you look at Tesla you can
apply the same principle at micro and macro level, i.e. the tesla already has
the hardware for self-driving but it lacks the smarts yet - i.e. the software.
Tesla converted the business of selling cars to a business of selling software
- and that is way more valuable than just the car itself.

~~~
pimterry
> upgradability and configuration is difficult due to the small form factor
> and awkward interface, hence why many IoT providers are going cloud first
> which makes sense from consumer level while it does not make sense from
> privacy point of view.

Remotely pushing updates and configuration doesn't necessarily imply loss of
privacy in practice. I think that's a red herring. I work for Resin.io - we do
automated deployments and updates and configuration management for fleets of
IoT devices, but that's totally independent of how the device's data is stored
and shared (or not).

Remote updatability does open up the _possibility_ that somebody could remote
connect in to read that data out, or push an update to get to it, but that's
quite a different gambit to devices that automatically scoop all your data,
analyse everything you do and resell that to marketers. It's also essentially
unavoidable if you want to have IoT that can accept remote updates, which
given the IoT security situation to date is sadly clearly necessary.

This move to cloud-focused IoT architecture isn't about upgradability at all.
It's a separate decision, with sometimes (often?) dubious motives, and that's
where the privacy concerns come in for me. We shouldn't let the necessity of
keeping devices up to date lead us to sacrificing the privacy of all our data,
they're not that closely related. Windows automatic update is not really a
privacy concern, Windows 10's ad tracking and cloud integration is.

~~~
_pdp_
I believe that we should look at this in a very different way. I frankly have
no issues with remote updates and I don't think most people will have issue
with the core of the idea as well. Why would they? This is more convenient
than doing upgrade via USB and it is more secure in the long run.

But what I have issues with (and I think everyone else) is that I do not know
if the upgrade is either not compromised or if it adheres to the same contact
that I signed for - i.e. not to sniff my data and do other things I did not
buy into.

Hence why, it will be a huge innovation if somebody can come up with a way of
proving that software work as intended. Then the contact is the software and
not the the TOS and I can use other software to verify that the software
adheres to the contact I bought into.

I am sure we will reach to that level of sophistication one day.

There is something else that I would like to add as well. The idea of having
your camera hooked on a cloud solution only works today because frankly we
have a technology problem. Most people will not run their own data caters and
the only convenient way of hook up your iPhone to have a continuous data
stream is by signing up for a cloud service.

However, I think that will change soon as well. The first company (probably
Amazon) which makes cloud technology seamless, i.e. consumers do not think
about it, will revolutionise the market for IoT because you no longer have to
rely on someone else's infrastructure that you would not trust - obviously you
need to trust your cloud provider :) but cloud could be much as ISP -
something that most people will sign up for.

------
noelwelsh
I can see how IoT is extremely useful in industrial and infrastructure
applications (e.g. monitoring leaks in pipes). I can see how if I was a retail
store I'd wanted to track everyone moving through my shops. But ... are there
any compelling consumer applications? Lights that change color don't count.
Connected thermostats---I've never understood the appeal.

~~~
ktta
I think that's because, we tend to have a strict opinion of what IoT is. And
that's apparent in industrial use, where it just collects data to relay it so
that other people can make use of it.

But the IoT in our homes are much more subtle. People don't just buy
standalone temperature sensors.

If you see carefully, the IoT wave we're expecting is coming in slowly,
bundled with other things. These days most of the appliances which were dumb
before, like fridges, coffee makers, security cameras, smoke detectors,
washing machines, cleaners (roomba, etc.) and others are now connecting to the
internet. I mean, a washing machine connecting to the internet might seem
preposterous so some now, but I don't think that'll be the case when they get
better.

Along with Alexa, Google Home, the digital assistants that are yet to come
have a chance to really change the way people use their devices at home. If
they get it right, and not close off communication to their own servers
(Which, I sadly see is happening now and doesn't seem like it'll go away) I
think there's a real chance they might have a big market.

~~~
bshimmin
But what is the actual benefit to the consumer? What is the user story here?
"I want my washing machine connected to the Internet so that _________"? I
can't finish this sentence - I have literally no idea.

As another commenter suggested, I expect the incumbent giants will add the IoT
functionality to most mid-range consumer products anyway, whether anyone wants
them to or not, and then it will be proclaimed a great success, while the
consumer will be left utterly in the dark about why their fridge has a wifi
symbol on it or what it can be used for. Perhaps it'll be less like 3D
printers and more like 3D TV, which has apparently now quietly died a death (I
tried it once on my TV, because I work in tech and felt some sort of weird
obligation to - I'm sure many people never even tried those stupid 3D glasses
that came with their TV).

~~~
ktta
Automation/Notification

1\. Your oven can cook the pizza in the oven, which will be ready by the time
you are home.

2\. Your coffee maker can check your location to see if you're in town or not
and decide to make coffee.

3\. Security cameras can upload video to cloud directly so you can see them
from anywhere live. They can be motion activated to alert you so that you can
check if it is a dog or a burglar.

4\. A fridge which recently came out with a camera which you can check to see
what you need to buy[1]. Can be triggered when your location is close to a
grocery store.

5\. Your smoke detector can send you a notification, turn off the internet
connected thermostat and any other appliances. Can turn on the security camera
inside so you can check if it's your family burning cookies or house burning
down.

6\. You washing machine can remind you when your load is done. Can send you
reminders that you didn't do laundry for a while.

7\. Roomba already does neat stuff that I don't need to explain here.

As I said, the real benefit comes when they all work together. There are
custom solutions, but if one can set up everything so that it can track your
location/schedule to automate things, that would make for a great increase in
quality of life. You won't keep forgetting food in the oven, let the heat bill
run up too high, forget your clothes in the washer, and a nice coffee as soon
as you wake up.

This might seem insignificant, but I think it's similar to having a very smart
housekeeper (although not as capable). Combined with all the data about you,
like weight, heart rate, schedule, etc. intelligent systems can work pretty
well.

[1]: [http://www.samsung.com/us/explore/family-hub-
refrigerator/](http://www.samsung.com/us/explore/family-hub-refrigerator/)

~~~
flukus
1\. How does the pizza get to the oven?

2\. Lot's of issues, my presence does not determine my need for coffee.

4\. Sounds great but in reality you won't be able to see things hidden behind
other things or if a sauce bottle is full or empty.

7\. What does roomba do that I need apart from a timer?

From your list is seems like we'll have an internet of half working things
that everyone turns off after a week because they're more trouble than they're
worth.

~~~
ktta
They aren't perfect. I don't really know what I was thinking with the first
one, but I'll just rephrase it to remotely controllable oven.

You can read more about what Roomba can do here[1]. If it isn't for you that's
fine. Not everyone needs to buy sauces all the time. Usually just a look
suffices.

The problems you talk about aren't against IoT but just the use case I specify
here. They're very solvable and there are many more uses than I can talk
about.

I'm not a salesman for these products so I just said what came to mind.

When any new technology first comes to market and tries to blow everyone's
minds away, it often fails to make the entrance it anticipates because, in
your words, "they're more trouble than they're worth". But all they need is
some rethinking and time.

When PDAs first came out, my dad scoffed at them and used a large notebook to
write down notes. But today that's changed. I think that'll be the same with
IoT. We're increasingly moving towards a more electronic home, and that's not
stopping anytime soon.

It just needs some time to reach proper attention just like phones did, and
we'll have standards (hopefully) which can harness the power of connected
devices in your home. As the other commented to GPs reply said, a great factor
is energy saving too. Intelligent devices can figure out by themselves when to
turn on and off, and that can do a lot of power savings.

[1]:[https://store.irobot.com/default/robot-vacuum-
roomba/](https://store.irobot.com/default/robot-vacuum-roomba/)

------
Razengan
So there was a nice little JRPG series by the name of Mega Man Battle Network
(Rockman.EXE in Japan) [0]

Aside from its obligatory antagonists, the world presented in it seemed more
or less like a utopia. What I _really_ wanted to come true from it was how
every device – from doghouses to alarm clocks to ovens – had a standard
interface that you could "jack in" to with the "Navi" (AI avatar) in your
smartphone-like PET (Personal Terminal)..

In current world terms, ideally that would be like:

• Every electronic appliance will have an standardized wireless interface,
with no physical controls other than maybe hard reset/power buttons.

• Whenever you get a new device you'd physically tap it with your
phone/wearable to register it on your Apple/Google/Microsoft/other cloud
account.

• You'd get different tiers of controls for each appliance based on your
physical distance and the level of authentication on your primary
phone/wearable. e.g. to unlock your front door you have to be standing right
there (like how unlocking a MacBook with Apple Watch works) but you can turn
the lights on/off from across the world if you've unlocked your phone and
entered your cloud password – and only from that phone.

• Personal Assistants (I hope they get to be called Navis at some point) would
be interchangeable and customizable – like ringtones and wallpapers – each
with its own visual avatar and personality. You could even have multiple
Navis, each with its own duties; a butler-like personality for controlling
your home, and a chirpy R2D2-like robot that handles everything else.

We can see some of that happening with Apple's HomeKit and its integration
with Siri, and of course their competitors' offerings.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_Man_Battle_Network](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_Man_Battle_Network)

------
quintes
I tell people as a joke that back when I did device / integration work we
didn't call it IOT we called it TCP. Really. Discrete values over wonderware
sql or modems transmitting level readings. If course it wasn't internet scale
but it worked. Just a new take on it.

------
fmap
As others have pointed out, the current state of the IoT market is nothing
short of crazy, e.g., regarding security, device ownership, and, ironically,
connectivity. I wonder if this isn't a perfect time to finally monetize the
mountain of distributed OS research from the past three decades.

After all, most of you "smart sensors" are actually fairly general purpose
computers, and there is no reason why you shouldn't be using all of them, all
the time, for computing. Additionally, distributed OSses usually came with
secure, low-overhead protocols built-in, which people in the IoT sector seem
to be struggling with...

------
jjoonathan
The EE hype sphere is leaking.

------
bshimmin
It's 3D printers all over again!

------
_1009
What's a good way of getting into IoT? Is there a "TensorFlow Hello World" to
get started with things? What basics should I definitely not miss and what hot
areas are out there?

~~~
patrickg_zill
ESP8266, buy a couple of them, learn how to make the light blink, connect
using builtin Wifi, send data, etc. $3 from China to $10 in USA. Get the
NodeMCU form factor, add usb cable. Check the YouTube videos on this device,
many projects and cool hacks.

Or the ESP32, which is more money but has more RAM and a little more power, as
well as adding Bluetooth. SparkFun has their ESP32 Thing for $20.

~~~
pjmlp
The ESP32 is specially cool, given that is powerful enough to run any kind of
development environment from the 16 bit days (MS-DOS, Amiga, Atari ST, ...).

~~~
patrickg_zill
Given the neat things hackers have been able to make with the 8266, I look
forward to seeing what is done with the ESP32.

------
taherchhabra
Can anyone name good IOT sensors manufacturer.

~~~
asavinov
Bosch. For example [http://bosch-sensortec.com](http://bosch-sensortec.com) or
[http://bosch-connectivity.com](http://bosch-connectivity.com)

~~~
taherchhabra
Thanks, I am looking to buy for some personal projects. I hope they are not
just for the Enterprises.

------
debt
It's just things. Everything will be connected in the near future.

------
skynode
Software _be_ eating up the world. :) Next iteration: smart _nano-agents_
capable of healing virus infected networks without need for traditional human
programming.

~~~
TeMPOraL
How that next iteration will look like in reality: "smart" firewalls that
deep-scan every packet looking for keywords to sell to advertisers, while
incidentally sometimes protecting you from malicious traffic.

------
LeicaLatte
Textbook bubble.

------
flamedoge
o great more ddos botnets

------
einrealist
I want that chrystal ball!

~~~
pfarnsworth
Why? It's clearly broken.

