On Tue, 12 Mar 2019, Livingood, Jason wrote:
[JL] Going onto to hardware like a smart TV will still result in lower
penetration that if you went to the app layer that is where attention
time is spent (which may be on a laptop or non-cellular-connected tablet
or a game console).
That's the problem with rules of thumb. You have eight other fingers.
Recognizing how long it takes to change things, I'm prognosticating what
things might be like 5+ years in the future, i.e., CES 2024.
I'm focused on devices with mediation layers, i.e. the intelligent
assistants, for a reason. Alert localization and user opt-outs should be
as close to the end-user as technology allows. You need the mediation
layer to do that per user/per household. Emergency alerts localized at
the cable head-end or cell tower are too overbroad, but maybe as specific
as old technology can support for backward compatibility.
Having mediation layer is also important for multi-tasking. I often have
Netflix, a web browser and email open at the same time on my computer. You
don't want to interrupt the local news stream, CNN or the Weather Channel
already covering a disaster with a non-local alert. If the alert is always
embedded in the content, that's difficult to do. For example, AT&T
U-Verse doesn't record emergency on the DVR. When you play back DVR
recorded programming, you don't get old recorded emergency alerts. If new
alerts happen while watching the U-Verse DVR, then you would get those
new alerts.
Analog content and dumb devices may not be able to support that. So there
will always be some exceptions. See rule of thumbs :-)
Likewise, I'm not suggesting every possible electronic device needs
emergency alerts. I'm focused on things that people typically interact
with for entertainment and information, such as smart TVs and smart
speakers. Not light bulbs, thermostats or smoke detectors.