[cdnsteve]

Meh, we need AI to understand API interfaces automatically and can communicate together seamlessly, without any hard coding. That's when device to device integration gets REALLY interesting. Wait, isn't this just bluetooth + web?

[mcrider]

We don't necessarily need AI, we just need APIs to be standardized so everything knows how to interface with them. This is IMO the killer app for the Semantic Web (I just wrote an article on this: https://medium.com/@mcriddy/semantic-web-design-92ef35f66c9f).

[MichaelGG]

How does that eliminate the need for AI? Having a "standardized" format doesn't fix much of anything, except a bit of search engine display logic. It does nothing of the sort of eliminating the need for render code per app/site. Maybe some actual, solid, examples of exactly what a "standard API" would accomplish would help explain.

[digikata]

It is, but I think the really interesting part is to making the connection seamless and as direct as feasible. e.g. how do you do it on one end of the spectrum if neither the embedded device or the users device has access to the internet, but they can see one another via bluetooth and wifi?

I think an app makes a lot sense to initially bridge embedded devices (that may only support simple web interfaces or even lower level network messages) to smartphone browsers (which are currently oriented to handling fairly rich web interfaces from full servers).

But where it should get really interesting is if you make the app support a generic enough protocol that you don't need an app-per-device type, but the app/protocol can handle a wide range of generic embedded device interfaces without requiring a full featured / high performance web server on every embedded device. After that you could basically get the protocol supported at the browser/os level and the app disappears.

[skinnybatch]

I agree that the AI component is important to understand. Essentially we're talking about putting everything on a computer system, and installing the same OS on every "machine." One of the problems that I foresee mirrors that of Microsoft, in terms of monopoly, as well as the ongoing debate between PC vs Mac usage. Inevitably, the shared OS maker will have the monopoly, though others may try to dethrone it, or there will be a battle between two to three different systems each competing for market share, and proving almost incompatible with one another… until some Hackers develop a patch.

[solipsism]

we need AI to understand API interfaces automatically and can communicate together seamlessly

I agree with that statement in general, but I don't see what it has to do with Google's Physical Web proposal/idea. You'd want what you describe even in a world with only traditional networked computers.

[webXL]

I think having the AI to accomplish that would be the really interesting bit. That makes a lot more technological advancements possible. And yes, this is just finding new applications for the web and expanding its value/reach.

[sp332]

The underlying tech is bluetooth + web, but the user interface for this does not currently exist.