The rise of the City Broker will allow for much more….

Smart Cities are not a new concept. Nor are they an earth shattering, orbit altering change. They aren’t even radical. Cities are heading towards smart city status for a number of reasons. The cost of water and energy and the reduction/management of that cost is a huge driver. Traffic patterns both within buildings (elevators and stairs) as well as traffic patterns (roads and public transportation) are also components.

#mysmartcity adds some features to future smart cities that would benefit all citizens of that particular city and all visitors. First off my argument that cloud brokers and later Cyber Physical System brokers cannot be cloud service and CPS service providers. I have heard the pitch of every SI out there as to why they should be a Cloud Broker. It scares me. First that they don’t get it. Second that they use the traditional sales tactics in selling cloud brokers. Security, device management and overall integration.

I have a really good friend that used to joke about the “catch of the day.” Watch the restaurant he would say, if they want people to dine earlier, they are always out of the specials by 6 pm. If they want people to dine later, they have specials all evening. I thought he was kidding for a long time but he wasn’t and he was right. Its why cloud providers cannot be brokers. They will have services they need to sell. So every time you want to add a cloud service, their service is on that list. The same is true by the way for companies that also provide only one specific service.

Cities or regions would offer more effective broker services. The addition for them would be the integration of baseline security for all users in their city or region. Yes there would have to be a cost, but the reality is we need better distrusted security throughout the connected bits world. So having a city based service that offered home internet security and broker services would reduce the exposure of all organizations from the top down. IE if we secure each home in a region/city/state/country you get the idea, then we at least have a known point of reference to begin fixing problems. Using integrated technology the city could quickly find a fix once, and deploy it to every home.

I understand the argument against this position. It is really quite simple. Why would I trust the government. It is by the way the same thing you have to ask yourself today about companies providing broker services. Ultimately you have understand the goal of the organization. With a City Broker you get three simple values for the city.

  1. Decrease the amount of taxes to be charged. The city can create a flat fee system. Organizations that use the broker heavily will pay more than users that use the system once. There would also be a monthly fee for the security device in your home. It allows the city to create a safe internet zone called the City Broker!
  2. Increase the incubation of small business and increase the tax base by providing additional services to create more successful small businesses
  3. Create greater security for the citizens of the city which reduces the risks for the city and businesses that use the internet for service provision.

I am not arguing that cities become ISP (internet service providers) that offers far too much control. Rather that they offer Cloud and later CSP Broker Services that encompass a City Virtual Market for additional services. This can be accomplished by creating automated city services that people use, as part of the Broker. Integrated security services and reduced cost of overall bandwidth from home by coordinating with ISP’s.

It just makes sense in the long run.


Cloud Broker advocate