I don't get it; how can one be sceptical of something which has been happening for centuries? How many scribes copying books by hand do you know? The interoperability issues - which are mostly a matter of politics (in a broad sense), not technology - will certainly affect how fast certain jobs can be automated, but that automation does and will happen is undeniable.

> will certainly affect how fast certain jobs can be automated, but that automation does and will happen is undeniable.

But that's a relevant point. The main question in the automation debate is not whether it happens, the question is whether job destruction due to automation happens fast enough to outpace the usual job creation mechanisms (appearance of new market segments etc.).

You're forgetting the main point (at least how I read it) of the article: Automation for buildings already exists, our office has a ton of the stuff, the thing is the automation hardware we're using easily goes for about $30-40k per room depending what you're doing. Our media and presentation room are about in that number. They work fantastically and in six years have never needed a huge amount of service aside from an occasional tire kick, the problem is Joe Schmo wants that same experience for his house, and it's just not going to happen at the price point that a lot of IoT products are hitting.

The sad thing is I would totally be up for IoT products that costed more, because then I would at least have an idea that whoever built it built it to last instead of with the accountant standing over their head.

I am well aware of how much automation exists. The amount of work we are doing is going up - 40 years ago it was mostly men in the workforce, now both men and women work.