The growth of urban centers, the impacts of climate change, and the need for information to inform city planning and community organizing have intensified the need for monitoring solutions in cities. The advancement of low-cost sensor technologies and digital twin frameworks presents an opportunity for cities to deploy extensive, real-time monitoring systems. However, few examples of long-term, large-scale, publicly available urban sensor datasets exist, limiting the ability of researchers and planners to explore important topics such as hyperlocal environmental variations. In this paper, we introduce a comprehensive dataset from a 118-node LTE-M connected, solar-powered air quality sensor network deployed across Chicago, Illinois, from April 2021 to April 2023. This dataset comprises 94,915,745 readings of United States EPA criteria air pollutants, in two parts: 1) 75,932,596 gas sensor readings for carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and sulfur dioxide (SO2), and 2) 18,983,149 particulate matter (PM) readings. This open-access dataset uniquely enables researchers to examine critical aspects of smart city sensing, including environmental equity, sensor network deployment dynamics, and interactions between urban infrastructure, natural environments, and residents. Via integration with open datasets from the City of Chicago and other sources, this dataset serves as a foundational tool for advancing research in environmental justice, public health, and urban planning, empowering researchers to build and test ideas before going to deployment to move closer to achieving smart, sustainable urban environments.

Can overtrust in robots compromise physical security? We conducted a series of experiments in which a robot positioned outside a secure-access student dormitory asked passersby to assist it to gain access. We found individual participants were as likely to assist the robot in exiting the dormitory (40% assistance rate, 4/10 individuals) as in entering (19%, 3/16 individuals). Groups of people were more likely than individuals to assist the robot in entering (71%, 10/14 groups). When the robot was disguised as a food delivery agent for the fictional start-up Robot Grub, individuals were more likely to assist the robot in entering (76%, 16/21 individuals). Lastly, we found participants who identified the robot as a bomb threat demonstrated a trend toward assisting the robot (87%, 7/8 individuals, 6/7 groups). Thus, we demonstrate that overtrust---the unfounded belief that the robot does not intend to deceive or carry risk---can represent a significant threat to physical security at a university dormitory.

In this essay, I consider some of the factors that are making it more and more difficult to expend the effort necessary to do system design. Because of changes in the economics of the field in both industry and research, we have become less able to take the time needed to do real system design, and to train the next generation of designers. Because of the intellectual property landscape, we are less able to discuss system design. The end result is that we do less good system design than we used to, at least in those environments where system design used to be most common. But there are reasons to be optimistic about the future of system design, which appears to be happening in non-traditional ways and in non-traditional venues.

Ad hoc networking is often thought of as simply a mechanism by which participants in a network can find each other in some automated fashion. Our experience in building such networks, however, has convinced us that there is far more to ad hoc networks than simple discovery. In this paper, we will discuss the other requirements of the infrastructure that must be provided for real ad hoc networking to take place, illustrating our points with examples drawn from the existing Jini/sup TM/ networking system.

Code reuse and distributed systems seem to have little in common, except for the obvious similarity that both are just about to become dominant forms of software. Further, both have been about to become the dominant form of software for as long as most of us can remember. The great success of these technologies seems always to be tantalizingly in the future. The author begins by arguing that there are a number of similar reasons for the inability of either of these technologies to fulfil their promise. Some of these are technical, some are sociological, and some have to do with the wrong set of expectations surrounding the promise. The one thing that most of the problems have in common is that no proposed solution for either code reuse or distributed computing actually addresses the problems in any serious way. The author then argues that, nearly by accident, we have stumbled across some potential solutions. While we thought we were figuring out how to use the World Wide Web, we in fact found some approaches that might allow a combination of distributed computing (understood in perhaps a new and extended way) and language-centric design to allow us to reuse code in ways that will help in the construction of large and robust systems. While there are still problems concerning the sociology (and psychology) of programming that stand in the way of general code reuse, we might be getting a little closer to having a chance of fulfilling some of the promises we have been making for the past 10 years.

How will the problem of software reuse be solved? I attempt to make some predictions concerning some of the subjects that, while they may not currently be important to the area of reuse, will become central in the not too distant future. Let me begin by pointing out that the question itself is somewhat ill-formed. There is no single problem of reuse. The factors that block software reuse are many and varied, and lend themselves to many different approaches. On the other hand, there are some trends in the production of software that I believe will turn out to be important for software reuse. There are other subjects that are not generally thought of as topics in software reuse that are also, I believe, going to turn out to be central to the problem. I look at some of these in order to see if I can start up some controversy.

No abstract available.

Goals and content: The morning session will focus on the Java language, Java safety and security, and the Java object model. The afternoon session will focus on doing collabroative applications in the Java environment, emphasizing such class libraries as those for remote method invocation, object serialization, and multi-media presentation and collaboration.