Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Microsoft Patents the Censoring of Speech

Posted by Soulskill on Sun Oct 19, 2008 09:11 AM
from the %$!#-!%-!%!$-##%-$@#! dept.
theodp writes "On Tuesday, the USPTO awarded Microsoft a patent for the Automatic Censorship of Audio Data for Broadcast, an invention that addresses 'producing censored speech that has been altered so that undesired words or phrases are either unintelligible or inaudible.' The patent describes methods for muting offensive words and replacing them with less offensive versions, and 'a third alternative provides for overwriting the undesired word with a masking sound, i.e., "bleeping" the undesired word with a tone.' After all, there's nothing worse than being subjected to offensive speech when you're shooting someone in the head."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Yay! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kral_Blbec (1201285) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:17AM (#25430923)

    So now the parents of kids too young to play dont have to worry about letting them play!!

    Come on, if you're old enough to play the game, you're old enough to either deal with it or tell them to stuff a sock in it. There are so many other options to work with. Why not just mute the stupid player? Or not even use the voip at all? Like the article says, its only really used for trash talk anyway. Unless I know who I'm playing with, I'm not going to try and coordinate anything.

    Stupid idea.

    BTW first post!

    • Re:Yay! (Score:4, Funny)

      by Sj0 (472011) on Sunday October 19 2008, @11:54AM (#25432019) Homepage Journal

      What's worse, do they bother censoring the ideas, or do they just use softer words?

      Hey, you mother[LOVER] I'm going to skull[LOVE] your [LOVING] corpse and then I'm going to get you down on your knees and get your corpse to [WHISTLE] on my [SKINFLUTE]

      Or would the Microsoft device just change the whole sentence to something like

      [I LIKE YOU. WE SHOULD GET TOGETHER FOR AGE APPROPRIATE SOCIAL BEVERAGES.]

    • Why not just mute the stupid player? Or not even use the voip at all? Like the article says, its only really used for trash talk anyway. Unless I know who I'm playing with, I'm not going to try and coordinate anything.

      Maybe it's only used for trash talk because stupid kids trash talking prevents anyone from having a civilized game. I mean, I don't play these kinds of games online *because* of all the "new to their testosterone" little brats running around using "fag" like it's punctuation. It's a tragedy of the commons situation.

      Muting the player can invite retaliation, and muting everyone (by not using VoIP) is just sticking your head in the sand. If this kind of software works, then I'd love to see it as an option w

  • Useless (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FluffyWithTeeth (890188) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:17AM (#25430925)

    Trust me when I say you can come up with new curses faster than you can code them into an automatic censorship proram...

    Nevermind all the fantastic new accents this is going to promote. And if you disagree; well quck you.

    • Re:Useless (Score:5, Interesting)

      by 4e617474 (945414) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:27AM (#25430977)

      Trust me when I say you can come up with new curses faster than you can code them into an automatic censorship proram...

      Pondering this make me feel a whole lot better about the whole enterprise. I'm all in favor of protecting budding young minds from the use of profanity as a substitute for creative expression... by teaching them that profanity is the inspiration for expressing yourself creatively. Also I like the thought of someone going to their manager and saying, "I need a ruling on 'defecating masonry'. Can we let that go?"

      • Re:Useless (Score:5, Funny)

        by BrokenHalo (565198) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:42AM (#25431045)
        Pondering this make me feel a whole lot better about the whole enterprise.

        Good thinking. I often think the standard of cursing in this language tends to be woefully inadequate, consisting of the mindless and dull repetition of combinations of the same four-letter words. For once, Microsoft could be doing something positive to improve articulacy of profane expression. It might not be what they intend, but I won't lose any sleep over that. ;-)
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I'm all in favor of protecting budding young minds from the use of profanity

        My parents kept tight controls over what I was allowed to see/hear. Fortunately, I learned profanity from other kids on the playground at school.

      • Re:Useless (Score:4, Insightful)

        by nightfire-unique (253895) on Sunday October 19 2008, @11:00AM (#25431589)

        I'm all in favor of protecting budding young minds from the use of profanity as a substitute for creative expression...

        I know I speak for many of us here when I say:

        Fuck you.

        Keep your intellectual parenting persuits where they belong: in your home. Raise your own fucking kids, and let me raise mine without government interference. We'll let them both compete in 20 years and see who did a better job.

        The moment you get your way with bad language censorship, I get my way with religious censorship.

        • I should have read your comment completely before posting... I think I misinterpreted what you were saying. Sorry about that. :)

          But it still stands for the others who feel language police are an acceptable limit on society.

      • Re:Useless (Score:5, Funny)

        by gyrogeerloose (849181) on Sunday October 19 2008, @11:26AM (#25431747)

        "I need a ruling on 'defecating masonry'. Can we let that go?"

        "Copulate that excrement!"

    • Re:Useless (Score:4, Funny)

      by CRCulver (715279) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:30AM (#25430991) Homepage

      And if you disagree; well quck you.

      Dude, don't disrespect your fellow Slashdot posters. That's crunked up.

    • I'm sceptical that it'll work that well. I do think it'll be more interesting than listening to people using fuck as punctuation - which is to me is dismally boring.

      Question: how will it cope with people using stuff like "Jesus/G-d" as an expletive? That sort of thing is offensive to many people too.

      Imagine if people started using Muhammad as an expletive. You can't just censor every mention of Muhammad because that will get you in big trouble too ;).

      It'll be interesting if the system can tell from the cont
        • Re:I'm sceptical (Score:4, Interesting)

          by TheLink (130905) on Monday October 20 2008, @12:53AM (#25437843) Journal
          As a Christian I actually find "fucking hell" less offensive, and by the way Jesus is also regarded as a prophet amongst muslims. It seems a violent and vocal minority of muslims appear to take offense at almost anything, almost anything can be regarded as insulting their religion, when in fact they're the ones ruining the reputation of their religion the most.

          I actually don't have a big problem with people saying fuck or using other expletives. To me there's a use for expletives. For example, if you were walking about and minding your own business, then some vehicle veered off the road and took your arm off. Now that's a perfectly valid time to say fuck or whatever.

          I just find it silly when people use it as punctuation. It's like reviewers giving 100% or 0% ratings in all of their reviews. Amusing for a few seconds at most.
    • And what about foreign languages where normal words are pronounced like curses in English.

      And other funny effects like in France where the Toyota MR2 will become the Toyota <bleep>. (MR2 will be pronounced like the french curse "Merde").

    • Yeah, but it could be a great tool for radio and TV stations. Even if it doesn't get rid of the manual bleep-out guy, it might make his job a lot easier. It's not entirely worthless because it doesn't solve the problem 100%... that's like saying we should never make gasoline engines more fuel-efficient unless we can skip all the way to zero emissions in one step.

  • Wow, it's just a regular cavalcade of innovation over there in Redmond. First Bob, then Clippy, UAC, aero, and now this -- Woooot!
  • I'm intrigued. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Night Goat (18437) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:23AM (#25430959) Homepage Journal

    Naturally, I didn't read the article, but I have to say I'm intrigued by this. It would come in extremely handy for radio stations if they no longer needed to have a delay on their live broadcasts. It would especially benefit college radio stations because they often have to limit what they can allow on air since they cannot afford the equipment that is required to have a delay. Although this technology might be very expensive as well, so who knows. I guess I ought to swallow my pride and read the article!

    • It would come in extremely handy for radio stations if they no longer needed to have a delay on their live broadcasts
      .

      That the "live mike" is dangerous is a lesson broadcasters have had to learn and re-learn since KDKA went on the air in 1920.

      Self-Censorship is intelligent and responsible:

      There will always be some damn fool on the line waiting for his chance to say that "The President has been shot!"

  • ... patenting automated triage.

    CC.
  • Oh come on..... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LibertineR (591918) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:25AM (#25430967)
    Is the heading not a TAD over the top here?

    Broadcasters can be, and have been fined thousands of dollars PER EVENT, through violations of FCC rules. One slip of the tongue should not be the basis for fining a program out of existance.

    A tool to help in that regards DOES NOT equal sensorship, and the title is a ridiculous assertion that hurts credibility around here.

    Hate Microsoft if you want, but Christ, why be stupid about it?

    What is next? "Microsoft wants to eat your babies"?

    As supposedly logic-driven geeks, can we not do better?

    • by 4e617474 (945414) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:32AM (#25430997)

      What is next? "Microsoft wants to eat your babies"?

      No, no, no. "Microsoft Sues Baby Eaters for Copyright Infringement". Pay attention.

    • by Throtex (708974) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:36AM (#25431007)

      You must be new here.

      IAAPL (I am a Patent Lawyer) ... as an engineer, I loved Slashdot. As a lawyer, I now know better and just come on here for laughs. It's like watching Sarah Palin discuss patent law.

      • I'd much prefer that, do you suppose we could take up a collection and procure her services? I'd far rather think of her saying the idiotic stuff than some pale geek that doesn't actually know anything about it.

        • by ColdWetDog (752185) * on Sunday October 19 2008, @10:21AM (#25431289) Homepage

          Keep laughing. One day, someone like me is going to string you up in a tree by your neck.

          Careful, we're talking about lawyers here. By now, someone has probably patented "a method whereby a human is elevated off the ground be means of large vegetable structures for the purposes of punishment".

          Try it and you'll be in a world of hurt.

        • No you won't. I always introduce myself as an engineer.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      What exactly is inaccurate about the headline? That's what their program does -- it censors speech.

      Broadcasters can be, and have been fined thousands of dollars PER EVENT, through violations of FCC rules. One slip of the tongue should not be the basis for fining a program out of existance.

      Actually, I agree with you. The FCC and the constant state of moral panic over words and god forbid naked people is absurd.

      A tool to help in that regards DOES NOT equal sensorship, and the title is a ridiculous assertion

      • Ah... the article submitter speaks....
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        A while back I was watching Saving Private Ryan on TV, and I actually thought it was kind of funny that they would show people stopping to pick up missing limbs, people holding innards in, etc, but when they were just walking through a field they censored out the curse words. Kind of doesn't make sense to me...
      • Actually, I agree with you. The FCC and the constant state of moral panic over words and god forbid naked people is absurd.

        The world did not end when Janet Jackson flashed a boob at half time in the Superbowl.

        I find it very disturbing that there was so much outrage over that incident, but no one seems to care about the amount of violence on TV. Bare breast bad, gun shot through the head good. Sigh.

        I miss Japanese TV. Tokyo channel 13 had this great show they played on late Friday night called Mini Skirt Police. Among other things, you could see young ladies crumpling beer cans with their breasts. Another memorable segment

    • Broadcasters can be, and have been fined thousands of dollars PER EVENT, through violations of FCC rules.

      That would be an example of ... wait a minute ... the word's on the tip of my tongue here ... oh right! ... censorship.

    • I think the problem here, within the paradigm you establish, is that MS is playing to the ridiculous system in which the moral police threaten free speech.

      These financial sanctions of which you speak are precisely what block free speech.

      Your argument is that this permits free speech because it permits them to say what they want. But in so doing, it stops them from saying what they want.

      The MS system here simply reinforces the paradigm, and makes money off of it too. It in no way permits or encourages fre

    • "Microsoft wants to eat your babies"

      I knew it! Thanks for confirming it.

  • Harry Enfield... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gringer (252588) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:41AM (#25431043)

    Reminds me of this clip from Harry Enfield:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmRTUNh1vPo [youtube.com]

    [For those hard of flashing, it's a parody of a short gangster conversation in which the bad words have been taped over with better words]

  • by KingTank (631646) on Sunday October 19 2008, @09:43AM (#25431049)
    Mother smiling gumdrops! I think that's a bunch of bull smurfs! That sparkle pony happy hole, Bill Gates and his piece of rainbow company, Microsoft, can go flower themselves with a sunshine until they bleed out their bunnies!
  • If you have 'forbidden knowledge' in a document, it goes poof with no recourse on your part..

    Oh, and it notifies the local authorities.

  • ... just curse your ass off when you tell it...

    And I'm sure this will work wonders for actors and other celebrities against the paparatzies...

  • by NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) on Sunday October 19 2008, @10:02AM (#25431165)
    What the Luck? Those Gassholes in Redmond can't stop me from sMitting up a verbal storm. I'll BLiss all over their parade!
  • When censorship is expensive, companies will be less likely to implement it.

    • Yeah but with Microsoft, they'll just say it's a feature of another product, and other products will cost more if they include it, or they won't have it at all, in which case it will look like the competition has less features and costs more.
  • For anyone who ever tried to have fun choosing a hotmail name:

    "[censored] [censored] threw a chair because he hated Google."

    or

    "[censored] [censored] resigned as CEO of Microsoft."

    Or of course, anyone who's heard voice chat during a Halo match:

    [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] you [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] in the [censored] [censored] [censored] with [censored] spoonfuls [censored] Lucky Charms [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored] with a [censored] cra

  • The title seems to imply that the Borg has patented censorship of speech. It's merely a method which uses speech recognition in a particular way to spot expletives and replace them automatically.
  • Sunny (Score:3, Funny)

    by Tablizer (95088) on Sunday October 19 2008, @12:59PM (#25432567) Homepage Journal

    I...love...Windows Vista. It is a piece of...brilliance. I want to take a sledge hammer and ... gently caress ... it to turn it into a pile of ... sunshine.

  • by Bones3D_mac (324952) on Sunday October 19 2008, @04:11PM (#25434299)

    It'll be interesting to see just how such technology will be abused. Want to prevent speech that might inspire someone to stand up and do something regarding a certain topic, simply filter out keywords in context to the topic itself to help tilt the topic to favor one group's interests over another.

    "Free" speech is long dead and buried. Welcome to the next China.