In Soviet US, Comcast Watches YOU 404
cayenne8 sends us to Newteevee.com for a blog posting reporting from the Digital Living Room conference earlier this week. Gerard Kunkel, Comcast's senior VP of user experience, stated that the cable company is experimenting with different camera technologies built into its devices so it can know who's in your living room. Cameras in the set-top boxes, while apparently not using facial recognition software, can still somehow figure out who is in the room, and customize user preferences for cable (favorite channels, etc.). While this sounds 'handy,' it also sounds a bit like the TV sets in 1984. I am sure, of course, that Comcast wouldn't tap into this for any reason, nor let the authorities tap into this to watch inside your home in real time without a warrant or anything."
Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
1984 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nope. (Score:2, Insightful)
1984 (Score:1, Insightful)
While this sounds 'handy,' it also sounds a bit like the TV sets in 1984.
Apart from the fact that allowing them into your house is entirely voluntary and not mandated by law. You know, the important bit.
I'm sick of people comparing everything to 1984. It's like they read one book in school and anything that has privacy implications is immediately associated with it because it makes them feel smart.
Look, I think this is a stupid idea and there's no way I'd let one into my house, but it's not like 1984. Hardly anything compared to it actually is.
It will get forced on us (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nope. (Score:4, Insightful)
If they simply must market such a technology, at least put a biometric device on the remote. That would have to work better than some mysterious body shape recognition, give them the same marketing information and I can still watch Sanford and Son reruns in my underwear.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy.
Re:1984 (Score:5, Insightful)
fixed it for ya
Re:Why the frag (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Already there? (Score:5, Insightful)
What makes you think the camera is not already there? Have you disassembled your cable box?
Food for thought. Your cable box could have a camera already. If you have cable internet you know it has enough bandwidth for monitoring you.
Re:It will get forced on us (Score:5, Insightful)
-What does legally happen when some adult's Comacast 1984-style bidirectional TV box "inadvertently" observes illegal underage nudity and sex. I am sure if this data was in any way streamed over their network there would be numerous state and federal laws violated (or if it were retained in any way), not to mention grounds for a very hefty lawsuit.
It would make for some interesting legal reading in any case.
They knew who I was. (Score:3, Insightful)
I put a picture of Mickey Mouse in front of mine. They got me for copyright and trademark violations too. How did they know?
TV is not worth this. Thanks to MythTV, I considered paying for cable TV again. There is no way in hell I'd sit a camera in my living room for it. What complete morons.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:They knew who I was. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:At last, per-person DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
I cna see it now. Every time someone walks into the room they have to swipe their credit card in the STB or the TV will turn off.
This sounds like a DRM dream. The sad thing is that many people will think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and will welcome this "customized user experience".
Arghhh.....
Unfortunately (Score:3, Insightful)
Them's the breaks!
Re:1984 (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh and this is perfectly okay since it's a corporation and not a government because companies are beholden to a small number of hyper wealthy share holders as opposed to the populous. And companies never do anything wrong! Why would they? I mean look at the housing market. Rolling along! Look at the energy markets where it was finally let loose of the yoke of government regulation! Enron! Worldcom! Bear Stearns! These are pillars of industry. Truly, we should simply have more faith in the wisdom of our betters.
Re:1984 (Score:2, Insightful)
*Use of set-top attention monitor required.
If allowing the camera into your home could save you $90 per month, you might consider it. Especially if you "have nothing to hide".
Re:Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Make the most of Indian hemp seed and sow it everywhere!" - George Washington
Re:Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
In a way, whining about this in a widely read forum like Slashdot, is defending our privacy. Public awareness is the first step towards stopping things like this. Now the American public has an almost zero attention span, so awareness has to be loud and alarmist to even register on the social consciousness. To add to that problem, the evening news is alarmist about everything because it gains ratings, but further buries any real problems from getting the attention they need in order to be resolved.
Pay Per Viewer, Duh (Score:2, Insightful)
The obvious application of this is a pricing model that includes the number of viewers in the room. This has been an issue since the early VCR days. Many of the big players (e.g. Disney) were violently opposed to the VCR at first for just this reason, that they could no longer charge based on the number of viewers. I'd be suprised if that idea didn't get floated soon after the debut of the camera, maybe in connection with some huge event.
Improved preferences/customization seems a small payout for such a large investment. They already have the 'thumbclick' data, which is far easier to run throgh the (Bayesian) software. I expect it's already got a model for how many regular users there are. From the perspective of preferences or targeted ads, who's holding the remote is more important than who's in the room.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Shamelessle and blatantly stolen from A Child's Garden of Grass: A Pre-Legalization Comedy (1971)
"Your paperss, pleass!"
"Uh, but I only got a pipe, man."
"Zen you'll haff to come vith ME!"
But seriously (boo! he's serious!), is there ANY evil the corporations won't stoop to? Time to take all those lame stale lawyer jokes and rework them to Capitalist jokes. Even you athiests have to agree with what the bible says about the love of money.
Re:1984 (Score:2, Insightful)
Sooner or later someone will apply "think of the children" logic, and we'll all have one of these in our living rooms.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:4, Insightful)
There are a whole group of people who "defend their privacy" in cases like this simply by avoiding such products and services. These people have no social impact *at all*, because they don't say anything - which means everyone else thinks that "no one cares".
What that means is simple: Yes, you should actively defend your privacy by avoiding intrusive services. But you also need to whine about it on the internet to let others know that someone cares.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:3, Insightful)
What if Orwell with his 1984... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ah well ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Then when you use it like that, they will start coming out with labels on duct tape saying its a federal offense to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
OK, how would you suggest raising public awareness about this? I only heard about it because it was posted here in Slashdot.
Slashdot isn't really that big, and the audience is very self-selecting for certain points of view.
Says user number 1,243,248. If Slashdot were a city that population would make it the ninth largest city in the US, between San Diego and Dallas. Yes audience is self selecting, this is a site mostly made of nerds with a libertarian bent. There is, at least, an effort to stay informed and back up statements with facts.
Re:They knew who I was. (Score:4, Insightful)
But really, what kind of sane person would put a camera they didn't have control of in their living room? I don't even like having my webcam pointed at me when i'm not using it.
What really annoys me about this, is I can see people getting it and BEING EXCITED that it can see them in front of the tv and pick out what they want. It goes back to that "i have nothing to hide, so why should I care" philosophy. I have nothing to hide either, but I sure as hell care.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to commit
Besides it isn't about
I also wouldn't say that we're that limited in the ideologies of the user-base. I'd say we skew towards mid-high income brackets, and towards the more libertarian techies, but thats not to say that they are a large majority. Look how many left-right, socialism-libertarianism debates plague YRO daily. We even have a share of Christian fundies resident. And while American's are the majority, we definitely have a LARGE share of folk from other countries/cultures to balance things out.
We represent a large array of international basement dwellers, in other words.
Re:Ah well ... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:They knew who I was. (Score:3, Insightful)
In any country you are going to find people who favor government control to an extreme degree. Regardless of how you choose to label them, they're still fascists to varying degrees. Given the history and values upon which the United States was founded, it's ironic in the extreme that the word "freedom" gets bandied about so often by the very people enabling the erosion of individual liberties.