Corporate Fallout Detector 267
BandwidthHog writes "MIT student shows off Corporate Fallout Detector. Acts and looks kinda like a Geiger counter, but it's a UPC scanner with an internal, updateable database of corporate misdeeds, with both Pollution and Corporate Ethics modes. I want one."
In case of slashdotting (Score:2, Informative)
A New Corporate Vision. (Score:5, Funny)
And I get free, instant, corporation level blackmail?
Sweet.
Re:A New Corporate Vision. (Score:2)
Re:A New Corporate Vision. (Score:2)
If you own one, you are probably a Facist.
Seems to me you need to buy a dictionary:
-----
fascist:
1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.
2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.
fascism
1. often Fascism
1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
An interesting first step (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it can work (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No, it can work (Score:3, Informative)
Re:No, it can work (Score:3, Informative)
Not that it would be easy to do...
What about my Oreos? (Score:3, Funny)
Doesn't matter I suppose. It's not like I could stop buying Oreos.
It's a good thing that... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's a good thing that... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's a good thing that... (Score:3, Interesting)
Quick way to get the product criminalized.
Reference the micro-subplot in Sagan's "Contact" about Ad-nix, Preach-nix and Jive-nix. (That was my favorite part of the whole book.)
Re:It's a good thing that... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's a good thing that... (Score:2, Funny)
Jumpin' Jehosophat! (Score:5, Funny)
I give him two to four hours, tops. Oh, what a brave sacrifice for research. I hope his suffering isn't prolonged needlessly.
Man, they are really throwing the doors down (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Man, they are really throwing the doors down (Score:5, Interesting)
Who shaves the barber? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Who shaves the barber? (Score:4, Funny)
Why not scan MIT? (Score:3, Funny)
Google Cache (Score:5, Informative)
google cache [216.239.51.104]
<article text>
Corporate Fallout Detector
The Corporate Fallout Detector reads barcodes off of consumer products, and makes a noise similar to a gieger counter of varying intensity based on the social or environmental record of the company that produces the product.
I came up with the numbers by correlating several online bardcode databases with a pollution database and a corporate ethics database. Of course the data produced by this approach is subjective and inaccurate at times, but that's part of why I built it: It's difficult for consumers trace corporate actions through the maze of corporate ownership, and find who is really responsible. This helps create an environment where consumers have difficulty making informed purchasing decisions.... without the use of "special tools"...
The case is made from a discarded steel computer case, cut on a waterjet cutter and bent with a metal brake. Inside is a SaJe microcontroller and a Wasp barcode scanner.
Click on the thumbnails at left for larger images.
</article text>
Re:Google Cache (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Google Cache (Score:2)
Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content
MIT = Shogun of the Dark? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:MIT = Shogun of the Dark? (Score:4, Insightful)
You get your money from a machine. Machines dispense your cola. Machines count your money, pay your bills, and gently remind you that your ass is due in a meeting 15 minutes from now.
In the Tao Te Ching, Loa Tzu refers to the idea ruler as follows:
Barcode this (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Barcode this (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Barcode this (Score:2)
Stanford gave up their class A (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Barcode this (Score:2)
Ain't that a waste? But hey, IPv4 was never intended to scale beyond a few universities and FFRDCs.
Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:2)
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:3, Informative)
Developed by some people I know (well, only Anna actually) who graduated one year after me. It doesn't give you an environmental lecture about the product you're scanning, but I guess it very well could. Aimed at the blind to help them with shopping. Actually, make it remotely possible...not easy to tell 200 different soups apart, or cereal boxes, when you're blind.
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:2)
I feel shamed that I didn't attend that school, even though I was heavily recruited.
My only question is... how is a blind guy supposed to be able to point the scanner at the bar code on the product? Is there some sort of groove on the side of the can that has the barcode?
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:2)
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:2)
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:3, Informative)
Unfortunately the gadget doesn't exist yet, at the moment people can input the code only manually, though the system also searches using the product name (just type in "Philips 19" monitor", for example).
Saw it on TV, the hosts claim they managed to bargai
Re:Bruce Sterling thought of something like this (Score:3, Funny)
Include product reviews in this device... (Score:2, Interesting)
O
Mine blew up. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Mine blew up. (Score:2)
Re:Mine blew up. (Score:2, Funny)
here we go again (Score:4, Insightful)
Any company that uses meat of any kind would be on PETAs list, all energy companies would be on the list, any company that uses plastics would be on the list (evil petroleum used to make plastics, you know), and the lists go on and on.
Re:here we go again (Score:5, Insightful)
Not sure how one goes about 'programming' ethics though. I imagine delegating your ethical decisions to a beeper also raises a whole lot of new ethical questions!
Re:here we go again (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, ethics like everything else in the corporate world tends to reach an equillibrium determined by financial considerations; on a scale of 1-100 of badness, most companies would probably bunch up around the 80 point mark. The distribution is likely to be, not normal, but log-normal. Therefore a linear scale is probably too sensitive at
Re:here we go again (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:here we go again (Score:4, Interesting)
A list where you tick off your preferred political and social leanings (or even a questionaire to help you determine them.)
That way I wouldn't be tempted to buy an Interstate Battery for my vehicle because it was made by religious zealots, or drink Snapple because they donate to pro-life causes; but I would be OK buying the package of napkins because the company that produces them makes official targets for the NRA.
And the PETA folks could choose not to buy Nike shoes because of the leather, the green folks would be sh!t out of luck trying to buy anything because the plastic packaging came from Amoco, etc, etc, etc.
Of course, widespread use of this would lead to widespread fraud, where corporate hackers start attacking the watchdog databases trying to convince users that their brand was made from organic soy but the other guy's brand was made from ground-up third-world children.
A big game on Animal (Score:3, Funny)
EthicBuilder> Do you care if animals are hurt?
N
EthicBuilder> Even if they are little bunnies?
N
EthicBuilder> Oh really, here are some pictures. How about n
Re:here we go again (Score:2)
Ethics are not. Ethics are empirical.
Re:here we go again (Score:2)
That's great, but how long can I live if all it lets me buy are Apple computers, tentacle pr0n, Pocky sticks and RC Cola?
Re:here we go again (Score:2)
Re:here we go again (Score:3, Insightful)
This is merely an attempt by someone to impose their ethics on everyone else.
Re:here we go again (Score:2)
Personal Review Site != Objetive Readout (Score:2, Insightful)
The data is "somewhat inaccurate" *BUT* you want people to use it as the do-all end-all of consumer evaluation? Heh. Fat chance. Who guarantees the database is not full of this guy's issues with the companies that set the sensor off? (New coke was a *good* idea... how could you drop it? Let's see how you like being corporate depleted uranium!). I really dislike this "dumbing down" of the consumer... people trusting the device could be tricked into believing bad things of good companies and vice-versa.
Some
In other news... (Score:3, Funny)
Cool! (Score:2, Funny)
Corporate Ethics gray area (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Corporate Ethics gray area (Score:2)
What if you had a simple bar-code peripheral you could hook up to your wi-fi PDA? (Combining a couple of ideas from earlier posts.) Ideally, it would be built-in; have it dual-function as a laser pointer.
Anyway, then you could set up your PDA to query based on that UPC. You might disagree with PETA and the Christian Scientists, but like Consumer Reports and the Catholics. Set up an open rating protocol and you're set.
Then, of cou
Re:Corporate Ethics gray area (Score:2)
Re:Corporate Ethics gray area (Score:2)
We (along with many other retail chains I am sure) are building UPC lookup via barcode PDA applications as we speak. They are rather trivial - the hardest part being designing a good UI
Re:Corporate Ethics gray area (Score:3, Insightful)
In addition
Re:Corporate Ethics gray area (Score:2, Insightful)
Depends on your own personal philosophy. If you're religious, then it's easy, you've probably got some standard set for you based on your religions teachings. If you're not religious you still have options. Some people are Ethical Relativist which means that they believe ethics are not absol
Bad design (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bad design (Score:2)
Adbuster's greenscan (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Adbuster's greenscan (Score:3, Interesting)
I find that extreme behavior or unpopular behavior hurts causes. Instead of boycotting, protesting, and
Re:Adbuster's greenscan (Score:2, Insightful)
One of their adverts describes how much an average american consumes versus the consumption rates of 3rd world nations
Re:Adbuster's greenscan (Score:2, Insightful)
Boston Tea Party? American Revolution? Extreme examples I guess...
Instead of boycotting, protesting, and destroying - why not work to solve the problem. Opposed to sweat shops making shoes? Start a shoe shop and make better shoes. Tired of companies that pollute? Start a "clean" business, or a business helping them *not* pollute.
Unfortunately, the reason
Re:Adbuster's greenscan (Score:3, Insightful)
Show me any proof that Nike is c
An excellent AND stupid idea. (Score:5, Interesting)
Ths is a STUPID idea as far as summarizing the result as a single-magnitude noise from a "geiger counter." Companies are large and complex--there aren't just "bad ones" and "good ones." there are interrelationships, hidden subsidiaries, and every manner of nonsense. put another way--remember that stuff about the brent spar oil platform that was sunk? it turns out that royal dutch shell was actually right and the (largely german) "environmentalists" didn't understand the science or engineering.
the point is that under the current 'geiger counter', you'd get, say, one loud crack for royal dutch shell. under a more nuanced system, which is what is required, you'd have some way of making your own judgement based on your own values and understandings rather than somebody elses. no, it wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a hell of a lot better than the current cartoon idea.
(incidentally, would nike get a big "crack?" as well? because nike's labor practices are seen as either laudable or despicable, depending on who you talk to).
Re:An excellent AND stupid idea. (Score:2)
But your observation that "there are a bunch in the middle" is a load of rubbish. That is to say, it belies the fact that you think that you can give companies a score from 0-100 on how "good" or "bad" they are and that people would, say, +- 10%, agree with your rankings. What I'm saying is that that is a completely faulty assumption. Yes, the
Actually (Score:5, Insightful)
Do some homework. The P.T. Nikomas Gemilang factory in Indonesia, which makes a large portion of Nike's shoes, pays its workers well below the poverty line for that country. Workers at that factory have to leave their homes and live alone in low-rent housing because they can hardly afford to feed themselves, let alone take care of a family. In this case Nike's practices are despicable in the context of the local economy.
The first response I hear to a statement like this is: "Should Nike just pull out then, and leave all those people unemployed and starving?" No, of course not. But that doesn't mean i like to see a wealthy american corporation exploiting the poorest of the poor. I will vote with my dollars by not buying their shoes, spread the word, and hope that other moral people can overcome the ocean of advertising in front of them and do the same.
related device (Score:2)
CueJack (Score:4, Informative)
Interesting ... (Score:3, Insightful)
He mentioned "what if there was a tool..." basically exactly like this -- scan a barcode, and find out if purchasing that item could potentially result in money moving to organizations that you don't support.
Even if it's a small concept, I honestly wish such a device went further, even if only as a demonstration piece -- take it into someone's kitchen and see what social issues are represented by the food in their pantry.
In the open source spirit... (Score:4, Interesting)
* Don't care much about animal cruelty: set the parameter to
* Concerned about consumption of foreign oil: set the parameter to
* Somewhat worried about obnoxiously high (CEO salary)/(average employee salary): set the parameter to
Bring in the databases that you trust, and weigh them accordingly. Exclude information provided by folks you don't believe. Whatever. Each person could configure his or her own rating system, in an attempt to model his or her own levels of "anti-goodness".
Don't poo-poo the idea. Embrace it, and it's configurability.
"I want one..." (Score:3, Interesting)
Q: Why does the web-phone NOT tell you the nearest restraunt to your current location?
A: Because only certain restraunts have PAID the phone company to be available that way.
In other words, if you let someone else compile a database and then use it to make decisions, you give them the power to adjust that database in accordance with THEIR AGENDA. If you know and support the specific group and their ideals, that can be a good thing. But if you don't know how many groups are involved? How did they make their decisions? How was it keyed in? What are all their agendas?
This kind of thing comes under the heading of believing everything you hear/read/download...
It was a typically British birth... I was three at the time... They had a strike in the maternity ward... I came out in sympathy.
I was destined to be an actor. The day I was born I stood up and took a bow. Really. When the doctor slapped me, I thought it was applause!
Bobe Hope - 1903-2003
How Appropriate... (Score:2)
I guess it's not just a clever name after all.
So what products... (Score:2)
Just about everything we buy is made by someone who backstabs, double-crosses, drives down wages, busts unions, pillages the environment, and/or is involved in political shenanigans.
Oh wait, I just read the implementation. He just generated a beep based on the MD5 hash of the first 7 digits of the barcode. Clever.
Here are a few questions (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, I will be modded down as flamebait, but it bears noting that not everyone around here is on the Liberal side of the aisle. Some of us who care about Corporate responsibility want to see these concerns addressed across the board, not just in support of liberal causes.
Great - just what we need. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:bad device (Score:4, Funny)
'Well, it looks ok on the Amnesty International band, but check out the reading on Greenpeace!'
Re:bad device (Score:2)
the internet, that, in a way, is dumbing down of information gathering. sometimes the info is wrong, but you can take it all with a grain of salt and still come out way ahead.
since when is further propogation of information a "bad thing"??
Re:bad device (Score:2)
You forgot:
4.
5. Profit! (for the lawyers, that is)
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:4, Interesting)
This is an excellent question. But it's not an impossible problem. The question of who to trust when there is no central authority is pervasive and addressed in any number of interesting ways. A few:
The /. moderation system.
Various "seals of approval" from organizations (For example, kosher food is certified by a wide range of organizations. Not all organizations are accepted by all consumers of kosher food.) Another example would be AAA ratings, travel guides, etc.
his sounds like typical "if I don't like it, it must be immoral and capitalistic" leftwing grad school nonsense.
Are you saying that there's no such thing as morality, or that corporations never do anything immoral? Labeling something and arguing for or against it are different things.
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
Good thing to remember when someone shoots your dog.
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
nah, I refuse to be one of those people who's logic fails when 'it happens to me'. It would be rotten to lose a dog/friend/family member/whatever, but it wouldn't change my opinion on this. Only a good counter argument could do that.
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
people can and will believe whatever they want. whether or no
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:3)
I reject this concept, but do believe in respecting others' _rights_ to have different beliefs. I may feel that your faith (for example) is bunk, but I don't think you are bad/wrong/necessarily foolish to have it.
I lost a long time girlfriend over this... her particular branch of religion didn't accept marriages w/non believers, so
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:3, Interesting)
my best friend's a catholic and being an atheist, I don't have a lot of respect for her religion, but if someone were to mess with her about it, I'd be right there to back her up. I have no res
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
Languages are based on concepts. The concepts may be common, but all languages are not. The words, syntax, etc. are all fairly random. Of course, languages grow more complex over time, and some are derived from others, but this is a matter of culture, not chromosomes.
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:3, Informative)
The article states that the instrument's response is based on a pollution database, http://www.scorecard.org/ and a corporate ethics database [scorecard.org] http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/research/corporate_ researcher.html [ethicalconsumer.org]
I think it's more of a (witty, IMO) satirical stunt item than anything that the guy thinks would actually be useful.
Re:Corporate Ethics? Says who? (Score:2)
If they think I'm a pain in the ass when the cashier asks if I have one of their "discount cards" just wait till I can run up and down the aisles with one of those squaking away!
Re:MIT Fallout detector (Score:5, Funny)
What's the conversion rate between those units anyway?
Re:MIT Fallout detector (Score:4, Funny)
Re:it was slashdotted before anyone even replied (Score:5, Funny)
Surely not... (looks out of windows to check for low-flying pork)
Re:Who watches the watchers? (Score:2)
Hm... Sorry, you have to use your brain, there really is no other way. Gather data from many sources - Internet, TV, Radio, friends, newspapers, organizations that you find trustworthy (at least up to a point). Don't believe any single source, even if it's a burning bush or a talking horse. If you asked the above questions, you'
Re:Who watches the watchers? (Score:2)
Uh, that sort of my point about the scanner.
And whoever rated my post as "troll" can seriously suck me long and languidly. Guess I trod upon someone's precious political religion.