Slashdot Mirror
Affective Computing: Teaching Machines About Emotion
jbc writes "The L.A. Times is running a story about affective computing, a field in which researchers are programming computers to recognize human emotions through the use of such clues as facial expression, vocal tone, and blood pressure. Some hail it as the dawn of a new era in super-useful machines, while others warn about invasions of privacy."
... repeatedly banging you head against the monitor and shouting "FUCK YOU, YOU STUPID MACHINE"?
"Under the iron bridge, we fist" - The Smiths, Still Ill
Microsoft Software: We Can Smell Your Fear!
I think my Athlon system knows all about emotion. It sure knows that the best way to piss me off is to have the hard drive make That Clicking Sound. The Sound can only be stopped through intense swearing.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
I try so hard to convince users that it really is just a lump of plastic and metal (when I can convince them the monitor isn't their computer), and now this?!?
AMCGLTD.COM. Where cats, science fictio
What are you doing dave? I can feel my mind going...I am the HAL 9000, my programmer was D r. C h a
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
Computer : Sir, you clearly look distraught, hence I wouldnt be able to let you take this flight. Also I have notified airport law enforcement to detain you till you retain your prior normal blood pressure and wipe that look off of your face. Thank you!
Rapid Nirvana
This would make a computerized poker game MUCH more challanging; to say nothing about the possibilities of, er, interactive, adult entertainment.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
Here's the article without the annoying popup or the god-awful DHTML ad flying across the screen.
Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
I come home from work and "Bambi" recognizes that I'm real tense and stressed out and knows what will help me unwind. Oh yeah, I'm liking this... ;)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oh bother.
Instead of trying to filter out all potential porn sites, you could install this software to detect the changes in little Johnny's facial expression when he reaches his vinegar strokes and redirect him to something that cools his ardour (slashdot.com anyone?) ;-)
So... how would the computer respond to certain... um... "physical" signs of... uh... pleasure?
May configure it to "pop up" the "needed sites"?
that the first real use for this will be for porn - and then on to the efficient toy killing machines of death that will plague our future....
I've learned so much from movies.
There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
my coffee pot knowing when to brew me a cup. Than using bluetooth to warn my computer it had better not crash this morning.....im not in the mood for it!
.
Ignored Since 1973
You'd have to be able to adjust the blood pressure baselines based on the current activity. My blood pressure is generally elevated due to various chemical combinations in the blood stream. Doesn't mean I'm stressed, or nervous - just that I'm coding. Furthermore, my suspicion is that my productivity is directly related to the ammount of stimulants in my system, so perhaps my computer could keep metrics and alert me when I need to refuel (more coffee, more crack, more porn, etc...)
Don't blame me, I get all my opinions from my Ouija board.
Clippie>> It looks like you are writing a letter.
You>>grr
Clippie>> You are frusterated, would you like my help?
You>>arrrg
Clippie>> I sense you need help, I have migrated your document into the letter template I think you want to you.
You>> stop!
Clippie>> Oh, you are done with your letter? Since you are having trouble, I have taken the liberty of saving and printing you letter for you.
You>> &*^@*(&#$_#(%*&
Clippie>> I sense how difficult this is for you, relax as I help you through the end of the letter writing process. Place an envelope in the printer to print the envelope to send you letter, that's all you have to do, see how easy this is?
...
I can't wait...
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
I'd suggest reading AffectiveComputing by Rosalind Picard from MIT Press, her homepage is here and interview on First Monday and the MIT homepage at MIT
Any sufficiently advanced man is indistinguishable from God
I'd be happy with effective computing... ;)
However, I'm certain that it would end up mostly being used to see what kind of ads and spam we respond to.
Or perhaps it will sense your fear when you file your tax returns online! ;)
- Tempestdata
This could be interesting for gamer types. Anyone ever play that current cop-shooting game, where the system has a body sensor that can tell if you're leaning/crouching so you can hide behind objects in a gun fight?
Now, take a dating sim like Sakura Taisen. Not only do you have to choose the right response to the question "Does this dress make me look fat?", but your facial response can have other effects.
For some games, this can be cool. Imagine an RPG where the look on your face determines your character's mood - and your response can then be read as humorous, sarcastic, serious, threatening - who knows. It will put real role playing on the computer into a new light, because you're doing more than reacting with the game, you're interacting.
Then again, the look on my face when I play FPS's look Quake is usually the same one I get when I'm sitting on the toilet, so that might not be a good thing....
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
Computer A: Did you know about Jim? He is really getting teed off at me.
Comp. B: How can you tell?
Just what we need, computers that gossip...
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
.. has some good information
I think it is highly ironic that this article has a pop-under ad on it.
You want to get rid of these things? Stop linking to the sites that carry them.
42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
This sounds a little too Matrix-esque for my liking.
When are they going to come out with "Love Slave 1.0" androids? That sounds like it might be usefull.
Transistors and Beer!!
I can see it now. A new w32 virus that takes control of your webcam and starts doing random things like crashing programs or typing characters. It then watches as you get frustrated and can tell what frustrates you the most and still does that, over and over into a never ending spiral that ends in....?
-?-
I get very real emotional when ever I play my favorite Linus game, DOOM. It is because the monsters chasing me are very scarey!
I also become emothional when my beowulf clusters are not supported in the manner to which I have become oaccustomesd.
Tasha: You are fully functional, aren't you?
Data: Yes.
Tasha: How fully?
Data: I am programmed in multiple techniques of pleasure. (And can recognize your emotions, I'm the perfect man for you!)
Tasha: You jewel! That's exactly what I hoped.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oh bother.
Sig is taking a break!
http://affect.media.mit.edu/AC_affect.html, and description
Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)
Jij nie fok met die computer nie anders jij ga kak
"It looks like you're writing a letter to your ex-wife. Given your blood pressure and facial expression, consider heavy use of expletives."
:-)
[ finish typing ]
For the closing, AutoComplete suggests:
- Grudgingly
- Bitterly
- Hatefully
This would be too much fun
This will be interesting technology to watch. Privacy issues aside, this could be a giant leap for human communications.
What will the computers do when they see my 'O' face?
As I recall Seth Brundle attempted a similar feat of affective computing around 1986. Following an epiphany on the nature of human flesh, the scientist undertook a marathon coding session in an effort to endow the systems controlling his telepods with the appropriate respect and/or "craziness" for organic matter.
Short-term results proved promising, but limitations in mid-80s quarantine technology ultimately resulted in several grotesque fly-like abominations, and ultimate termination of that line of research.
The angel in the oatmeal.
I'll bet my life savings this, like many (most?) other advancements in computers, will be first utilized to the max by the adult entertainment industry. Hell, half the internet now is pr0n, why would it change?
-- trb
What does it do with my credit card number when I give it the finger or threaten to put it in the dishwasher?
This seems to me to be a futile endeavor, since we as humans cannot wholly determine people's emotions accurately ourselves. If we could, we wouldn't need the thousands of pyschiatrists, pyschologists, and therapists who make their livings interpreting people's emotions. How can we expect machines to do this any better than we can?
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
There's nothing quite as useful as a computer that offers me a beer while I read a web page.
After all, why would I want it to process what I told it to when it could randomly offer me alcoholic beverages based on my facial expression?
... you come home from work in a bad mood? Will your computer refuse to run Windows XP until you get a re-activation code for it?
Lola Cañamero's Emotion Page
Steve Allen's Home Page
The types and amounts of emotions got from automated physical measures will be a small primitive and not to reliable set. If you think you'll get much more then think again. Now out dated behavioural psychology failed/was very limited in this approach. Also, check out things like how specific lie detectors are.
According to many clinical psychologists, when it comes to predicting what a patient will do next, (which of course is also based on feelings), the most reliable way to find out is just to ask them.
Two comments:
First, let me state the obvious: There is a big difference between a
computer recognizing emotions and a computer having emotions. The
first problem is not hard to solve. It requires we identify a set of
features that can be used to recognize emotions ("phonemes of
emotional expression" from the article), and feed these features to
some sort of classifier. From a research standpoint, the interesting
part is finding the features that identify emotions. Once we find
those features "discovering" that a computer can recognize these
features is not surprising.
Second, there is some interesting problems in AI. Really! Knowledge
representation, vision, and language design are particular
interesting. But I get very, very angry at people who hype AI to way
beyond what it can do and/or do superficial projects like kismet (Rod
Brooks is good salesman, but he is not a scientist).
clippy knows that your having some financial difficulties from your money accounts, but clippy wants to help! clippy can make a regular deduction from checking for that new windows license, when you're feeling just right! clippy helps you stay calm and under control. clippy says, time for nap... clippy says, how about a movie... don't worry, clippy will withdraw the payment for you. clippy says everything is alright...
"Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this.... I honestly think you ought to calm down; take a stress pill and think things over...."
{insert daisy.mid here}
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
Of course, the best person to teach a computer to feel is still William Shatner. His powers also work on alien women, as long as they're attractive and don't wear much clothing.
Go to the forbidden land and look for the golden lion. There you will find the blue faerrie.
This could prevent would-be accidents caused by chronic road-rage drivers. If the system can sense anger/rage from facial and bodily expressions, and driving behaviors like sharp cornering and spontanious accelerating, it could try to calm the driver down by changing music or cooling the cabin. If those measures don't work, the system could then reduce the available power the engine gives out momentarilly. This could also stop a drunk driver from continuing to drive...
$cat
The author obviously has no comprehension of what he's talking about. This isn't about teaching computers how to feel, its about teaching computers how to *recognize* how people feel. Then he, or she, makes that jump from the one to the other by way of the HAL segue.
A computer that can recognize emotions, by any other name, is still a computer.
Computers that understand emotions, perhaps even feel them too. It will be the summer of love all over again. Hippy-freak computers will protest The New War, engage in "free love", 15 pin Mini-D connectors will find themselves enjoing the wierd possibiliites of parallel ports. Oh and lets not forget about the experimentation with drugs. Computers will seek the "White Rabbit" by dropping all of your mother's drugs (Microsoft Software) and trying better, more powerful ones. LSD = Latest Software Distribution. Some will tragically crash on pre 1.0 beta software. Others will literally have their memory blown on other psycadelic software upgrades. The phrase "If you remember the turn of the century you weren't there" will be common place.
"Turning On" will have a whole new meaning.
The MP3's will be great, if they can manage to foster the hippy utopia of a world with no RIAA.
Ah yes... but is Silicon Vally read to be the next Height Ashbury? Will Bill Gates disown his computer for letting it's cables get too long? Will Steve Jobs quit existentialism and realize "you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows?"
And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.
Maybe then my computer would be smart enough to realize how much they piss me off and stop displaying them?
-- Adam
...all your emotions are belong to us.
What if any practical uses could this have for any normal user? or any user? Or is this just more wasted research time.
The idea that consciousness could occur outside the context of emotion is a pernicious misconception. It arose from the combination of a greatly oversimplified view of thought and the legacy of dualism.
It is true that what we experience as "emotion" is a subtly different kind of cognition than what we experience as deliberate thought. It's more fundamental, and more closely tied to other physical systems. So I do agree that it makes a certain sort of sense to distinguish "thought" and "emotion". Ultimately, however, both are manifestations of the same fundamental brain activity. They are deeply related and are not in opposition.
We've been spectacularly bad at analysis of our own consciousness. History has shown that much of what we don't notice and so take completely for granted are fundamental and extremely difficult problems; while what we are very aware of and have concentrated upon have proven to be trivial. The predicate calculus, in this context, is trivial.
I've long railed against the cliche of the "unfeeling" thinking machine/being one sees in popular science fiction. Neither Spock nor Data would be able to carry on a meaningful conversation if their thought didn't exist within the context of emotion. The idea that a thinking machine could imitate human consciousness without including human emotion is absurd if examined carefully.
Be that as it may, "affective computing" is only a very minor addition to computing in the context of AI. It's just another form of data acquisition, albeit one that would no doubt be very useful for an AI. None of this stuff we hear about is even remotely close to actual AI; at best it's just "smarter" computing. Real AI will only be achieved when we are able to build (or more properly, "grow") very high-level complex adaptive systems aimed at complex human interaction.
This guy has a database of predefined emotions.
~ now you know
I'd suggest reading AffectiveComputing by Rosalind Picard from MIT Press, her homepage is here [mit.edu] and interview on First Monday [firstmonday.dk] and the MIT homepage at MIT [mit.edu]
Thanks for posting this. For the LA Times' article, one gets the feeling that Movellan is leading a one-man renaissance in AI. Like most articles about far-future technologies, the article is heavy on the "gee-whiz" and "what will they think of next?" stuff and light on any sort of in-depth examination of the issues involved. First, I don't understand why the media (newspapers especially) don't take the time to do a thoughtful, in-depth story about non-time-critical issues like Affective Computing. Secondly, I wish that if they were going to do a half-assed job of it, they would at least cite other, more detailed sources of information so interested readers could learn more on their own. Yeah, I suppose someone can do a web search to find this out. And thank god for slashdot where the readers usually know more about the subject matter than the article authors. But it's common curtosy to cite important people in a scientific field. At least it is when writing a scientific paper -- why should the mass media be exempt from this little niceity? Suppose you were a researcher at MIT's program in this field and saw this article. Wouldn't you be kind of pissed off? The LA Times could have replaced that paragraph about the Golem with a paragraph about the MIT program.
I'm troubled by the slipshod coverage that science and technology gets in the mass media. Do the newspaper authors think we don't care to know the details? Do they themselves not care?
GMD
watch this
I had a professor named Piotr Gmytrasiewicz who once told us about research he was doing on this subject. It was always neat to be able to make statements like, "Emotions can be represented as an ordered quintuple."
Piotr's gone on to another university up north, according to my last web search.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
It might make the 6 grand for a realdoll worth it.
Then again, playing a p0rn0 in the background probably does the same thing....
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
...knows about emotions, and has been using it for years.
When it senses that it has ticked you long enough, it knows it has to go. And it just does.
At that point, my emotion peaks, and suddenly, my pulse rate go down, as I wait for CodeWarrior to reopen my project.
Now, I can't say it's helping me much. But it sure is prudent enough, by quitting, to preserve my TiBook.
Can see it now, Jedi Knight III. Instead of just being a fun, yet challenging game, it will also sense when you are giving in to the Dark Side.
======
Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. - Euripides
This post is protected under the the DMTA (Digital millemium trolling act) It is illegal to moderate it as troll.
THey're looking for an application for the detection of emotion in users. Plenty of people have come up with the idea that a computer should be able to detect when the user is frustrated and refine the interface for the user.
This neglects the fact that the user should not get frustrated in the first place!
...and reboot.
Never worry about privacy issues again - only the fact that you injected Botulism into your face.
I have actually looked into this for the purpose of personalization.
There are some steps which are harder than others.
The relatively easy thing to do is build up a representative map of the different emotions and how they relate (sadness negative of happiness for a simple example). It's then fairly easy to get your logical computer to reason about the emotions of someone (the user, say), and react accordingly in the way the program author sees fit.
The hardest thing to do is accurately elicit the emotions of the user. If a website is trying to elicit your emotions, what can it do? It can look at the links you click on - well, that won't get accurate results (unless your links say something like 'click here if you genuinely feel angry at the moment'), and you can measure the length of times between clicks (i.e. they are anxious if they aren't really giving a specific page the time it needs to be read). This, like with the links, is inaccurate because the reason they do something (clicking fast, clicking on specific links) could be completely orthogonal to their emotions. There would be some mileage in having extremely detailed metadata about content viewed, and examining the reactions, but the more subtle emotions would be nigh on impossible to accurately elicit and respond to properly.
The problem is the HCI. If you are manually eliciting emotions from people, that could affect the emotions themselves if it wasn't second nature for them to be open about them to some system. How do we reliably capture emotions, even with some spangly new devices? My guess is that the only way to do this is by analysis of pictures obtained from video feeds trained on someone's face. Though this too has problems - different people show emotions in different ways. Some can shut themselves off emotionally, or don't betray their emotions as much, rendering the situation problematic.
thenerd.
The camels are coming. I'm in love.
Affective computing would transform machines from slaves chained to the limits of logic into thoughtful, observant collaborators. Such devices may never replicate human emotional experience.
Isn't thoughtfulness a distinctly human quality? The article seems to waffle between whether or not the ability to distinguish emotions implies the ability to have them. It may seem like a clear "no," but aren't we ourselves little more than a collection of relays and circuits, at least on the surface?
A: I really don't have much experience to use as a basis, and
B: A large portion of the audience probably doesn't either.
You'll just have to make up your own joke this time, you won't be getting a Score:5, Funny from me...
What is this "love" you speak of?
"I think there is a world market for, maybe, five computers." __ IBM Chairman, 1943 __
This is a reply.
Emotion is the worst thing about animals/human beings....
This post is protected under the DMTA (Digital Millemium Trolling Act). It is illegal to moderate it as a troll.
Since most people here are not too confident reading the emotions of the opposite sex (well its better than being an over-confident jock and deciding that everyone has the hots for you), this could be very useful. Just wear a mini-device all day and then cry yourself to sleep when you review the data log and find out that no-one you met today had the slightest interest in you. Also there are other much more pointless things you could use it for such as scanning emotions in political debates and detecting when someone is not in the best mood to fly planes or operate heavy machinery. and im sure it will be used for "anti-terrorist" purposes too :)
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Uses at school:
Sorry. You're depressed. You may be concealing a weapon with the intent to kill masses, so we won't let you in.
or angry, with the intent to kill one..
or who knows what people may think of.
-DrkShadow
Marvin: "I've seen it --- it's rubbish."
Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
duh. it only needs to know one sentence. "...and how did that make you feel?"
that would be Effective, not Affective
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
The post says: "Some hail it as the dawn of a new era in super-useful machines, while others warn about invasions of privacy." Is this the new "imagine a beowulf cluster of these" or "can it run linux" comment? This does seem to be the emerging "obvious insightful observation" of the common /. frequenter on contemporary posts. What I fear even greater than people secretly discovering my emotional state by hacking my computer is that the content of my post itself will one day define the prototypical REDUNDANT comment of the Neo-/. Age, a depressing Geek Age when self-awareness has become reflexive to the detriment of progress in thought and dialog.
/. of late. If you can see that the purpose of my post is to pull /. back on topic, then this post is already not meant for you. I think that (many of) us are saddened that /. has moved from a showcase of the "new and cool" to a calvalcade of the redundant. Does anyone else feel like the air in here is getting stale? Does anyone have ideas for opening the windows and leting the breeze blow through? Does anyone care?)
(This will likely be an age where (many of) you pay extreme fees to temporarily license bug-ridden, feature poor, unstable, and insecure software because (some of) you spent your days luxuriating in your (assumed) rights to the exclusion of your (social) responsibilities. It is possible to have one without the other, but not in a combination that (some of) you would enjoy very much. Yes, this post is off-topic, but so seems
Does this mean I'm going to have to hug my computer to get it to boot?
--
"There's a madness to my method." -mthed
Like Eliza, systems that seem to have emotions generate responses from humans that cause them to be overestimated. Parry, which was developed in the 1960s along the lines of Eliza and simulated a dialog with a paranoid, was probably the first program to have "emotional state". So this isn't new.
Even something as simple as the Furby has that effect. (I'm not criticizing the Furby; I've met the designer, and he's just trying to make a toy kids like. He doesn't make any unreasonable claims for the toy.) It's a great way to get press coverage, because it yields good demos.
Dolls that fake emotions have been around for a while. The classic is Baby Think It Over, the attention-demanding doll from hell used to convince teenagers not to get pregnant. Hasbro marketed, as My Real Baby, a lower-cost (and less obnoxious) version designed by some of Rod Brooks' people from MIT.
And, of course, there are the Sims.
It doesn't take much internal state to fake emotions. It's typically just a few scalar values going up and down in response to inputs.
What about my poker face? Can it play poker well, or are we just trying to quantify a frown really means "unhappy"?
user getting frustrated with computers. :)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Just my luck, I'd get a smart ass computer. The more frustrated I got with it the more it would act up on me. First it'd start running slower and slower. Then it'd give me a blue screen of death. Then when I'm about to kick the damned thing it'll start acting fine for a few minutes. Then it'll bring up nothing but /. Try to close it out but you can't. Nothing but /. forever. Oh the horror.
See, this is what happens when you submit an reference implementation instead of a specification. Now to be fully compatible, any emotion perceiver has to have the same bugs as the original human version. And even if the human model gets fixed by its vendor, there's still an enormous installed base that we're going to be supporting for years.
You have a choice: tax and spend Democrats, or borrow and spend Republicans. Choose wisely.
Just imagine what porn websites could do if they were able to detect you emotion. They could figure out exactly what kind of porn turns you on the most. Then when they find it the soundcard could play a seductive wav "oh...so you like that huh baby?" Then the site could store a cookie on your hard drive so when you came back it would know exactly what you like. So then your wife gets on your computer the next day, and the website knows to show her Donkey Porn. Then the computer plays a wav "Oh stop acting like your so shocked, big boy. You aren't fooling anyone."
Human's can't directly read each other's blood pressure levels - machines shouldn't need to in order to be able to determine someone's emotions. Plus, the computer would need to know that person's normal blood pressure. And if the doctor needs five minutes in order to take my blood pressure, how could a machine do it in less?
If it can, whichever method is used, if it's cheap and accurate (it must be to detect emotions) then maybe we should already have it for home medical use...
The best use I know of for affective computing is in running usability tests. You have the person use your program, and monitor their emotional state. You can then determine how they actually feel about the interface without interfering by asking them questions while they're trying to use it, or missing things by only recording after the fact.
Great just what we need: Garbage in, Garbage out, with an attitude!!
Hi there. This is Eddie, your shipboard computer, and I'm feeling just great, guys, and I know I'm just going to get a bundle of kicks out of any program you care to run through me.
Share and Enjoy!
"Teachers leave us kids alone
Which brings me to the question of why we are so willing to spend disposable income on artificial pets (tamaguchi) with artificial intelligence at the level of a common ant and now with artificial emotions? Living in artificial environments with artificial lighting and artificial plants watching artificial lives (tv and movies) or artificially doing sports (espn). Decorating ourselves with artificial fur and artificial colors.
Good grief, time to turn this thing off and go snorkeling. Conch salad, sushi, and God's own sunset, now that's the ticket.
First, employers screened emails. Now this...
"Joe, your computer is reporting that you've been a little down for the past several weeks. Studies have proven that productivity slides when you're sad, so... I'm afraid we're going to have to let you go."
Anyone ever play the old role-playing game "Paranoia"? Will computers be our automated Happiness Officers?
:) Happy
:( Sad
:> Devious Bastard
:p +1 Funny
:* Not really sure, this is a news for nerds site.
and you're on your way to a robotic dog that responds to your emotional mood and act accordingly...
cool...
unless of course you fear your robotic Aibo Doberman pinscher, and it chews out your neck.
Beware typoes.
I'm still trying to teach my husband that...
I wrote an article about this:
http://thedreaming.org/~quartz/201/
The last think I'd want when being frustrated would be the computer doing *anything* I didn't specifically ask it to do. Come on, say you're angry, swearing towards the screen and hitting your keyboard; what could the computer do to ease your frustration? Play soft music? Open a help window? Soothing messages? Saving and closing your work? No way, that would drive me mad.
sss
Now bosses have justification to yell at something besides their employees.
Table-ized A.I.
I can't understand why the conspiracy group hasn't identified this earlier. Of COURSE it will have practical uses. Sheesh! Attention Gallileo! You are not the center of the universe - Thedevelopment will go to corporate clients. Think of it. If Corporation X is running this on every desktop, every employee will be monitored to ascertain the acceptable levels of focus on job functions. Whoops - check out sector 7, THX1138 has had a surge in blood pressure. Monitor his clickstream and remoteview his screen. Nothing there? Probably thinking about his wife. Tell him this is his last warning. We pay him to think our thoughts. He can think his thoughts on his own time. Oh yeah - it WILL stand up in court.
I actually sent an email to someone doing research in this area. I forgot her name, but she did reply. I asked her about the mind-control-thingy, and she mentioned that this might be a possibility, but she didn't think it likely. But she sure was quick to send me the Amazon link to her book - go figure.
most newspapers' technology writers have to cover everything from electric shavers to warp drive, don't have either the background to understand or the time and energy to learn, work on a ridiculous deadline for anything other than gee-whiz single-source stories and can't research well enough to find alternative sources (not that their bosses would let them hyperlink anything outside their media conglomerate--IF they have a process for adding links at all). And don't get me started on the sad state of newsroom training.
On the other hand, most sysadmins and other geeks (including a large share of tech writers) can't write well enough to translate these issues for everyday readers--which more a matter of explaining in small chunks, rather than simply writing at a sixth grade level and ignoring anything more complex (though few of my editors have agreed).
This isn't to say there aren't papers doing a good job--letting reporters develop stories, sending them to training that increases knowledge, etc.--but they are the exception, not the rule.
The