Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

"Body Talk" Could Control Gadgets

Posted by Hemos on from the talking-with-the-machines dept.

Fragglebabe writes "The BBC reports that we could soon be controlling our gadgets using small movements of the body, such as a nod of the head. In order to make this possible, 'Audio cloud' technology has been developed by researchers at the University of Glasgow. They say that 'audio clouds could make using mobile devices on the move safer and easier'. According to the article, 'the researchers have developed ways to control gadgets, such as personal digital assistants (PDAs) and music players, using 3D sound for output and gestures for input.'"

8 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. What problem does this solve again ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful


    sure we can see the advantages for disabled people but for the able bodied this seems like a solution looking for a problem

    there must be some bored execs about

    1. Re:What problem does this solve again ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      sure we can see the advantages for disabled people but for the able bodied this seems like a solution looking for a problem

      How about times when your hands are full and the environment is noisy? Say an auto mechanic working on a motor, he could be adjusting components and still have simple control over a diagnostic computer. I'm sure there are plenty of other potential uses. I think the problem is that whenever something like this comes up, everyone always assumes that it is something that is designed to replace the keyboard/mouse and if it doesn't have applicability to 95% of the computing masses then it's useless.

  2. Fantastic Direction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    HCI has not really had any new ideas since the mouse. It is great to see people working on practical ways to interface with mobile devices. I'd love to try this one. I bet using it would give me lots of ideas for new twists on the principle, and for useful applications.

  3. This is dumb by connah0047 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think we've already proved this concept is silly with the Sharp's V603SH.

  4. Could be useful if done right by janek78 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure this could be useful, I can see some great uses for disabled people (e.g. it could make using certain devices easier for people who lost their finger(s)).

    "The whole thing is about trying to make it more natural and using the right way to control something at the right time."

    I think this paragraph sums it up nicely. I always fear these smart phones (PDAs, gadgets or even PCs), because once they start guessing what you want them to do it's fine 95% of the time when they get it right. But those 5% can become a real nightmare (if they take away some low level control from you).

    Could be also a bit hard to use for old people with hand tremor (or Parkinson's disease). But I guess you can filter this low amnplitude tremor out (wasn't there an article about a smooth mouse on /. recently?).

    So I say yes, but please give me a full backup option to control my /insert a favorite gadget here/.

  5. Are they insane? by Illserve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Admittedly, I didn't read the article, but I don't think I have to to know this is a bad idea because I've heard it all before.

    How the hell is linking tiny gestural movements to PDA/mobile control going to improve control for people "on the go"? Whether, walking or driving, if I'm actively moving from one place to another, my body needs to be involved in the process. If I have to control head motion while driving or walking to control a PDA, my awareness of my surroundings will be worse.

    This whole idea of controlling devices with formerly incidental motions is like a recurring bad dream. Wake up. This idea is bad. It will not work. While we can consciously control these motions with severe training, the default state is that the brain does these things automatically. Any communication medium that forces the user to laboriously reprogram their own brain so that formerly automated behaviours have to reside under exclusive conscious control are impractical.

    The most successful user input devices (ie. cars, telephones, pencils, keyboards) have always focussed on elements of interaction that are under direct control in the context of the use of that device (ie I don't control my feet while walking, but I do while sitting in a car, because the walking program isn't engaged)

    1. Re:Are they insane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I think product engineers spend a lot of time/money on things like fancy new user interfaces because it is an excuse for not having to do more useful (but much harder) problem solving work.

      Frankly, a mobile phone or PDA that I can control via voice/touch/brainwaves is nice, but I would trade it all for a simpler device with a far longer battery life. Or how about a screen that was actually sharp enough to read text for extended periods of time?

      When was the last time anyone used voice-dialing on their mobile phone?

      It seems companies are continually forcing products with new features down our necks, to disguise the REAL usability problems.

  6. Re:Tension conveys intention by Reziac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good thought, especially for those of us who tend to wave our arms around, and if we sat on our hands would be rendered mute :)

    However, what about deaf folks' signed communication, which is purposeful (tensioned) by its nature?

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?