Slashdot Mirror
Cell Phones Predict the Future
An anonymous reader writes "Wired News reports that cell phones were used in a recent project at MIT to both document and predict the lives of 100 MIT faculty and staff members. During the Reality Mining Project at MIT, Researcher Nathan Eagle logged 350,000 hours of data over nine months about the location, proximity, activity and communication of volunteers through cell phones carried by the participants.
From the article, "Given enough data, Eagle's algorithms were able to predict what people -- especially professors and Media Lab employees -- would do next and be right up to 85 percent of the time."
.... how is this very much different than human observation and analysis to figure out what someone's patterns are? If you watch anyone long enough you can get a good "feel" for where they will be, when they take lunch, who they hang out with, etc.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding but it looks as if this is just location-level tracking with GPS thrown in....hardly predicting the future, much more likely analyzing the past.
no, YOU invested in it!! You pay an average of 40 bucks a month to carry around a device which can be tracked, attached to, bugged, listened to, databased and demographied. There is a really simple solution: DON'T CARRY A CELL PHONE! now take your $480/year savings and buy something nice for the wife.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
- If MIT statisticians can do this, the government can absolutely do this. They just have to get under your phone records.
- Under the patriot act rules the House is currently renewing, if the government wants to put a tap on your phone records, they don't have to explain to a judge what they're doing. They just have to say "we are going to seize some records, but we aren't going to tell you which ones".
But, of course, I guess you don't have anything to worry about from an entity with absolute power and no accountability or oversight, unless you have something to hide."Given enough data, Eagle's algorithms were able to predict what people -- especially professors and Media Lab employees -- would do next and be right up to 85 percent of the time."
You mean if I give you a constant stream of my position data for months you can predict a future point where I will be with up to 85% accuracy?
Massive privacy concerns aside, this is a pretty shitty algorithim if thats as good as a prediction as it can make. Humans are creatures of habit, in 9 months just about every geographical habit you have would make itself known, we even do random things in a periodic manner.
Still got a long way before this is ready to be sold into the hands of advertisers and cell phone makers. So I suppose I could be glad about that.
There is truth in humor.
"We want to have our life choreographed, cataloged, witnessed and archived," Stakutis said. "Now we are heading to a world where this is possible without effort."
Indeed, next comes the government contract to expand and fully exploit this information. Soon, local law enforcement will be using this data to do their jobs more efficiently and stopping people for questioning just because they've "strayed from the herd".
And they'll do it without directly violating your privacy because they won't see the data that was the basis of the alert. As long as no one but the black box doing the mining sees your private information and doesn't disclose any of it with its findings, it's not going to be seen as a violation of your privacy. Privacy violations will become defined as disclosure of one person's information to another person, and machines running automated processes will be exempt by definition.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
there's no reason to assume that it's going to be used for some nefarious purpose.
he openly admits that there are privacy implications and that he's starting up a company (TBF it is benign right now) that's going to track social networks via mobile phones. As I stated above, that technology will likely be bought out by some corporation and used for their own records. It's not even so much the corporations or the government that worries me. It's intrusions via inappropriate third parties (ala T-mobile) that might get access to this data that worry me.
The horrible thing about "Big Brother" wasn't that he knows what you're doing, it's that he stops you from doing what you want to do.
What do you mean it's not stopping you. You wouldn't even give it a second's thought if you knew someone might be watching what you are doing? It certainly makes me think twice before I leave my mobile phone on while I make my daily rounds.
All this privacy nonsense really has to stop. It really doesn't matter who knows what you're doing, and chances are a lot of people know a lot about you just by looking. I don't think it has any negative impact on my life if people know what I'm doing as long as I can still do whatever I want. Of course, dishonest people might think otherwise.
You are a direct product of this time period. "I have nothing to hide. I don't care." That's what's wrong. People *should* care and *should* be questioning that idea.
It's so scary that people don't. I just hope you are trolling.
Google Dot Com
I'm not exactly paranoid. But if you look at googles recent developments and purchasing of services; you can see how data such as this could be used in the future.
Couple that with archived search engine results, google maps, google wallet, google froogle, ect and you know a lot about a person does. If you were to then apply these predictive models, you know a lot about what a person will do in the market place. Food for thought.
Marketing marketing marketing.
The jokes fails when you add an "h" to it. The Cheerios I eat don't contain any "h" shaped letters.
So this system can predict where someone -- who regualary follows a timetable -- day in day out -- will be. Wow.
...Oh wait
You could do the same thing for me, just look at my lecture timetable.
What's this? Decrying a new technology based on its potential applications? Am I reading the same Slashdot that I used to? Everything has the potential for abuse. Does this mean we should stop developing new uses for networks?
This service appears to be 100% opt-in. Therefore, those who choose not to use it (like me and, I assume, you) will never be affected by it.
Dear Mr Asimov,
Only after the dead of a giant, it becomes clear of how big a giant he was. You yourself most likely admired Jules Verne, who was so accurate in predicting the technical marvels of the first 70 years of the 20th century. Sometimes a bit poetic. He himself probably admired Leonardo da Vinci, however his predictions took a lot longer to come through.
Anyway to cut to the chase, another of your stories is turning into a prediction which seems to be slowly coming true. The bases for the science of the 2nd foundation has been laid. It is still a crude version, but it is working for 85% accurate on a group of odd people (scientist & professors).
Anyway, your list sofar:
1. Scientists accepted the 3 laws of robotics as a good bases for robot behaviour, and are working hard on the first autonomous robots (somewhere this christmas we can expect the first few).
2. Computers which are shaping the world.
3. Longer lives through science (genetic research, nanotechnology, expected around 2030).
4. And your last feat: Working social behaviour prediction algoritms.
Knowing you were a great writer, and I only read a part of your books, I am probably missing a few more predictions coming through. I hope others will come through too, it will turn out to be a great future.
High regards,
Jurt1235
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
You are a direct product of this time period. "I have nothing to hide. I don't care." That's what's wrong. People *should* care and *should* be questioning that idea.
How about preventing the social constructs that encourage such abuse instead of trying to prevent technology from advancing? The danger I see in this thread isn't from the technology- the danger comes from the fact that we've already let corporations become first class citizens- making real human beings mere second-class has beens at best. Worrying about privacy is just a symptom- the real problem is an overly invasive, super-powerfull business world that places profit above all other considerations.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
In my mind, it is highly unlikely. Things are never as bad as the cynics say and never as good as the optimists believe; besides governments are becoming less and less important in the world.
You're 100% right, they won't enter into a contract for the data as they would have to pay for that. They will just claim it's to track a terrorist cell and take the information under the guise of National Security.
It's far more devious this way as the American Public might never hear about it as it's illegal to announce that an investigation is happening.
We have no longer have protections of anonymoys sources to the press, we no longer have protections of our privacy from repressive regimes, and we have people that continue to go around thinking that it is all right because "they have nothing to hide".
Stop creating the means to make it easier for the corporations and the government to do what they have been trying to do for decades.
Ah yes, the classic "you have nothing to hide if you are doing nothing wrong" defense.
Yeah, especially when they know damn well that the fear of being "in the wrong" or "caught out" is the exact opposite of the real concern.
Living in a world where a faceless authority rides your ass all the time, silently recording and judging, just does NOT appeal to some people.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.