Slashdot Mirror
This Text Message Will Self Destruct
mwilliamson writes "Silicon.com is reporting that Staellium UK (cell provider) has created a protocol in which text messages disappear after 40 seconds. This, of course, relies on the implementation of the protocol in the device used to display the message. They're touting a future roll out for photos as well, and service in the US."
For me, the first thing that comes to mind from "self destructing SMS" is the advertising potential. Combined with a locator, you could now receive "Eat at Wendy's!" messages that expire so you don't have to delete them.
I don't really see it happening, but advertising in the old markets (TV, radio, newsprint) is not returning as big of a response as it used to. They'll always try to find more direct ways to advertise, and I wouldn't be surprised if this move is a predecessor to more direct advertising schemes.
Hopefully I'll be able to opt-in rather than opt-out of any such programs.
FWIW, I just can't imagine that people are SMS'ing proprietary information. If its private and confidential, keep it on paper (preferably typed with a typewriter). Digital information will always be too insecure.
As if the average person wasn't already running under the assumption that they were somehow anonmyous in their electronic communications. Frankly, I wouldn't knowingly buy a phone that implemented this protocol and didn't allow it to be toggled.
Richard Stallman correctly predicted this was going to happen as a result of of DRM, also known as Digital Restrictions Management, Treacherous Computing, or Handcuffware. To quote from his essay "Can you trust your computer?":
...There are plans to use the same facility for email and documents--resulting in email that disappears in two weeks, or documents that can only be read on the computers in one company.
Imagine if you get an email from your boss telling you to do something that you think is risky; a month later, when it backfires, you can't use the email to show that the decision was not yours. "Getting it in writing" doesn't protect you when the order is written in disappearing ink.
Imagine if you get an email from your boss stating a policy that is illegal or morally outrageous, such as to shred your company's audit documents, or to allow a dangerous threat to your country to move forward unchecked. Today you can send this to a reporter and expose the activity. With treacherous computing, the reporter won't be able to read the document; her computer will refuse to obey her. Treacherous computing becomes a paradise for corruption...
Please sign me up for your new service.
Love and kisses,
Paris Hilton.
This kind of message already exists for GSM mobile phones. It's called WIG Push (SIM Browsing or SAT) messages. They are visible for a short time and vanish after a timeout.
For more information check http://www.smarttrust.com./
Regards!
I predict:
From my personal point of view this "auto descruction" feature should only be seen as a convenience where phones autodelete messages to keep enough free memory space.
Sounds like a great idea. What happens if you can't finish reading it in ti..
One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
Am sure almost every article on Slashdot was "reported" elsewhere beforehand.
That is not the point. Some of us simply don't have the time to check a million other websites, instead we use Slashdot and a handful few others that can filter out stuff of interest.
Maybe if you subscribed to a couple of hundred tech-blogs, you might end up knowing half the headlines on Slashdot. But it's much easier to just read it on Slashdot, in one place, when I can be sure that it will eventually show up.
It was a couple of days late. So what? By the time the service would be available, it would be more than a few days later.
I do not understand this obsession with, "Oooh, I saw this on $foo 32 minutes and 23 seconds ago. Slashdot is SLOWWWWWWWWWWW."
Big deal. Some of us don't really care, as long as we hear about it somehow. Slashdot is primarily a forum, if you are a news junkie, look at other sources.
*shakes head*
... because the system simply sends a WAP push to a page which expires after a given period of time - the request is made over plain HTTP. The problem is that WAP gateways often choose to ignore the "no-cache" directives as do a lot of WAP browsers, which means that the message remains in the cache and can still be read both by the client and the gateways along the route after it has expired. A quick test we ran showed the messages being stored on the memory of a phone even thought it wasn't supposed to be cached. Also, it is always possible to simply save the page source to a different file on the phone.
A mobile software consultancy I work for is actually working on a project for a client which takes things a step further by encrypting the traffic from the server to the client and allowing the user to read it only via a J2ME MIDlet which never stores the messages to the RMS (persistent storage). For more information check out www.simtext.com