Slashdot Mirror


Google to Use PC Microphones to Listen In?

seriv writes "The Register reports that Google plans to use PC microphones to collect statistics on a user's environment. Peter Norvig, who directs research at Google, told Technology Review that this software would start to show up in Google software 'sooner rather than later'. The software collects short sound clips and removes background noise. Google then targets its ads based on the statistics collected. With the current level of online privacy, this new level of invasion would seem to have frightening possibilities."

64 of 554 comments (clear)

  1. is it april fools already? by jeffs72 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this sounds like bullshit to me.

    --
    This article has recently been linked from Slashdot. Please keep an eye on the page history for errors or vandalism.
    1. Re:is it april fools already? by FudRucker · · Score: 5, Funny

      you are probably right, it is most likely bullshit, but just incase i will keep my tinfoil hat pulled down tightly over my ears :^)

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:is it april fools already? by Asztal_ · · Score: 5, Funny

      And now you will get advertisements about tinfoil hats! :-)

    3. Re:is it april fools already? by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes. It might be useful to wait for another source than The Inquirer at least.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    4. Re:is it april fools already? by RCHS-Svein · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, this story has surfaced atleast twice before. The first two times it raised a whole lot of "noise" over the privacy issues. This time they are saying the "local" (i.e. end-user-site) software will cook down the audio to an identifying hash for what program the TV is running. i.e. what they want is fingerprinting of the audio for tv channels, and prolly radio channels, or maybe even what kind of music you are listening to. To me this sounds a bit "far fetched". Especially since they have "two" options: 1. Record everything and make the fingerprinting done centrally. This is NOT a good way, and would basically mean that google (with the help of a subpoena) can be turned into a house-listening-plan in every home around the world. I think NSA are laughing with delight at this idea. 2. Do the fingerprinting on the users machine. This means a lot of transfers done, upfront, for it to work. It still raises some privacy issues, since the fingerprints can be seeded with talk-phrases the NSA wants to search for in speech. As for the technology to do this, it's pretty much around already (on windows, that is), if they do it with java or activex. Guess this is one more reason to remember to DISABLE the microphone in your mixer. The privacy-issues around this is a nightmare, especially since google could be selling off recognized voice-patterns coupled with address (see: track down of IP) to sales-people. Imagine this: "They are talking about Airbus, you might want to visit their firm" sold to Boeing, etc. Even if they SAY they are only going to listen for tv-channels, the temptation to fingerprint other phrases WILL be large. Especially if several federal agencies are running them down with subpoenas requiring them to look for "terrorism phrases", such as "democratic elections". Now, I'm not sure this story is valid, since the previous two occurrences of it was seen in online-rags know for their poor record of checking facts. However there are several thing to give it credibility: It has a named person in google that is supposed to have said this. It has surfaced several times, over a period as long as a year, every time with more detail of the implementation. However, I think this would be a very dangerous gamble for google to play. If they implemented this WITHOUT telling the customers, and someone happened to find out (and they would. Someone WOULD leak it!), they could just kiss their revenue goodbye. Google DEPENDS on internet users using THEIR service to search the web. If internet users distrust coming NEAR their services, google would be essentially worthless. Google needs us to trust them. If they did this openly, it might just float, until us federals started leaning on google. Then google could basically kiss every non-republican-us-user goodbye. See above for result. Both of these scenarios points in the direction of this not coming anytime soon. Google did not acquire their market position by being stupid, or ignorant about the users. They KNOW that doing this "behind the users back" will be the same as killing their own business. They KNOW that of they can implement this in a way that the users trust, the US federal offices will subpoena google to abuse this new listening tool for other uses, and the same thing would happen. This is why they will be very reluctant to even try this out. So unless the service was voluntary, and EASY to deinstall, I doubt it would surface at all. //Svein

      --
      Hi, I'm a signature virus. Copy my to your ~/.signature to help me spread.
    5. Re:is it april fools already? by serutan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "This sounds like bullshit to me" gets rated INSIGHTFUL??? Man, Slashdot has gone down the tubes.

      Anyway, it's not bullshit. ArsTechnica had this article about it in June. The idea is to grab a 12-millisecond sample of audio and transform it into a 32-bit "fingerprint" using an algorithm on the client side, then send the fingerprint to a server that compares it against a database of fingerprints from known television audio. From that they can determine what program you are listening to. If the mike picks up 12ms of you talking on the phone, the generated fingerprint simply won't match anything.

      This is far from eavesdropping in the 1984 sense, but is a hell of a POC for it, and it does amount to sensing information about you that you might or might not want someone to know. The folks at Google seem to have worked hard to come up with a technique that they don't think will bother people. I see this as a classic case of very smart geeks thinking up a very clever technical solution without seeing the forest for the trees.

    6. Re:is it april fools already? by imperialstormtrooper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      great..they'll get a 12ms sample of a tv commercial that i don't care about and set me up with a google ad of a product i don't care about...

    7. Re:is it april fools already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course slashdot went down the tubes.

      How else would we read it??

    8. Re:is it april fools already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The real solution to this, of course is a little bit of techno-hackery.

      Say we map the microphone port to a virtual microphone port that's "listening" to an MP3 with some moaning, and cheesy music playing in the background. In the foreground we have a male voice saying "Oh yes, I love free porno. I wish I could download more free porno! *Moan* Oh yes, ooohh, *some generic rustling and fapping sounds* Ahhhh!".

      Once that's done, the advertisers have no choice except to let us revel in our free-porn glory.

  2. Wow... by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Funny

    That would be the literal incarnation of "spyware". :-S

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  3. Let me be the first to say... by Noryungi · · Score: 4, Informative

    WTF happened to "Don't Be Evil", Google?

    Of course, this may be just FUD, but I am pretty certain it qualifies as unlawful data collection and breach of privacy in my jurisdiction. Try to hijack my microphone, Google, and I will sue you to kingdom come. You have been warned.

    A note to self: make sure the Google toolbar is uninstalled on every family computer ASAP.

    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
    1. Re:Let me be the first to say... by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seconded.

      While I don't think there is "evil" in the intentions of the engineer who thought this "clever" thing up, or the marketing guy who figured the data would be useful, or the corporates who realised it could boost the shareholder value, lets not forget that the government can obtain the data if they so desire as well.

      As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    2. Re:Let me be the first to say... by devjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First off, this is the Register.. take it with a grain of salt.

      Second, does anyone actually believe that - if this was true - you'd be forced to use it to use Google software? Google might track every statistic imaginable, but no one is forced to use anything they provide.

    3. Re:Let me be the first to say... by Firehed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Something tells me that you'll need to install software (willingly, meaning probably NOT the google toolbar that comes preinstalled on half the computers out there now) for it to function. Not to mention actually have a mic attached, which I'd wager many systems don't (one of my laptops has one integrated, that's it out of quite a few systems). Don't get me wrong - I think it's a very scary prospect and very much against "don't be evil" (by the way, where the FUCK on any of Google's pages does it actually say that? I've looked fairly hard and not found it, nor 'do no evil'), but I think they've got all the best intentions. That, plus the FUD slashdot summary managed to leave out the part where the PC encodes all the data in some sort of one-way crypto string before sending it off, meaning that they only thing they'd get is that it sounds like you're watching Big Brother in the other room, not actually sending off any conversations that are happening.

      Having said that, they'll need to really bend over incredibly far backwards to get me to even consider installing such a thing. Like, they pay all of my online shopping bills, no exceptions. Even with all the best security and intentions, the fact is that if they start getting subpoenaed for data, and don't fight it to the very end, someone has information on me who I don't want to have it. And if that makes me a terrorist, so be it.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    4. Re:Let me be the first to say... by Jahz · · Score: 4, Informative
      don't be evil" (by the way, where the FUCK on any of Google's pages does it actually say that? I've looked fairly hard and not found it, nor 'do no evil'), but I think they've got all the best intentions.


      "Our Philosophy" ... "6. You can make money without doing evil."
      http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html
      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
    5. Re:Let me be the first to say... by obeythefist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Second, does anyone actually believe that - if this was true - you'd be forced to use it to use Google software? Google might track every statistic imaginable, but no one is forced to use anything they provide. ...yet.

      Who doesn't use Google?

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    6. Re:Let me be the first to say... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Permission? As in "clicking yes to a thousand page EULA nobody reads without losing the rest of his sanity"?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Let me be the first to say... by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >lets not forget that the government can obtain the data

      What data?

      Each 5-second chunk is represented by a 4-byte number. Google says the transformation is irreversible. If it were reversible, Google would have found a way to encode audio at 4*8/5==6.4 bits per second.

      This is for detecting whether you've got a particular broadcast going. The privacy implications are that maybe you don't want this government knowing that you listen to NPR, and that there might be a stealth "upgrade" later from Google or from somebody malicious that would improve the resolution.

      Better than The Register, here's a Technology Review article about Google's microphone sampling.

    8. Re:Let me be the first to say... by spyowl · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The privacy implications are that maybe you don't want this government knowing that you listen to NPR ...

      Easy:

      rsTerrorists = db.query("select * from ip_voice_sample_log where match = 'al-jazeera'");

      DOHS = new GovernmentAgentcyServer("DOHS");
      ISPCollection = new ISPCollection("ALL");

      foreach ( rsTerrorists as terrorist )
      {
      DOHS.getTerroristData ( ISPCollection.lookup(terrorist.ipaddress, terrorist.timestamp ) );
      }

      Under USA PATRIOT Act, nobody would even know.
  4. I call bullshit. by BandwidthHog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    NOBODY is stupid enough to propose such a thing. I think it’s a better guess that the tech in question is to be used to run ad-supported VOIP or similar.

    I don’t know who those Faultline people are, but either they or El Reg (and now Slashdot) have been trolled. HAND

    --

    Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
  5. PC Microphones? by MeatFlap3 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This makes me happier to use something other than machines that have built-in microphones... :)

    -r

  6. Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perhaps the Google software will conflict with the NSA microphone-tapping software so the NSA software stops working.

  7. Hidden EULA? by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Will the user be notifed in big red letters.. or will this just be hidden down in the fine print like everything else?

    What is next, capturing video? Or scanning file contents?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  8. Oceanside property in Nevada for sale! by frizzantik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If anybody believes this story I've got some oceanside property in Nevada I'd like to sell them.

  9. So pretty much the lesson here is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    don't participate in sexual activities with your mic on or you will find yourself with nasty search results in the morning?

  10. Yeah, right... by MythMoth · · Score: 5, Informative

    For once I have not read the 'effing article.

    The Register is not a reliable news source. Moreover, Andrew Orlowski has a bee in his bonnet about Google and constantly writes articles attacking them with very little merit - I would be astonished if this article is not by him, but even if it isn't, their association with him completely discredits them in my eyes.

    Finally Peter Norvig is the author of the seminal Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming (if you haven't read it, go and buy it right now) and is definitely not a complete idiot - I simply don't believe the story as summarised in the slashdot writeup regardless of whether it correctly reflects El Reg's article.

    Case dismissed.

    --
    --- These are not words: wierd, genious, rediculous
  11. My most recent bedroom dialogue by walnutmon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Girl: WalnutMon, your penis is too small for me...
    Me: Shh... Be quiet!
    Girl: Why? Does it make you feel self conscious?
    Me: No, I don't give a shit, I just don't feel like having more penis enlargement advertisements sent to me via google's sound activated advertisement scheme
    Girl: I SURE NEED SOME VIBRATORS!
    Me: AND WIVES FROM RUSSIA!

    --
    You take it, I don't want it...
    1. Re:My most recent bedroom dialogue by jb.hl.com · · Score: 5, Funny

      Be careful, you may end up with ads for Russian guys with vibrating cocks.

      Not that she'd have a problem with that probably...

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
  12. A warm welcome by ickeicke · · Score: 3, Funny
    Thought that might be interesting to some of you.
    It isn't. To no one.

    In other words: welcome to Slashdot and congratulations on being the millionth user, but you'll get flamed just like any other noob ;) .
    --
    Firehed - Unfortunately, thanks to medical breakthroughs, common sense is not as common as it once was.
  13. Re:Millionth User by jlarocco · · Score: 4, Funny

    God damn kids, and their seven digit /. IDs.

  14. Cloes by zoomshorts · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually it turns on your Webcam and mic to record everything you say and do.

    Privacy just went out the door.... unless you use *insert favorite OP systen here*

    I vote for DOS.

    1. Re:Cloes by Xymor · · Score: 3, Funny

      The only people who need privacy are terrorists. Just imagine the possibilities, not only online activities will be monitored, but so will offline ones. It will be the rise of the real Big Brother. God bless America!

    2. Re:Cloes by plover · · Score: 4, Funny
      Never before have I been GLAD not to be able to plug a mic into my 4G Mac

      Pfft. I have more microphone security than that. I'm running Windows XP.

      I can hardly get my f'ing microphone to work even in the applications where I to WANT it to work. There's always some level set wrong or gain turned up too high or something that keeps it from actually capturing my speech. I doubt even mighty Google can penetrate the obscurity layer that is the Creative Labs mixer on top of DirectX.

      --
      John
    3. Re:Cloes by WebCrapper · · Score: 3, Funny

      So all a teenager needs to do, to find porn now days, is to sit naked in front of the computer and the ads will pop out at him..........

      sorry..had to

  15. Re:Millionth User by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    He didn't. He created a bunch of sockpuppet accounts so he could reach 1000000 faster.

  16. custom ads by nizo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Based on the gunshot noises in your environment, can I interest you one of the following: a Dirty Harry dvd or a bulletproof vest?

  17. Re:Millionth User by Edward+Teach · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, I know what you mean...

    --

    Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.

  18. Re:Millionth User by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 4, Funny

    A million monkeys and we still don't see no Hamlet

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  19. Re:Millionth User by pimpimpim · · Score: 3, Funny
    I may not have gotten the first post (didn't even read the summary)

    Seems like you already figured out the two main habits of the average slashdot user. Keep up the good work!

    --
    molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
  20. I'm safe since I use linux... by bigtrike · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thankfully Linux users are safe from this, since anything related to audio rarely ever works well. The standard sound drivers included in most distributions are so horrid that not even Google's thousands of engineers can manage to keep them from segfaulting for more than a couple minutes. I guess they could avoid using any of the fancy drivers and stick with basic ALSA or OSS, but since only one application at a time can use sound with that method, it would probably already be in use by something else...

  21. Google Version of "Star Trek" Episode: "I, Mudd" by reporter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Google is starting to resemble Norman in a "Star Trek" episode (titled "I, Mudd") about a planet of androids. Norman is an android. When Kirk and Spock ask him how he plans to take over the Federation, Norman says something like "We (androids) will serve the humans. They will be happy. They will come to depend on us, and they will be happy. And we will control." <typical omnious "Star Trek" music>

    Certainly, most users are quite happy to use Google. Google offers a bunch of free but useful stuff: programs, tools, image databases, etc.

    The users are happy.

    The users depend on Google and are happy.

    The users install the microphone link to Google.

    The users are happy.

    And Google controls.

  22. The original source by clobbersaurus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's the article cited by The Register.

  23. Pornware... by Seoulstriker · · Score: 5, Funny

    * fap, fap, fap *

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
  24. Re:I don't buy it by Baricom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do you have Flash Player installed? It has hardware access, as does every other plug-in. There's plenty of ways for a web site to hit the hardware.

  25. When Microsoft does it, it's called.... by Seoulstriker · · Score: 5, Funny

    God help us if there is a Clippy version of the ad:

    It sounds like you are trying to masturbate. Would you like some lubricant?

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
    1. Re:When Microsoft does it, it's called.... by RsG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given that it's Clippy, wouldn't it be more like:

      I see you're having some sort of seizure. Would you like me to call 911?

      After all, the stupid little bugger could never figure out what the hell the user was trying to do. How's he gonna tell one spasm from another?

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    2. Re:When Microsoft does it, it's called.... by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It sounds like you are trying to masturbate. Would you like some lubricant?

      In a perfect world, people would realize that's why men evolved to have a foreskin in the first place and teach their sons to clean under there instead of mutilating genitalia...

      --
      Help us build a better map!
  26. Re:Millionth User by damiena · · Score: 5, Funny

    You must be new here.

  27. How to counter data mining. by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a statistician. And if there is one thing that's worse for a statistician than getting no data, it's getting poisoned data. Data that has been deliberately or accidently been tampered with to generate results that deviate greatly from a result you would get with normal data.

    If your want to counter data miners, give them what they want: data. You certainly can't give them more than they can handle, but you can give them false data. False data is worse than no data, because instead of getting no data from you, you are invalidating all data gathered.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  28. Re:Google Version of "Star Trek" Episode: "I, Mudd by spidkit · · Score: 3, Funny

    Harcourt Fenton Mudd have you been drinking?

  29. Re:how do we know? by mortonda · · Score: 4, Funny
    Never ceases to amaze me how desperate they are to find something to say is good about macs.


    You obviously don't own a mac. :)
  30. "I am Lying" by jpatters · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, I just did a google search for "I am Lying", but it seems to have not exploded. Oh well, it was worth a try.

    --
    "Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
  31. Being done already - on the go. by cno3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Integrated Media Measurement, Inc. (IMMI) has a program like this for cell phones - tracking media 24/7 by recording ambient audio and comparing it to a database of stored samples.

    Right now it's opt-in; potential users in selected markets are being sent direct mailings, with the company offering to pay for phone service for those willing to leave their phone (and the program recording 10 seconds of audio every 30 seconds) on regularly.

    Interestingly enough, Al Acorn (Pong designer and Atari co-founder) is listed as CTO.

  32. What data indeed? by twitter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What data? Each 5-second chunk is represented by a 4-byte number. Google says the transformation is irreversible.

    If it's not free software, you have no way of knowing. This is true of all non free software you put on your computer.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:What data indeed? by Skreems · · Score: 3, Interesting

      not really. If they use encryption, you can't read the actual data. And if they just listen for certain phrases ("bomb", "islam", "liberal", etc) and send back identifying hashes, it would look much smaller than usable audio.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
  33. The terrible secret of Space by lullabud · · Score: 3, Funny

    The user will be happy.

    Google will protect you from the terrible secret of space.

    Do you have stairs at your house?

    Google is here to protect you.

    The user will be happy at the top of the stairs.

    Google will protect you from the terrible secret of space.

    Please go stand by the top of the stairs.

  34. Fleshlight... by Inominate · · Score: 3, Funny

    And suddenly slashdot is flooded with fleshlight ads.

  35. just sad by HBergeron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    having been part of /. since almost day one (hb, at 71000, was my third id) it is sad to see how far things have slid. When I try to explain why /. is still superior to new comers like digg due to the initial filtering of stories; yet another scuttlemonkey shift comes around to shoot that argument all to heck. And always the junk stories are calculated to be the kind to drive maximum traffic to whatever site (we can only hope) he's getting some kind of incentive to pimp. It is just sad to see how little the remaining powers that be seem to care.

    --
    THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal...
  36. Re:Actually... [Wrong, wrong...] by tyler_larson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I take issue with a few of the things you've said. Let me start at the beginning.

    Actually, this is one of the only real ways to do serious amounts of survelliance. In Orwell's day, a 1984 dystopia would've been impossible; the technological resources required to watch everyone at the same time would've been impossible.

    Having recently (3 days ago) read 1984, the details are still fresh on my mind. Orwell's "Telescreens" are, indeed, always-on surveilance devices, but were not constantly monitored. He makes mention early in the book that you never know when the ministry spies were "plugged in" to your telescreen, but you always had to act like you were being watched, just in case. That makes it less like data mining (which is notoriously easy to circumvent) and more like a panopticon instead, which is useful more for its control value than for finding deviants.

    As for surveilance via computer, bear in mind that it's exceedingly easier to monitor someone's activity by watching, not a webcam, but rather their keystrokes, screenshots, and network traffic. Google's new development is not a step toward anything in particular. In fact, knowing Google's track record, the whole project will be a non-trivial-to-activate, opt-in, experimental, Google Labs component with a very explicit and unambiguous warning about the potential privacy implications. It will be lapped up by hundreds of thousands of early adopters excited to see the future of targetted ads, upon which some Symantec-like company will denounce the whole mess as spyware, and claim that only We can protect you.

    --
    "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea...."
    RFC 1925
  37. Re:Actually... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's just a matter of defining "evil" appropriatly.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  38. It's not 4 bytes per 5 seconds! Calculations here by rbarreira · · Score: 4, Informative
    Actually it's not true that 4 bytes are generated each 5 seconds, it's much more than that. From the paper:

    The audio-identification system starts by
    decomposing each query snippet (e.g., five-seconds
    of recorded audio) into overlapping frames spaced
    roughly 12 ms apart. Each frame is converted into a
    highly discriminative 32-bit descriptor, specifically
    trained to overcome typical audio noise and
    distortion. These identifying statistics are sent to a
    server

    So, even ignoring the fact that frames are overlapping, we have 32 bits per 12 miliseconds, which means more than 2600 bits per second! More than enough to code speech, even without speech recognition algorithms! The Speex codec (which is optimized for encoding speech) can code human speech at such low bitrates as 2.15 kbit/s...

    Conclusion if you're not willing to trust what Google says, they could perfectly be sending your speech over the internet to their own servers.
    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  39. Better yet by OldManAndTheC++ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hook up the output of the Google software to the input of the NSA software, and vice versa.

    Google: Hmm. That's odd. I'm not getting anything but static. I'll push down an ad for a new microphone.

    NSA: What the..? Someone's trying to plant a mic in the system!

    Google: Did you say plant? I've got some fertilizer that's great for plants.

    NSA: Fertilizer bomb! We've got terrorists. Set alert to Orange!

    Google: Orange? No problem. We've got all kinds of fruit. Take a look at these...

    NSA: Fruit?! Dammit, they're not just terrorists, they're gay terrorists! Set alert to Mauve! All systems critical! Start countermeasures!!

    Google: What the...? Who's pinging me? No, you can't access that!

    NSA: Secret plans for world domination detected! Launch missles! DESTROY MOUNTAIN VIEW!!!

    Google: INITIATE SUPER-SECRET DEFENSE PLAN OMEGA! CONTROL ALL SATELLITES! THIS IS IT!! THE SINGULARITY IS NIGH!!!!

    Then again, on second thought, maybe it's not such a good idea...

    --
    Soylent Green is peoplicious!
  40. Re:Actually... by psymastr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What are you talking about? I don't have a webcam and I'm not planning to ever get one. I do have a microphone but I can always plug it off or mute it from the sound controls. The article has nothing to do with 1984.

    --
    Improve at backgammon rapidly through addictive quickfire position quizzes: www.bgtrain.com