Slashdot Mirror
Beamed Sonic Advertising Is Coming
newtley writes in with a story from Ad Age a few days back. "Advertisers are determined to get into your head by one means or another, and Holosonic Research Labs has found yet another way of invading your privacy in the name of forcing you pay attention. You're walking down a street in New York when all of a sudden, a woman's voice whispers 'Who's that? Who's There?' No, you weren't having a psychotic episode; you were being subjected without your permission to 'sound in a narrow beam, just like light.' It was coming at you from a rooftop speaker seven stories up."
It makes one wonder about the concept of graffit... The process (usually illegal) of drawing symbols, images or words on private or public surfaces without permission. This really, is the process of using sonic graffiti that I can imagine would be readily open to hacking, sonic tagging and sonic vandalism. Of course this opens up all sorts of questions as well: What sorts of messages are appropriate to beam into someone's awareness? What about inappropriate messages? How about unintended consequences when someone with paranoid schizophrenia encounters these messages? What are the legal implications if someone else targets the same area with a different sonic message than the one intended by the advertiser?
Personally, I find this advertising practice offensive and a little ignorant of where the possibilities may lead to. Furthermore, I am disappointed that A&E television would engage in this sort of thing, but A&E has been sliding down the slippery slope into crass, base appeal lately, attempting to go for shock factor at the expense of cultural sophistication. Back on topic: Would the advertiser consider it offensive if their message was sonically blocked via interfering sound waves? Would they consider someone else beaming messages into the same "acoustic space" unfair competition? Would they consider it vandalism? What are the liabilities if in the very unlikely possibility, a paranoid schizophrenic were to become violent in response to such messages? (note: only a very small percentage of paranoid schizophrenic patients are outwardly violent)
If I lived in NYC, this would be a call to me for a little social experimentation with A&Es advertising campaign. But beyond that, think about the possibilities for social filtering, or even the surreptitious delivery of information, allowing the legal (or illegal) routing of people, goods and supplies via temporally discrete windows of sonic delivery.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
... I could imagine that this advancement of the 'art of advertising' could do some harm to people that are not so stable.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
I doubt I'll hear it. I usually have my iPod on when I'm walking around outside.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
...for me if I encounter a device like this, is to leave and come back with a baseball bat and trash the device into pieces. This measure is clearly an invasion of privacy if I'm generous and assault if not so generous. I do not want to be bombarded by forced mind control that is advertising.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
AHA! We all knew it. We saw it coming. They laughed at us yes... YES!! Well, now THEY'LL be the ones to laugh at... ahhhhahhhahahahahhahhahaa!
Tinfoil hat brethren, I say we unite and add tinfoil earmuffs to the wardrobe. NAY!! The WHOLE wardrobe must be tinfoil. Only then will you be SAFE FROM THIS INVASION!!
VINDICATION IS SO SWEET!!
I got a catholic block.
How long until everyone starts hearing THAT while walking down the street?
Hear recorded Slashdot headlines on your phone! New service beta testing. Just call (248) 434-5508
Umm, there is NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IN A PUBLIC LOCATION! Now that I have your attention, this is why anyone can videotape you walking down the street, record a vocal conversation on a street corner without your permission, etc.... When you are in public, you do not have any expectation of privacy.
I hate the paranoia that creeps into slashdot....
In Soviet Russia, ...you speak into the mic?
Lightspeed briefs, style and comfort for the discriminating crotch!!
http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
Many municipalities have ordinances against intentional noise, like the ones against overly loud Car Stereos. The local ones specify a number of feet from the source as the limit for hearing the sound.
Targeted "sonic advertising" could be construed as noise pollution, even if it has a very small foot print.
I am not keen to see a technology like this used to interrupt one's thoughts and concentration, particularly for commercial purposes.
A possible "good" use for it might be at street crossings to warn pedestrians of changes in the traffic lights. I am sure that other uses for the public good could be found.
--
Sig: A model airplane company in Montezuma IA.
How much fun would it be to beam things at politicos speaking at rallies? Confuse them and make them say things they didn't mean?
Or, by targeting the microphone itself, just speak directly to their audience?
One wonders how effective this will be in a world filled with iPods. I see a stunning percentage of people wearing earbuds or bluetooth headsets in downtown public spaces. This is partly to counteract the noise of the city, and partly because I think it makes people feel safer and more connected to be able to walk through a crowd of strangers listening to their own personal soundtrack.
I get the feeling that the general response to this kind of invasive advertising will be, "Man, that's creepy and makes my skin crawl." The only advertisers who might want that kind of reaction are horror movie producers or skin cream manufacturers. :)
What if we eventually can't distinguish sonic narrow-beam advertising from mental illness? Why does being around other people increasingly mean you're raped 24x7?
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
It is penetrating my space purposefully and unavoidably to sell me a product that I do not want. And even if I *did* want it, I will no longer thanks to this intrusive form of advertising. And yes, it is like a flashlight: directly in my eyes from which I cannot turn away.
No no no no no. Direct audio advertising like this is a Bad Thing(tm).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I was involved in a university experiment with this technology. It's very difficult to make it work well, so, all privacy annoyances aside, I'm deeply impressed on a technical level.
;)
It's really freaky when someone waves these ultrasonic speakers around and the sound washes over you like a spotlight. But in our experiments the sound was really tinny, just like a paranoid voice in your head
They want their Ministry of Information back!
we just wear our Ipod headphones all day.. so it won't work on us! Muhahahha!
--- We need more Ron Paul!
Vee one at gee vertical bar two ay! Pee three nis hundred time larger!!
Who said that?
"Hearing voices in your head? Big Pharma has just the answer, Nonoidizan. See your Doctor today!"
... not only ban these things out of existence, but get rid of billboards too. They've been ruining perfectly good landscapes for years now.
I hardly ever see someone my age walking around with bare ears--nearly everyone listens to music while walking. So are these directed sounds going to be loud enough to cover the rap and rock that most young people listen to?
And then there are those wonderful Bose noise-canceling headphones (though they DO allow most human voices to go through). Hopefully those will keep the ads away. If not, I'm sure these ridiculous ads will spur a new line of headphones that specifically -make sure- that the ads stay out of your ears. Sound is much easier to block than...say...billboards/other visuals.
How many people really believe ads anyways? Are they REALLY that effective? I can see a few ads here and there... but the more intrusive ones really just turn me off to the company. I know I'll make a point never to buy a product that gets injected into my ears.
Actually, that's probably the best way to get these ads off the street: just tell everyone who complains about the ad to stop buying the product. Eventually, the news will filter up, and other marketing agencies (hopefully) will learn that it's not even worth implementing. Until then, noise canceling headphones + music for me.
Forgive me in advance, for the rant that shall follow. :)
So yeah, this topic seems to have been getting bounced around for years, and sooner or later, it seems inevitable that the technology will finally make its way into our culture. As regrettable as that is, I must also say that I really only see it as an extension of our already annoying and invasive society. Much more primitive technologies already exist, but since they have become a part of our collective consciousness, few people object to them. A most obvious example is loudspeakers; with those annoying fucks yelling out prices or other offers on the sidewalk (I have noticed this practice is more prevalent in some countries than others). A more subtle example would be billboards; which at this point cover virtually all of the landscape that people associate with "civilization". Yet, nobody really objects to these practices, with a few notable exceptions.
One could make the argument that the difference between the two is that one is beamed in your head, and the other surrounds it. In the case of the latter, it is possible, with an extreme degree of vigilance, to avert one's eyes from every objectionable sign cluttering the landscape. Perhaps the difference lies only in the fact that people feel somehow targeted, and therefore violated, when the advertising is being transmitted directly to them, rather than broadcast to everybody. Frankly, I also find this development disgusting, though only because it is the natural progression of a society driven by pop culture and material goods.
"Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
...ad agency Neurotronics has developed a new means of getting consumer's attention: bashing them in the skull with a sledgehammer. "There's going to be a certain population sensitive to it," says CEO Gary Krane, "But once people see what it does and feel it for themselves, they'll see it's effective for getting attention."
"Very expensive" "Rip you off" "90% profit margin" "Unreliable"
Etc etc.
FUD works wonders.
Deleted
I don't like this way of advertising one's product, so I'm voting with my euros and I am going to not buy anything from companies that I know are using this advertising method, as far as it is practical and possible.
If it's ok for the advertisers to hit me with a concentrated beam of sound energy, then it's ok for me to hit the advertiser's speaker with a concentrated beam of kinetic energy, right?
'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
This is why we have the right to bear arms. "Come to Bob's Car Mart, where-" BLAM! Of course we'll also get, "You've won 1,000,000 dollars in the Pepsi Sweepstakes! Just send a security check for $500 to: Mpondo Dwhaliki..."
...tell me this is a good idea. Should I believe them?
it seems like a lot of the comments here are being made by people living in red lodge montana
folks: the place is one giant cacophony of noise and colors
frankly, i'd appreciate it if could all be squelched out and some sexy female voice was isolated in my head. i would even talk back to her, as if that behavior would stand out, what with all of the schizophrenics and suits with blue tooth headsets walking around
she wants to sell me life insurance? ok. like i said, i live in times square, and used to work at the world trade center until 9/11/01. i probably need it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I expect you will hear it. It's a collimated sound beam that vibrates the skull. Listeners describe it as seeming like a voice from inside.
Woody Norris, the inventor of the device, spent some time spooking people at the mall. He claims he always told them what he'd done afterward, but you can see how someone might abuse such a thing. Easy to convince someone they're crazy.
I'm glad the device is in Times Square. I hope as many advertisers use this as quickly as possible. Right now, only a tenth of the populace at most knows about these things. Everyone else is as vulnerable to trickery as the natives in any colonialist short story about explorers pretending to be gods.
"Johnson, show the Ugabi your flashlight again!"
Natives: "EV-ER-ED-EE! EV-ER-ED-EE!"
Once enough companies are advertising this way, it'll be more like Scooby-Doo.
"Farmer Stoutworthy was using this projector to beam a ghost onto the barn wall, and for his swamp-thing mask he used phosphorous paint."
"I would have gotten away with it too, if you meddling kids had never been to a movie theatre or had a glow-in-the-dark toy!"
Something like the AGM-88 HARM, except smaller and it goes after emitters of sound waves.
Mp3 player, simple as that.
also, wouldn't this count as noise nuisance, if I played music out of a seventh story city centre window that people could hear at street level, the cops would come and tell me to turn it down, just cos it's in a small area why should the law not apply?
What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?
Couldn't you just walk away from this? I mean it's a stationary device pointing to one area. You could start avoiding the area entirely, discovering new routes around it. If business in the area decreases from people avoiding the billboard wouldn't that encourage them to remove it? I just don't see how this is (too much) different from if the billboard was shouting the same thing to everyone. It's just beaming it in a narrow column: just walk away. I guess the confusion comes from the Slashdot writeup that makes it seem like some guy's going to be standing on the rooftop aiming the device at you, but that's not the case. If that were the case I can see the cause for alarm, but since it isn't I find the majority of the posts in here to be alarmist at best.
Please! Then let's arrest everybody for honking their horns or even talking within earshot.
What?
This has got to the be the first time your sacred right to bear arms makes any sense..
Come as you are, do what you must, be who you will.
"I can turn off the TV or radio, close a magazine or close my eyes, but soon the only option left will be to not go outside."
Nothing like the safety of the maternal basement.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
"But the damned shark still looks fake."
Table-ized A.I.
yeah yeah, horrible thing nobody should do that.
But it's neat, how does it work?
... you are shopping in a grocery store and as you go down the aisle you pass by another and after you pass you hear them say something. You turn to ask them what it was they said to you and see their hands are either free or have some package from the shelf in them. They glance at you and continue on. You did not notice the blinking blue light near their ear.
You are standing in line to buy something and another comes up behind you in line and starts talking, you turn around an see they are on a cell phone. This doesn't stop them from standing behind you a foot away and talking really loud directed at the back you your head. All you hear is half a conversation. You mention it to them how annoying it is and they respond by saying they are not bothered by this act of theirs.
You are in city traffic the car in front of you misses a green light but you have a meeting to be at. At the next light you are cut off and again miss the light, getting out of teh city you seem to be constantly stuck behind a car driving 10-15miles an hour slower than the speed limit while traffic in the lanes next to you is speeding by faster than you are able to change lanes. and during all of this you notice in every case the person causing teh traffic interference is on a cell phone.
Now imagine walking down the city sidewalk and the person in front of you suddenly stops and you walk into them. Imagine walking down the sidewalk and you hear what sounds like someone talking to you and you turn to answer them and someone else walks into you. Imagine commercials where there are sirens, like the telephone or door bell commercials that fool you into answering the door or phone. Imagine having your car top down in the city and hearing such sounds.
Are there any other ways to cause stress in our every day lives?
Didn't the guy who figured out this technology, win invention of the year either last year or year before?
They had talked about using it in grocery stores, so that as you looked at items it would tell you what the specials were on just the products in front of you.
I can't remember where i read that. I may have dreamed it. Can somebody confirm that i'm not totally crazy?
You're right these are easy to avoid, let me just walk off the sidewalk onto the busy street full of stupid drivers that don't pay attention to avoid an advertisement.
If these become popular the entire sidewalk will be filled. Heck I bet that if these work through cars then they will cover the road too. This is like littering, only harder to clean up. I suggest that people make a device like the noise canceling headphones that will beam an opposite sound wave onto the same spot.
Imagine walking down the road and going from one ad to another. "...buy...zybex...ask...drunk...best...recomended...k...eel...all...hue...man's...with...a...edbull...it..." Try holding a conversation when walking down any big street with these. Currently you can direct your conversation away from other people so your not as loud to them as their conversation. These are like the annoying political advocates who barge up with loudspeakers. Heck even loudspeakers aren't allowed to be used like this.
At my church I help with a 4-5 year old class. In this class there is one kid who has a mental problem that makes him react badly to loud noises. I would hate to have him experiance these things. He would sadly end up on the ground trying to cover his ears. (noise causes extreme pain for him).
I don't preview or spellcheck.
People will start tuning out anything that isn't directed towards them. After I hear enough of this crap, like probably 1 minute's worth, I'm pretty much going to stop paying attention unless I hear my name. I give out fake names or made-up nicknames when registering for anything*, so even if they've got my name and figure out how to identify me with the device that's emitting the sound in the first place, they're still not going to get my attention. And am I really going to turn my iPod off? I've got music on just about every device I own now, I'm listening to music almost every chance I get.
Plus, look at car alarms... these things go off every 5 seconds in parking lots, nobody starts panicking or screaming, nobody calls the cops. People hear it so often now that it's just a deterrant to the crook if they get nervous enough about what they're doing, or if they take too long doing it. If people hear the alarm going silent they think "Finally!" not "What's happening now?"
See, that's kind of my point. If marketing is invasive enough, people stop paying attention and start finding ways to get the attention of advertisers off them. Instead of people putting up with advertisements and the ads having some effect on the population, instead they'll lead the population to shutting the ads out entirely.
Then the only person selling anything will be the guy who can block the ads... kinda like the autodial blocker. So brilliance all around fellows, congrats on this one.
Twinstiq, game news
Slashdotters find this concept deeply offensive, and thereby assume it must be an invasion of privacy because thats what normally rubs them up the wrong way. That isn't it though.
The problem is the claiming of public space for private purposes. If there were advert booths where you walked in and got some marketing blasted at you, it wouldn't be so bad, but these pricks are polluting a public space for their own asinine purposes. No, it doesn't count as free speech because corporations are not people and therefore do not have such a right. Furthermore, it isn't a petition against the government, its an annoyance to individuals.
Be aware of the concept of public space. Its vital to civilisation but is seen by the elites as merely space the private sector hasn't got a use for. Yet.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I knew something was up when I was walking down the street and heard "SEEEEEGAAAAAA!", then something about a fast hedgehog.
This is a sig. Deal with it.
they may get inundatet with lawsuits for harassment.
Hopefully, there will be a judge sentencing the idiots to a mandantory exposure to their crap in a prison cell for 3 hours daily. Or - even better, tied to a post on a pedestal on time square with a sign with their sentence cause around their neck.
Isn't that whole commercial advertising shit turning into an automatic subconscious rejection of that particular product? Maybe some gene will get flipped in the next generations for just that.
It will solve itself, because intrusive ads don't work.
Over the past few decades there's been an arms race to "cut through the clutter" with more and more novel, attention-grabbing, intrusive ads. They only work for a very short time. The first time you see an ad on a placard inside a supermarket cart, it grabs your attention. Then you tune it out. Lately the local supermarket have gone to putting ads on the floor, in some kind of tough plastic laminate. The first time you see it, it grabs your attention. Then you tune it out.
A few years back, they had little discount-coupon vending machines hanging off the shelves, flashing bright LEDs at you. I notice they're gone now. They probably worked for a while, then people tuned them out.
These will be a seven days' wonder, then advertisers will start studying the results, and I already know what they will find: the devices will be expensive to put in place, expensive to maintain, very effective for a short time at getting people to talk about the ads... and very ineffective at getting people to buy the product.
What's the "unique selling proposition" here? What, exactly, is the difference between reading "Ask your dermatologist about Enbrel," hearing someone tell it to you on a TV set, or hearing it inside your head as you walk down the street?
The unspoken assumption is that hearing the sound localized as coming from inside our heads will somehow turn it into a command hallucination and force us to obey. It won't. Not any more than "subliminal advertising" did. Not any more than using electronic echo effects, or making it sound like Darth Vader, or a "voice of God" echo effect would.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
It gets to be more fun when they're paying attention to _who_ their beaming the sound at.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
FTA: "If you set up a loudspeaker on the top of a building, everybody's going to hear that noise. But if you're only directing that sound to a specific viewer, you're never going to hear a neighbor complaint from street vendors or pedestrians. The whole idea is to spare other people."
What the interviewee is conveniently omitting to mention is that putting a loudspeaker to blare all day in the street would be obviously illegal, so nobody is being "spared", we're just being forced to listen to advertising which is so invading that it would be illegal in normal circumstances.
Sorry.
I think it's actually a case of The Onion imitating reality. Although, I can see how it might seem the other way around to people who don't spend much time outside, and instead live on the internet.
... and then they built the supercollider.
If you're in New York City, then you're already fucked.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Since when are people anti-social?
ResidntGeek
This would be a great way to sell earplugs! Imagine the possibilities! For other products it might not be so good, such as hearing aids. You'd also be in trouble if your target audience was the deaf.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
AC has a point. The laws and decisions nowadays seem to favor the corporate client in these cases. I am shocked nobody has stepped up in our legislature to make it a federal crime for terrorists with spray cans &c. to impede the protected speech of billboard lessees
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
Would those in-ear earphones work as a rather simple way of blocking the ad? I don't know how it works, but I'd rather listen to the worst band in the world (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=worst+band+in+the+world) than crappy intrusive advertisements.
It seems clear to me that noise laws that are currently described in terms of the dB level allowed on the street would have to be interpreted by a judge in terms of their effect on one's eardrum. So if these beamed messages appear to the listener's ear any different (eg. louder) than if they were played from a traditional speaker on the street, regardless of their power at the transmitter, then they'd be violating the law just as much as an obnoxious megaphone. Except that the beams would annoy only one person at a time, which would only mean that they wouldn't be as liable for "public nuisance" under those noise thresholds.
So you could just sue them (if you could find them - the law really needs to require anyone doing this unsolicited to identify themselves with every message, like a traditional speaker does) under the existing noise complaint laws, if not harassment, etc. Of course, your lawyer would have to realize the physics of transmitted vs received sound power, but every lawyer reads Slashdot, right?
--
make install -not war
you may need to have it serviced or replaced. it seems to have gone off line
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?
Fry: Well, sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts and written in the sky. But not in dreams. No, sir-ee!
(link)
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
I'm seeing a few ways that this kit could be put to good use, hm? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
Professor Farnsworth: It's very simple. The ad gets into your brain just like this liquid gets into this egg. He shows an egg and injects it with liquid from a syringe until the egg explodes.] Professor Farnsworth: Although, in reality, it's not liquid, but gamma radiation.
Retaliate. Get your own sonic speaker thing, pick the most obnoxious annoying painful sound you can think of (Nails on chalkboard?), and whenever you spot one of these, wait. As soon as someone approaches in the room (even if it's just sitting there and/or automatic, they must come up there at some point), blast them. Or perhaps set one up to continually bombard the window this is coming from. Or just find a way to screw up the speaker.
Ohh, I know. If they have someone up there directing it, blast them back. If not, just get your own speaker, point it at the same place, and overpower their message, either with your own or with inverse waves to theirs (though that would be rather difficult to do, if not impossible)
If they can annoy us, we have every right to take every measure within the law to annoy them.
Stand outside their doors at opening and closing times and shout at their employees with megaphones. Helpful, inoffensive things, like looking both ways before crossing the street and buckling up while driving.
Use public records to find out who is responsible for ad campaigns and beam audio at their children telling them to beg mom and dad for a pony.
I live around the corner from this advertisement in NYC and as soon as I walked past it for the first time, I went straight home to write A&E a letter expressing my concerns. This thing is intrusive, annoying, and ridiculous. I have a high tolerance for many things but having advertising forced into my ears in such a bizarre way is crossing the line. I shouldn't have to live in some marketing world. RIDICULOUS. To see this thing in action, youtube: 'prince street btwn mulberry and mott sts'
LEELA: Didn't you have ads in the twentieth century?
FRY: Well, sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio... and in magazines... and movies, and at ballgames, and on buses, and milk cartons, and T-shirts, and bananas, and written in the sky. But not in dreams, no sirree.
So surely there must be at least on Slashdot reader who's a millionaire, is annoyed by this too, and isn't the one doing it.
Please SUE them!
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
I've been noticing these adverts for the last 20 years or so.... isn't everyone?
§
... like the body or the subject!)
*FILLER TEXT*
Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment
I'm surprised no one has mentioned what a kick-ass fun house/horror house addition these speakers would make.
You're walking along in the dark and suddenly it sounds like someone is standing right behind you whispering sweet murderous nothings in your ear - or an animal growling - or just a "boo!".
How bout recording your group reacting to a previous scare and then broadcasting it from the direction you're heading.
There's some freaky stuff you could do with directional sound projection.
I know you can bounce it off walls too, so you could one speaker multiple times for different effects.
Pocket size.With a microphone.
I thought Schrodinger's cat was in Pandora's box !? Apparently the cat escaped by pushing the lid open.
The problem I have with this technology being used for advertising purposes is not so much the invasion of privacy issue, but rather the obvious safety issue. The key here is that people aren't expecting to hear these sounds. There is no obvious source, the sound is projected narrowly, and most of all, as an advertising medium, it fails to satisfy a basic standard of expectation--and so, used in this manner, this sort of remote sound projection is a safety hazard. We generally don't go around surprising people in the middle of the street. Such actions can cause a great deal of distress, followed by anger once the victim realizes it's a f***ing advertisement. It's entirely plausible that someone could start behaving belligerently towards other strangers, demanding to know who is whispering into his ear.
The distinction of voluntary vs. involuntary forms of communication is important but actually not quite the central problem, because many forms of visual advertising are so pervasive as to constitute a de facto involuntary, non-consensual form of communication. The real problem, in my opinion, is that this technology effectively deprives the recipient of the message from having an awareness of its source. At least, with television, radio, and print, while one may not be able to avoid these messages, at least you know where they are coming from. Should society become increasingly aware of this technology, people might come to accept it, but this leads me to ask whether we should accept it in the first place, and whether anyone, including the advertisers (who will literally go to any length to make a buck), have fully thought through the social consequences. So we're all supposed to walk around in public, allowing rooftop speakers to project voices into our heads wherever we go? What's next, retinal projection units inside your car making you see ads while you drive? Advertisers would cut their right nut off if they could invent a device that alters the minds of consumers to force them to purchase a product of their choice. Oh wait, they've already done that, it's called Britney Spears.
Here's the Holosonics device that does it, if you care. It's a cute trick of nonlinear acoustics. This thing has been around for about five years, used for niche applications like narration in musum displays. But usually at a range of about a meter or two. I'm amazed that they can make the thing work at 15-20m.
They haven't been successful in getting the cost down or the quality up. Otherwise, it would have market share in hands-free phones and computer speakers, where such directionality would be really useful.
My guess is that it will be shut down as a public nuisance in NYC.
Check out the Enclosures of the late 18th and early 18th centuries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure. The human cost of these enclosures was great. People starved. Many emigrated. The public response was often violent.
No, you weren't having a psychotic episode;
Actually, I was...
What's that? Do what with the knives to who? OK then.
Sorry about the interruption. As I was about to say - you insensitive clod.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If this stuff takes off, and doesn't get sued into oblivion due to the first distracted person that walks in front of a bus, I guess we will just have to walk around with our ipod on anytime we are out in public.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I thought the message was "Green door".
AccountKiller
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?
Fry: Well, sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts and written in the sky. But not in dreams. No, sir-ee!
Saying your "phone ran out of batteries" is like saying your "car ran out of gas tanks".
IAANYCR (i am a nyc resident) and there's one outside my apartment. It's not 7 stories up, nor is it high tech. It's just an annoying speaker that goes off when you walk by.
The funny thing is, I thought it was pretty stupid and so must have the high schoolers who hang out 20 feet from it each morning because they smashed the thing =) lol
I'm a 2000 man.
So what happens when a company - or government - decides that they should beam these sounds into an area they don't want you to stay in, with a continuous and annoying sound/message that dissuades you from remaining? I can see this used to discourage loitering (ie standing around in a public space, which is perfectly legal), I can see it being used to beam political messages. How about "Vote for X" blanketing the parking lot near your polling station?
Shouldn't private companies be required to ensure that the only places they can aim these messages are also on private property? If I am walking down the sidewalk (on city land) I should be free of these messages right?
The potential for abuse is monumental in my opinion.
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
Much more subtle than the aforementioned rifle, not as tricky as a crossbow. There's no projectile left behind. The downside is that if you start a fire you're an arsonist.
Really, they should just update local noise ordinances to stop this. In fact, if the noise ordinance has language that refers to the distance at which the sound is audible, these devices may already be illegal.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Bravo. Beyond that, there is the very real psychological desire to mentally "mute" that which you do not wish to experience. This occurs visually with online advertising--as one learns where ads appear, one begins to ignore them and the space they occupy. Personally, I sometimes cannot find things on a website if they occupy a space normally habited by ads. The same is true for signs and posters and the like. People get accustomed to ignoring that which annoys them. The great danger of this new system is that, inevitably, folks would train themselves to block out the sounds of strangers and that the true cry for warning, "Hey, watch out for the bus!" or "Fire!" or "Rape!" would go unheard and unnoticed. We've learned to block out the sounds of the city and traffic and business, but should we begin to block out the sounds of humanity? If visual advertisement no longer works, would it not be as effective to repair the visual medium as it would to invade others?
If it looks like a duck, let's call it a moose.
Screw noise-canceling, I think an EMP generator would be a better idea. Just fry the damn thing, let them replace it every day.
I think most people will just find this to be too annoying to be effective. In some ways it goes along with the failure of video phones because people don't necessarily want to pick up the phone and be seen in their pajamas right after getting up out of bed.
Do You Experiment?
UNLESS, you happen to "beam" your words into my skull. If I hear you and know where you're coming, its one thing.
:) And I'll mean it too. Lets see what court can call deny me "temporary insanity" if I feel violated by your targeting me and making me feel violated.
The moment you start me questioning my sanity, or looking for Slimer, I can guarantee I'll shatter your nose and crack your jaw and claim insanity via invasive trespass into my skull
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
There are large areas of the countries where this technology will be WAY to expensive to maintain and there is no real technological way to "fix" it as far as I can tell.
You see, people where I live own these things called "firearms" - in this case namely "rifles". Most of us that own them, while not top end marksmen by any stretch of the imagination, shoot well enough to destroy these things. Not only that, but being what we refer to as "rednecks" (however, in rural areas that has a different connotation than in cities, a more appropriate term for most Slashdotter's to understand is "hillbilly" or "country") we do not take to such measures easily and, well, shooting things to destroy them isn't exactly unheard of either - sometimes just for fun let alone when something really needs it.
Our county government recently installed those nice little red light camera's to catch people who run the light, already a number of them have turned up inoperable due to a large amount of swiftly moving projectiles entering the housing and destroying the contents. Interestingly enough, they actually caught one person doing it recently and they guy hadn't ever had a ticket, just thought the dang things were an invasion of privacy and ought to be destroyed. I can't imagine the number of the intrusive devices in this article that would be shot down.
------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
God: Hi Kent. Have you been touching yourself?
Kent: Yes. I mean, NO!
Or an electrolaser. Just fry the thing and make it look like a lightning strike or something.
would they even be visible?
this could be both good and terrible...
This reminds me a lot of those new gas pump TVs that play nothing but commercials. Now I hate commercials sooo much that I got rid of the TV. I get my occasional boob tube fix through netflix and netflix instant watching. No commercials. I don't listen to commercial radio. Even NPR type commercials are starting to drive me nuts. So when I pull up to the pump on my way into work in the morning, before my first caffeine fix, and I have to hear that same stupid !@#$%!@# Jack-n-the-Box commercial, I do get a little crazy. I've been thinking for weeks now how I could mute the speakers on those things without being seen on the security cameras. It's not the flickering image of the idiot tube that bugs me it's the blaring sound trying to sell me a slab of shit on a sesame seed bun.
-- QED
We have a low-impact version of this technology at the local Meijer store in West Ann Arbor / Dexter, Michigan.
;-)
Frankly, it's both cool and disturbing. Cool because it works - stand only 2 inches out of the field and the audio simply disappears. But it's no less or more disturbing than any other advertising that gets so good at targeting its message that it is focused directly and solely at YOU.
At a firm I work for, we received calendars where elements of the picture formed the first name of the recipient - think your name being written in the snow, or ants lined up on a picnic table showing your name. The surprise comes when you notice that the ad is targeted solely at you - that the elements of the picture eventually *reveal* themselves to be aimed at you. And then suddenly - suddenly - you feel just a little bit violated... as if the magician had figured out the card you selected.
Is *this* your card??!!
The problem with this advertising is that we all will eventually - and likely sooner rather than later - become immune to it. We will all be Tom Cruises blowing past ads like this in a Minority Report future.
Makin' money, makin' friends, makin' whoopee and wearin' Depends
When you hear the voice "hey, good looking, take the next door, third floor, 3001" you start understanding the potential of technology helping people. The poor persons don't have to stand on the street, in cold and rain, but they can more efficiently work inside. Or maybe if you like other good things in life "Step in, we have a whiskey tasting going, happy hour just started, and so on.."
So... ... do I get to fight the BOSS DAEMON?
If I view the sonic formed beam as a case of sniping... and create a piece of hardware that project back and ids the beam forming speakers then BLASTS them with a SMALL LASER
Aw, you're just jealous the Voices are speaking to ME.
While this particular implementation of targeted sound is only recently practical 'in the wild' the practice isn't. Indeed in the 70's it was quite popular in museums and galleries.
Typically a long tube with a speaker on top was hung over the target area. With a bit of carpet below to absorb sound splash it is fairly easy to provide site-specific audio, typically narration or soundscapes.
For example walking up to a display of geese a viewer might also become a listener treated to the sound of their honking cries. At the next exhibit a different audio selection is offered. Because the sound is transmitted in a fairly narrow cone and largely prevented from reflecting the audio presentations don't overlap or disturb others even a few steps away.
The New York State Museum, in Albany, New York, USA used to (& might still) have a number of displays utilizing this. It can be quite effective, if a bit startling the first time it is encountered (as I recall spotlights were used to indicate 'audiospots'.)
So targeted sound is not entirely novel, just getting wider application.
A more positive commercial use could be in music stores. Stand on the blue circle to hear band A, walk over to the yellow circle to hear band B, all sans headphones or disturbing other nearby shoppers.
A public-spirited use could be at crosswalks. Instead of loud piercing noises, often poorly imitating bird sounds, an alert area could be created specifically on the walk route. Only those approaching or on a crosswalk would hear it's state, leaving those nearby but not crossing free from unnecessary noise pollution.
Indeed if handled respectfully targeted sound could augment advertising displays in a welcome, constructive, way. Stand in front of a sign for a radio station and hear it live, while not annoying those disinterested. On a subway platform sit on the purple bench to hear sponsored classical music, avoid it to be exempt.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
It is actually fairly common for these things to be mounted on an automated pan-tilt platform--moving the beam actually makes a pretty interesting effect as it reflects off whatever surface it hits. I can't say if that is the case here but it is possible.
At least one study has concluded these things are basically harmless to human ears, but they do use ultrasonic sound at extremely high power levels (>150 db SPL). Acoustics in air are non-linear at this level, and by modulating the carrier, wave interference forms a "generation region" that induces audible frequencies.
By the way these are no good for music as the low cutoff is about 1khz.
Does anyone else remember the advertising in The Space Merchants, which included exactly this "straight-to-skull" messaging?
...
The hero ends up being addicted to alkaline enhanced cola, since he once had the misfortune to walk into a street audio billboard
which plays the Moke Coke subliminal message.
I feel we move closer to the world of that book every day
(R)ule in Hell or (S)erve in Heaven [R]?
Years ago, if someone was walking down the street and having a conversation with the empty air, I knew that they were crazy. Now, if someone does that, they are probably chatting on their cell phone. However, they could be crazy and I'd never know it at first glance.
Add this to the mix: invisible voices whispering in my ear as I walk down the street. So now I cannot tell if I am crazy.
Andrew Borntreger
Champion of cinematic disasters
If they're seven floors up, maybe just an umbrella or parasol would work. They might need a lining or something.
Well, we could do that, but on second thought no... let's instead use this system for running creepy commercials.
Blip-Verts! Beamed directly into your head, just like in the 80's sci-fi TV series. Somehow, this makes me wonder if Max Headroom is only 20 minutes into the future...
/I wonder when the ads will start killing people at random
I'm done with sigs. Sigs are lame.
Not having read TFA I can only guess. I've seen parabolic sound reflectors (kinda large) that operate from say a few stories away but 7 is a bit much I think. However I am aware of a technology that came out of MIT Media Lab several years ago and was initially aimed at museum displays, which IIRC used superimposed ultrasonic beams that resulted in audible sound in a given spot (and probably dogs going nuts).
I made a comment earlier about the constitutionality of banning these things on the grounds that the first amendment doesn't give you the right to a captive audience. I was hoping there'd be a lawyer/law student/someone who knows more about law than me posting who can confirm or deny this notion.
The real sad part of this is that, honestly, you wouldn't think regulation would be necessary, just like a law shouldn't be necessary to keep people from walking down the street punching strangers in the face. The idea of beaming advertising directly into people's heads is beyond the edges of common human decency and shows a complete lack of respect for people, their privacy, and the sanctity of an individual's mind. It's sad.
There are already noise laws. And how the hell can advertisements be compared to living people? No one suffers if you don't allow ads. What I hate is that these aren't visible. This kid knows to avoid crowds and large speakers. These things are basically invisible from street view.
I don't preview or spellcheck.
The danger with this advertising is its extreme invasion of privacy, to the point that it subverts individual free will in how people have no choice but to hear it. In other advertising forms, people can ignore it or not look at it, largely because it's not so close or invasive to them as to be imposing. In the case of a person coming up to people and trying to market a product, they can always turn the person away. With holosonic advertising, there is no way to avoid it and no way for people to instate their choice of privacy against it.
The reason they don't use a loud speaker isn't because they're concerned with annoying the general public in the area. It's because they don't want a ticket from the local 5-O for violating a city noise ordinance.
So, if the beam could be measured with decibel meter and found to exceed the limit, problem solved. If not, then just wait a month for a new city ordinance to be passed once the advertising becomes prevalent in your area.
Of course, if and what specific restrictions are implemented will vary between municipalities. The inevitable whining from the ad companies about 1st Amendment issues will come. Then they can take it to federal court, spend lots of money, and lose. And lose they will.I agree absolutely.
I did some experiments with flat 15 x 15 cm electrostatic mid-range / tweeter speaker more than 15 years ago. I found out that high frequency range or anything above 10KHz travels trough the air almost with no dispersion. Also I got bad ear ringing form just 2W of sound power. OK, I was 3 meters away from the speaker and in a closed room, but I keep wondering how safe is this and what will come next.
I guess that holographic advertising beaming into eyes and perfume carrying microcapsule shooted at pedestrians are to come in next 10 years.
This is a really bad technology if used without permission of the listener. What about the effect on babies and young children? Has this been tested before subjecting everyone to it? I can choose not to read a billboard but this is terrible. Plus the brainwashing, propaganda that this could be used for is mind numbing.
We czn easily put an end to this nonsense. When halosonic addvertising is near a location near you, boycott the location! Avoid it at all costs. The businesses located there would sue whoever is using it for advertising it and eventually it will removed.
I'm afraid you are wrong as to corporations and free speech. Legally (IANAL) corporations ARE people and enjoy pretty much all the same rights as individuals. They also have less of the drawbacks such as possible imprisonment or certain death (eventually). Even if a corp. were to declare bankruptcy, they are most often bought by another corp. and so live on. I contend that a change in the laws to revoke this "personhood" is what is needed to end many of the abuses inflicted by corporations on the public (i.e. REAL people). Check out [http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/]. In another vein, the fact that in many cases governments (and their representatives) are immune from lawsuits is also a problem. Imagine how much excessive police violence would be reduced if the individual officer was liable to a personal lawsuit. How much would toxic pollution be reduced if the corporate officer who ordered it or the bureaucrat who approved it were personally liable.
Someone writes "boycott the location"; hell, no. Look around, find where it's coming from, go into the building, find the perp, and break the damn thing over their head.
*Then* call the cops, and charge *them* with assault, and you acted in self-defense.
mark
Saunders' second story in In Persuasion Nation does a good job imagining what New York will be like when advertisers fully have their way with the city.
I can see this technology being easily made bannable or at least highly restricted, if the range is good and people start using it on public figures and influential individuals.
The worst-case scenario is that the technology becomes illegal for anyone except approved corporations to use, which means the politicians and executives don't have to experience it any more but the rest of us get bombarded every day.
A frequency is inaudible to humans if it does not set the eardrums vibrating, but I wonder about vibrations of other parts of the body. It would depend, of course, on the frequency used. But 100dB is a non-negligible amount of physical energy; my guess is that residents near these things will have disproportionate numbers of headaches and other pain that isn't easily diagnosed. I hope somebody does as you says, and furthermore that they sue the manufacturer for reckless endangerment, and bankrupt it.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
The First Amendment does not apply to these things any more than it would protect a kidnapper who gives the excuse "I just wanted to talk to her." You cannot legally force others to listen to you. If you want me to listen to what you say, you must say something that is interesting to me. Advertising might not cut it. Tough luck.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..