Long Term Effects of Gizmodo CES Prank

theodp noted that someone from Gizmodo brought a TV-B-Gone to CES and used it to turn off a wall of monitors during demos. Funny yes, it earned him a ban for life and may have repercussions to other bloggers struggling to be treated as equals with traditional journalists in the future. But also this might lead to a future with encryption on remotes.

Comments

Encryption on remotes?

[Bazman]

Yeah, or presenters sticking electrical tape over the remote sensors on the displays.

Re:Encryption on remotes?

[Anonymous Coward]

If they are putting walls of $100 WalMart tvs on a display at CES they have bigger problems than them not turning on/off when you want them.

Electrical tape

[rlp]

Electrical tape over the IR port at shows. Problem solved.

Encryption's going a little too far

[DingerX]

The only reason to put encryption in would be to prevent people shutting these things off at product demos and restaurants. Turning them off at restaurants isn't a widespread problem (unfortunately), and at product demos, duct tape is going to be a lot more popular in the future.

I wish they would stop calling these things "gates", and worry about the future of bloggers. Yes, the CES created two classes: "press" and "blogger", and yes, members of that underclass acted in a juvenile manner, bad enough to cause a stink that will appear in the "press". It will appear in the "press" tomorrow. See, yesterday it was all over the blogs, and now it's hit the aggregators. Sooner or later those with press credentials will catch on to the story.

Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Crasoum]

Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act like professionals, then they won't be treated as professionals.

In the article it stated they weren't being taken as seriously as the Press; and when someone decides it'd be cute to do some practical joking, at the expense of others, it just reaffirms the assumptions they aren't to be taken seriously.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Migraineman]

Didn't they learn this lesson as a child? "If you want to sit at the adult table, you have to behave like a big kid."

For a short-term chuckle, they've managed to damage the long-term credibility of bloggers who were actually trying to earn proper press credentials. The trade show guys all know each other; the news will get around. The event organizers have a choice:
. (a) inconvenience the paying customer by recommending that they cover their IR ports on displays
. (b) inconvenience the non-revenue-generating bloggers by showing them the door

The smart ones will do both, though they'll play the good-guy with their customers and issue an article in a newsletter that provides helpful tips to "Make your booth time a better experience!" Bloggers will be downgraded to the status of the great unwashed masses ...

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[BeanThere]

It's not clear to me why all bloggers should be lumped together or treated as a "community". A blog is just a medium, like a blank piece of paper. If one painter behaves unprofessionally, nobody assumes it somehow reflects on the "entire community of painters as a whole". Likewise for cartoonists, or movie actors or directors, or radio DJs, or stand-up comedians, or writers, or "real" journalists for that matter. Treat professional individuals like professional individuals, and unprofessional ones like unprofessional ones, and scrap this silly obsession with regarding all bloggers like one single borg-like entity.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

The event organizers have a choice:

1. inconvenience the paying customer by recommending that they cover their IR ports on displays
   
2. inconvenience the non-revenue-generating bloggers by showing them the door

What a poor set of choices you've picked. Did you do that to try to mislead people? Are you a politician?

What does being a blogger have to do with playing a prank? Anyone on the floor can play a prank. Having a press credential doesn't make an iota of difference. Kicking out bloggers won't reduce the risk of interference any more than kicking out the white males or the booth babes would.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Crasoum]

Sure it's like a medium, but for blogs their revenue comes from impressions and ads served, much like a newspaper, but unlike a newspaper there isn't professional vetting.
In some cases they will act professional and not resort to juvenile tactics, in others they will resort to exactly that. (not including Yellow Papers in this, naturally.)

Really it boils down to if you want to be treated professionally, act professionally, more so when your already being scrutinized.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Jeff DeMaagd]

While I don't agree very much with treating an entire group the same, there is a point to it. The trade shows are by professionals, for professionals. If you're working for a competitor, you risk getting fired because you exposed your employer to legal liability, because you represent a company when you're at the show. If you're a pro journalist, then you're NOT going to risk your career over a prank. In comparison, most bloggers have nothing at stake.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Andrew-Unit]

Bloggers will be downgraded to the status of the great unwashed masses.

Oh please. Downgraded? I thought the neat thing about blogging was that it was done by people like me... a member of the unwashed masses!

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act...

[Migraineman]

What a poor set of choices you've picked. Did you do that to try to mislead people? Are you a politician?

Not a politician, but I have worked my share of trade show booths. You pay a pretty penny to put your wares on display at a trade show, and as the customer of the trade show, you have expectations as to how the event organizers run the event. If someone pranked my display, I have every expectation that the event organizer will eject said prankster. I didn't include the "do nothing" option because it really isn't an option for the event organizer.

Having a press credential doesn't make an iota of difference.

Whoa, clearly you haven't been to a trade show on a press pass. There are tons of perks for the press - give aways, press-only days, non-public demos in the hospitality suite ... The primary point of attending the trade show is to get exposure for your products and services. Demoing to Joe Sixpack might garner a sale (or a handful if he does the word-of-mouth thing.) Demoing to a tech reporter can result in a magazine article that garners hundreds or thousands of sales. The trade rags (electronic or dead-tree is irrelevant) have the audience. The reporters are the focal point that brings your products into view of the desired audience. The reporters are definitely a different class of people at a trade show.

There are a bunch of bloggers who are trying to establish that blogging is as valid a "press" medium as the traditional outlets. If they're successful in establishing that expectation, they and their peers move up in the food chain. The pranks executed by this handful of bloggers will reflect poorly on the perception of all bloggers. Members of the press are expected to behave in a certain manner - they're supposed to present an unbiased report of events. An individual who is effectively vandalizing a trade show booth can hardly be considered "unbiased." Similarly, if the local NBC affiliate was caught pranking a trade show booth, I'd expect the event organizer to black-list them permanently.

Seems like a pretty immature prank

[DrXym]

Imagine you're a company presenting your new lineup of TVs and some dickhead in the audience decides to shut them down during your presentation. How do you even begin to calculate the damage that might have caused to prospective customers or partners?

The guy should be banned for life. At least with IR remotes you can stick a bit of tape over the receive to stop it. I imagine that wireless technologies could be extremely vulnerable to similar pranks (and sabotage). Imagine the trouble someone could cause just by blocking signals, or sending spurious malformed messages designed to kill a device.

Re:Seems like a pretty immature prank

[PdMYmU]

this prank was the only news i've heard coming from ces. ces used to be cool - now its just repackaged processors.

A desperate attempt at relevance

[thethibs]

Funny, no; childish, yes.

It's a shame spanking is no longer deemed appropriate.

Re:Encrypted remotes?

[Anonymous Coward]

They needed insight to believe that the invitees wouldn't act like little children? Give me a break - why would you assume someone would be an asshat like that? While this is one of those things that at first seeing of the video you might think, "that's funny" - the second thing you should be thinking is "what an ass" and the third would be "I guess we will need to cover the IR ports next time to stop the next asshat".

There really isn't any excuse though for this kind of behaviour. It is flat out wrong to be interfering with the show. No "security researcher" cred for this; it is just mean.

I love my Spy Remote

[portforward]

I seriously do. We don't have a TV at home that is hooked up to an antenna or cable or Directv or whatever is out there. If we go to lunch and a TV is up, I will find myself distracted by the movement, and I hate extra noise. Just Thursday one of my coworkers and also my manager saw me turn off a plasma screen (that no one was watching) at a Vietnamese Pho place and now they both want three.

I have no problem turning off a non-watched CNN at lunch, but I wouldn't turn off a football game at a sports bar. That would be rude. But I don't understand the need to be constantly distracted by TVs. To quote Bill Cosby, "Parents don't want justice, they just want silence."

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't have a TV at home that is hooked up to an antenna or cable or Directv or whatever is out there.

By "we", I assume you me you and your cat? BTW, congratulations on the article.

If we go to lunch and a TV is up, I will find myself distracted by the movement, and I hate extra noise. Just Thursday one of my coworkers and also my manager saw me turn off a plasma screen (that no one was watching) at a Vietnamese Pho place and now they both want three.

You, sir, are a douchebag. Same goes for your coworker and manager.

Try to comprehend this: IT'S NOT YOUR FUCKING TV.

Instead of being polite and asking the proprietor, "Excuse me, would it be possible to turn the TV off?", you impose your will on them and anybody else that comes into that establishment.

Do I like TVs in these places? Usually not. If there is no one around, I'll ask the owner or staff member to turn it off or to let me do it. NEVER has such a request been refused. If I was refused for what appears to be no good reason, I'll remember that for next time and not give them my money.

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[Belial6]

What you did was vandalism. Pure and simple. If your manager was smart, he would be looking for an excuse to fire you. After all, if you are willing to screw with one business because there is a little bit of movement in the corner of the room, then just imagine what you would be willing to do to a business that you are on the inside of when there is a bunch of movement.

Seriously, the "I don't have a TV" crowd don't even realize how ignorant they are. I can assume by your wording that you do have a TV, you just watch movies instead of broadcast television. Here is a secret. Movies are not inherently better than TV. Heck, even books are not inherently better than TV.

And the Cosby joke you reference isn't saying the parents are right. It is saying that parents are self serving pieces of crap that will be unjust to get what they want. By using that quote, you are openly admitting that you don't care about right or wrong as long as you get your way. Do your children know that you are a bad person, and are willing to screw them for your convenience?

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[hoooocheymomma]

It seems like you need to calm down. I don't think you are fully considering the implications of turning off somebody else's television.

Secretly turning off somebody's tv is not a trivial act. Have you considered that a restaurant proprietor who knows nothing about electronics and a lot about food might ignorantly assume something is wrong with his television, and that he might spend hundreds of dollars trying to fix the problem?

Moving a chair in a restaurant isn't exactly going to trick anybody into thinking that the floor is suddenly on an incline, so it's hardly comparable. More comparable acts include walking up to the television to turn it off, or telling the proprietor to turn it off. This is what the post to which you are replying suggested.

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[portforward]

vandalism - Willful or malicious destruction of public or private property.

Pray tell, what did I destroy? The TV still functioned. They turned it back on just before we left. NOBODY noticed that it was off except my table for around 30 minutes. The place was packed and the 50 inch plasma was 15 feet directly in front of me. The workers can't speak English and were too busy to serve meals to turn off the TV.

Actually my current manager is the best manager that I have ever had. He gets technology and he gets people. He stands up for me, and is very understanding of personal situations. The coworker that wanted three of them is one of the most ethical people I know. It is a huge stretch of the imagination to say, "turn off tv" to "sabotage databases". I would never, ever mess with the data at my job. I work with the transmission of medical records. It is not an exaggeration to say people could die if I do that. Why kill someone's mom or son because I hate my job?

Yes, I have a projector hooked up to a DVD. It is on for two hours once maybe every three days. I do this because it would be way too easy for me to sit down and watch TV and waste my evening. My six year old would be watching ALL THE TIME. So I cut down on the amount he watches, and I have much more control over content. Instead of "American Idol" he and I build Legos, and he learned to read at a very early age and do math at a very early age. Not having broadcast TV in our home has been one of the best decisions that my wife and I have made. I don't know about you, but I like quiet. Quiet allows me to think. Quiet allows me to work. Quiet allows me to have conversations and relationships with people I care about. Why do you crave distractions?

It is saying that parents are self serving pieces of crap that will be unjust to get what they want.

Wow, are you 19 years old? Do you have kids? In the same comedy bit, Cosby said, "My wife and I used to be intellectuals." And then they had kids. I am not the world's best husband or father, but I do try my best.

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[schnell]

You're at least as self righteous as I am. Re-read your post if you don't believe me. The only difference is I'm calm enough not to use all-caps. I hate TV's, you hate me for hating TV. Cool.

I think you're missing the GP's point. That poster doesn't care how you feel about TV, he cares about you surreptitiously turning it off against the wishes of the owner or whoever has the right to control it. It's no different than walking into a party and changing the music everyone is listening to without asking. You aren't a jerk for not liking TV, you're a jerk for being rude to others.

While I'm being pedantic I'll just go over the top and mention that I think you're misusing [sic].

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[Blnky]

To be clear, I generally do not like television in commercial establishments.

So if you had a party of 4 and there were only 3 chairs, would you ask the owner before moving a chair from the next table? Yes I would. Either someone who works there or someone already sitting at the table. That chair may already be in use by someone who is not at that table at the time. Very rude to take it. Additionally, someone who works there may already be retrieving a chair for me. By not asking first, I may be invalidating their work when they show up with yet another chair. So asking first is being polite.

If the door was open and there was snow blowing in, would you ask the owner if you could close the door? Yes I would. Perhaps for some reason it has been left open to allow someone to carry in stock with their hands full. It is not for me to presume the reasons. That is the reason for asking.

It's not a matter of "being polite"; it's something so trivial politeness doesn't even enter into the equation. Interesting that you view the act of shutting down someones else's electronics trivial. A leery person would never let you into a hospital.

("Impose your will", ha. I've never in my life seen anybody watch TV in a restaurant, even briefly.) Either you have not been within the same restaurants as I have been or you seriously lack powers of observation. Consider this, why would all those proprietors waste money on televisions and electricity if it was not utilized by anyone?

So comprehend this: ... It's just a TV. If the proprietor really wants it on, he can turn it back on, and tell everybody "please leave it on". You know, like if he really wanted the chair left by that other table he could come over and tell you that, too. (Another way to look at it: TVs are much, much easier to secure than wifi networks.) So a proprietor has to tell everyone to leave it alone. Then someone new walks in and turns it off. So the proprietor has to tell everyone to leave it alone. Then someone new walks in and turns it off. So the proprietor has to tell everyone to leave it alone. Then someone new walks in and turns it off.... Understand it now?

Common sense says that if you wish to change something that's small, irrelevant, and perfectly reversible, it's OK to do without asking for permission. Common sense also says that what may seem small and irrelevant to you may not be to someone else. Therefore you should not assume it is ok without checking first.

And yet, as soon as a television is involved, HOLY FUCKING SHIT GOOD SIR DO NOT CLICK THAT REMOTE OR YOU ARE A DOUCHEBAG. It is a communication medium that has been established. Consider a physical bulletin board with both entertaining and informative posts. I might find all of the posts small and irrevelant. However, even though posting them back up if I take them all off and lay them on a table to the side would be a reversible action, this does not make it ok for me to take such a change without checking first. From my perspective you do not see the act of turning off the television as a part of a larger concept of actions all of which are considered impolite.

So comprehend this: CALM FUCKING DOWN. So comprehend this: Learn to keep your hands to yourself.

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[Anonymous Coward]

He can turn it back on on his own, but he won't know why it mysteriously turns off. Most people take things in for repair when they don't work right.

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[steelfood]

Main Entry: vandalism
Pronunciation: 'vand-&l-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the willful or malicious destruction or defacement of property
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law. Merriam-Webster, Inc. 12 Jan. 2008.

You should stop talking. Your actions cannot be justified, and your attempt at it just makes you look worse.

Pray tell, what did I destroy? The TV still functioned. They turned it back on just before we left. NOBODY noticed that it was off except my table for around 30 minutes. The place was packed and the 50 inch plasma was 15 feet directly in front of me. The workers can't speak English and were too busy to serve meals to turn off the TV.

Put it this way: You're rushing down a single-file escalator, and there's a person in front of you. Instead of saying, "Excuse me," you shove your way past the person. Your initial attempt at justification is like saying it's not a big deal because the guy didn't get hurt, he dusted himself off and everything was back to normal. It wasn't like you pushed him down the escalator or anything. Then, you go on to effectively say, well, the guy's handicapped, so it wasn't as if he could retaliate. And then you also include the interesting bit of information that the guy doesn't speak English, as if that changes anything, or makes you better than him somehow.

Of course, your boss and your coworker condone and would willingly partake in such behavior, as if it was the most natural thing to do. So if they were right behind you, they would've pushed their way past the guy as well right behind you.

Actually my current manager is the best manager that I have ever had. He gets technology and he gets people. He stands up for me, and is very understanding of personal situations. The coworker that wanted three of them is one of the most ethical people I know. ...
Instead of "American Idol" he and I build Legos, and he learned to read at a very early age and do math at a very early age.

I don't care how great of a father you think you are (and I'm not saying you're not), how awesome your boss is, how ethical your worker is in the workplace. They're irrelevant. And the fact that you don't like television because it interferes with your ability to function normally is also irrelevant. It's not your television, it's not your restaurant. If you don't like the environment there, you go find a better place. Otherwise, if eating there is so important to you, deal with it. If you seek to impose your will upon others, and you think that's OK, you're a douche by my book. And if your environment actually condones such behavior, there's a lot of douchebaggery going on around you.

Oh, and it's interesting you say your coworker is one of the most ethical people you know. They say that the measure of a person isn't by what they do when there are consequences or the threat of consequences, but by what they do when there are no consequences. Quite frankly your coworker might be ethical, but that may be because he does not want to risk his job. I'm not so sure he's the kind of person I'd like to associate with. And I'm not sure you are either.

Look, nobody's perfect. Everybody's going to get pushed past that line at some point, and if we haven't already, we're all going to do something wrong to someone, or a group of people. But most people at least have the decency to be shameful about it; they do go around boasting about it, much less try to defend it after they bring it up. You remind me of the other douchebag here that started boasting about how he insulted this girl by calling her a slut, and how him and his buddies ganged up on her boyfriend for trying to defend her. But these things happen to even the best of us. It's not something to be proud of though, and moreso than the act itself, that is the most offensive part I find about what you've said.

Pranks involving TV-B-Gone were funny when I was in high school. If I was 14, I probably would've had a go

Re:I love my Spy Remote

[Mathonwy]

Hey kids! Having trouble figuring out if using your TV-B-Gone is ok? Not sure if you're doing a public service, or just being a jerk? Here's a simple test you can try at home or "in the field":

Any time you would use your TV-B-Gone, ask yourself "Would I be comfortable just walking up to wherever the TV is and turning it off, without offering any explanation to anyone else here?" Then ask yourself "Would I be comfortable announcing in a loud voice 'I'm going to turn off the TV now.' before clicking your TV-B-Gone?"

If you answered "no" to either of these questions, then yes! You're being a jerk! You're merely using technology to hide from responsibility for your actions, and justifying it to yourself!

If you answered "yes", then you're [probably] fine! But consider putting this to the test by actually announcing your intent to everyone before just quietly clicking "off" and not telling anyone!

Have fun! And remember kids, ask your parents before you try this at home!

Not funny...

[QuietLagoon]

Immature, unethical, and unprofessional.

A ethical line is crossed when a blogger creates the news instead of reporting it.

Vandalism.

[xtracto]

I just saw the video. I did not know what was this about. At first, I thought it was hilarious. Yes, the prank was nice. But then I thought that such acting is vandalism. I mean, the company (maybe motorlola?) that got their monitors turned off while it was presenting really should be able to sue these guys for vandalism. I know they should grow a sense of humour, but at the very least the guys should apologize publicaly to the companies that they affected.

This kind of stuff is what you do only *ïf* you are prepared to face the consequences, and even though maybe turning off TVs would not have a lot of effect at the doctor's office or at some random public area, in this kind of technology shows it really affects the people.

Re:Vandalism.

[ucblockhead]

Yeah, it's funny until you think back to the last time you yourself gave a demo, and think about what it would be like if someone else was deliberately messing with the demo of the software you'd put months of sweat into.

I hate TV-B-gone

[Egdiroh]

I really think that the only reason for such a device to exist is to make a list of all the self centered arrogant people who buy one to purge them from society.

The device is designed to turn off other people's TVs. If you don't like TV, or televised sports, avoid those places that have them on. Be a discerning consumer and create a market for places that will provide and pleasant atmosphere for you. Don't be a petulant child and turn the TVs off. I don't come into your place and turn your computer, or stereo off, or slam shut the book you are reading. If I did you'd take great offense, and would feel violated. Well the world is not all about you. Get over it. Don't do things whose analog you wouldn't like done to yourself.
This might have been a rant. It might be a troll. But I really would love to hear a justification of this device that does not amount to a fascist imposition of one person's will upon others. And these things do not have enough buttons to really validate the rudimentary universal remote argument, and they are targeted at individuals not institutions, so I won't buy that some institutions with large numbers of TVs might find it useful for start/end of day stuff.

Re:I hate TV-B-gone

[fireboy1919]

ut I really would love to hear a justification of this device that does not amount to a fascist imposition of one person's will upon others.

This is not normally associated with fascism.

I would have thought this would be obvious. Are you one of those people who finds humor sinful? If your company can't handle having itself be the butt of a joke, then it can't handle business with my company. On the other hand, if it can, then we can probably work around whatever other communications problems exist.

Humor is, IMHO, the single most important facility in interpersonal relations.
Its what lets unlike people work together without fighting. Laugh it off, and the problem doesn't seem so difficult to overcome, or so personal.

Re:I hate TV-B-gone

[Have Blue]

Humor is, IMHO, the single most important facility in interpersonal relations.
Its what lets unlike people work together without fighting

But the TV-B-Gone isn't used on people you have any sort of relationship with- if you did, you could ask them to turn the TV down or off and they will usually oblige. All it's ever used for is anonymous passive-aggressive pranks and asserting that what you want the TV to do is more important than what everyone else in the immediate area wants, which usually includes the TV's rightful owner and a number of people in the middle of watching it.

Re:I hate TV-B-gone

[cyber-dragon.net]

Incorrect. Maturity is knowing WHEN a prank is going to funny and when it is highly inappropriate.

Example: Some friends and I saran wrapped a co-workers cube for his birthday. Every item individually wrapped. Funny? Of course. No one was hurt, no ones reputation was at stake.

Same thing but do it when you KNOW he has an important visitor from another company coming to see a presentation. Now my company will fire me and my professional reputation will be tarnished.

A mature person sees the difference between these two things. One is funny, one gets you fired.

Re:right...

[The PS3 Will Fail]

The person you were replying to wasn't asserting that trade shows never go under. He was asserting that CES seems to be a healthy trade show that still draws a large crowd. Your mention of COMDEX in no way refutes that statement since by the time COMDEX was canceled, it was pretty obvious that it had been slipping in size and stature.

I really find your post offensive in the sense that it adds nothing to the discussion and seems to be refuting something that was not said. What was the point of your post, really?

No one fucking said trade shows never go under. What the fuck?

Re:Encrypted remotes?

[glpierce]

Yes, and they should have the insight to wear bullet-proof vests, too, right? That's what you'd say if somewhat started shooting, I assume.

Vandalism is a crime, but the presenters are to blame? Yeah, this was clearly entrapment. Who could resist the lure of shutting off TVs with exposed IR ports?

Where are we at as a society that we blame people for being victims, when they haven't done anything to provoke an attack?

Just watched Gizmodo's 'hilarious' prank...

[danielk1982]

What an asshole thing to do. It wasn't funny at all, and their 'apology' was worse.

Dead Gizmodo - don't expect a Macworld invite

[Picass0]

I would expect Gizmodo's chances of attending future press events are circling the toilet now. A shame, they have always done minute by minute coverage of the "One more thing..." and Macworld keynotes.

If I were a marketing staffer or PR guy I wouldn't want them anywhere near a press conference. People can lose their jobs over press demos not working, so they aren't going to take the chance of inviting four year olds in the future.

A complete over reaction

[bhima]

To read the comments here and on Digg, you'd be lead to think this man had raped, looted, and plundered. All he did was turn some televisions off and interrupt a few demonstrations.

He.Turned.Off.Televisions. This is now a heinous crime? It's vandalism? It deserves flogging and imprisonment?

Yes he disrupted a couple of demonstrations, how many times had the presenter been through his script? For how many days? What exactly was lost by this disruption? How will the consumer electronics industry survive this loss?

Yes he went beyond the news and created the news. This is a time honored tradition and I'm sure Hunter S. Thompson would approve, particularly in light of what CES truly is. To quote Gizmodo "a disgusting, bloated beast oozing everything that makes this industry horrible. Nay, everything that makes our culture horrible"

I congratulate the inventors of the TV Be-Gone device for coming up with a wonderful gizmo and then Gizmodo for using it to demonstrate how pathetic our society has become.

Gizmodo's assessment of the CES show is particularly interesting: http://gizmodo.com/342495/ten-reasons-were-doomed-ces-edition

Re:A complete over reaction

[Anonymous Psychopath]

I can't tell if you're just trolling or actually believe the crap you wrote.

Just in case you believe it, I suggest you try standing up in front of a crowd of people and try to present something while some coward in the audience anonymously fucks with you, doing their best to embarrass and humiliate you with no better reason than they thought it might be amusing. Vendors spend a lot of money to be at those shows and have the opportunity to present. Gizmodo should compensate Motorola for their costs to present, which is probably in the neighborhood of $200k or more when you include everything. See how funny they think it is then. Assholes.

It's not an overreaction. Credentialed members of the press would face the same criticism, would likely lose their jobs, and are probably unlikely to pull such an amateurish stunt in the first place. If bloggers want to be recognized as "real" press, they have to act like it.

Remember when freedom of the press and not revealing confidential sources was tested in court for a blogger? If I remember right, it was versus Apple. Do you think this helps, or hurts the next guy?

Re:A complete over reaction

[GoofyBoy]

>Yes he disrupted a couple of demonstrations, how many times had the presenter been through his script? For how many days? What exactly was lost by this disruption? How will the consumer electronics industry survive this loss?

Ever presented anything to an important client? Now as you are doing your presentation and right in the middle of it, take out your visual portion of it. Now pretend that the visual portion of it is what you are selling.
Not exactly so small.

prank

[v1]

an entertaining prank to be sure, and a surprise that no one's tried it before on this scale. There's no excuse for there not to be black electrical tape over every IR receiver on that set of displays.

If you leave something THAT open to pranking at a public or semi-public event, it's going to happen. That's like leaving LAN jacks open all over the place at the conference and having an unsecured credit card processing machine on the same network. You deserve what you get for that level of carelessness.

On a completely different take, this is not possible with every remote. For example, all Apple remotes have the ability to "pair" with a computer, to prevent a computer from responding to any remote besides its own This is not rocket science, and it's not new. Pairing of remotes to equipment has been going on for years and won't cost them a nickel more to add to the chip. It involves each remote having and transmitting its serial number along with the command, and the computer can simply be told to only listen to commands from one (or a small group of) serial numbers. The only thing they will have to deal with is the occasional tech call from a customer that's managed to pair a different remote to their unit.

I for one would like to see this happen several more times until the manufactures get their heads out of the sand. This is unfortunately what it takes to motivate them. They won't lift a finger until it starts to cost them.

Additionally, it's sometimes hard to find where on a set the IR receiver is at. On the Apple's it's behind the big apple on the front of the unit or the black dot near the latch on the laptops. On some sets, where they have a large black border, it can be hard to locate. Also, the prankster should have been very easy to spot for anyone educated in such things. Most digital cameras are VERY senstitive to IR light, and to anyone with a digital camera looking at the LCD preview screen, or to anyone with a web cam pointed into the audience, that remote would go off like a strobe. It should have taken them less than 20 seconds to find this joker.

Re:The difference between a blogger and a journali

[danielk1982]

>someone who graduated from DeVry isn't "really" a programmer since he didn't get an MS in CompSci or Maths or whatever.

If he can write good code, it doesn't matter if he has a degree or a diploma or nothing. You will find very few people here on slashdot who disagree with that. So I don't see why a McDonald's burger flipper blogging on politics cannot have better commentary than a graduate of Harvard Journalism. Journalists have to earn the public's respect, something they have been failing at the last 20 years. I get a sense that journalists have some warped sense of entitlement towards their degree and profession.

Re:Tv-B-Gone: Guranteed for next year CES

[Kjella]

My (glass) windows are not secure against big hurled rocks, and it's a fairly obvious "security hole". I'd be happy to prosecute anyone doing that for vandalism, not conclude that I need to change windows or board them up. Stop trying to defend an asshat, it's perfectly reasonable for someone to bring a TV to a presentation without someone turning it off or yanking the power cable or unscrewing the fuse, even though it's not permanent like breaking a window. This is simply malice and he deserves to be banned.

Alas

[Mateo_LeFou]

You guys are kind of optimistic. I expect the TV-B-Gone to be banned as somehow violating someone's "intellectual property" or some such.

Just block IR ports

[dindi]

When even at your local gym they know how to put a little piece of tape over the IR receivers' port, how comes this is not accomplished by high-tech show operators?

You could also use non transparent IR blasters to control and block unwanted nerd attacks out.

Re:right...

[Jerry Beasters]

People just like to see their words in writing whether they have any clue what they're talking about or not. What else is new?

Re:Or fixed in hardware....

[ahaning]

Hey! This is an opportunity for COMPLEX ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS! DON'T GET IN THE WAY OF OUR FUN! Actually, I don't see why the presenters couldn't have just said "ha ha ok *turns monitor back on* Now, as I was saying..." or the pranksters could have just turned the monitor off for 5 seconds, turned it on, laughed and waved their TV-B-Gones to the presenters and walked off. Is turning a monitor back on that big of a deal?

future

[Anonymous Coward]

"But also this might lead to a future with encryption on remotes."

uh...yea, right. I think they'll also require fire extinguishers on all porches by law so people can easily put out flaming bags of poo. I think you are absolutely right...because there is nothing worse than having to turn TV's back on or cover their LED's with a piece of black tape. That surely justifies increasing the cost of all TV's and making all previous universal remotes useless by adding encryption. I'm certain your right...so don't worry about making such silly statements.

Re:The importance of CES

[cyber-dragon.net]

I guess when you work flipping burgers at McDonalds and posting from mommies basement you would not know nor care about the importance of these things to startup companies. For those of us with real jobs trying to sell our creations it DOES matter. These trade shows are pretty much the ONLY outlet provided.

Hell I once spent two hours walking up and down isles in a trade show juggling a competitors glowing ball giveaways to get people to come to our booth and talk to us. Guess what? Small sacrifice of pride and we got attention and customers that allowed the company to double in size and survive. I left the company for another opportunity but the stock I did keep bought me a new car. So you hold to your high and mighty morals and I will not regret one bit going to the show and juggling a little to get attention, nor the hours I put in prepping as I drive around in the car it bought me.

If you want the end of big mega-corporations as you claim, then support ways for little companies to find each other and work together.

Re:Sure, cos NOBODY ELSE will do it...

[seriesrover]

Its not about the technology (tv-b-gone) and security - electrical tape will easily fix this particular issue. The point is that Gizmodo are idiots and made a choice to have some fun at somebody's expense. As a consequence people will quite rightly have reservations about these guys (and bloggers in general) because they have demonstrated that they are *capable* of causing disruption. Correct no lives were lost BUT I can gurrantee that if you were on the recieving end you wouldnt be laughing.

Heres a test: take some code somebody has been working on for 4 weeks and move it somewhere to make it look like its been deleted then watch them for a few hours whilst they try to explain to their boss what happened. You expect them to laugh once you produce the 'deleted' code? I mean it should be funny, no lives were lost right?

Re:Why do we still even use IR remotes?

[TheRaven64]

I think the more obvious issue here is why we haven't made a push for Bluetooth-based controllers for our fancy new digital, high-definition devices So you're in favour of replacing the batteries in your remotes once a week? We still use IR because it is cheap and because it is low power.