Slashdot Mirror
In Soviet US, Comcast Watches YOU
cayenne8 sends us to Newteevee.com for a blog posting reporting from the Digital Living Room conference earlier this week. Gerard Kunkel, Comcast's senior VP of user experience, stated that the cable company is experimenting with different camera technologies built into its devices so it can know who's in your living room. Cameras in the set-top boxes, while apparently not using facial recognition software, can still somehow figure out who is in the room, and customize user preferences for cable (favorite channels, etc.). While this sounds 'handy,' it also sounds a bit like the TV sets in 1984. I am sure, of course, that Comcast wouldn't tap into this for any reason, nor let the authorities tap into this to watch inside your home in real time without a warrant or anything."
This is one privacy issue that a little electrical tape can cure easily.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
A 'bit' like 1984? Who in the hell would go for this? Americans seem to have managed to convince their politicians and corporations that they have no interest in freedom at all.
This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
That depends on the marketing strategy. If it's a `cool new device for interacting with your friends`, I'm sure they'll get not so tech-savy or privacy-savy people to buy it.
While this sounds 'handy,' it also sounds a bit like the TV sets in 1984.
Apart from the fact that allowing them into your house is entirely voluntary and not mandated by law. You know, the important bit.
I'm sick of people comparing everything to 1984. It's like they read one book in school and anything that has privacy implications is immediately associated with it because it makes them feel smart.
Look, I think this is a stupid idea and there's no way I'd let one into my house, but it's not like 1984. Hardly anything compared to it actually is.
There will be a "think of the children" campaign. People will protest children seeing adult material and someone will argue that "the technology already exists" to solve this problem. These cameras will detect that children are in the room and block inappropriate material. A law will be passed requiring the camera-in-box technology. There you go... it's in people's homes.
Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.
If they simply must market such a technology, at least put a biometric device on the remote. That would have to work better than some mysterious body shape recognition, give them the same marketing information and I can still watch Sanford and Son reruns in my underwear.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I'm sure Comcast will say they are going to sell some type of video phone service or something similar to justify putting the camera in the box. If asked why all boxes have a camera rather than some with and some without, Comcast could come back with some excuse indicating that it is cheaper for them to stock a single type of box rather than multiple types that could result in shortages and poor customer service.
What makes you think the camera is not already there? Have you disassembled your cable box?
Food for thought. Your cable box could have a camera already. If you have cable internet you know it has enough bandwidth for monitoring you.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I put a picture of Mickey Mouse in front of mine. They got me for copyright and trademark violations too. How did they know?
TV is not worth this. Thanks to MythTV, I considered paying for cable TV again. There is no way in hell I'd sit a camera in my living room for it. What complete morons.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Heck, wan't there a proposal in the VHS era that would limit the number of people in a room for tape watching? Something like you could only have 8 people at a time, otherwise you would have to pay additonal royalties?
I cna see it now. Every time someone walks into the room they have to swipe their credit card in the STB or the TV will turn off.
This sounds like a DRM dream. The sad thing is that many people will think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and will welcome this "customized user experience".
Arghhh.....
Unfortunately, by sticking electrical tape on the camera, you have invalidated your warranty (by their own definition) and they cannot be held responsible if, say, the device becomes permanently nonfunctional when it notices the channels being changed while the camera detects no motion or light.
Them's the breaks!
The obvious application of this is a pricing model that includes the number of viewers in the room. This has been an issue since the early VCR days. Many of the big players (e.g. Disney) were violently opposed to the VCR at first for just this reason, that they could no longer charge based on the number of viewers. I'd be suprised if that idea didn't get floated soon after the debut of the camera, maybe in connection with some huge event.
Improved preferences/customization seems a small payout for such a large investment. They already have the 'thumbclick' data, which is far easier to run throgh the (Bayesian) software. I expect it's already got a model for how many regular users there are. From the perspective of preferences or targeted ads, who's holding the remote is more important than who's in the room.
did not forsaw all of this coming, but instead gave the bad guys the ideas...