Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Guardian Angel In Your Cell Phone

Posted by kdawson on from the all-watched-over-by-machines-of-loving-grace dept.

theodp writes "Bill Gates and Ray Ozzie are listed as inventors of the Guardian Angel, which is described in a most unusual Microsoft patent application that should intrigue privacy advocates. In addition to protecting you from possibly diseased people, by detecting body temperatures, the Guardian Angel's 'monitoring component can take note of the number of conversations occurring in a room (and more specifically, a breakdown of the types of people in the room accompanied by a warning for dangerous persons, based on sex offender registration, FBI most wanted, etc.).' The versatile Guardian Angel, Microsoft notes, can also recommend restaurants, advise you on the appropriateness of your jokes, detect that your heartbeat has stopped, display targeted ads on billboards, and block spam."

21 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Wait, what? by evanbd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It displays targetted ads on billboards *and* blocks spam? Aren't those mutually exclusive?

    1. Re:Wait, what? by v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The initial knee-jerk reaction to this is that it's not going to reduce the spam I am exposed to. But then on further consideration, if I'm going to get spammed say, four times this morning, I'd rather they be at least slightly relevant to me. I don't need help with credit card debt, I'm not shopping for children's toys, and I don't want to buy a new car. If you must spam me, at least make it useful.

      Probably 90% of the adverts any given person is exposed to on a daily basis are a complete waste of their and the advertiser's time. (which is why email spam works, because it doesn't cost much to spam everybody)

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    2. Re:Wait, what? by Mprx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only possible reason you could want more relevant spam is because you might buy spammed products. This encourages spammers and makes the internet a worse place for everybody.

    3. Re:Wait, what? by v1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't think you can blame people for buying a product that they found out about through spamvertisement, if it's something they wanted. What are you supposed to do? Look at the message and say "Gee actually I was thinking about buying one of those, that one looks perfect, but since they spamvertised it to me, I refuse to buy it." Sounds a little childish and stubborn.

      Though I do agree that the few that buy from spamvertisement do encourage the behavior. If you build a system that has a fundamental design flaw that makes it vulnerable to abuse, it will get abused, always and forever, until you fix the flaw. Trying to fight the abusers is a waste of time. So long as its profitable, it will continue to be abused.

      SPAM is not so much a problem because of what it is, unsolicited advertisement, but because it's being used wrong. You get spammed when you watch TV. When you listen to the radio. When you drive your car down the road. As you walk through the isles in the store. It's everywhere. You can't just say that you're going to boycott every product you see spamvertised.

      Unfortunately email spam is global, and in many cases is considered legal. Here's the thing... if tomorrow it was announced that for the next 5 months no one was supposed to buy from spammers, and they followed through with this, the spammers would go out of business. I'd gladly participate in that. But since you can't make that many people change your ways, all you accomplish with your own private boycott is to inconvenience yourself. It's like organizing a boycott in your town against WalMart because they are selling a brand of toy that's a choking hazard. You and all 30 of your fellow boycotters, what do you think you're going to accomplish, besides your shopping more at K-mart? Is it going to change anything? If you could get 5,000 people in your town to boycott them, ok that may actually get something accomplished. But if you can't DO that, there's no point, unless you enjoy making your life a little bit more difficult, needlessly.

      THAT being said, I've never actually bought anything spammed into my inbox. Not because I'm against it in principle, but because they've never spamvertised anything I'm interested in. I'd be willing to bet a lot of people are in the same camp - never having replied to spam, wishing it would go away, but at the same time being perfectly willing to reply to it if something they truly wanted was being pushed.

      There are basically two driving forces in spam. Illegal or scam, and anonymous buying. Either things where you cannot conduct legal business such as prescription meds without a prescription, or sex-related sales. Online is arguably the best way to conduct business in either of these areas, and spam is no doubt the best way to advertise it. Nothing is going to change that, short of either making spam illegal or impossible. Trying to convince the masses to not respond to the spam will also not change these things, and is an exercise in futility.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    4. Re:Wait, what? by kunwon1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think you can blame people for buying a product that they found out about through spamvertisement, if it's something they wanted. What are you supposed to do? Look at the message and say "Gee actually I was thinking about buying one of those, that one looks perfect, but since they spamvertised it to me, I refuse to buy it." Sounds a little childish and stubborn.
      Sounds a little like voting with your wallet.
      --
      Specialization is for insects. -Heinlein
    5. Re:Wait, what? by whereiswaldo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think you can blame people for buying a product that they found out about through spamvertisement, if it's something they wanted. What are you supposed to do? Look at the message and say "Gee actually I was thinking about buying one of those, that one looks perfect, but since they spamvertised it to me, I refuse to buy it." Sounds a little childish and stubborn.

      That depends on how you view spam. One way is that it is mind pollution. I try not to buy from companies that pollute excessively, and that would mean not buying products from companies that try and pollute my mind.

      SPAM is not so much a problem because of what it is, unsolicited advertisement, but because it's being used wrong. You get spammed when you watch TV. When you listen to the radio. When you drive your car down the road. As you walk through the isles in the store. It's everywhere. You can't just say that you're going to boycott every product you see spamvertised.

      Sure, assuming that TV and Radio advertisements are the gold standard. I think they are just as annoying as email spam and I avoid watching TV for the most part, and almost never listen to the radio because there is hardly any music on it anymore! There are better alternatives anyway, like renting a movie, watching shows on Joost which has very little advertising, or listening to music from my own collection.

      Here's the thing... if tomorrow it was announced that for the next 5 months no one was supposed to buy from spammers, and they followed through with this, the spammers would go out of business.

      Do you really think that's true? How much does it cost a spammer to stay in business? I belive it is very little - that's the economics of spam. Also, nailing spammers is like playing whack-a-mole: you get one and another pops up. So even if you did bankrupt many spammers in that 5 months, there would always be more to pick up where the others left off once people started responding to spams again.

      But since you can't make that many people change your ways, all you accomplish with your own private boycott is to inconvenience yourself.

      Possibly. However, don't underestimate the power of communication these days - it is easy for anyone to get in touch with thousands of people. Also keep in mind that not everyone's goal is to convince everyone else to do the same thing. I'm happy to do my part and if others who I tell share the same view then great. If not, it's still worth it to me to uphold my principles.

      It's like organizing a boycott in your town against WalMart because they are selling a brand of toy that's a choking hazard.

      I think that's a poor example. Can you imagine the bad press a store would get if they knowingly sold a toy that is a choking hazard? I think most stores are really responsible in that area.

  2. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "WTF" was precisely the first thing that came into my head as I read the description. Are these guys for real?

  3. Exactly the problem with patents by Jimmy_B · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is certainly a neat concept. However, no one has made one - including the patenters. It won't be possible to make one until a lot of technologies have improved (especially battery technology).

    Since it's impossible to make, there can't be prior art. Since it's being patented before it *could* be made, it never will be made. This is a very common, very ridiculous occurrence.

    1. Re:Exactly the problem with patents by Genda · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but this is simply ludicrous...

      By the premise of this patent, I could at this very moment patent every interesting idea I've ever read in a science fiction story. Give a full discription of the what, with a pitifully vague description of the how. Then as the technology became available to make it happen, I could fill in any of the 20 or 30 [And a miracle happens] type, blank spaces in my patent disclosure, until shebang, it's 2019 and I have now got a perfectly good patent back-dated to 2008, for technology that had only become viable as of 4:30PM Friday May 10, 2019...

      Okay let's see... I'm calling dibs on; The infinitly dense super light super compact battery, The faster than light transport engine, the direct neural link (good between people to people and people to machines), and the serum that provides perpetual youth. Y'all can take the rest.

  4. Hey, don't shoot this down just yet by Ethan+Allison · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mecha-Big-Brother is actually a great idea. Look at all the benefits Guardian Angel has. I mean hell, I'd rather a computer tells me that my joke is stupid than another person, and if I happen to have any sort of health problem it's an instant 911 call.

    Just don't forget the off switch.

    --
    I make websites and stuff. Buy one.
  5. utter, utter bullshit by thermian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No really.

    This patent is nothing more then a placeholder on imaginary tech that might become a reality in the future.

    In the words of the deity of slashdot:

    "And thus he spaketh, 'there be nothing to see here, moveth thee along'. (Gospels of CommanderTaco IV)"

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
  6. Re:WTF? by mrbluze · · Score: 5, Insightful

    [It can] detect that your heartbeat has stopped

    Oh thanks. And am I going to be conscious when it tells me that? Talk about BSOD!

    Nobody is going to be walking around with freakin' defibrillator pads on their chest and a Microsoft Guardian Angel in their pocket.

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  7. Just wait for the blue screen... by Taelron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As it is I have a Windows Mobile "not-so" Smartphone from my work. Just like a PC I have to power it off or pull the battery and reboot it periodically or it acts up and crashes...

    If this ever gets made I can just see the news storys and lawsuits... Family sues Microsoft after daughters murder... Daughters Guardian Angel bluesceened while on a date with a serial murderer... Details at 11...

    And if its polling information on everyone you are around, just exactly what information is it sending about you back to Microsoft?

  8. Re:just great by dotancohen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft has a track record of trying to do things with computers that shouldn't really be done Microsoft has a track record of preventing progress in the computer industry.

    There, fixed that for you.
    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  9. Hmmm by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, it can display targeted advertisements and block spam? How long before it chokes on its contradictory orders and eliminates all humans?

    In all seriousness, though, we have got to do something about the "if it moves, advertise at it; if it doesn't move, advertise on it" culture we have growing. At this rate, the first people with mind control rays won't be the CIA spooks, it'll be Brainpoint Concepts Media, inc. and Your Dreams(tm), brought to you by Ambitrex.

  10. Inventors? by rastoboy29 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why grace them with the title "inventors", when they haven't actually made the thing.  They are science fiction writers, or futurists, at best.

    And since the thing is only an idea at this stage, does that make science fiction stories with similar ideas prior art?  My God what a mess the patent system is right now...nuke it.

    --
    expandfairuse.org
  11. Total invasion of privacy by willeyhill · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Almost all of the safety information it can serve should be public record except who the people around you are - which makes the device useless. Free software in phones, the RFID guardian and other good technology should come to the rescue if laws don't. Only Bill Gates would think he has a right to card and track everyone then sell the results to the highest bidder but that's where his EULAs go and the asymmetry of information access will errode your rights until there is nothing left. Transparency for public records that should be kept along with laws to protect privacy in public will make this abomination of a patent worthless if the patent office does not throw it out with all software and business method patents.

  12. Bunk by camperdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    SPAM is not so much a problem because of what it is...

    No, it is a problem because it is exactly what it is: Unsolicited messages. TV and Radio commercials are not spam. When I watch TV, I am not paying for the show. When I listen to the radio, I am not paying for the music. I get these feeds free because I am willing to listen to the ads on some level. Newspapers are partially subsidized by the ads, and some are completely subsidized. In all these cases, I get paid something for my attention.

    My inbox (and my phone for that matter) is a different thing, though. *I* pay for that communication channel, not the advertisers. It is supposed to be for my private use. If my ISP offered some sort of discount based on the number of ads I have to cope with, then fine. Until that happens, spam is a leeching evil blight. (Well, all ads are pretty much leeching evil blights, but spam is especially so, but with puss, and foul odours on top of it.)

    Spam, and telemarketing should be made illegal.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  13. Re:I call bullshit by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seeing as how Windows already works on 90% of the machines in the world.

    What do you mean 90%? Can it run on a PowerPC architecture? No. ARM? Not really (Ok, Windows mobile probably can but its not as much Windows as a new OS similar to Windows). SPARC? Nope. Can (current versions XP/Vista) run on old hardware? Not very well.

    Can Linux work on almost any CPU architecture known to mankind? Yes. Can it run on old hardware on current versions? Yes. Is it as easy to attack as Windows? No. Can (and does) Linux run on many cell phones? Yes. UMPCs? Yes.

    To say that Windows works on 90% of devices (and implying that Linux or any other OS has only a marginal lead) is false. Even game consoles can run Linux, most cannot run Windows (natively).
    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  14. Re:WTF? by LKM · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look at the bright side. Microsoft is too incompetent to implement something like this anyways, and the patent will prevent competent companies from implementing it. Thanks, Microsoft, from helping us avoid intrusive crap like this!

  15. Re:Slander and Libel charges should do the trick. by sorak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lawsuits and common sense should get rid of these devices. They are going to accuse people of horrible crimes with all the accuracy, security and correctness of Microsoft Windows.

    I could imagine the political controversy that would ensue.



    Plaintiff: That device keeps falsely accusing me of pedophilia.

    Hannity: Why should we believe you. You're a pedophile!

    Plaintiff: But I didn't do it.

    Hannity: How could you! They're children and you robbed them of their...

    Plaintiff: But I didn't do it.

    Hannity: with the groping and the touching and...



    If the Supreme Court doesn't stop it, then it will be controversial for a week and then be trusted unquestioningly.