Slashdot Mirror


Speech-Jamming Gun Silences From 30 Meters

MrSeb writes "Japanese researchers have created a hand-held gun that can jam the words of speakers who are more than 30 meters (100ft) away. The gun has two purposes, according to the researchers: At its most basic, this gun could be used in libraries and other quiet spaces to stop people from speaking — but its second application is a lot more chilling. The researchers were looking for a way to stop 'louder, stronger' voices from saying more than their fair share in conversation. The paper reads: 'We have to establish and obey rules for proper turn-taking when speaking. However, some people tend to lengthen their turns or deliberately interrupt other people when it is their turn in order to establish their presence rather than achieve more fruitful discussions. Furthermore, some people tend to jeer at speakers to invalidate their speech.' In other words, this speech-jamming gun was built to enforce 'proper' conversations."

31 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Big Brother is speaking by sandytaru · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Silence, peon. Your must wait your turn. And not yell. If you speak out of turn or too loudly, you will be muted.

    --
    Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    1. Re:Big Brother is speaking by Tom+Womack · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This strikes me as an almost perfectly cliched Japanese technical solution to a social problem: you cannot accept the loss of face that would be involved in telling your minion Mr Akusake to shut up indicating that you do not have the degree of control over Mr Akusake that your relative positions would indicate, or the unspeakable loss of status that would be implied if you told your minion Mr Akusake to shut up and he didn't, but you can point the shutting-up machine at him and cause him to shut up.

      Loud people dominating conversations is undeniably an actual social problem, and this is an actual technical solution to it.

    2. Re:Big Brother is speaking by Defenestrar · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Silence, peon"?! Dude, think of the children! I mean seriously, think of the awesome power of this tool when used on children. Screaming in the back seat? Being asked a third time for candy before dinner? Grocery store tantrums that everyone notices? Not anymore!

      This is probably the best parenting tool to come along since the willow reed or the TV!

      On another note - this thing looks like it could be bypassed with the simple expedient of plugging your ears while speaking. If you wanted to get all technical with countermeasures, it'd be interesting to see what constructive interference does to mute the loud inconvenient person

  2. Let me say this about it ... by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 5, Funny

    "This is totally ....."

    --
    Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    1. Re:Let me say this about it ... by Phreakiture · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Having read how it works, I can tell you that being focused is enough to overcome this. It doesn't drown you out; it doesn't mute you. What it does is return your words to you about 200ms later so that you are dealing with a terribly strong reverse echo. This has a psychological effect on the speaker.

      By focusing, you can overcome it. I know this for a fact, because, as an A/V tech and DJ, I have spoken into a PA system that had a compressor on it, which compressor introduced about the same amount of delay. Even as I watched other people struggle with it when it was their turn to speak, I had no problems taking the mic and speaking, as long as I focused on what I was saying and ignored the feedback. (For the record, I used that compressor exactly once. It wasn't intended for PA use, but for broadcast, where the latency wouldn't have mattered.)

      If you can keep yourself focused on what it is you have to say, you can overcome this quite easily.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  3. Is this new? by drooling-dog · · Score: 5, Funny

    Conventional firearms have been effective at silencing speakers for centuries. Do we really need this?

  4. see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If conversation fails, people escalate to violence.
    If bigbro wields this against the masses, a riot's going to erupt. Might as well go straight for the teargas and flashbangs.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except this isn't about the conversation, this is about people trying to drowned out the conversation.

      Screaming at someone while they are trying to talk is not a conversation.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not really.

      If you've ever been in a discussion where, lets see, say, part of the group was motivated by political or personal interests and ... oh lets just make something up... maybe the rest of the team was ummmm technical in nature, and just wanted to solve the problem... and didn't care if Johhny's cousin sponsors a great product that we could hack into our system vs actually chosing the correct technology...

      very often when logic and actual reason fail, people resort to loud repetition... see the concept of branding (a marketing concept) if you don't believe me, its a billion dollar industry based around brainwashing people by loud repetitive messages.... with no bearing on you know... reality.

      This is a tool.

      The same way a SWAT team is a tool.

      both can silence voices.

      both have appropriate uses.

      its up to us to be responsible, and if we can't then we deserve to burn.

    3. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by iamgnat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except this isn't about the conversation, this is about people trying to drowned out the conversation.

      Do you really think this technology won't be abused to silence disenting opinions in a conversation even if it is being delivered in a calm and well thought out manner? I don't buy into the "big brother" mass usage, but stuff like this is ALWAYS abused.

      Hell, the RIAA will probably want to use it at concerts to prevent people from "violating their IP" by singing along...

    4. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by Yetihehe · · Score: 5, Funny

      Silencing guns don't silence people. People silence people.</sarcasm>

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    5. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      very often when logic and actual reason fail, people resort to loud repetition

      Sounds like every protest group I've ever seen, and their cute sloganeering.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    6. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

      - John F. Kennedy, 1962

    7. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by pavon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Screaming at someone while they are trying to talk is not a conversation.

      But that is exactly what this device does. It literally interrupts and screams down someone who is trying to speak by repeating their own words back at them. It is just a technical implementation of what the conversation abusers were already doing.

    8. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by next_ghost · · Score: 5, Informative

      Except that sticking fingers into your ears while speaking will render that gun useless.

    9. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by kubernet3s · · Score: 5, Funny

      Useless as the weird dystopian weapon you are trying to make it out to be. Useful for moderating debates and designated quiet areas? Yes. If you wear earplugs into a library just so you can talk loudly, you're a jackass, not the inventors

    10. Re:see, here's the fatal flaw with this idea... by phiwum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have no doubt that non-racists can dislike Obama, and I reckon the majority of Tea Party members are not racist.

      Now, how about some evidence for your claims that:

      (1) Some or many of the racist signs at Tea Party events were the product of liberals trying to discredit the movement and
      (2) The media has removed black people from images of Tea Party rallies.

      Just 'cause, you know, anyone can say anything.

      --
      Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
  5. Not really a speech jammer by parlancex · · Score: 4, Informative

    According TFA all the "jammer" does is play back a copy of your speech delayed by 0.2 seconds, akin to being annoyed by loud echo on a VoIP phone or Skype conversation. While echo can sometimes be annoying when it interrupts yourself, it is fairly easy to adjust if you've done it before and talk over yourself. Because the gun features both a directional microphone and directional speaker, if you can comfortably talk over yourself everyone else will hear you just fine, sans echo.

    1. Re:Not really a speech jammer by snowgirl · · Score: 4, Informative

      According TFA all the "jammer" does is play back a copy of your speech delayed by 0.2 seconds, akin to being annoyed by loud echo on a VoIP phone or Skype conversation. While echo can sometimes be annoying when it interrupts yourself, it is fairly easy to adjust if you've done it before and talk over yourself. Because the gun features both a directional microphone and directional speaker, if you can comfortably talk over yourself everyone else will hear you just fine, sans echo.

      Looking up Delayed Auditory Feedback, it's been long used to help stutterers to produce fluent speech. It causes them to speak slower, but they also speak more fluently.

      I'm with you, this does not actually stop speaking, it just makes it annoying and stressful to speak, but a lot of people won't suffer any impairment in dominating a conversation even with this device.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  6. Three hurras for the STFUgun! by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hip! hip! H....

  7. Not as cool as hyped... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was disappointed to see that it doesn't create some kind of actual interference, but rather just gives them a local echo of themselves and creates a psychological effect. This can easily be overcome with practice. If you've ever announced in a gym or a stadium, you get the same effect and get used to it quickly.

  8. So it's basically a mute button for people? by Millennium · · Score: 4, Funny

    There's a Nobel prize waiting for the person who invents a way to use this over the Internet. Possibly the Nobel Peace Prize itself.

  9. The Obligatory XKCD by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  10. Re:Umm by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having worked with different types of audio equipment my entire life I can assure you that this effect is real.

    However, depending on the delay it might not "shut you up" completely. It can make you slur or not be able to form words. You can get stuck on a single syllable because your brain says you haven't finished it.

    So, no, it doesn't sound just like simple feedback or echo.

  11. Re:Umm by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interesting. I worked phone support for a company, and their systems would occasionally do this. The delay was anywhere from a fraction of a second to a couple seconds, randomly for each call it happened to. It is really, really annoying, but I always assumed it made me stop talking because I was trying to be polite to the customer and when I hear a voice from their end, I'd stop and listen.

    It took me about a week to learn to just keep talking when I heard my own voice, and not someone else's.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  12. Won't work with politicians by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Funny

    They like to hear themselves talk too much.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  13. Re:Umm by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Funny

    I used to do this to co-workers at the music store I worked at many, many years ago. Make a bet that they can't say the alphabet, put a set of headphones on them, run it through a digital delay set to 150 ms or so, then sit back and listen to them sound like a speech-impaired two-year-old. :-)

    --
    Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  14. Getting used to it by DrYak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Same phenomenon :
    - for people used to do VoIP over shitty connection with a correspondant lacking echo cancellation (where you get a smiliar delayed echo). The first few days, you might be distrubed by the delayed echo. Afterward you just start ignoring it.
    - for people who've learned not to rely on auditory feedback when speaking (like simultaneous speech translators: they use sound blocking earphones to hear to source material, and speak the translation into a sound-proof recording mask, to avoid creating noise interference to other translator in neighbooring booths. Thus they are used to speak without any auditory feedback).
    - for deaf or hard-hearing persons who've lost the auditory feedback since long time ago.

    They too will be unaffected by this device, just like you probably aren't due to your training with shitty phone links.

    The only way to effectively silence a conversation would be using destructive interferrences (playing the conversation back in-sync but with opposite phase, to cancel out the noise).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  15. Japanese conversation style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember reading an article a few years ago called "Conversational Ballgames" by an english-speaking woman who became fluent in Japanese while in residence there. She describes her difficulty fitting in to conversation patterns even after she was "fluent" until she learned that social expectations of the conversation differed across cultures. She compares western-style conversation to volleyball or tennis, a match where you bat back and forth the same ball with a partner -- whereas Japanese conversation reflects more a game of bowling. She explains the game:

    "A Japanese-style conversation, however, is not at all like tennis or volleyball, it’s like bowling. You wait for your turn, and you always know your place in line. It depends on such things as whether you are older or younger, a close friend or a relative stranger to the previous speaker, in a senior or junior position, and so on.

    The first thing is to wait for your turn, patiently and politely. When your moment comes, you step up to the starting line with your bowling ball, and carefully bowl it. Everyone else stands back, making sounds of polite encouragement. Everyone waits until your ball has reached the end of the lane, and watches to see if it knocks down all the pins, or only some of them, or none of them. Then there is a pause, while everyone registers your score.

    Then, after everyone is sure that you are done, the next person in line steps up to the same startling line, with a different ball. He doesn’t return your ball. There is no back and forth at all. And there is always a suitable pause between turns. There is no rush, no impatience."

    Here's a link to the essay: http://books.google.com/books?id=EhAYIyaeuz8C&pg=PA454&lpg=PA454#v=onepage&q&f=false

    The reasoning given by the researchers for the need to silence someone (while still chilling) comes into context for me when I think of them trying to harmonize a game of bowling. I can see them pointing their silence gun at rowdy american-like bowlers butting into the lane when it isn't their turn, distracting the bowler on deck, and scooping the ball off the lane before it reaches the pins!

  16. Easy workaround by sarysa · · Score: 4, Informative

    I read TFA and there seems to be a really easy workaround, and politicians making speeches can easily utilize it.

    The speaker can simply block their ears. The gun works by sending the speaker's audio back to them with a delay.

    --
    Charisma is the measure of someone's ability to lie with a straight face.
    1. Re:Easy workaround by camperslo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The speaker can simply block their ears. The gun works by sending the speaker's audio back to them with a delay.

      Ahhh yes... people that listen to themselves delayed tends to slow down to nothing and stop. It messes up people on call-in talk radio, and some in radio too. People in broadcasting often listen to themselves as heard on the air in headphones and there many be a significant delay when net latency and satellite links are in the loop. They learn to cope, but it isn't easy. Even phase flippers can drive a person nuts. Voice is rich in even harmonics due to a lack of symmetry in the waveform which has a spikier character in one direction. In a.m. broadcasting some audio processing gear senses the stronger peaks and on the fly inverts the signal to make the higher level modulate the a.m. carrier up to 125% modulation. The signal can't go below nothing when the audio is reducing the r.f. envelope, but there's no limit other than an arbitrary regulation in the other direction. Anyway, an announcer hears a combination of his voice directly and what comes through the headphones, and the combination is awful when the phases don't agree. It jumping back and forth is torture for them. But if they listen to unprocessed audio, they don't have as good a feel for the mix so they usually endure.
      And people thought only the audience was tortured by radio...