Slashdot Mirror


Startup Wants To Peek Through Your Home's Wired Cameras

alphadogg writes "The little cameras in your home are multiplying. There are the ones you bought, perhaps your SLR or digital camera, but also those that just kind of show up in your current phone, your old phone, your laptop, your game console, and soon your TV and set-top box. Varun Arora, founder of startup GotoCamera in Singapore, wants you to turn them all on and let his company's algorithms analyze what they show, then sell the results as marketing data, in a sort of visual version of what Google and other firms do with search results and free email services."

50 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. Jennicam 2.0? by dtmos · · Score: 5, Informative

    Startup wants to peek through the wired cameras in your home, sell the data

    Wait, wait. Could we go back and cover the part about why I would want them to do this, again?

    1. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Its not what *you* want. It is what advertisers want. You are just the product being sold.

    2. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by mhajicek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For 2% off on up to 15 gallons of gas.

    3. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by Bieeanda · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You missed a step. First they need to come up with some incentive, let's call it a Judas goat, to sign on and let their programs sift through our pictures. This is a little more complicated than web bugs and tracking cookies, since it requires more effort on our part than logging into Facebook or searching through Google.

    4. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by berashith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      no kidding. do i get a free house or something?

    5. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by amiga3D · · Score: 2, Informative

      The way gas prices are headed that could add up to real money.

    6. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by sunderland56 · · Score: 5, Funny

      let's call it a Judas goat

      If they gave every user a goat, then they'd certainly come up with some footage to resell.

    7. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by NEDHead · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yessir. One free glass house coming up!

    8. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by Andrewkov · · Score: 2

      Judas goat? Perhaps if we built a large wooden badger..

    9. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah. What's in it for me, Mr. Arora? And don't say "Access to ads for products you actually want!" because I'm a grown-up and know how to find things I want*. Besides, I doubt your "targeted ads" are any better than clicking I'm Feeling Lucky and dumping my CC# into the first 16 digit field I find.

      I could be persuaded to let you watch me pick my nose at $1000 per frame, though. Otherwise, you and your startup can feck right off, sir.

      *Who are we trying to kid, anyway? As a married father of two teenage daughters, I already KNOW what ads would best target ME: late-night Tampax/Midol shops, Rue 21 and Banana Republic clothing stores, and any vendor at the mall selling shit that confuses me. You should pay my kids as if they were on your marketing staff; they already did your research for you, buddy.

    10. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 4, Funny

      If only it worked this way:

      Dear Sir,

      I would like to sign up for your offer of (robotic voice) FREE GOAT. I have been made to understand that FREE GOAT is both adorable and delicious..

      Please ship FREE GOAT overnight directly to my doorstep at your earliest convenience, for I have become hungry while typing this sign-up request.

      Thank you,

      Guy willing to let a FREE GOAT vendor know he likes FREE GOAT for a FREE GOAT.

    11. Re:Jennicam 2.0? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 3, Informative

      You missed a step. First they need to come up with some incentive, let's call it a Judas goat, to sign on and let their programs sift through our pictures.

      They already have - they've ripped off the government excuse - security. "Turn all your cameras on and be able to monitor everything." And if you do, they "give" you 1 gig of storage. (which they would need anyway to do any video datamining).

      And he wants the camera companies in on it - selling the cameras below cost in return for getting a kickback on the revenue stream.

      Can someone please take this retarded idea out behind the barn and shoot it?

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
  2. Startup Wants To Peek Through Your Home's Wired Ca by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Funny

    And ponies, too. Good luck with that...

  3. Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd trade pictures of myself in my underwear for a "free" console. For an added fee, I'll even put clothes on.

    1. Re:Good Idea by jjp9999 · · Score: 2

      Lol. I wonder how long it would take them to seriously regret looking through people's webcams.

    2. Re:Good Idea by bobcat7677 · · Score: 2

      Maybe there is a cross-marketing opportunity in there somewhere with that "People of Wal-Mart" site...?

    3. Re:Good Idea by GodInHell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably about 10 seconds after the first time they recorded and then looked at child porn (i.e. a nude "good" under the age of 18 in most U.S. states). That's a strict liability crime in most states. Also, makes you a registered sex offender.

    4. Re:Good Idea by KhabaLox · · Score: 5, Funny

      a printed picture of Goatse

      I read that as "a painted picture of Goatse." I thought, "You, Sir, are a connoisseur."

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  4. The offering to the user... by Neil_Brown · · Score: 5, Informative

    a startup that provides online storage and software for web and Wi-Fi cams

    Sadly omitted from the summary (albeit in the article) — the user gets "free" storage in exchange for the analytics.

    Far too little to convince me to share such data, though.

    1. Re:The offering to the user... by Mitchell314 · · Score: 2

      What are you talking about? It's a perfect exchange. I get free stuff at the price of being watched for about half an hour. After that, it's safe to assume who ever is watching has already gouged out one eye and is busy working on the other.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    2. Re:The offering to the user... by ohnocitizen · · Score: 5, Funny

      After a week of analytics they shifted their business model slightly. "We are now offering users cash money to keep their cameras turned off, in the name of basic decency, animal rights, and several reports recently published by the FDA. When we say our users are sick we being literal in the most precise and correct sense of the word."

    3. Re:The offering to the user... by mcmonkey · · Score: 2

      Sadly omitted from the summary (albeit in the article) — the user gets "free" storage in exchange for the analytics.

      AKA, the Google business plan.

      The only difference here is their transfer is 'pull' while Google waits for you to 'push' your life on to their servers.

    4. Re:The offering to the user... by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 2

      The information you provided means this cannot be a real thing that is happening; if it is I think my head just might implode.

      What it means is they want to watch us at all times using our own cameras, and in return they're offering, for our convenience, to snoop through our data. A few posts up we were talking about getting free goats for offering up constant home movies of ourselves. This is more like offering up constant home movies and, in return, getting a free goat that's constantly staring at you.

  5. Yeah right by Sean · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let a company spy on me constantly so it can make a profit by selling information about me? That sounds like a great deal for me. Where do I sign up?

    1. Re:Yeah right by twotacocombo · · Score: 5, Funny

      www.facebook.com

    2. Re:Yeah right by phrostie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      if ever there was a post that deserved a 6, this is it.

    3. Re:Yeah right by thegrassyknowl · · Score: 2

      try and find a way to force it on to people

      Like deals with Skype, Microsoft, or laptop makers (what laptop doesn't have a webcam these days), Sony (a lot of PS3s have EyeToy plugged in; slip something deep in the EULA for the upgrade making it nice and legal), etc. Ultimately, it's scary that these people are actually even suggesting this.

      It's more scary that there are a bunch of "I'm not doing anything I don't want them to know about, and I get free stuff"tards who will sign up for it. Now, I have to worry about going to visit people just because they may have signed up for this nonsense.

      --
      I drink to make other people interesting!
  6. Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2

    No company or "customer" could possibly be this stupid.

    1. Re:Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you give the common individual WAY too much credit. Just look how successful facebook is. :P

    2. Re:Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by grimmjeeper · · Score: 2

      Rarely has a business gone bankrupt because they underestimated the stupidity of the average consumer. There will be a large number of people who don't know enough or care about their privacy who will line up to get "free" storage.

    3. Re:Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by markana · · Score: 2

      You're new around here, aren't you? All they have to do is add some tangible, meaningless incentive for the customer and they'll have people signing up in droves. Free storage, free email, maybe a social site with some music and games - they'll get tons of takers. Add in some real prizes, say, a monthly random drawing for a car or a vacation, and stand back.

      The lesson of Facebook is - a very large number of people either don't value their privacy, or don't recognize when they're giving it away. They'll happily trade some potential future negative outcome for the shiny bauble here and now.

    4. Re:Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by Githaron · · Score: 2

      I can hand pick what information Facebook gets.

    5. Re:Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by amRadioHed · · Score: 2

      Can you perfectly control what everyone else says or does with information about you anywhere? This is not a Facebook problem, the solution is to find better friends.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    6. Re:Editors: This is March 1st, not April 1st by causality · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Can you perfectly control what everyone else says or does with information about you anywhere? This is not a Facebook problem, the solution is to find better friends.

      It would normally be difficult to aggregate and analyze all of that information in a single central place. At least without a court order. Facebook is a system designed to do just that, with no court order needed since you agreed to give them permission to the data. To ignore that obvious fact means you are either being dishonest or you're performing mental gymnastics to rationalize away legitimate concerns about Facebook, no doubt to dismiss the foolishness of using it. Otherwise it would be hard to continue doing so, which you fully intend to do.

      No, it's not difficult to see what's happening here and it's really transparent. You're just a different kind of fanboy and those pesky facts won't stop you. A Microsoft fanboy has to downplay the whole abuse of monopoly thing. An Apple fanboy has to downplay the disadvantages of walled gardens. You have to downplay the fact that the system is carefully designed to separate users from their privacy. That kind of selective blindness is a step towards psychosis, you know.

      Further, I appreciate the way I disagree with you, therefore I must have horrible friends (and by extension be a horrible person myself), but I tire of these little childish stabs that have no place in rational discourse. Facebook's privacy settings, even with friends who use them perfectly, don't stop Facebook and its marketers from analyzing data everyone posts to Facebook. My friends have the decency and self-respect not to betray my trust, but that's no good if I am communicating with them and the medium of communication itself is untrustworthy.

      In the case of using Facebook while desiring privacy, that's the situation. Thus, I don't use Facebook and neither do my friends. Isn't that so much easier than trying to perfectly control everybody else? When you don't use a system designed to violate privacy in the first place, suddenly there is no need for that.

      This is a problem quite unique to Facebook and systems like Facebook (such as MySpace before it, etc). Trying to generalize it the way you are doing in order to obfuscate that fact is beneath you, or should be.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  7. Re:GREAT!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're only conspiracy nutjobs till proven right. Then they are wise.

  8. Two sentence reponse: by fallen1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck you. No.

    Pardon me for being crude but - what are these nutjobs thinking? All it takes is someone in the household going "Sure, we'll do that!" and then little 15 year old Suzie walks by the camera on the way from her bathroom to her bedroom and *boom!* the company behind this has just analyzed child porn. Congrats!

    I cover up or disconnect all cameras in my home that might be turned on remotely for one simple reason -- it is my private home. Period. The end.

    --

    Dream as if you'll live forever.
    Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
    ~Anonymous~

    1. Re:Two sentence reponse: by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      I think the end result will be more like chat roulette. Nothing but guys showing their junk.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Two sentence reponse: by QuasiSteve · · Score: 5, Insightful

      [...] and then little 15 year old Suzie walks by the camera on the way from her bathroom to her bedroom and *boom!* the company behind this has just analyzed child porn

      Putting aside for a moment that perhaps such households should think for a moment before opting into such plans, I have to ask... ...what, exactly, would be wrong with that scenario?

      For one thing, it's not child pornography. The law may perhaps interpret it as such, especially if it ends up being treated as such by the person caught on camera / their legal guardians, but naked people walking in front of a camera does not necessarily pornography make.

      For another, my computer could be analyzing child pornography all day long every day of the week. Perhaps it's analyzing it to see if it's known pornography or new pornography. If it's new pornography, perhaps it's trying facial recognition to see if this is of a person whose case has already been handled, or that it may be a new case and should be flagged as such.

      But given that the system doesn't know what the material is in the first place, perhaps it's analyzing the picture, sees what looks like a human form, detects that either there's no clothing or the person happens to walk around in a wetsuit that matches their skin color, and either way decides to discard the data.
      The analyzing software may be much more interested in that bright rectangular surface called your TV to see what programs you watch.

      People are way, way too jumpy about this stuff. Next thing you know an adult can't go to a lake for a swim because there's also kids who like diving into the water and have issues keeping their bikini bottoms on* and you just might see that. Oh noes.

      It's different if that's the purpose of going swimming there in the first place, of course. Just as it would be different if one of the goals of this company would be to catch people naked (adults: blackmail, kids: CP market?), or if, as part of its operation, the material would be made available to third parties who in turn might have such motives.

      ( * apparently, that's a thing? Here, have a plug: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/525823883/swimwear-that-stays-put-made-locally-made-responsi )

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not opting into such a program anytime soon.. but the whole "what if it catches X doing Y!?" thing? Not the biggest problem with this by a long shot.

  9. Re:Startup Wants To Peek Through Your Home's Wired by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ponies and wireless cams?

    You pervert.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  10. Copy Machine by rullywowr · · Score: 2

    Sounds like we should give them the same image as one reproduces by sitting on the copy machine, sans trou.

  11. Analytics by paleo2002 · · Score: 2

    Sounds like a great deal, actually. I get free off-site storage and all I have to do it put little post-it notes over the webcams on my computers. I'd change the color each day, just to give their consumer data algorithm something different to look at. Only draw-back is the resulting spam email with offers for pills that will turn my penis yellow or electric blue.

  12. wow by squidflakes · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, if I got this then I could guarantee that all of my spam would be about weight loss, masturbation aids, and (naughty) maid services? I don't see the difference from my current crop of spam.

  13. Late to the party. by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    My botnet already does this. Except I don't sell marketing data to advertisers. Visit RealAmatuerTube.ru. /TongueInCheek

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  14. Strange times by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

    We very well may be heading toward an Orwellian future. Sadly we seem to be selling ourselves while making it happen more so than it being thrust upon us. I'm still dumbfounded by shows like the Jersey Shore, Kardasians, etc. These people are rich because they act like (or are) complete morons and do so in front of a camera. Then the masses happily do the same on Youtube for free. And now this. Lets' not forget the domestic drones and other cameras that have been slowly invading our privacy for years.

    I remember as a small child being creeped out thinking that the people on the television could see me the same as I could see them. It seems this could very well become reality soon.

    Weren't we supposed to have flying cars, no poverty, and shiny cities under glass domes on the moon to go along with the computers, "eyes in the sky", the police state, and video phones? Someone really screwed this up.

  15. No way dude. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you want to sell some porn, hire some actors you cheapskates.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  16. Exhibitionists rejoice. by Medievalist · · Score: 2

    I don't think these guys are going to get what they are looking for.

    Or maybe they are - if they are going to sell the data to Durex and Trojan...

  17. My company is working on a blocking technology. by Lashat · · Score: 2

    We are timing the product to launch at the same time these cameras become available. We are making it easier than ever to block intrusive cameras in your home.

    Look for our product out soon.

    Electrical Tape.

    --
    For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
  18. TFA says this is B2B by TheSpoom · · Score: 2

    For now, his company makes money by charging manufacturers for offering its services with their products, or from users that upgrade to extra storage. Currently most such cameras are USB-driven, but a new wave of cheap Wi-Fi models are on the way, and manufacturers like Samsung and Panasonic are putting them into TVs and other devices, mainly for motion control and video conferencing.

    "USB is a sunset industry" for cameras, Arora said. He showed off a tiny wireless camera from partner Trek 2000 International, about the size of a roll of film. It sells online for about US$65, and other manufacturers will soon launch for less than $50. Unlike USB models, Wi-Fi cameras don't need to be plugged into a computer or network, and usually just require a power source, which makes them ideal for security and monitoring.

    As the prices of such devices fall, manufacturers will be squeezed, and GotoCamera proposes to provide a portion of the online fees it receives back to them, a rare ongoing revenue stream he compares to disposable blades for shaving razors, that must be continually purchased.

    "What we say to them is, 'Please accept that you're a commodity, and let us bring the Gillette model to you,'" Arora said.

    Their primary audience seems to be camera manufacturers, not users. The indirect offer to consumers seems to be, "buy this camera at a discount and in exchange we get access to its video feed."

    Which is not enough to make me buy one, but hey, maybe it's enough for others. Or it'll just be in the fine print and people won't know about it.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  19. "Please accept that you're a commodity..." by idontgno · · Score: 4, Informative

    Did he really just say that?

    Did he just call me a fungible mass material, like pork bellies and orange juice? Am I going to be traded as futures at the Chicago Board of Trade?

    My God. He just called us sheep. No, not even sheep. Less than sheep. Meat. Raw materials. Resources, in the most over-the-top insulting reading of "Human Resources" possible.

    Wow. I guess some people have no subtlety. And no shame. And scum like this wants to turn the world into the largest episode of The Prisoner ever.

    Let me reiterate. I am not a number. I am a free man.

    I must respectfully decline your intriguing offer. I will not be subscribing to your newsletter.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  20. Eventual law enforcement aid? by Mundefined · · Score: 2

    So you've purchased a cellphone with microphone, video camera and GPS capability. And you've also purchased an extremely high-powered computing device to play games on that, coincidentally, has high-powered voice-processing and surveillance capabilities (e.g. Xbox360 w/kinect). On neither of these devices do you have admin/root privileges. And both of them have been shown to connect to their "home" manufacturers/owners and send back data periodically.

    So... suppose law enforcement decides to publish their Top 10 Wanted to both of these manufacturers with the understanding that all capable devices will periodically scan for known voice patterns and/or facial patterns and report back findings. Nothing technically impossible about this.

    So... once it becomes ridiculously cheap to store this data... why not scan continuously under the guise of "homeland security"? Characteristics can include people with long beards, dark skin, particular languages, what-have-you.

    But you may be thinking... "I have nothing to hide. If a company is willing to buy me a camera/game/etc they can watch me all they want." Recall... there's a difference between having nothing to hide and having nothing to show.