Slashdot Mirror
Kinect: You Are the Controlled
theodp writes "GeekWire reports on a newly-surfaced Microsoft patent application for 'Targeting Advertisements Based on Emotion', which describes how information gleaned from Kinects, webcams, online games, IMs, email, searches, webpage content, and browsers could be used to build an 'Emotional State Database' of individuals' emotions over time for advertisers to tap into. From the patent application: 'Weight-loss product advertisers may not want their advertisement to appear to users that are very happy. Because, a person that is really happy, is less likely to purchase a self-investment product that leverages on his or her shortcomings. But a really happy person may purchase electronic products or vacation packages. No club or party advertisers want to appear when the user is sad or crying. When the user is emotionally sad, advertisements about club parties would not be appropriate and may seem annoying or negative to the user. Online help or technical support advertisers want their advertisements to appear when the user is demonstrating a confused or frustrated emotional state.'"
Why am I thinking of the old Clippy cartoon, "You look like you are writing a suicide note..." and now with ads for rope, guns, cheap Canadian pharmacies...
If Kinect can see my enraged expression at yet another ad with loud, obnoxious music peddling something I've not the slightest interest in and show a different one I'd be happy... or to be more precise, less angry.
If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
Class 201: The Dark Ages
Today we examine the early 21st century nation state once referred to as “America” but now classified as the Dark Age. The political and financial manipulation practiced on the masses then was through a deftly controlled network of so-called think tanks, foundations, research centers and pre-positioned academics.
An excellent example would be a pseudo-educational complex, MIT, later bombed and razed during the Revolution of 2023 (see Mbotu and Heineman, Zeno ScholarGrid, circa 2045), where academics referred to as “economists” would spread propaganda and misinformation while pretending to represent the interests of the people.
One academic poseur, whose position was financed by the military-intel firm, Mitre, would mislead and confuse on labor economics. Another academic poseur, whose position was financed through a series of phantom foundations by the oligarch, the family known as the Rockefellers, would mix truth and fiction, confusing and bewildering the masses while claiming that his backers, the Rockefellers, had given away their fortune through philanthropy.
These were dark times, indeed!
The same political henchmen and women would continue to re-surface in presidential administration through presidential administration, from the Carter administration through Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush (the son of the previously mentioned Bush – evidently some type of quasi-dynastic rule?), Obama and Mueller; difficult to believe so many were so easily duped, but literacy was at an all-time low during the Dark Age.
The ruling oligarchs of that period had succeeded in hiding their ownership and wealth, and the populace strangely enough appeared to remain incurious as to who exerted control over their daily lives.
Many routinely believed the political lackeys and servants of the oligarchs were actually in control – difficult as that may be to accept today – that was the reality in that era. (See Rule by the Hegemon, Chao and Zuma, circa 2051).
“Class, please review Chapter 17: Mind Control Through Cloud Computing and Social Networking for next week.”
[Soft tones signal end of session]
Note: Futura Fantasia was the name Ray Bradbury gave his high school newspaper which he published frequently during his later school years.
Ray Bradbury
1920-2012
Rest In Peace, Oh Mighty and Eloquent Wordsmith.
Just another detail in the race to implement constant commercial surveillance of everybody's home and another reason to opt-out of this technical innovation.
A few more of the stories and the idea of being watched by your TV will seem normal. But not acceptable to me or anybody who cares even slightly about privacy.
Here's a new idea: Turn that Kinect or other camera around and point it at a video feed that comes from somewhere else. Say I want to watch cerain kinds of ads. I substitute the video feed from the Kinect (or Sanyo or whatever device) with a video stream designed to elicit the kinds of ads I want to see. It never actually sees me. It sees old Leave it to Beaver reruns, or Scooby Doo episodes. Whatever you want. Or turn it around and show it the program that it's sending you right now. That would be an interesting experiment in itself. Would it settle into one of a number of stable advertising states?
Am I the only one who is tempted to put duct tape on everything with a camera on it? We have curtains to keep people from peeking in. Why do we accept total strangers to watch us, analyze us and 'target' us with advertizing crap?!?
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
I'd be more willing to pay attention to this news if the history of "targeted advertising" hadn't been so wonderfully, idiotically, shit. Perhaps a Microsoft offering like this might just achieve something worthwhile, but I'm not holding my breath. Let's see how the much-vaunted personalisation algos are these days:
I splash my personal browsing habits and general information all over the web (I don't even log out of FB most of the time) yet I have never been aware of anything other than random, pathetically irrelevant ads. As of writing, I have my Gmail open in another tab and I'm looking at an automated mail from Spotify that says "Anna just joined Spotify" - Anna is a friend of mine. Now, what do you think the mighty Google might be selecting, given that it knows lots and lots about me, and reads all my emails numbering tens of thousands? Tadaa!! "How To Declare Bankruptcy" and "Easy Web Site Builder". WFT? I'm not even self-employed, have never been in fact, and tons of my emails deal with subjects such as Apache and MySQL (I maintain a small little server for my friends). Why the hell would I want an easy web site built?
Maybe that was atypical. Let's try another. Here's one from a recruitment agent asking me about a job in user experience (I'm a designer). Google decides to show me these: "Gap Year Placements" and "Doctors in hot demand" - Huh?? I'm not a student!! I'm not a doctor!! Does Google know NOTHING about me after over five years of intensive Gmail use??
I dunno, maybe if I was a one-eyed teenage porno extra or something, I might be seeing relevant stuff in my datasphere, but right now it's just not happening.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
Where controller controls ME?
Well, as long as you're going to be shown ads, you might as well
That's a defeatist attitude. Settling for less is the reason why we have a progressively less free, and less private society, and why people with power (influence & money, which is really money and money) continue to abuse people without consequence.
I refuse.
Advertisements are an abomination and only serve as an affront to an advanced and intellectual society. There is no amount of money, or shiny, that will get me to participate in such offensive and vapid wastes of time.
So I can't watch sports anymore because it is a screen full of advertisements. Big deal. If I really liked the sport so damned much... I could get off my ass and go do it. The only difference between me and NASCAR are the police who object to me driving like that.
So I can't purchase new consoles that want to destroy me freedom (specifically peaceful enjoyment of property) and take away my privacy so they can make even more money. Big freakin deal. There will be plenty of open source alternatives (Humble Bundle aint bad) and given enough time, technology like Kinect will be developed by competitors, hacked, and applied to open source alternatives that don't exploit you.
So I can't watch TV anymore. Yeah.... *huge* loss there. I have been set free since I stopped watching TV nearly 10 years ago. There are a couple of shows that I am interested in and I just pirate the web releases that have no commercials and no overlays during the programming itself. Pay for Netflix and purchase DVD box sets when I really like a show.
So I can't stand outside my car when I fill up with gas because those asshats want to put in 30 display screens playing advertisements WITH sound blaring. Fine, fuck-em. I get back in my car and turn on the music a little louder and relax till the indicator says it has stopped filling up.
So I can't get a magazine anymore. Big Whoop. The quality of journalism has plummeted into the depths of the sewer system since I grew up anyways. Far better off just purchasing a book that will have far more detailed information and analysis about a topic than a vapid, attention-getting-whore of a journalistic attempt in some paper.
So I can't listen to the radio anymore. Well that's a dying format anyways. A couple of dollars a month and I get commercial free music and programming at my fingertips, with premium options giving me more on demand control.
So I don't have a usable mailbox anymore because junk mail advertisers fill it up in 2 days with useless and environmentally unsustainable advertising. Solved that more than 10 years ago with a single private mailbox store that filters all presort class mail into the recycle bin for me.
So I can't surf the web anymore like I did when it was first created. Yeah.. that one did not affect me all that much since I was doing my best effort from the start to defeat tracking and prevent advertisements from hitting my screen at all. It is very rare that I encounter one now.
So I can't just allow anybody to email me anymore. I run my own mail server. A couple thousand aliases and counting. Anytime a single piece of SPAM makes it to the inbox (which made it past the filters and RBL's) I just destroy the alias and deliver a new one to the source if I deem it appropriate. My business cards have a random prefix plus my name that I print out. Makes it easier to manage.
In about another 10 years or so I will seriously consider a Kickstarter like project to create augmented reality glasses that can remove all advertisements from my field of view. Granted, that is quite problematic and has serious philosophical and societal implications, but let's face it, by then it will be all out techno-war for your attention and any hope at a peaceful quite life of intellectual pursuits will hinge upon your ability to tune out the massive amount of noise corporations want to throw at you.
Never give up. Never surrender. Plenty of options.. including the best move... not to play.
What about not showing me yet another Geico advertisement when I get angry every time I see their logo, reinforcing my negative feelings from years back when they ripped me off, which I am reminded of every time I watch their commercials and which I would likely forget about otherwise after those 11 years. Good job Geico. Same goes for other companies.
If you got a tech to judge my emotional state, don't judge it before the ad, judge the way I react to it and if its a strongly negative one (annoyed, angry, frustrated), just stop the ad right away. If its bored, I'd probably seen it and still remember so no need to watch more than 5s spot, since you already reminded me of the product, so safe to stop that as well, but maybe not remove from circulation like in the former case.
Also, ad delivery networks should understand that they are damaging their own brand by consistently showing me ads from companies I hate with passion. They get to share the feelings by association. So since every other ad on Hulu is from Geico, they managed to change their image from a favorite service to a place I dread to go and would rather pay for the content if available than to watch it on Hulu with stupid Geico ads. Good job on ignoring my 250 nos on the "Is this ad relevant?" question, Hulu. Bravo.
Just my 2c
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
You're not going to be successful if you're doing it in front of a mirror. What you really need is to buy my video on how to look smart. It's only $49.95. Call now--operators are standing by!
"Well, as long as you're going to be shown ads, you might as well filter them,"
Why? My internet has been AD-Free for years. There have been tons of choices for ad blocking. Heck some of the recent ones even strip ad's from YouTube.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
That's a defeatist attitude.
No, actually it isn't. What I'm talking about is the opportunity to turn "an affront to an advanced and intellectual society" into something actually informative. For me, the ideal advertisement is just like a tech site. Like Slashdot, for example. I learned about the Raspberry Pi here, and that's a product I'm interested in. Ideally, you'd only see advertising that you actually wanted to. And there are many that you do want to see, unless you make no monetary transactions whatsoever. I'd be interested in learning about places that offer organic vegetables nearby. I like to know which tech gizmos are being launched. Why should I shun out ads completely? Their current form is the problem. They are intrusive because they are competing with every other ad in existence, and stupid because they have little time to do so and people are plain uninterested in them (mainly because they are instrusive and stupid). I'll say it again: they can be made into something actually helpful. The fact that a lot of people can't see it says a lot about the low they have reached.
Never give up. Never surrender. Plenty of options.. including the best move... not to play.
Again: we shouldn't be declaring war on advertising. Not even in a metaphor. It's nonsensical and infeasible. Unless they simply die from continued bad of ROI due to lack of interest from the general public, you'll be fighting a useless fight. That isn't fighting, by the way, in any way, shape or form. It's just shunning out things that annoy you. Using an ad blocker, not listening to the radio, getting grumpy when you see an outdoor etc. is hardly taking arms against a sea of troubles. Actively working to make ads either better or obsolete could perhaps be viewed as a struggle of some sort, but what you're doing is more akin to a spoiled kid shutting his eyes, plugging his ears and screaming.
No, actually it isn't. What I'm talking about is the opportunity to turn "an affront to an advanced and intellectual society" into something actually informative. For me, the ideal advertisement is just like a tech site. Like Slashdot, for example. I learned about the Raspberry Pi here, and that's a product I'm interested in. Ideally, you'd only see advertising that you actually wanted to. And there are many that you do want to see, unless you make no monetary transactions whatsoever. I'd be interested in learning about places that offer organic vegetables nearby. I like to know which tech gizmos are being launched. Why should I shun out ads completely? Their current form is the problem. They are intrusive because they are competing with every other ad in existence, and stupid because they have little time to do so and people are plain uninterested in them (mainly because they are instrusive and stupid). I'll say it again: they can be made into something actually helpful. The fact that a lot of people can't see it says a lot about the low they have reached.
You're not talking about advertising.
You specifically came to Slashdot. Slashdot offered a review of the Raspberry Pi. It contained detailed technical specifications, examples of how it could be used, price comparisons with Arduino, Interesting, Insightful, and Informative comments from other users.
If you want to know about places that offer organic vegetables near you, you can go to a website similar to Slashdot that will offer reviews and directions.
Advertising is about manipulation and deception, and anytime accurate or relevant information has been imparted, it is only a consequence of law, and the minimum amount possible.
Advertising is also most objectionable when it actively interferes and interrupts with an activity. I don't give a flying fuck if I *LOVE* organic vegetables, don't fucking put an overlay up on my TV programming to tell me. Wait till I actively search out for food, and even then, don't manipulate me. Just give me the cold hard facts, because I asked for them.
Again: we shouldn't be declaring war on advertising. Not even in a metaphor. It's nonsensical and infeasible
Wrong on all counts.
1) We should be declaring war against anything that is an affront to common decency and intelligence. Advertising is about active manipulation and deceit for profit. Nothing about that is useful or beneficial to society in any way, shape, or form.
2) Nonsensical. How? It has an intelligent meaning. To avoid information that is purposefully deceitful and manipulative. It is also neither ridiculous or unreasonable to want to distance yourself from such unworthy material as it only cheapens your existence and is a waste of your mental faculties. A person actively avoiding such a nuisance would seem to be exhibiting good judgement.
3) Infeasible. Incorrect. I have removed the majority of advertisements from my life, and it has saved me money and time. I no longer spend over $100 per month on a content distribution system that cares nothing for my desires as a customer and only presents me as a product to the true customers. I am not bereft of digital content either. A plethora of books, music, and movies is at my fingertips on my terms, and 99.9% of the time it is legal! .
you'll be fighting a useless fight.
Far from useless. I'm winning. How many advertisements have I seen in the last 10 years? Practically none. How many have they tried to show me? Probably tens of thousands. In all honesty, it is most likely Advertisers 452, Me 1,124,198 over the last 10 years.
That isn't fighting, by the way, in any way, shape or form. It's just shunning out things that annoy you.
As opposed to allowing things that annoy me to continue to annoy me and stay close to me?
It's
Then it comes down to a disagreement over what a term means. Advertising, in practice, is in discordance with your definition. My definition, OTOH, fits perfectly.
That's fine, let's not make it about right or wrong definitions. I understand the concept you are trying to present and agree that it is vastly preferable to the current offering.
However, targeted advertisements will not take advantage of the fact I am looking for a cellphone and offer me reviews and technical data. It will be more vapid, manipulative, and deceitful media not designed to inform, but to get me to react and agree to their call to action.
It's really quite funny. I mean, I understand what you are saying, but it is not in reality.
Your preferred version of reality: Hey, dog. I have something over here that is nutritious, weighs x amount, tastes like a reasonable facsimile of bacon. It may, or may not contain, toxic substances from our dubiously sourced suppliers in China, where as you know, they eat you.
Reality: Look whats over here! I got Bacon! It's BACON! Come get it mother fucker! Come get it!
Even for someone like you, they could send offers of greatly priced earplugs and blindfolds for when you have to go out.
Cute. I am paying far too much attention to the women around me to notice bill boards, have music for earplugs (advanced solution), and can walk away from most areas that get too fucking annoying. For instance, I wholly stopped shopping at Walgreens the first time a motion activated advertisement started screaming at me about the product on the shelf right next to it. Fuck that noise. I don't need blindfolds and earplugs for that. Just don't walk into a Walgreens.
As for your rationale that you're winning, I can't really follow. You seem to think that, somehow, the advertising industry is keeping a score or something.
OMG. LMFAO.
They are keeping score. It's called Metrics and ROI. How else do you think those big firms justify their existence in the first place? There is actual data that shows the effectiveness of advertising.
I'm winning, quite simply, because my goal is to remove advertising from my life and their goal is to forcibly inject advertisement into my life. As well as collect data on me that violates the level of privacy I find desirable.
There you go. I'm winning and will continue to do so.
Your lofty idea that advertising can change, despite the privacy implications of targeted advertising is supremely cute. Cute, like believing in Santa Claus kind of cute.
So I can't stand outside my car when I fill up with gas because those asshats want to put in 30 display screens playing advertisements WITH sound blaring. Fine, fuck-em. I get back in my car and turn on the music a little louder and relax till the indicator says it has stopped filling up.
Speaking of freedom: unfortunately, you can't do that in many states, since quite a few have outlawed the nice catches that would hold the gas pump trigger until the tank was full (at least at self-service pumps -- the full-service guys still get to use these "advanced technologies").
Those of you in southern states may not mind this as much, but when you're trying to fill up with a subzero wind chill in a northern climate and forgot your gloves that day (because otherwise you spend so little time outdoors in your commute that your pockets work fine for the rest of the day), this is NOT a fun experience. I don't even need to get back in my car: I'd just like to put my hands in my pockets, for gosh sake. (I'll happily discharge any static wherever you want me to after participating in that dangerous behavior, which the full-service guys get the privilege to do.)
On a particularly cold day, I even saw a guy take a sort of short bungie cord thing he had rigged up and wrap it around the gas pump trigger -- just so he could get back in his car. Yeah... that's the kind of behavior we want to encourage.
All this because in the few refueling fires that have occurred, in something like 1/3 of cases, people returned to their cars while pumping, and the going theory (just a theory, mind you, not strong empirical testing) is that these people built up static electricity which caused the fuel to ignite.
Anyhow -- if it's so freaking dangerous, why not put a huge sign on the gas pump: "THE SURGEON GENERAL SAYS: DO NOT RETURN TO YOUR CAR WHILE FUELING OR YOU WILL DIE!" or whatever. I know there are small signs with this information buried on gas pumps, but if it's so darn dangerous, why not make the warning stronger? After all, I've definitely seen many scenarios where family members are "tag-teaming" during the gassing up, and even without the convenient trigger lock apparatus, it's very easy for someone to exit the car to come assist or talk to the person pumping the gas and theoretically discharge static electricity...