Slashdot Mirror
Apple Patents Polluting Facebook, Google Profiles
theodp writes "On Tuesday, the USPTO granted Apple an odd patent on Techniques to Pollute Electronic Profiling, which presumably might concern the targeted ad revenue-hungry folks at Google, Facebook, and LinkedIn (and their investors). The patent, apparently assigned to Apple from Novell, is designed to thwart 'dataveillance techniques from automated Litter Brothers,' including lawful targeted and aggressive marketing tactics. Creating cloned identities that are 'intentionally populated with divergent information [e,g., fake phone numbers, email accounts, credit or debit card accounts],' explains the patent, 'circumvents the reliability and usefulness of dataveillance used by network eavesdroppers and effectively provides greater privacy over the network to principals.'"
has a patent for lying and fooling people?
So yesterday, we see how Steve Jobs wanted all of Google's products to be integrated with Google+, presumably so that they could make things more relevant through social interactions. Then today comes the Apple patent for polluting a social profile and making that information useless. I guess his strategy of "going thermonuclear war" is still alive...
Makes me wonder if this is evil or good.
Evil because it's fucking with Google. This is squarely a jab to google's breadbasket. If WWDC wasn't a big "fuck you" to google, this certainly is.
Good because this is anonymity to the next level. Defeating snooping from big business to try to sell us shit we don't need.
Evil though because this idea should belong to everyone.
TBH, I'm surprised the EFF didn't figure this one out sooner.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Facebook buys a facial recognition system.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18506255
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I have been doing this for over a decade. I claim Prior Art.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Lying TO the customer I do not appreciate, Lying FOR the customer does interest me.
I guess the idea is that if there are patents, then Friends of Privacy is delayed for 20 years. Sorry, Vernor, but it'll happen some day. That's why you write about the future, because patents mean the next 20 years always has to suck.
The founders were clever to put that into the constitution:
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Skimmed through the patent and all I can figure out is that our master profile stays the same, but you will have a bunch of fake ones. This does not give you a whole lot of privacy to the user since you are still tied to the master, but makes it harder for facebook/google to created targeted ads and make it harder for someone to find the real you. Unless you are actively using all these clones then Big Brother is going to know who you are. Next there will be a patent to filter out these clones.
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
About 15 years ago I wrote a script for populating "phishing" forms with plausible-but-fake names, addresses and credit card numbers that pass simple validation checks. I can't remember what I called it, possibly "phishfood" or "phishfarm". It's probably still on sourceforge.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"Creating cloned identities that are 'intentionally populated with divergent information [e,g., fake phone numbers, email accounts, credit or debit card accounts],'"
I've been doing that for years.
Wasn't there prior art in Sun Tzu's Art of War? This is only deception done on a network instead of a battlefield...
I've been doing this for 15 years now, ever since my first spam email lured me to my first spam site.
I own several domains and give different emails; faked whenever I don't care if I never hear from the admen again.
I invent (fictitious, but coherent) persona's for myself when answering marketeers dumb questions. I regularly complete 'Can we tediously interrupt you to gather marketing info' wonkery with entirely faked data. If I care about a website, or think a company is treating me properly, then I help them help me by being broadly honest, all others get systematically and deliberately misinformed.
My 2 point plan; which I heartily recommend:
1) Reward honesty with honesty,
2) Reward spin with spin.
And if any marketeers read this, hahaha, spin on it.
(PS: I know, from colleagues and friends, that I am not alone in doing this.)
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
Since they own it, they can now prevent anyone from using it (against them)...
If you have enough evidence from a person then only extreme amounts of noise will prevent you from identifying that person.
http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/vitaly/papers/Kearns93-e.pdf (Statistical Query Learning (1993; Kearns)
Note to appletards. just cos you don't like a post doesn't mean you should mod it down.
Not only have I actively used such techniques - such as my "Famous Dictators and Cruel Leaders" series and the ever popular "Dead Little KnownPresidents" series when signing up for affinity cards and websites; I have also written about it. Yes, I am the reason Attila T. Hun is in your database, as well as a Mr. A Shickelgruber who resides at T. Bunker, Berlin. Please call me at 202-555-1212 to discuss this.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Being intrigued by the summary, and naturally reluctant to RTFA, I tried to find out what an "Automated Litter Brother" is. Best I could come up with is something from the same litter as an other automaton, or some kind of automaton that litters.
Makes me wonder if this is evil or good.
Here's a hint: if it's done by a big company, whether that company is Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Sony, or Starbucks Coffee...it's evil.
Die in a fire.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Let's stay on topic - this was not obvious to a technical skilled in the art of internet identity obfuscation?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
When these seemingly-weird patents come out, why does someone always assume they're meant to be used? I'm betting that Apple wants the legal clout to prevent other companies from using the techniques they've patented, even if they don't want to use them themselves. For example, suppose you were granted a watertight patent on spamming. That might be a nice tool to beat spammers up with in court: "hey, judge, they're violating my government-granted monopoly on the techniques I described! I offered to license them for only $2,000 per email but they refused. I want triple damages."
This patent is a far cry from stopping spam, but maybe that preemptive principle is what they're aiming for?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Prior art, see my comment from June 12:
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2909133&cid=40294085
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
too much power - capitalizm can suck my crank
I had an idea like this once for responding to phishing e-mails. A phishing URL would be submitted and a fake identity would be created using a database of first names, last names, street names, cities, states, zip codes, etc. A phoney (but real looking) SNN and date of birth would be created as well as any other information. The form would be submitted and the fake identity would be stored in the phisher's database. Repeat this a few thousand times and the database's value would drop. Get enough people using this program and submitting phishing URLs and phishing in general would get harder to do successfully.
Sadly, I never implemented this idea so it can't be claimed as prior art.
(Side note: If anyone wants to take this idea and run with it, go right ahead. Just give me a thanks somewhere and let me know about your project as I'd be interested to see how it works out.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
How can Apple patent a basic technique of anonymizing your identity? One that has been used by many of us for the past 30 years of online experience. This is lame.
who've hijacked the government and been printing US dollars for years now will come forth with the same old argument: why do you have something to hide? As if they owned us!
I considered it a fight for the guy to protect his identidy by obfuscation. I was considering having my fake profiles friend each other on FB and such as well to build some relevancy.
Can I patent wiping my ass with a dead cat, because I think that could be useful.
.. I would have patented that in 2005 when I started doing it. Data pollution is one of the most underused tools in security, together with deception, and is FAR more efficient than the usual tactical, reactive protection because it devalues the stolen information to a point where the risk may be higher than the benefit.
"circumvents the reliability and usefulness of dataveillance used by network eavesdroppers and effectively provides greater privacy over the network to principals"
so it will be harder for facebook target ads based on the sites i've visited? (not that I use FB)
Facebook Exchange
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/18/tech/social-media/facebook-ads-web-browsing/index.html
A new Facebook system will use your activity on other websites to send you what Facebook thinks are ads about your current interests. Advertisers will, in effect, be bidding to get their ads in front of you.
It seems to me that if you can detect these cloned entities the patent describes you will be able to find out a lot more about the individual, since all the information associated with the clones is all but guaranteed to be false. If clone A says "I like cats" then original probably doesn't like cats. Negative information is still information.
Apple will still have to pay me royalties because I have lodged a patents for "Using patents to gouge", "Getting patents despite prior art by using jargon that patent officers don't understand" and "Making things white and shiny so dumbasses will like them"
You are correct that privacy is essential if one is to act in spite of authority. I contend that the ability to act in spite of authority is the only true freedom. Even in the finest of nations, many laws are onerous, unreasonable or sometimes impossible to scrupulously obey. Every successful act of defiance, major, minor or individual, is a triumph of human spirit.
Do you have any idea who I *am*.
Exactly. And I've been doing that since you clowns thought a 5 meg drive on a IIe was a big deal.
kthxbai
Need Mercedes parts ?
This patent does seem surprising, in that it appears on its face to be a departure from Apple's usual preference for surveillance of users. However, I wouldn't be surprised if this patent ultimately were used as an addition to the dataveillance arsenal.