Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mobile Sharing: "Bezos Beep" Vs. Smartphone Bump

Posted by samzenpus on from the talk-talk-talk dept.

theodp writes "GeekWire wonders if the 'Bezos Beep' could replace the smartphone bump for mobile content sharing. A newly-published patent application listing Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos as sole inventor describes the use of audio signals to share content and communicate between devices, eliminating the need for NFC chips and facilitating the simultaneous sharing of content with multiple people via a remote server. From the patent application: 'For example, a first device can emit an encoded audio signal that can be received by any capable device within audio range of the device. Any device receiving the signal can decode the information included in the signal and obtain a location to access the content from that information.'"

39 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. New and interesting technology by pryoplasm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't sound like a software based dialup modem at all...

    --
    Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who live by the gun...
    1. Re:New and interesting technology by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually it's talking about a broadcast medium, where any device within range can listen to the encoded signal.

      Modem? They are trying to patent talking!

    2. Re:New and interesting technology by ledow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seems like we have indeed come full-circle, except now the audio just encodes a link (presumably with no lengthy initial communication phase) and the rest of the content is actually on the Internet.

      Also seems less secure - now anyone can play one of those sounds and try to get you to go to it, or intercept the communication to work out what you're doing.

    3. Re:New and interesting technology by langelgjm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I read the claim (there's only one):

      1. A method of sharing information for accessing content on a computing device, comprising: generating, on a first device, an encoded information signal, the information signal including information associated with accessing the content; outputting the encoded information signal as an audible signal; audibly receiving, at a second device, the encoded information signal; decoding the information signal to identify the information associated with accessing the content; and accessing the content with the second device utilizing at least part of the information associated with accessing the content, wherein the second device accesses the content from a source other than the first device.

      So... if I take an acoustic coupler, amplify its volume, and put it near two handsets, then use the connection to access a URL, I'd be violating this patent. If this is granted, it will be (another) sad day for the USPTO.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    4. Re:New and interesting technology by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      New form of urban terrorism: Ringtone trolling. Set your ringtone to loud, have it as the encoded URL to $ShockSite.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    5. Re:New and interesting technology by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wouldn't a 300BPS acoustic Modem qualify as Prior art, other than the "content from another source". I'm asking, because the "other source" shouldn't really matter ... should it?

      And, while I'm thinking about it, should the "acoustic" be key part, shouldn't this be abstracted more? If the abstracted version of the process is common, why would the specifics be granted, especially since this is all abstract in the first place?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    6. Re:New and interesting technology by postbigbang · · Score: 2

      Audio data rates aren't too bad, provided there aren't any background noises to figure out. You could exchange keys, broadcast to a room full of your friends, and share.

      Modulation, demodulation, as stated upthread.

      Some patent officer needs their logic examined, just prior to being sacked.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    7. Re:New and interesting technology by rgbscan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or, say, broadcasting Commodore 64 software over the radio...

      http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-08/20/finland-radio-code-broadcasts?page=all

    8. Re:New and interesting technology by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      You can already try to do that with the cellular signals.

      Just because we can now audibly hear the signals, doesnt make it any more "broadcast" than cell / wifi, or any less secure. Security will entirely depend on whether and how they encrypt the signal, and as always has remarkably little to do with the medium used.

    9. Re:New and interesting technology by Xemu · · Score: 4, Funny

      New form of urban terrorism: Ringtone trolling. Set your ringtone to loud, have it as the encoded URL to $ShockSite.

      In the next generation of this technology, there will be a secure way of transmitting messages by moving the audio in a small tube connected to the other device.

      Future developments may include sending audio messages to multiple devices across a network of interconnected tubes.

      --
      Tell your friends about xenu.net
    10. Re:New and interesting technology by omnichad · · Score: 2

      On top of that, if the encoded audio is just a link, then why bother with the audio at all? Just push it to the other phone through the service and be done with it. If the point is being cross-platform, the audio is not a compatibility bridge if it still requires accessing the data from a central server.

    11. Re:New and interesting technology by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Wouldn't a 300BPS acoustic Modem qualify as Prior art?

      Wouldn't an ear also count as prior art?

    12. Re:New and interesting technology by ByOhTek · · Score: 2

      More worrisom - I don't want every one in the room to get my contact information when I give it to a friend. I hope they implement this with a 'public key' request/reply mechanism.

      Request sends person's name, public key.
      You can then pick one of the last few requests to respond to.

      I declare this modification on the original idea, public domain.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    13. Re:New and interesting technology by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      Some patent officer needs their logic examined, just prior to being sacked.

      In the history of Slashdot, was there ever a report of a patent that Slashdot users didn't think was invalid due to prior art? Where posters didn't claim the patent officer is wrong?

      Given that some patents must actually be valid (not necessarily this one), there appears to be something wrong with the hivemind's concepts of what valid patents are.

      Now I'm no expert on patents. But my guess is that it's the idea that prior art in and of itself disqualifies a patent. Because if you look at most patent applications (not necessarily this one), you'll see a list of prior art put there by the claimant himself.

    14. Re:New and interesting technology by fritsd · · Score: 2

      OK, agreed, if they are challenged and upheld in a court of law then they're by definition valid in that jurisdiction. And you're right that I believe we'd be better off without them :-)

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
    15. Re:New and interesting technology by sentientbeing · · Score: 3, Funny

      Luddite.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
  2. Yeah, and... by 6Yankee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...marketers won't use this to hijack my phone anywhere they can get hold of a speaker.

    1. Re:Yeah, and... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      ...marketers won't use this to hijack my phone anywhere they can get hold of a speaker.

      Destroying one's ability to hear high-pitched sounds is going to become a popular elective surgery once every public space has a background of marketing bullshit URIs encoded in ghastly modem warble...

    2. Re:Yeah, and... by GrumpySteen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who needs surgery? Just listen to lots of loud music (or let yourself age for a couple of decades) and it'll happen on its own.

    3. Re:Yeah, and... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Funny

      they'll play it so loud, it Hertz!

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  3. Dang by nortcele · · Score: 5, Funny

    Jeff just patented the 300 baud modem.

    1. Re:Dang by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jeff just patented the 300 baud modem.

      No, no, no! He said 'encode' and 'decode' rather than 'modulate' and 'demodulate', which makes this totally different. Plus, we all know that the patentability of an otherwise ridiculous claim can be magically restored by the addition of 'over the internet' or 'on a cellphone'. This patent includes both!

  4. Audio version of QR Codes.... by DontScotty · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Audio version of QR Codes....

    Yet another failure brought to you by people targeting people unwilling to type in a URL.

    "The needs of the stupid outweigh the needs of the smart, or the sane"
    -Doctor Speck, Start Wreck

  5. R2-D2 by Misagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    R2-D2 communicates with other devices (C-3PO) using beeps, ... and he can store and play back content in form of holographic messages.

    Besides, R2-D2 was made a long long time ago... Definitely prior art.

    --
    "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
  6. Over the Radio by Mikkeles · · Score: 2

    I remember recording various bzzts, pings, bwrrps and the like from the radio onto tape which were Commodore 64 programs.

    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    1. Re:Over the Radio by fritsd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So do I, it was called BASICODE.

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
  7. it's also called speech by mtrachtenberg · · Score: 2

    'For example, a first device can emit an encoded audio signal that can be received by any capable device within audio range of the device. Any device receiving the signal can decode the information'

    It's also called speech.

    1. Re:it's also called speech by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      'For example, a first device can emit an encoded audio signal that can be received by any capable device within audio range of the device. Any device receiving the signal can decode the information'

      It's also called speech.

      More specifically, language.

      Ungeachtet, dessen ist es nicht neu oder einzigartige irgendeiner Form.

      Apologies to any devices which can decode the above signal, my, er, "programming" skill are atrocious.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  8. LF Wifi by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

    So it's basically like all other radio-based protocols, but at lower frequencies?
    Yup; definitely worthy of a patent.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  9. It's not as stupid as it sounds at first... by Bearhouse · · Score: 2

    Yeah, most people are beating the shit out of this, prior art, IR, bluetooth, QR codes, whatever...Thay have a point. Transmitting data via audio is new? Nope.
    But glanced at the patent app, it's actually a *little* more clever than that; the sound would just send a link to download content from a remote server, (presumably owned by Amazon), so you would not go mad while your kid's phone whistled and crackled it's way through transferring a lolcats jpeg.
    Superficially quite smart, since as they point out, not all phones have bluetooth or whatever ability.

    But to implement it, you'd presumably need a smartish phone, and they all have ways of doing this kind of data-transfer already. So I'll give this a fail.

    Could be fun, though, imagine "could you just humm that URL for me again, please?"

    1. Re:It's not as stupid as it sounds at first... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      How is that any different than sending a URL via a modem?

      A URL is just data too. It is data that contains a way to get more data over another source, but it is still just text data.

  10. bluetooth replacement by MagicM · · Score: 2

    A follow-up patent application describes the use of audio signals to communicate between devices and their peripherals, eliminating the need for Bluetooth chips. From the patent application: 'Look at what we can do with a speaker and a microphone. Isn't it neat?"

  11. Prior art? chrp.io by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This app has been around for a year or so:

    http://chirp.io

    Might be considered prior art?

  12. Zenith Space Command by SIGBUS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The old Zenith TV remotes used ultrasonic signals to activate TV functions. There's nothing new here other than "on a computer."

    --
    Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
    1. Re:Zenith Space Command by PsiCTO · · Score: 2

      ...ah, you remind me of the good old days when vigorous jingling of my keys would change channels on my Zenith :-) That "exploit" might suggest others, and then Bezos can be named ("Bezos exploit") and blamed...

  13. I'm no security whiz by Zeromous · · Score: 2

    As described this sounds like the worst idea ever.

    WHY:
    First off, how is an encrypted audio transmission any different from a higher frequency wireless transmission?

    HOW:
    How is this better than a wireless transmission?

    WHEN:
    On earth would I want my smart phone listening to everything around it, including stuff I can't here and acting on those signals without further interaction on my part.

    WHAT:
    the F*

    The only advantage here is some sort of multicasting, but again, why would I want this?

    --
    ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
  14. Re:Sounds horrible... by mu51c10rd · · Score: 2

    ... I don't think so, Tim...

    Congratulations on probably being the first poster on Slashdot to use a Home Improvement reference. I had thought the rules stated only Star Wars, Star Trek, Matrix, and obscure Sci-Fi show references were permitted.

  15. Replace the smartphone bump by Chelloveck · · Score: 2

    "could replace the smartphone bump for mobile content sharing"

    Does anyone actually do that? I mean, other than in a couple of crappy TV ads? For that matter, has anyone ever used device-to-device file sharing more than once to see that it works? Outside of a couple novelty applications I never actually saw the Palm Pilot's beaming used for anything, or (god help us) Zune's squirting.

    I guess if Bezos wants to patent an existing technology in a "novel" new application that nobody wants to use anyway, it's his money to throw away...

    --
    Chelloveck
    I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
  16. Morse Code by Ozoner · · Score: 2

    Once again the hams have been doing this for ever.

    Imagine a radio class where people are earning Morse Code. Copying data sent as audio from a buzzer.

    Or all the umpteen sound card communication applications like PSK31.

    A standard source of fun at Ham meets is to have a PSK31 "scramble" where a bunch of people use their laptops to communicate simultaneously via PSK31 and audio.

    And a hundred other examples I could think of.