Slashdot Mirror


"Hello Barbie" Listens To Children Via Cloud

jones_supa writes For a long time we have had toys that talk back to their owners, but a new "smart" Barbie doll's eavesdropping and data-gathering functions have privacy advocates crying foul. Toymaker Mattel bills Hello Barbie as the world's first "interactive doll" due to its ability to record children's playtime conversations and respond to them, once the audio is transmitted over WiFi to a cloud server. In a demo video, a Mattel presenter at the 2015 Toy Fair in New York says the new doll fulfills the top request that Mattel receives from girls: to have a two-way dialogue. "They want to have a conversation with Barbie," she said, adding that the new toy will be "the very first fashion doll that has continuous learning, so that she can have a unique relationship with each girl." Susan Linn, the executive director of Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, has written a statement in which she says how the product is seriously creepy and creates a host of dangers for children and families. She asks people to join her in a petition under the proposal of Mattel discontinuing the toy.

163 comments

  1. Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by Art+Popp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...be a book or a doll? In an age where Internet is thick on the ground, no contest.

    So, will a weak-AI owned by a for-profit company inspire little girls to have this conversation:

    "Mom! The Raspberry Pi 2 is out! It's got four ARM7 cores! My 3D printer would print a pair of ruby slippers in under an HOUR! Please!"

                or this one?

    "Mom! If I want to be a size zero, I need Kellog's Brand Nutrigrain Bars!"

    1. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Furbies didn't need no steenking cloud.

    2. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The potential of the cloud though is that when a Furbie figures out which jokes make his owner-child laugh, other furbies can reorder their lists.

      If we can do it safely it seems kinda cool.

    3. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by Qzukk · · Score: 2

      Speaking of a Young Lady's Illustrated Primer, what happens when Nell tells Barbie that her mommy's boyfriend is a bad man?

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    4. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by kheldan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We should be so lucky as to live in a world where something like the YLIP really existed, even with all the conflict and problems in The Diamond Age.. but we don't live in that world. We live in a world where it would just blather on about nonsense, meanwhile everything the little girls say will be analyzed by market researchers for better ways to profit from them, and likely have Barbie say things to indoctrinate little girls into being 'better consumers' (read as: PESTER MOM AND DAD TO BUY YOU MORE STUFF) and for all we know brainwash them into being who-knows-what. Then there's the possibility of someone hacking into them and making Barbie say obscene things or things intended to mislead little girls into doing something horribly, horribly wrong, or who knows what. The hell with shit like this, make it go away. It's not the technology that's bad, it's the fact that you can't trust corporations or anyone else with it these days. In fact let's get rid of Barbie entirely, it's a shitty concept that's at the root of all sort of malodorous crap concerning little girls and their development anyway.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    5. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by fractoid · · Score: 2

      Well, the Primer was (iirc) a custom product for a plutocrat's (grand?)daughter. It had no ulterior motives, it was simply there to provide a companion and an education for the young girl. I think this is by far the most important criterion for a primer - that it not be influenced by any for-profit company.

      I like the book form-factor but that's mainly just because I like books. :)

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    6. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      The potential of the cloud though is that when a Furbie figures out which jokes make his owner-child laugh, other furbies can reorder their lists.

      If we can do it safely it seems kinda cool.

      Yes but how long until /b/ figures out how to spoof this out and spams their servers sexual and racial epitaphs, thus leading to a furbies becoming the toy equivalent of bucket the chatterbot

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    7. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      ...be a book or a doll? In an age where Internet is thick on the ground, no contest.

      So, will a weak-AI owned by a for-profit company inspire little girls to have this conversation:

      "Mom! The Raspberry Pi 2 is out! It's got four ARM7 cores! My 3D printer would print a pair of ruby slippers in under an HOUR! Please!"

                  or this one?

      "Mom! If I want to be a size zero, I need Kellog's Brand Nutrigrain Bars!"

      wait a minute, are those the only two options?

      neither seems quite right to me

    8. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      All you need to do is convince people to stop buying it and they won't make it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    9. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...be a book or a doll? In an age where Internet is thick on the ground, no contest.

      So, will a weak-AI owned by a for-profit company inspire little girls to have this conversation:

      "Mom! The Raspberry Pi 2 is out! It's got four ARM7 cores! My 3D printer would print a pair of ruby slippers in under an HOUR! Please!"

      Funny how you demand little girls become eggheads and abandon childish activities while referencing ruby slippers. Care to tell me how said little girl will learn about that story if she doesn't put the book down once in a while and play within the fantasy world you are referring to?

    10. Re:Should A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All you need to do is convince people to stop buying it and they won't make it.

      No no no no! We should most definately NOT boycott this, think of the trolling possibilities.

      If like me you live in an appartment block with neighbours who play dreadful happy hardcore techno most of the night, and who don't appear to know how to secure their wi-fi AP, one of these dolls connected to their network and recordings of a young girl uttering choice phrases, (daddy no, would have to be a favourite,) could see you unburdened of your shitty neighbours fairly quickly I imagine.

  2. I hope this is the type of dialog we will hear by robbyb20 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lisa [playing with Malibu Stacy]: A hush falls over the general assembly as Stacy approaches the podium to deliver what will no doubt be a stirring and memorable address. [pulls Stacy's cord]

            Malibu Stacy: I wish they taught shopping in school!

            Lisa: [groans, pulls Stacy's cord again]

            Malibu Stacy: Let's bake some cookies for the boys!

            Lisa: Come on, Stacy. I've waited my whole life to hear you speak. Don't you have anything relevant to say? [pulls cord]

            Malibu Stacy: Don't ask me, I'm just a girl. [giggles]

            Bart: Right on! Say it, sister.

            Lisa: It's not funny, Bart. Millions of girls will grow up thinking that this is the right way to act....that they can never be more than vacuous ninnies whose only goal is to look pretty, land a rich husband, and spend all day on the phone with their equally vacuous friends talking about how damn terrific it is to look pretty and HAVE A RICH HUSBAND!!!!

            Bart: Just what I was going to say.

    1. Re:I hope this is the type of dialog we will hear by robbyb20 · · Score: 2

      oh and credit, where credit is due.

      http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki...

    2. Re:I hope this is the type of dialog we will hear by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Celeste: There's something wrong with what my Stacy says.
      Malibu Stacy: My Spidey Sense is tingling. Anybody call for a web-slinger?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    3. Re:I hope this is the type of dialog we will hear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFLMAO

      That is so Lisa.

  3. WE ARE SLASHDOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HOORAH!!

    1. Re:WE ARE SLASHDOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Waaahh you guys are so paranoid, this is just Siri in a more child friendly package.

    2. Re:WE ARE SLASHDOT by anagama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is marked funny, but think about it for a minute. Our computers, phones, tablets -- even watches -- are collecting way more information than this Barbie is and yet how many people think these ubiquitous machines are creepy? Not many. The lesson here might be this: the shape of the surveillance device doesn't make it creepy -- what it collects is what makes it creepy. Oddly though, very few people are creeped out by their own phone.

      Two conclusions based on "shape irrelevant":

      1) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. have become extremely creepy surveillance devices (this is where I am, which is depressing, because I've loved technology for so long).

      2) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. are surveillance devices and surveillance is totally not creepy -- just don't care.

      To mix and match 1 & 2 though, making barbie creepy and siri not, is inconsistent and illogical.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  4. Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? Really really really????

    Do you think Mattel cares?

    We're talking about a company run by men, who produces obscenely sexist toys which portray women so poorly that I feel bad for any parents who actually think they're good toys.

    They won't listen.

    Just don't buy such garbage toys. Simple. Your kids will thank you later in life.

    1. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing more sexist than this tech industry oppressing women struggling in tech, let's be clear.

    2. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mattel is in the business of convincing girls that they're too stupid for the tech industry. Girls still have to overcome that first - it's just one of a chain of obstacles which men will never experience.

    3. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Dunbal · · Score: 2

      "American businesswoman Ruth Handler is credited with the creation of the doll using a German doll called Bild Lilli as her inspiration."

      Bzzt. Just goes to show you know nothing about nothing. Now please STFU the smart people are talking.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      or, they market toys to people who want to buy them. clearly they are doing something right if they are still around.

      Face it, men and women tend to like different things, and thats ok!

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's just one of a chain of obstacles which men will never experience.

      Men are never told they are too stupid for something? Really? You really want to claim that?

    6. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Created the doll != currently runs the company and makes decisions concerning the toy.

      Also, women can create things that are sexist towards women.

    7. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Men are not regularly told by society that they are too dumb to pursue a particular career because of their gender. Women do regularly experience this.

      Get over yourself, and go back to the MRA troll dungeon from which you came.

    8. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your post has NOTHING to do with the original assertion. Yes, of course men and women tend to like different things and yes that's ok.

      What not OK, is seeing nothing wrong with an entire line of popular toys which feeds destructive stereotypes and insecurities.

      Barbie doesn't teach girls that it's OK to do what you want. It teaches them that they're worthless without big boobs and looks and that being showy for the sake of men is the more important than being smart or educated or strong-willed.

      Show me a toy marketed primarily towards boys which even comes close to propagating such negative ideas.

    9. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Men are told they're not caring enough to be kindergarten teachers or nurses, and that only gay men become airline stewards, theater actors or dancers. Men are also told all the time that they're not intelligent, strong or enduring enough or have too much potential to do what they want and they should instead do what somewhat else thinks is best for them. If you, man or woman, want to do what you want, you have to do make it happen. Other people serve their own interests, not yours. That's not sexism, that's just the way the world works.

    10. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ewibble · · Score: 1

      Really? Isn't that a bit melodramatic? Trying to kill someone for advocating education for girls is not even the slightest bit more sexist? (Malala Yousafzai)

    11. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about guns? Guns are awesome! Guns are fun! Join the military and shoot people and maybe die!

    12. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ewibble · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Men are told they can't get into child care, ok not because they, stupid but because they are not capable of controlling themselves.

      Ever heard the sayings:
      Men can't multitask?
      Men don't ask for directions?
      what about this article that described how women better at certain tasks:
      http://www.livescience.com/470...
      or this one https://www.americanexpress.co...

      I have never thought women where less smart than men, in fact I was of the opinion that the where smarter.

      Men are often portrayed in media as beer swilling, sex crazed, idiots that can't be pried away from watching sports.

      To reference the Simpsons, which was mentioned in the last thread, rank the family in order of intelligence.

      My guess would be:
      Lisa, Marge, Maggie, Bart, Homer.

    13. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have never thought women where less smart than men, in fact I was of the opinion that the where smarter.

      It's not often you see a sentence that serves as supporting evidence for the idea it expresses.

    14. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Barbie has been selling extremely well for decades. If that product were as "obscenely sexist" as you claim, people would have recognized it and production would have ceased after the first year.

      Quite simply, you are mindfucked. Barbies are purchased because they are seen as a clean, attractive, and worthwhile model for girls. Would you prefer a trollop designed by Ralph Bakshi? An fat unwed mother welfare queen doll?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    15. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Men are not regularly told by society that they are too dumb to pursue a particular career because of their gender. Women do regularly experience this.

      Get over yourself, and go back to the MRA troll dungeon from which you came.

      O seriously bullshit, are you that goddamned stupid? I spent my entire childhood being told I couldn't do this, I couldn't do that. And all that did was fuel my desire to succeed. And it worked.

      If I had a daughter What I would have to say is "If all it takes to make you fail is people thinking you aren't good enough, or can't do something, then maybe you weren't good enough in the first place. Because it's you that succeed or fail, not them.

      Because no matter who you are, what gender you are, there will be people who are happy to tell you what you can or cannot do. It's up to you to listen to them or ignore them. And if you listen to them - looks like they were right.

      This is the flaw of the "society conspires against women" meme, certainly in this country. If all it takes is a little negative pressure to completely wreck a woman's spirit, cusing her to believe that she isn't capable, then there is a problem with women to begin with - they are too weak to grab what they want. And I don't think there is a problem with women in that regard - only present day whiners.

    16. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      WWE action figures???? You are over thinking things. Everyone fantasizes, whats wrong with it???

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    17. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Have you ever bothered to measure a Barbie doll? It's a little difficult because the breasts are not well delineated, but a good estimate is that they're B cup or smaller. That's average or below for well fed human females.

      The unusual dimension for a Barbie doll is waist size, equivalent to about 17" IIRC.

      being showy for the sake of men

      That women dress up to show each other how successful they are is so well-established a notion that it's even made it into popular music. (Van Morrison, "Domino")

      being smart or educated or strong-willed

      How, pray tell, would you show those things in a doll? Do you think microscope-toting Barbie would sell well?

      Show me a toy marketed primarily towards boys which even comes close to propagating such negative ideas.

      Just about anything that promotes mindless destruction. "Transformers" comes to mind.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    18. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      FWIW the last time I heard a Mattel spokesperson speak about the Barbie product, it sounded like the movie stereotype of a male homosexual. Try analyzing the motives behind that person's contributions to Barbie.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    19. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Also, men are reluctant to go into childcare because a man showing interest in that field is immediately suspected of intent to molest.

    20. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by mjwx · · Score: 2

      Gender stereotypes work both ways.

      Other news exclusively for misogynists and misandrists at 11.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    21. Re: Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did mommy spend lots of time with her special special snowflake? Deluding others into thinking that someone can do WHATEVER they want is as bad as telling them they are worthless, for the same reasons.

        Face facts.. Not everyone is cut out to be a scientist, or Dr, or physicist.

    22. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by narcc · · Score: 2

      but a good estimate is that they're B cup or smaller.

      Only if you assume she's extraordinarily tall and anorexic. On average, she's got 3.5" waste and a 5" bust. At 11.5" tall, that's pretty top-heavy! Now, this is after the much-publicized downsizing her upper-body received sometime during the age of Netscape. Let's be honest about this.

      But we're just picking on a popular example. Mattel has a number of dolls that make Barbie look positively wholesome, even through the eyes of the hairiest radical feminist your imagination can conjure.

      How, pray tell, would you show those things in a doll? Do you think microscope-toting Barbie would sell well?

      Why wouldn't it? Do girls have some aversion to microscopes? Now that you mention it, a barbie themed microscope wouldn't be a bad idea. There are a number of companies already that sell microscopes and telescopes designed to appeal to girls. You'll have a hard time, unfortunately, finding them at the local brick-and-mortar.

      That you would even ask such a question is troubling. The very idea that enough girls would want anything to do with microscopes for such a toy to be economically viable seems impossible for you to imagine. That's the entire problem. We have this odd cultural belief that things like microscopes are for boys and that any girl interested in things like microscopes is deviant (or going through a phase or whatever).

      Kids are sensitive to that. Imagine taking a girl to a toy store and seeing here develop interest in a display microscope. What will she do when she finds that the only microscopes for sale are marketed toward boys, with no 'gender-neutral' or 'for girls' options? (Note: This is the most plausible scenario.) What message do you think that sends to her? How does that change her understanding of how microscopes and other scientific equipment relate to gender? Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing for girls? Society in general?

    23. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by narcc · · Score: 1

      WTF are you talking about? Barbie dolls have been subject to (rather harsh) criticism as long as they've existed.

      But, kids love the damn things and most parents don't care enough about those issues, even if they agree that they're serious, to let that influence their purchase. It's really easy to say "it's just a doll" when your kids is clamoring for one, a relative buys one for her, she's bombarded by Barbie ads on the television, etc.

      Truth be told, this isn't about Barbie so much as the countless toys and media that send the same message. Barbie gets the most attention as she's been the go-to example since your parents were children. There are dolls now that make Barbie look practically wholesome, after all. But that doesn't mean there isn't a serious problem.

    24. Re:Asking Mattel to make toys more ethical?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Anon because I've mostly been modding]

      Of course things are going to be hard sometimes, and of course they're going to be hard for everyone. And that's a given. But you're using that to ignore what has been really well documented - that white men (and to some extent asian men) get a lot less discouragement, and a lot more encouragement, in CS and engineering. (Because yeah, this isn't just about women.) And yeah, everyone needs to learn to be tough - but everyone also has times when they are insecure and confused, and getting encouraged, and getting support and having mentors matters. And if that encouragement, support and mentorship is disproportionately available to men and not to women (and non asian minorities*) no one should be surprised when it's the men who are mostly getting the CS and engineering degrees.

      Hopefully if you had a daughter, *you'd* be giving her support and encouragement. And that would help. But if you're going to talk about whiners and weaklings, why not look at the guys who are getting all these benes that are so much less available to women? How many of them would shrivel up and go become psych majors if they weren't getting the encouragement they are?

      (Okay, and I think back to when I was a hiring manager, and part of me thinks that might not have been the worst thing ever...

      But I'm on a different side of this whole dyanmic now. I was a software engineer for many years, and I'm currently a computational neurobiologist. I work with undergraduates kind of a lot, men and women. And, often, teach them to code.)

      * Though the data on asian students are really mixed.

  5. commercials and young kids by jbolden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I remember when my daughter was about 2.5-4 commercials were unbelievable effective. Even those commercials that targeted the mother watching with the kid had an impact and my daughter would often get upset we didn't have the right products. I'd love to just see a ban on advertising for kids under 10, and public financing.

    1. Re:commercials and young kids by itzly · · Score: 4, Informative

      Can you imagine how effective would it be if the kid's talking doll suggested buying some other toys or accessories ?

    2. Re:commercials and young kids by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OR, you know ... good parenting, not allowing them to watch TV except when appropriate

      OR you know ... teaching your kids about how commercials work, trying to get them to buy useless toys and crappy "food" products.

      Why did you allow your kids to be bombarded with commercials at an age where they couldn't cope?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:commercials and young kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't watch TV, specially if your kids are present. Go read a book with your kids. It's a simple solution.

    4. Re:commercials and young kids by jbolden · · Score: 2

      Yes. I could easily see it making things much worse.

    5. Re:commercials and young kids by jbolden · · Score: 1

      Why did you allow your kids to be bombarded with commercials at an age where they couldn't cope?

      Because there were compensating advantages to those shows. Life is about grey and tradeoffs. And her wanting particular products and getting upset about it while a negative was not a game changer. Your ID is low enough that you are about my age. I'd assume you know this and should be sounding like a teen that hasn't made these tradeoffs.

    6. Re:commercials and young kids by antdude · · Score: 2

      That is what marketing does. How about not watching the commercials and the media?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    7. Re:commercials and young kids by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Life is about grey and tradeoffs.

      Good parenting is about knowing the tradeoffs and finding a solution that doesn't require you into compromising "compensating advantages" and getting "Upset" daughters (have them). TV was and is Optional. I chose to give up some conveniences for the sake of raising my kids better than the marketers wanted me to raise them.

      At age two - three, there is NOTHING on TV worth getting a brat at the store. Read them a book. Play with them in the sandbox. Teach them YOUR values, one of mine was, "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours".

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:commercials and young kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quoting a book is possibly a substitutable activity. Reading a book usually isn't. If I have the attention and the freedom to read a book, then we aren't watching TV anyways.

    9. Re:commercials and young kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what a preachy person you are, Archangel Michael!

      You know so much about being a parent, and at the same time, you are keeping your "perhaps the person I'm talking about isn't my total inferior" senses very well hidden! I hope one of your taught values was the power of being sanctimonious and patronising! Perhaps a good new lesson would be about not making negative assumptions about people? - although it sounds like you might need to read a book about that one!

    10. Re:commercials and young kids by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      Anecdotally my daughters (4.5 & 2) have a built in ad blocker. It is actually something quite interesting to watch. The unfortunate thing though it what they love to watch are almost ads anyway.

      My eldest loves watching the DCTC videos on youtube, which are essentially toy unboxing videos. Given half a chance she will spend all day watching them. From this she has an almost encyclopaedic knowledge of My Little Pony. When an ad comes on though she is instantly hitting the 5 second skip button. no matter what it is, even if it is my little pony ads. She actually gets irate if is an ad that can't be skipped.

      That said she has almost never seen TV ads as everything is on our media centre. So I don't know if those ads would be more effective on her.

    11. Re:commercials and young kids by chihowa · · Score: 1

      I've always been a little astounded at the general acceptance of marketing campaigns that are directed toward children. It's hard to see how the existence of teams of highly educated and extremely well funded adults who's job is to most effectively manipulate the minds of young children for profit is anything other than profoundly unethical and malevolent.

      Targeting adults with marketing is pretty sleazy, but targeting little kids seems more than a little fucked up.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    12. Re:commercials and young kids by chihowa · · Score: 1

      I'll just go ahead and blame my poor grammar above on old GI Joe commercials.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    13. Re:commercials and young kids by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      OR you know ... teaching your kids about how commercials work, trying to get them to buy useless toys and crappy "food" products.

      That sounds a lot like uninformed optimism.

      Adults who know how commercials work are still swayed by them.

      Also, when the majority of adults can't effectively cope with commercials, how can you in any way say that kids should be effectively able to cope?

      What I heard you say is "Don't let kids watch TV ever, unless you can remove the commercials." You may not have meant it that way, but that's what you said.

      You also said, don't let them be in the room when mommy and daddy are watching TV. Or listening to the radio. Or in the supermarket. Or, really, anywhere outside the home due to billboards and all manner of decorated vehicles.

    14. Re:commercials and young kids by antdude · · Score: 1

      Who's = Who (i/ha)s. You meant whose. ;)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    15. Re:commercials and young kids by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      This is something of a trend in TV right now. More people streaming and using DVRs to skip has lessened the value of traditional advertising. Producers responded by turning to alternative forms of advertising - mostly product placement.

    16. Re:commercials and young kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Children are bombarded with ads every day. Even if they didn't watch TV they would still see ads.

      It is thought that up to the age of 7 or 8 children are unable to understand the nature of advertising — developmentally, they can’t identify the underlying persuasive intent.

    17. Re:commercials and young kids by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      I've yet to see / notice product placement in the stuff my daughters watch (mainly animated stuff). But there is a HELL of a lot of merchandising for the shows.

    18. Re:commercials and young kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours"

      Unfortunately your child is never likely to feel the same way about you.

      Why this trend in modern western society to value their children above all things? They aren't that important, they sure as hell can bloody wait for adults to finish doing what they're doing, and the child-centric view point has simply resulted in a generation of selfish and egotistical fucks.

    19. Re:commercials and young kids by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine how effective would it be if the kid's talking doll suggested buying some other toys or accessories ?

      Or telling them to kill their mommies & daddies?

      Think of the parents!!!!

      --
      Be seeing you...
    20. Re:commercials and young kids by robbyb20 · · Score: 1

      I've heard that this is a huge thing with kids these days.

      I would be interested to see if there is a correlation with ASMR videos as well. The soothing voice, the crinkles and opening of the boxes and wrappers may have a calming effect the children without them knowing it and that's why they love to watch them.

      I even watch other asmr videos when I need to fall asleep, unboxing items falls into the category of things that a put me to sleep and relax me.

    21. Re:commercials and young kids by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      Life is about grey and tradeoffs.

      Good parenting is about knowing the tradeoffs and finding a solution that doesn't require you into compromising "compensating advantages" and getting "Upset" daughters (have them). TV was and is Optional. I chose to give up some conveniences for the sake of raising my kids better than the marketers wanted me to raise them.

      At age two - three, there is NOTHING on TV worth getting a brat at the store. Read them a book. Play with them in the sandbox. Teach them YOUR values, one of mine was, "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours".

      when I was a kid I watched Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood and Reading Rainbow and Winnie the Pooh.

      trade offs is compromise which is how we got stuck with voting for only 1 of 2 people-- because we believed the lie that "voting for someone besides those two is throwing your vote away" instead of correctly being told "the only way to throw your vote away is by voting for someone you don't agree with"

    22. Re:commercials and young kids by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Or you could just not show TV with advertisements to your kids. You know, parental moderation? The wife and I did it. My kids had to grow up without Disney TV etc, but today I think they are better off for it.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    23. Re:commercials and young kids by internerdj · · Score: 1

      I see your children have played neither Skylanders nor Disney Infinity.

    24. Re:commercials and young kids by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      My son is 2 and had pretty much never seen an advertisement. We have netflix and hulu, and the only things he'd really seen were things like Sesame Street and Curious George on Netflix. No ads. Well one day mommy and daddy happened to be watching a rare show on Hulu, and an ad comes on, and my son points at it and yells "I DON'T LIKE THIS! I DON'T LIKE THIS SHOW CHANGE IT!" I laughed.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    25. Re:commercials and young kids by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I've yet to see / notice product placement in the stuff my daughters watch (mainly animated stuff). But there is a HELL of a lot of merchandising for the shows.

      Yeah, it's called the show itself.

      This started around 1984, actually - the FCC lessened the rules regarding targeting children. It's what lead to the show-length ads we called cartoons. You know, TV shows like Transformers, GI Joe, My Little Pony, Jem and others. They were basically 30 minute ads in the form of shows. They weren't completely in your face about it like an infomercial, but they were still ads.

      And yes, the merchandising IS the reason those shows were produced.

      Hell, Hasbro figured it out way back in 1986 when they created the original animated Transformers movie. Its sole goal is to basically get rid of all the existing toys to make room for a new lineup. Kids actually cried out - some from the fact that their entire collection was now "gone", others from the death of Optimus Prime who was so beloved that midway through season 3, Hasbro brought him back.

      But yeah, if you grew up in the 80s, most of your cartoon TV programming were actually ads. If you watch the episodes today (thanks to DVD box sets) you actually notice how blatant it is at times.

      Oh yeah, this extends to today as well - Transformers, GI Joe, Battleship - those movies Hasbro basically licensed it out for free to Hollywood - the prime consideration is not how well the movies did at the box office (that was Hollywood's problem), but how well Hasbro's sales did.

    26. Re:commercials and young kids by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      OR, you know ... good parenting, not allowing them to watch TV except when appropriate

      OR you know ... teaching your kids about how commercials work, trying to get them to buy useless toys and crappy "food" products.

      Why did you allow your kids to be bombarded with commercials at an age where they couldn't cope?

      Being an overprotecting helicopter parent is also harming your child.

  6. Hello, Talky Tina by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Any predictions for how many days it takes for this to get hacked and we have Talky Tina epidemic?

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    1. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Funny

      A thousand points to the person/group that does a "positive hack." Instead of the obvious string of obscenities, have Barbie embrace geekiness and the maker culture instead of being a brainless bimbo.

      Little girl: "Barbie, do you want to go shopping?"
      Barbie: "Sure. I could use a new soldering iron. Also, my favorite comic book has a new issue out. I can't wait to read what happens this issue!"

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by Skidborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny how "positive" in this case seems to mean simply "more like me".

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    3. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      A thousand points to the person/group that does a "positive hack." Instead of the obvious string of obscenities, have Barbie embrace geekiness and the maker culture instead of being a brainless bimbo.

      Talky Tina would be a great hack. And she is certainly not a brainless bimbo

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    4. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Buying a soldering iron and some comics is somehow not going shopping? Or it's a better kind of shopping because it's a tool and a comic book? Geek elitism strikes again girls! You're nothing if you're not soldering and reading about super-heroes!

      Mattel shouldn't be listening in to children's playtime conversations for any reason - but this doesn't mean that there's something wrong with playing with barbie and talking about nice shoes. This does not make you a "brainless bimbo". It makes you a child.

    5. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      A thousand points to the person/group that does a "positive hack." Instead of the obvious string of obscenities, have Barbie embrace geekiness and the maker culture instead of being a brainless bimbo.

      Little girl: "Barbie, do you want to go shopping?" Barbie: "Sure. I could use a new soldering iron. Also, my favorite comic book has a new issue out. I can't wait to read what happens this issue!"

      Hey, since real world girls refuse to become geeks despite all the countless programs everyone is coming up with, I guess we do have to make some mechanical ones ...

    6. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      If you want a doll that can listen, speak, and learn, available technology embedded in a doll cannot be adequate. The choices are a program on a home computer that's always on, or an internet connection.

      It's creepy if you're untrusting (which may well be valid), but there aren't really many viable options to achieve what they claim they're trying to do.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Actually using a soldering iron isn't anything like me, personally, as I've never used one. I was aiming for "encourage the little girl to use her mind instead of acting like brainless bimbo is a life goal."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    8. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by narcc · · Score: 1

      That doesn't explain the comic book.

      Do girls just naturally need a vacuous form of entertainment?

    9. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Agreed, comic books tend to be vacuous ... but TV is worse.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re: Hello, Talky Tina by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to slut shame. Nothing wrong with bimbos. Why do you think them brainless just because they're sexy? The mind is the biggest sexual organ. Who's to say your views on sex are correct?

  7. Not safe for kids by ITRambo · · Score: 1

    "You're such a good little girl. Now, go the kitchen and find that big shiny knife that mommy told you never to touch. It's okay because we're going to play a fun game called mommy cushion, Good girl." No thanks.

  8. Whey your son* demands* a conversation with Barbie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When your daughter demands to have a conversation with Barbie, you explain to your child that you don't have conversations with things, lest you be institutionalized and put on heavy medication before long.

    *) let's not be sexist, mkay?
    *) children don't request, they demand, especially the ones with parents who buy them Barbie dolls.

  9. posting to remove accidential mod by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

    made the wrong mod, posting to remove it

  10. adult v child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How come it's creepy with Barbie but not with siri, google, smart tvs, xbox kinect, or the myriad of other things that constantly monitor us when we think we are alone?

    1. Re:adult v child by brantondaveperson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They're creepy too. It's worse when you're bugging children's playtimes, but we shouldn't accept any of those things in our lives.

    2. Re:adult v child by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      because wont SOMEONE Think of the CHILDRENN!!!!! It really is that simple

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:adult v child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Slashdot is full now of people who have a mandatory minimum of things which must offend them, even if it's hypocritical to do so.

    4. Re:adult v child by harryjohnston · · Score: 1

      Because if they tell us to unlock the back door in the middle of the night, or to get into that nice man's car, we probably won't do what they say?

    5. Re:adult v child by mjwx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They're creepy too. It's worse when you're bugging children's playtimes, but we shouldn't accept any of those things in our lives.

      Often I find kids will eschew high tech toys in favour of a simple cardboard box. I gave my nephew a simple electronic drum kit for Christmas (it was to help with developing his co-ordination and to give him better musical tastes than his parents, so there was some thought into the gift) but he spent the entire day running around with the box it came in and having a ball. You wouldn't have been able to pry that box off him with a crow bar.

      You dont need to get high tech toys for kids, they'll enjoy lego, blocks, matchbox cars and the like just as much as I did when I was a kid. Hell, one of the best things you had to play with was a large refrigerator box.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    6. Re:adult v child by cazzazullu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I gave my nephew a simple electronic drum kit for Christmas

      As a parent, and speaking for most parents in the world, I wish upon you a house full of confetti and glitter, a sick goat locked up in your car, and from now on you're only allowed roughspun wool underwear.

      --
      int main(void) {while(1) fork(); return 0;}
    7. Re:adult v child by crtreece · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, you'll get your chance for payback when you have the opportunity to give gifts to your nephews/nieces/grandkids. It's the circle of (family) life.

      --
      file: .signature not found
    8. Re:adult v child by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I gave my nephew a simple electronic drum kit for Christmas

      As a parent, and speaking for most parents in the world, I wish upon you a house full of confetti and glitter, a sick goat locked up in your car, and from now on you're only allowed roughspun wool underwear.

      It was actually my sister who asked me to buy it.

      So I wish upon you that your children place you in the dodgiest pensioners home that they can find on 60 minutes.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  11. Re: Whey your son* demands* a conversation with Ba by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    Or, maybe, the child could have a conversation with her toy and use her imagination to have the toy reply. Why does everything need to be preset and electronically prepared for our kids so that they don't need to use their imaginations to play?

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  12. Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the story summary calling it creepy, to just about every initial response being negative, I cannot help but shed a tear for the love of technology that used to permeate these hallowed (now hollow) halls.

    Having a doll that can talk back to you, that can intelligently respond to what you are asking and learn what you want to talk about is not creepy. That is actually really interesting. It could be really cool.

    Is there potential for abuse? Sure. Would it be nice to have a clear off switch so it doesn't pick up things it shouldn't? Sure. But that doesn't make it a bad idea, or mean we should kill the baby in the cradle, and see how it actually turns out.

    Can the rabid un-thining pitchfork-wielding crazed mobs that roam Slashdot now please take a step back and think about the future at least once?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Young Lady's Illustrated Primer reference was an allusion to just how incredibly useful such a tool could be.

      When deciding whether an object, like a grenade, should be available to the public, it's fair, without being a Luddite, to consider whether it will do more harm than good. It doesn't mean we have to reject it, but we do, as thinking people, need to come up with a plan so it is on the whole beneficial.

      Turns out grenades are lousy tools of self defence, and very easy to make mistakes with. Machine guns are better, but still sloppy (I could lean either way). Small concealed pistols, damned handy. Harsh words and mean stares? Everyone should have those available, even criminals.

      Where to corporate driven listening devices with high entertainment value and the potential for customized education fit in the spectrum? Do any safeguards need to be put in place? Is there a responsibility on Mattel's part to listen for signs of abuse and respond? Can Barbie's input be used as evidence against you in courts, since you opened the box with the EULA?

      It doesn't seem Luddite to consider these questions.

    2. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by MtHuurne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Having a doll that can talk back to you, that can intelligently respond to what you are asking and learn what you want to talk about is not creepy. That is actually really interesting. It could be really cool.

      The creepy part is not a doll that listens, it is the manufacturer listening as well. An interactive doll that operates without an internet connection would be a great piece of technology.

      Can the rabid un-thining pitchfork-wielding crazed mobs that roam Slashdot now please take a step back and think about the future at least once?

      Technology in itself is neither good nor bad, it all depends on how you use it. Embracing every new development out of love for technology is just as irrational as rejecting it out of fear.

    3. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      The creepy part is not a doll that listens, it is the manufacturer listening as well.

      Not if you understand the technology, because you know that in order to do the first, it ALSO has to do the second.

      The other way it can be phrased, which is more accurate and less creepy, is to say a SERVER processes the audio data in order to form a response. That's not creepy; it's necessary - it says nothing about humans or "the company" (whatever that means) listening in.

      Technology in itself is neither good nor bad, it all depends on how you use it.

      Right, so lets not assume anything network connected that requires a server to function is bad. That's what I;m saying. Keep a neutral attitude, and evaluate what it does rather than the scariest thing it MIGHT do.

      Embracing every new development out of love for technology

      It's less wrong because it advances, instead of retards, humanity. The only real enemy is chaos and stagnation.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Those are all great questions, but what I'm seeing is not those, but instead "STOP MATTEL FROM PRODUCTION RIGHT NOW".

      Get the technology out and see what safeguards make sense.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you in theory.

      However, this is by the same company which recently released a children's book, featuring Barbie as a CM major in which she got through her studies by acting helpless and recruiting help from the boys.

      This talking doll will NOT say intelligent things. Guaranteed.

    6. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One of the concerns is that what the child says will be recorded and mined for nefarious purposes, such as using it to profile them. Another concerning thing is the concern that it could be used to manipulate them psychologically in various ways. Parents have no way of knowing what this damn thing could blurt out to their children next. Its not impossible that this thing could allow the cloud to get inside the childs head and use responses to cause psychological responses. Unlike the interaction with the child with one of their real, living peers, what is behind this doll is a massive corporation with huge analytical capabilities and the potential for an ulterior motive to try to get inside and and manipulate the users of this doll. Children are more vulnerable than adults due to the fact they are still in a period of rapid development and learning.

    7. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 2

      The creepy part is not a doll that listens, it is the manufacturer listening as well. An interactive doll that operates without an internet connection would be a great piece of technology.

      Is the manufacturer listening? There's at least one data analysis team lead listening, but is that person doing anything more than tuning the algorithm? Are they looking for keywords to be able to sell additional products, or partner with other sellers?

      Technology in itself is neither good nor bad, it all depends on how you use it. Embracing every new development out of love for technology is just as irrational as rejecting it out of fear.

      Read the first quote, and the second quote. Is this still true of manufacturers? Do we have any hard facts other than the unfounded assumptions of the masses that this information is being somehow data-mined?

      Normally, I would assume that we don't need facts. But your second quote has persuaded me that people here and elsewhere might be reacting on fear. And yes, I'm using your own quotes against you. Because you're not consistent.

      So, is a manufacturer that respects privacy while delivering a requested product evil? Or is it just fear of the unknown operating here?

    8. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It's nessicary at the current level of sophistication and viable price point. If computational capacity were cheaper, it'd be possible to put more of the doll's systems onboard. Maybe not everything, as any half-reasonable conversation is going to need a huge knowledge engine behind it, but the voice recognition at least, and some of the simpler query processing.

    9. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      "Are they looking for keywords to be able to sell additional products, or partner with other sellers?"

      Maybe, maybe not. Part of the issue is that we don't know. Worse, they could make a decision retroactive: Even if they aren't doing so now, they could decide to in future and process the logs of previous conversations. What we have here is a technology with a strong potential for abuse, and a clear commercial incentive for abuse. This should raise some alarms. The solution should be to set up some means - perhaps techological, perhaps legal - to preemptively block such abuse.

    10. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by kheldan · · Score: 1

      Can the rabid un-thining pitchfork-wielding crazed mobs that roam Slashdot now please take a step back and think about the future at least once?

      Not until you take off your rose-colored glasses and look at the real world for a change!

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    11. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Poohsticks · · Score: 1

      Ummmmm - no. This is not the reasoning of rabid un-thinking crazed mobs. This is the rational thinking of a distrustful public since the product and services are run by a corporation that has very little of the public trust. I actually agree with you that the technology is wicked cool. I just don't trust ANY corporation to use said technology responsibly (and F'-you to Google, Apple, Microsoft and Disney for their intrusive tech of GoogleTalk, Siri, Cortana, and the Disney wristband). We used to have privacy. I'd like mine back (thankyouverymuch). And yes - I am a grumpy old man, DAMMIT!

      --
      "The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been wide
    12. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      I think you make a good argument there. That book was especially horrible.

      But the book was the vision of a handful of people, unyielding once released.

      Imagine if the book could be re-flowed with entirely different text after release. Or if the girl really liked horses, it could include sections on great litigation about horses, or cool facts about horses...

      That is a doll with a server behind it, picking up on topics of conversation. Even if it shipped a little dim witted, it doesn't have to stay that way, and can adapt for girls with any possible interest. Even programming...

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    13. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by MtHuurne · · Score: 1

      The creepy part is not a doll that listens, it is the manufacturer listening as well.

      Not if you understand the technology, because you know that in order to do the first, it ALSO has to do the second.

      It doesn't require a super computer to do voice recognition, as demonstrated by the $75 retail price (which would cover a few years of server-side processing, unless the article failed to mention a mandatory subscription) and a game like There Came An Echo. My guess is that a modern ARM processor would be able to handle it just fine. If the processing would drain the battery of the doll too quickly, it could be done in an in-home base station (plug server, for example) that communicates over local WiFi. There are advantages to doing the processing on a central server, but I see no reason to claim it is not feasible to do it locally.

      The other way it can be phrased, which is more accurate and less creepy, is to say a SERVER processes the audio data in order to form a response. That's not creepy; it's necessary - it says nothing about humans or "the company" (whatever that means) listening in.

      How I imagine it will work is that the large amount of data coming in from all the dolls in the field will be used to improve both the voice recognition and the dolls' responses. For that purpose, they would build a big data set that proposed algorithm tweaks can be tested against. Collecting this data from customers rather than dedicated test sessions is cheaper, allows for quicker iteration cycles and produces much larger data sets, which generally improves the results.

      The question is whether the stored data will be anonymized early and properly or whether it will be possible to connect the stored data to a specific doll. Even if they would have no intention to violate anyone's privacy, I wouldn't trust them to get this right for a talking doll, when so many institutions dealing with medical data manage to screw it up.

      Technology in itself is neither good nor bad, it all depends on how you use it.

      Right, so lets not assume anything network connected that requires a server to function is bad. That's what I;m saying.

      Once the stored data exists, it is only a matter of time until someone comes up with an idea to use it in an unethical way. It could be an employee, it could be someone in the government, it could be an outside attacker who found a way into the network. In recent years we've read about companies selling data sets, huge data breeches and overreaching spy programs and I don't expect that 100% of those even reached the news. So assuming that a privacy policy will protect your data is naieve, in my opinion.

      A completely different concern with an essential server-side component is the same as with always-online games: if the manufacturer pulls the plug, this doll would revert back to being just a plastic doll.

      Keep a neutral attitude, and evaluate what it does rather than the scariest thing it MIGHT do.

      How would you evaluate it? Even if you have the knowledge to be able to evaluate such a complex process, they wouldn't let you audit their systems.

      Even apart from the data collection angle, evaluation is an issue: with a book, a parent can have a quick look at it to check whether its content is something they want their children exposed to. With an interactive online service, how the doll behaves a year from now might be different from how it behaves today. What to do if Barbie suddenly starts begging her owner for a horse or a boyfriend?

      I'm not saying the potential for misuse means no-one should buy this doll, that's for every individual parent to decide. What I'm objecting to is being called a luddite over what I think are very valid concerns.

      Embracing every new development out of love for technology

      It's le

    14. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      My guess is that a modern ARM processor would be able to handle it just fine.

      Come on. That gets you a "DOLL ON" kind of command recognition, not a natural language conversation with a little girl that learns over time. Do you have any idea how out of reach that would be even for any modern smartphone to do completely standalone?

      It says a lot that all technologies like Siri are wholly cloud based and can do just about nothing without network access. If they could work locally, they would.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    15. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by MtHuurne · · Score: 1

      Do we have any hard facts other than the unfounded assumptions of the masses that this information is being somehow data-mined?

      I have no information about this doll other than the article, so no hard facts. I do consider it very likely it will be data-mined in some way, since that would actually be useful for improving the product. See my other response above.

      So, is a manufacturer that respects privacy while delivering a requested product evil? Or is it just fear of the unknown operating here?

      There is no proof they will respect privacy and there is no proof they won't. But when it comes to large companies, I am no longer willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. That's not fear, it's cynicism. I don't like having that attitude, but I can't justify any other attitude to myself either.

    16. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by narcc · · Score: 1

      Not if you understand the technology, because you know that in order to do the first, it ALSO has to do the second.

      Why can't it happen locally? We've had "learning" chatter bots and local voice recognition for ages. Worst comes to worst, have the kid read the doll a story for the training portion and you're good to go.

      Really, I don't see why we couldn't even cram the whole thing on the doll. With a suitably restricted vocabulary, you wouldn't even need a training portion.

    17. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by supercrisp · · Score: 1

      I understand your position, and I appreciate the references to Diamond Age. But, my kids have school teachers fishing for information on my family. You know, the usual stuff about "do mommy and daddy do drugs?" Our government and retail and other services have their noses so far up my butt, I'm burping their boogers. The cops are roaming around with stingrays and x-rays, and some airports are still using rapey scans. And my kids are always running up to me reciting their need for the latest tacky plastic crap that teaches really stupid things--or some garbage about how an adult or other child is teaching them about eternal damnation or Sky Daddy and Zombie Boy. And all this despite the fact that we don't watch commercial TV in our house. But they get enough at school. Anyway, point is: in a climate like this, it's hard for me to call any reaction to this sort of "cloud-enabled" toy an over-reaction. Burroughs was a nut, indeed, but he was on the money on "the paranoid man is a man who knows a little about what's going on."

    18. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      We know that the technology isn't quite there for something like this. I'd love to be proven wrong, but nothing has passed the Turing test. Maybe coming close is good enough for small children, though. However, we know that the marketing is *there* so the initial reaction is pretty creepy. I'm glad to be proven wrong. Also electronic security has just been awful. It's more likely than not that this will get hacked in a negative way. Although I'm not sure how big of a risk that is in terms of the value of the data.

    19. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That means trusting Mattel, and there seem to be reasons to believe that would be a bad idea.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    20. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --You know, it's funny - but when I read Asimov's "Robbie**" I was rooting for the robot, because reasons. The robot was written from a sympathetic point of view, appeared to really care for the daughter, and 3 Laws blahblahblah.

      --I find this whole "spying Barbie" idea to be creepy (and unnecessary) as hell. Perceived motives and all that. USRMM (from the story) had no vested interest in advertising to litle girls.

      ** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    21. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is behind this doll is a massive corporation with huge analytical capabilities and the potential for an ulterior motive to try to get inside and and manipulate the users of this doll. Children are more vulnerable than adults due to the fact they are still in a period of rapid development and learning.

      Let's be honest. Children may be more vulnerable but obviously adults are extremely vulnerable or we wouldn't have the current situation with massive advertising that does nothing to inform that drives purchases. Having said that...

      Another concerning thing is the concern that it could be used to manipulate them psychologically in various ways. Parents have no way of knowing what this damn thing could blurt out to their children next. Its not impossible that this thing could allow the cloud to get inside the childs head and use responses to cause psychological responses.

      Yea, that's some classic sci-fi and as absurd as the Satanic subliminal messages in the music.(which you can hear if you play the music backwards) that turns all the kids into blood thirsty killers. Nah, they'll just do the same standard advertising that equates happiness with products that already happens everywhere else in a child's life. I don't see it as particularly worse. Just stupider as it is tantamount to buying a DVD of commercials.

    22. Re:Slashdot Overrun by Luddite Barbarians by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      Why would a company make a locally run version of Siri only to loose out on all the extra money they could make from analyzing the "Big Data". I don't think it is as simple as saying if they could do it, they would. Stand-alone GPS units from a decade ago could hold a map of all the roads in the USA for routing you to your location. Does Google Maps have the roads locally stored or do they send your current location and target destination to their servers so they can get more data on you?

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  13. Re: Whey your son* demands* a conversation with Ba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? Because it is currently the mainstream trend to pretend like imagination and non-logical thinking are not only totally delusional, but harbingers of Ted Cruz's apocalypse.

  14. Re: Whey your son* demands* a conversation with Ba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, maybe, the child could have a conversation with her toy and use her imagination to have the toy reply. Why does everything need to be preset and electronically prepared for our kids so that they don't need to use their imaginations to play?

    Training a generation of worker drones question nothing and as their managers prefer they will not ask questions too. Woohoo! Duh! (Homer Simpson)

  15. not as creepy uses that will transpire by nimbius · · Score: 4, Funny

    1. 4chan kickstarter successfully orders 128 hello barbies, a raspberry pi, and some old karaoke speakers. ISIS, NAZI, and Boko Haram propaganda are then looped through mplayer. blood curdling screams and pornographic soundtracks liven up the data collection.
    2. 4chan kickstarter successfully purchases 16 hello barbies, straps them to the undercarriage of random long haul tractor trailers at undisclosed truck stops.
    3. original plans failing, 256 Hello Barbies are purchased, locked in a closet, the question "Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? " is asked. the barbies answer eachother for eternity.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:not as creepy uses that will transpire by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      You are a horrible person. Not that I endorse that, but argument ad absurdum is an art. I love your idiocy.

    2. Re:not as creepy uses that will transpire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >4chan
      More like they buy the dolls and end up falling in love with barbie; stealing the market away like My Little Pony.

  16. It would be fine if not for the network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would be fine if it was not the case that the doll answered back itself without network access using its own processing capacities. The point of this toy is not to let kids have discussions with their dolls, its to mine conversations for marketing purposes from children. This has happened before with Mattel was distributing Windows games with Malware and Spyware that the FTC slapped them with a fine for.

  17. The future of child care is here by aberglas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Who really can provide all the time that that a little girl requires. Now the problem is solved. The electric Barbie will be her friend and confident, and guide her through the mysteries of life. Parents can continue to watch TV safe in the knowledge that their children are safe. I presume that interactive destructor robots are not far off so little boys will not be left behind.

    The will all grow up to be good, politically correct individuals. As the software becomes more intelligent, it will appeal to older and older children. No need to deal with real friends who need to be cared for, listened to, and can be nasty. Barbie is always nice. Always listens, is always concerned about you. And all that personality data can be sold to other companies to help guide their entire life. Buttons sewn when she is 3, pressed when she is 30, how wonderful.

    Computers are getting smarter. This toy may be a bit of a joke, but the next version will be better. And they will be coming cheaply from China, with software driven by Google.

    When Computers Can Think

    Anthony

    1. Re:The future of child care is here by dlingman · · Score: 1

      Recall the bear from the movie AI?

    2. Re:The future of child care is here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a Barbie girl in the Barbie world,
      Life in plastic, it's fantastic.
      You can brush my hair, undress me everywhere,
      Imagination, life is your creation.

      Come on, Barbie, let's go party!

    3. Re:The future of child care is here by twosat · · Score: 1
    4. Re:The future of child care is here by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      When we were growing up, unemployed mothers spent an average of 11 hours a week directly engaged with their kids. Now unemployed mothers spend 17 hours a week with their kids on average and moms with full time jobs... spend an average of 11 hours a week with their kids. I don't know statistics for dads. The numbers are from Sheryl Sandberg's book. I haven't personally validated them. But the answer to who can spend the necessary amount of time with a female child.... you can!

    5. Re:The future of child care is here by jaxn · · Score: 2

      You are so far off it's not funny. Parents will continue to watch Netflix and Hulu not "TV" ;-)

      --


      "Being alive is a crock of shit." --Kilgore Trout
  18. hot grits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    greased-up Yoda doll won't rat you out your darkest desires to the cloud.

  19. Re: Whey your son* demands* a conversation with Ba by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Or, maybe, the child could have a conversation with her toy and use her imagination to have the toy reply. Why does everything need to be preset and electronically prepared for our kids so that they don't need to use their imaginations to play?

    IMAGINATION BAD!
    If children learned to use their imaginations, then they will be adults with imaginations and won't be as easily swayed to do our bidding.

  20. Imagination by verbatim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They want to have a conversation with Barbie

    It's official, folks. Childhood imagination is now officially dead.

    --
    Price, Quality, Time. Pick none. What, you thought you had a choice?
    1. Re:Imagination by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Defend. All children? Or children of parents who can afford an $80 toy?

    2. Re:Imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defend. All children? Or children of parents who can afford an $80 toy?

      or the marketers who sorely wish to define the entire conversation about it? (or rather, wish they could eliminate all discussion about the product entirely and replace it with the willingness to buy it?)

  21. I'm uncomfortable until it's a local service by msobkow · · Score: 1

    I'm uncomfortable with Siri, Cortana, the "smart" TV voice commands, and the whole lot of it unless and until all the processing can be done locally. Under no circumstances do I want my conversational data uploaded to the cloud for processing. Damned if I'm going to watch what I say in my own home because of eavesdropping equipment!

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:I'm uncomfortable until it's a local service by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Suggested solution:
      1. Learn digital signal processing.
      2. Learn linquistics.
      3. Learn advanced statistical modeling.
      4. Learn machine learning.
      5. Create an open-source voice recognition library of comparable or greater accuracy.

      Or maybe a better plan:
      1. Contribute money to hire someone who has done 1-4 to help improve the libraries that already exist - I can find a few on google, but they clearly aren't good enough.

    2. Re:I'm uncomfortable until it's a local service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot:

      0. Design a CPU and memory SoC that can handle 1-5 at a reasonable price point.

      Oh wait, it can't be done.

  22. Today's crazy thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a daughter in the age group heavily marketed by toy companies. When she asks for a toy that I, for what ever reason, disagree with I tell her NO. If you don't like a product, for what ever reason, DON'T F'ING BUY ONE!!!! Grow a pair and tell little Johnny or Suzie that you don't approve and they will have to find something else to play with. If you are late to this "parenting" thing it is going to take some time and you'll have to deal with the spoiled brat attitude, but in time you'll have well behaved respectable children. My kids don't have cell phones, we don't have cable (which eliminates most of the advertising) and the computers have ad blocking. We have Netflix and original Wii systems, one of which is on a CRT TV. Teach them to respect what they have and that they don't need the latest and greatest heavily marketed widget and they will go far in life.

  23. A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer by LionKimbro · · Score: 1

    I just had this extraordinary vision of Barbie teaching a computer science curriculum to girls everywhere.

    1. Re:A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer by geggo98 · · Score: 1

      CS skills without ethics is exactly what lead to this Barbie dressed childhood infiltrator.

  24. Now that thought is scary by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I presume that interactive destructor robots are not far off so little boys will not be left behind.

    People are freaked out about a doll that has a server processing audio.

    That is NOTHING compared to the thought of a ten-year-old buy in charge of a small ultra-strong autonomous robotic mech suit... that learns right and wrong from the boy. *shudder*.

    On the other hand, that should absolutely stomp out the last vestiges of nerds being picked on in school. So I guess i'm in full support. Just lead me to the Kickstarter.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  25. Not exactly surprising by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

    For the time being, you can expect all inexpensive products that feature voice recognition will be sending sound recordings to a server for processing. Building the voice recognition software and databases into the product would make them prohibitively expensive.

  26. As seen in the movie "Small Soldiers"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So that a tortured doll becomes homicidal?

  27. Diamond Age by cas2000 · · Score: 1

    This kind of thing sounded cool and amazing in Neal Stephenson's Diamond Age, but in real life it's just fucking creepy and perverted.

    The key difference is that Stephenson's version was a primer that educated the owner about maths and science and all sorts of things, while this abomination is from a company that has a history of marketing to and exploiting children, and is a doll whose purpose is to teach rigidly oppressive gender roles, teaching girls things like "math is hard".

    sadly, Stephenson's version is probably only possible in fiction. In real life, the corporate profit motive makes it just marketing spyware.

  28. Easier said.. by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Being a good parent you restrict access to the toy(s) and here is the conversation at school with the school supplied Barbie. "I hate mommy and daddy, they are so mean to me. They won't get me a talking Barbie and banned me from using it at my friends houses too! *sob*" Barbie: "Really, should I report them and get you new parents?"

    Anyone who has raised a child knows that kids say some pretty mean things growing up. It's part of growing up, and covered in every book I read on psychology for raising kids. This is a plain old horrible idea on just about every level.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  29. Re: Whey your son* demands* a conversation with Ba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THIS!

    A child learning to use their imagination is required for proper childhood development! We need to let our children use theirs.

  30. Aw hell no! by Morpeth · · Score: 1

    Seriously... no, no, no and fuck no. I hate barbies anyway, this takes it to a new level.

    --

    'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
  31. That is Lame, not Cool by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Why can't it happen locally? We've had "learning" chatter bots and local voice recognition for ages.

    Yes, which is why that would suck compared to what they are trying to do - have a more intelligent conversation.

    Point a five year old at Eliza sometime and see how long they maintain interest.

    Really, I don't see why we couldn't even cram the whole thing on the doll.

    Perhaps ten years from now we can. Right now, not if you want to make it work at all well and not be terrible, plus about 10x more expensive than it will be. It's pretty cheap to run audio to the cloud and come back with voice synth, way WAY more expensive to move that processing into Every. Single Doll. Not to mention worse battery, and so on. The doll as it is will be $75, already pretty expensive.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:That is Lame, not Cool by narcc · · Score: 1

      Point a five year old at Eliza sometime and see how long they maintain interest.

      Point an adult at it and Weizenbaum will tell you how disturbed it make him feel to see adults attribute real intelligence to a computer program.

      Hey, let's face it -- chatter bots haven't exactly advance much farther beyond Eliza.

      that would suck compared to what they are trying to do - have a more intelligent conversation.

      I should probably point out that this is a toy. They're not out to produce some advanced AI program; they want to make a slightly improved talking doll to sell to young girls.

      Remember: the only reason Siri needs to talk to the server is to avoid a short training session. That bit is all about voice recognition. On the chatter-bot side, more computing power isn't going to net you any significant gains. It's still just as bad as it's always been. Just ask Siri.

      Right now, not if you want to make it work at all well and not be terrible, plus about 10x more expensive than it will be

      I think you underestimate the state of modern technology, or the computing power necessary for speech recognition software suitable to the task. While I'm not familiar with the internals of the toy, I suspect there exists a micro-controller capable of adequately meeting that need already on-board. Ditch the wifi and you'll even save a bit of money.

      Like I said before, reduce the vocabulary and you can skip the training step. After that, something like this was well-withing the capabilities of my old 66mhz IBM Aptiva with 8mb of RAM. If a training step can be integrated in to play, even better.

  32. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  33. do you really have to ask? by electrosoccertux · · Score: 2

    This is marked funny, but think about it for a minute. Our computers, phones, tablets -- even watches -- are collecting way more information than this Barbie is and yet how many people think these ubiquitous machines are creepy? Not many. The lesson here might be this: the shape of the surveillance device doesn't make it creepy -- what it collects is what makes it creepy. Oddly though, very few people are creeped out by their own phone.

    Two conclusions based on "shape irrelevant":

    1) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. have become extremely creepy surveillance devices (this is where I am, which is depressing, because I've loved technology for so long).

    2) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. are surveillance devices and surveillance is totally not creepy -- just don't care.

    To mix and match 1 & 2 though, making barbie creepy and siri not, is inconsistent and illogical.

    a good childhood is about innocence, fun, and the world being in general a good place.

    Big Brother is there to help with that.

  34. There is a good reason for that by aepervius · · Score: 1

    We have seen abuse over abuse stappled over abuse in the last decade. At some point you start to WORRY a little bit especially with young children very weak to suggestion and advertising. That's not luddism, which would be rejection of ANY improvement, that's called being a realistic fuck which learned and lived through the last decade.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  35. Similar doll exists - My Friend Cayla by Daemonic · · Score: 1

    Mattel didn't call it the "world's first interactive doll", they called it the "very first fashion doll that has continuous learning". The key words here being "fashion doll", which allows them to differentiate themselves from competitors they don't consider fashionable, and "continuous learning", i.e. the server is keeping a log of previous conversations, and using them to have better conversations.

    The Cayla doll for instance was brilliant at answering questions like "What is Polytetrafluoroethylene?", and rubbish at answering questions like "Do you like kittens?" Sadly, it was a rather dull toy for a 7yr old girl, despite looking initially exciting.

    What it didn't do, and this Barbie won't be doing, is snooping on us. I'd expect it to use Bluetooth to communicate with an App, which will then be using WiFi to connect to the Mattel server. If you don't have the App turned on, and by the sounds of it, if you don't press the button on the doll, it won't be listening. So if a child is playing with it, don't discuss national secrets, and if a child is not playing with it, there's no snooping.

    The online conversation history is interesting, but not worth getting worked up about. It's recording how you've played with it, like all sorts of other online games keep logs.

    Sure, there's a potential for abuse - "Hey - you say you like ponies! Did you know Mattel make a Barbie pony that's only $9.99 from your local Wal-Mart?" but I think if they start doing that, the backlash of people not buying their products out of sheer disgust will stop them pretty quickly. I'd say the worst is probably more like "Hey - you say you like ponies! I've got a pony called Muffin" without mentioning that Muffin costs $9.99 from Wal-Mart (or might do if it existed).

    1. Re:Similar doll exists - My Friend Cayla by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You are believing what professional liars tell you. Off switches are frequently merely switches that disable local output.

      I *do* agree that if you don't have an accessible WiFi in the neighborhood it probably won't be snooping on you. But the neighbor's WiFi might well do.

      OTOH, if you are right, and it requires a dedicated smartphone to operate, then it will be less intrusive, but also a lot more expensive than stated. (I.e., you'll need to include not only the $80 for the doll, but also the cost of a phone and its monthly connection rental.) (Practically, I don't think the doll can share your cell phone, as you are often out of the house. Perhaps you could let it onto your computer...I'm sure they've got the security tight enough that *your* data would be safe. But I wouldn't trust it with *my* data.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Similar doll exists - My Friend Cayla by Daemonic · · Score: 1

      I'm basing it on how the similar Cayla doll works. Doll -> Tablet/Phone -> House WiFi -> Internet. Also in TFA it says the parents enable it by "signing into an app". That's most likely something they need to do each time the doll's turned on. Most of the local processing power is likely to be in the App.

      It also makes sense from a maintenance point of view. It's a pain to update the doll's firmware, but easy to update mobile apps and server-side software. I doubt if there's any processing going on in the doll at all.

      As for security, it's as secure as any other Android app I allow on my phone with "full internet access".

      Yes, the professional liars could be lying about "Its listening function is activated only when a button on Barbie's belt buckle is pressed." but battery life will suck if they do it any other way.

    3. Re:Similar doll exists - My Friend Cayla by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, I've no idea about the Cayla doll, I was comparing it to the recent TVs. Your point about battery life is decent, but I'm not certain. That would mean it wasn't transmitting much, but a USB stick can hold a lot, so they wouldn't necessarily need to transmit very often.

      Of course, I'm assuming that they are intentionally collecting information. But then they have advertised that that's what they're doing, and I don't expect the PR people to know how the thing works, and I don't really expect most of the designers to have known how the part they were working on was going to be used. (After all, it's probably a lot better if it's desinged so that it can work in lots of other things.)

      Recording sound to non-moving storage is cheap on battery power, it's only transmission that's expensive.

      FWIW, I don't have a smart phone with apps, but I'll probably end up with one soon...for an uncertain value of soon, could be months, could be years.

      Another FWIW: The professional liars that I was talking about were the PR spokesmen. These people generally don't even realize that they are lying, because they never check. It's like the artists that do paperback book cover illustrations. They're told a bit about the story, maybe a scene, and then they come up with something they hope will sell. And they never bother to read the book. (Usually they wouldn't have a chance until afterwards anyway.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  36. Terms of service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello this is Barbie online service, to accept the terms of service and continue press on the righ breast, to decline press on the left breast.

  37. Obiligatory by PyroGX · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Obiligatory by PyroGX · · Score: 1

      Cant edit spelling :(

  38. Forget that, do you know where I can find.... by Dareth · · Score: 1

    Forget that, do you know where I can find....a Cherry 2000, I really want her to go get me a Pepsi. ;)

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  39. Can't help but think of Harry Harrison's... by unitron · · Score: 1

    ...short story "I Always Do What Teddy Says".

    --

    I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  40. That's good but... by Yanglish · · Score: 1

    I hope soon will not be aggressive toys that can harm the child.

    --
    Success is the sum of small efforts - repeated day in and day out.