New "sixth sense" technology

[john titor]

Don't know if its been posted up here but check this out!!!

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/pattie_maes_demos_the_sixth_sense.html

This will be the next revolution in IT.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

wow this is incredible. I'm quite fond of the Amazon book rating feature and being able to draw a watch on your arm.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Is this really such a good idea? I honestly think some of the ideas proposed with this device seem over the top, not to mention I think pose a serious privacy violation.

Lately, I think people don't seem to understand how important privacy is or even why it's important. Some people believe it's completely dead: It's actually not -- there actually are some aspects of privacy remaining in the lives of average people, but at the rate we're going it will be all gone very soon, and once it's gone it will never come back -- ever. This will affect us all, me and you.

CuttingEdge100

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Is this really such a good idea. I honestly think some of the ideas proposed with this device seem over the top, not to mention I think pose a serious privacy violation.

CuttingEdge100

What kind of privacy violation? it only gives information which has been posted by the person in their blog for all to see and it relies on picture recognition which the person it's getting info on has freely posted themselves.

 

[john titor]

Is this really such a good idea? I honestly think some of the ideas proposed with this device seem over the top, not to mention I think pose a serious privacy violation.

Lately, I think people don't seem to understand how important privacy is or even why it's important. Some people believe it's completely dead: It's actually not -- there actually are some aspects of privacy remaining in the lives of average people, but at the rate we're going it will be all gone very soon, and once it's gone it will never come back -- ever. This will affect us all, me and you.

CuttingEdge100

You raise a very pertinent point, there will need to be serious legislation in place to prevent privacy breaches. This technology could also be used for increased surveillance purposes a la 1984, which would truly be disastrous. On the flipside wouldn't it allow people greater horizontal interconnectivity than ever before thus weakening the power of governments perhaps? The technology isn't bad, it depends on how we use it, granted there will be idiots at all levels of society whose usage will reflect their idiocy=intrusion/civil rights violations etc.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Mr. Titor,

You raise a very pertinent point, there will need to be serious legislation in place to prevent privacy breaches.

Agreed, and the current laws are not sufficient.

This technology could also be used for increased surveillance purposes a la 1984, which would truly be disastrous.

Which is my primary concern. There are other technological creations which also offer a similar potential (even worse in some cases) for eroding privacy such as this particular gem ( URL's: http://www.ibm.com/news/us/en/2008/07/29/x657352h71096o55.html / http://web.media.mit.edu/~vemuri/wwit/wwit-overview.html ) which if IBM has it their way will become part of all future phones and PDA's. Since the FBI in the past has been able to remotely activate GPS systems on people's phones and even the audio-recorders even when the user switched them off in order to catch criminals, there is a risk that the government could remotely activate this particular device as well. With the recent NSA Warantless Wiretapping scandal not too far behind us, in which the NSA and DIA has essentially for years monitored virtually everybody's phone-calls, e-mails, internet-transmissions, and such (They didn't record every one, but their computers did pick up every single message, run it through their filters to look for any particular words, sequences of words, certain words in proximity to each other, even certain voice-patterns and upon such detection it would flag the message for a person to look at), in the aftermath of this FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was created in 1978 in response to Nixon's various surveillance abuses, and the Church Committee probably, which established a secret court to approve warrants for various wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping purposes to avoid surveillance abuse -- it more or less has instead proven a rubber-stamp court, approving virtually any request made of it) was more or less amended to actually make it easier for the government to use FISA for domestic surveillance purposes -- it is hard to trust the government not to tap a device like the IBM Memory Aid and essentially gather every piece of data on the lives of every single person. Especially when you keep in mind the fact that Barack Obama has actually defended the program. (It should also be noted that in 2008, the National Application Office was given it's charter, and is currently in service, which essentially exists for the purpose of essentially providing satellite data gathered through intelligence agencies, and the military to be given to law enforcement agencies for law enforcement functions. Since the military or intelligence agencies such as the CIA/NSA/NRO are not supposed to be used for domestic law enforcement operations, this is obviously not a good thing freedom and privacy wise.)

On the flipside wouldn't it allow people greater horizontal interconnectivity than ever before thus weakening the power of governments perhaps?

Good point. However regarding the trends of the past eight years, regarding the government's excessive use of surveillance powers, willingness to intrude into the lives of innocent American citizens without warrant (often in complete disregard for the Constitution) it would seem that most likely this technology would end up violating privacy-rights and individual liberties far more often than it would be used to help expose government wrong-doing...


CuttingEdge100

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I'm waiting for haptic feedback devices and mediated reality by using contact lenses that project an overlay of your world view directly onto your retinas. See "Rainbows End" by Vernor Vinge for a description of possible social implications of such technologies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbows_End

 

[Meredith]

Watch the anime series "Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex" if you want to see the logical conclusion of a lot of this technology.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Deuterosome,

The problem with such an idea with contact lenses is, what if someone could, though hacking, and manipulation of such a device essentially display whatever they wanted you to see?


Meredith,

Interesting...


CuttingEdge100

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Deuterosome,

The problem with such an idea with contact lenses is, what if someone could, through hacking, and manipulation of such a device essentially display whatever they wanted you to see?

One of the themes of the novel by Vernor Vinge that I mentioned. I guess you'd have to rely on really good security software. It's an ongoing battle at the moment with PCs, PDAs, mobile phones, so any future wearable computers will, of course, also potentially be vulnerable.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Deuterostome,

An author actually wrote about such a problem already? You could see how this could be a major problem though...

 

[hyzmarca]

I'm waiting for someone to invent a two-way DNI and software that can be used to kill someone over the internet.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Deuterostome,

An author actually wrote about such a problem already? You could see how this could be a major problem though...

Of course, but it's only one of many and existing firewall and cryptographic solutions should help. If this technology comes about, it's the nearest we're going to get to holosuites in our lifetimes.

I do recommend reading "Rainbows End" by Vernor Vinge -- it won the 2007 Hugo Award for best novel. Vinge was a professor of mathematics and computer science at San Diego State University so he's no lightweight.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

hyzmarca,

What's a two-way DNI?


Deuterostome,

I doubt firewall and cryptographic solutions will help any great deal... especially when you consider that newer viruses will be created, and the government should it be inclined will almost always be able to hack you (The government recently has been involved in a lot of illegal surveillance of its citizens).


CuttingEdge100

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I doubt firewall and cryptographic solutions will help any great deal... especially when you consider that newer viruses will be created, and the government should it be inclined will almost always be able to hack you (The government recently has been involved in a lot of illegal surveillance of its citizens).

Paranoid much?

 

[Trekker4747]

Don't know if its been posted up here but check this out!!!

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/pattie_maes_demos_the_sixth_sense.html

This will be the next revolution in IT.

Great. A whole bevy of stupid things to give people to do while driving.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Deuterostome,


Actually paranoia is an unjustified or irrational fear.

There are hackers in the world, and they often do create viruses and worms and other malicious software. Generally anti-virus software is updated to deal with the threat, so hackers create newer bugs. This is not news.

Our government has engaged in massive illegal warrantless wiretapping. There is ample evidence of it.

Various governments, which include the US do employ hackers for various purposes. The Russians, as an interesting note prior to invading Georgia launched a massive cyber attack. This is known.

If a person was wearing a device that actually could display information to them via special contact lenses in the same detail as the human eyes, and that data could be manipulated via hackers (whether or not they affiliated with a government), a person could be quite cleverly deceived and manipulated. This would potentially be a far more serious of a problem than what a modern day, run-of-the-mill hacker can do today. I mean a hacker cannot make your eyes themselves see whatever he/she wants you to see...

I should note, however, that governments do tend to have better resources at their disposal than your typical run-of-the-mill hackers do, and would be far more effective at defeating anti-virus and firewall software. Russia has already employed massive cyber-attacks for tactical/strategic purposes...

So, with that said, I would not consider my statements to be unjustified or irrational.


CuttingEdge100

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Actually paranoia is an unjustified or irrational fear.

It can also be defined as delusions of grandure.

So, with that said, I would not consider my statements to be unjustified or irrational.

I agree, but are the government or governments going to expend resources to persecute mere nonentities?

 

[plague]

As a previous intelligence officer for the DOD, I have to say that a lot of fear of the government spying on it's own people is unjustified. One of the first things that is drilled into an officer's head is the huge warning against collecting intelligence on American citizens. There are also several layers of oversight to protect the citizens.

Now, if you're not a citizen, then you likely want to use encryption.

Regarding the "sixth sense" device, do we really need more noise? I would rather be free of the data.

 

[Jadzia]

I can't see this device catching on myself.

This system involves equipment that's bigger than an average phone hung around your neck. Can you imagine walking around with that thing swinging around infront of you? The camera and projector sometimes will be pointing the wrong way. And why project it? Phone and watch functions especially.

Projectors are not much use anywhere sunny, or anywhere you don't have a surface to project onto. What's wrong with displaying data on a screen on a handheld device? What information is so necessary that it needs to be constantly layered over our visual field?

As plague suggested, it's overloading people with data.