Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Television That Watches You 94

Posted by blizzard from the big-brother-is-watching-you dept.
According to an article in Wired, cable companies are starting to deliver set top boxes that track what you view on television. These boxes are already being rolled out in suburban detroit. Treasure your privacy while you still have it, folks.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Television That Watches You More

Television That Watches You

Comments Filter:

  • Rip the system. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I agree that the TV is largely a waste, but there is still some good content out there. I suggest that if you afford the electricity drain and you have one of these boxes, you turn your T.V. on to the Learning Channel or Discovery when you leave for work. Shove some flood data down their throats.

    If they FORCE you to have one of these boxes (which I think is unlikely), then a lawsuit could be in order. Primarily with the purpose of getting an official ruling. I doubt that boxes like these would stand up in court.
  • You can read "1984" online (!) at:
    http://www.alkar.net/moshkow/html-KOI/ORWELL/r19 84ch1.txt

    1984 is a closer reality than most think, but it was not accomplished using violence as a mechanism. Rather, control
    over your mind (and thus your body) is acquired through satiation - the saturation of your senses with meaningless pleasures - fast-food, the commercialisation of sex, oily popcorn at sci-fi flicks, bombarding you with lights, sounds, and colors. In some ways, it is the antithesis of 1984.....but with equivalence results.

    Fear fascism, fear tyranny, thanks for listening.

    Eron
  • When I told a friend of mine about how his newly installed MS Win98 could electronically download all the information about his machine and software at the time he registers it electronically. He observed that 1984 was coming from massive corporate power not from expected governmental authorities.

    Just remember how Lexus Nexus was disseminating private information ( for a fee ) that had been collected in their database (from multiple sources), which could allow financial transactions in your name without your knowledge or with your consent.

    The latter backed off a bit, by removing social security numbers. However, other information remains that can be easily misused.

  • $1 (Score:1)

    by crayz ( 1056 )
    That's what Neilsen pays

  • We have MediaOne in Atlanta too. I had them disconnect a couple years ago when the reception degraded to worse than I got with an antenna. (Which is saying a lot, We get a lot of interferance

  • It doesn't have enough power to do that. Besides, if they could do that, they wouldn't need a phone line hookup to order pay-per-view.

  • Actually, as a suburbanite of Detroit, I believe that this is a competing company for the already established cable companies. So in a way this is a good thing (breaks the connection between the established companies and their "utility" standing) but tracking what people watch doesn't settle well with me.
  • Isn't this a punchline to a Yakoff Smirnov joke:

    "In America, you watch television. In my country, TV watches you!"

    "In America, you go to party. In my country, Party comes to you!"

  • <revival-meeting> Amen! Preach it, brother! </revival-meeting>

    Seriously, I don't own a TV and don't intend to buy one after I graduate from college, either. I might get one with a VCR to watch movies, but I won't even have an antenna to receive broadcast channels, let alone cable. If there are any shows I consider decent enough to watch (e.g., B5), I'll just get a tape from my friends.

    While we're on the subject... April 22-28 is TV Turnoff Week; see the Adbusters site [adbusters.org] or the TV Turnoff page [adbusters.org] for more information.
    -----

  • British Interactive Broadcasting "give" you a £167 subsidy, on condition that you connect the box to a telephone line. This connection is checked (I don't know how often - I don't have a box). If you disconnect from the phone line, (or, more correctly, if BIB detect that your box has not dialled them for some undisclosed period of time), you get a bill for the subsidy. So, it's not a fine, but it's as good as. You can buy a box without the subsidy, but I understand that it has been "suggested" to many larger retailers to not bring this to the attention of the buyer as strongly as they may otherwise wish to....
  • This was one of the central notions behind the Max Headroom series-- real time ratings. The blipvert (high-speed advert) seems to have happened already, too-- does anyone else remember how strange it was to watch those first 15-second spots?

    Go Network 23!
  • When I'm done watching TV, I hit the big green power button on my receiver's remote, and it powers down the TV, VCR, and receiver all at once. The cable box is always turned on. Does this mean if I'm gone for a week that I watched 168 hours of Sci-Fi because I never turned the box off?
    If this ever does roll out in my area, that's when I cancel my cable. It is nobody's business what I watch and when I watch it. Even with the "...if you read the fine print you can get out of it" crap, I'm sure Time Warner would find some way of making me use something I don't want to. And of course, since I have 11 TV Guide channels (TWHT1-5, DIS, CMX, TMC, SHO, HBO + actual TV Guide channel) because I don't dig movie channels, if I leave the station on a scrambled channel such as one of those, would that arouse suspicion of theft? After all, that's 168 hours of TV Guide, but set to a pay station...
    Bah.
  • I believe that WebTV (owned my Microsoft) goes and class up the main server each night and tells it (among other things) what you watched, when, and for how long...there was a big uproar about this, no? Or am I just completely out of it?
    David E. Weekly (dew)
  • This system is called "Audimat" in France and exists for 15 or 20 years... each TV channel try to have the more point possible, you can see them on nice graphix like histogram for each channels and hours and number of people who are watching what, etc etc etc...
    it's even publish in the elevator of some channel's building each morning, so when you take the elevator you know how pany points you did last day, and know if you are fired :o)
    --
  • how pany points=how many points
    --
  • Seriously...

    The first thing I thought of was 1984 when I saw the headline...

    Targetting demographics is one thing, but I'm sure I watch some things I don't want anyone knowing about :-) Thankfully, the cable companies are covered by legistlation regarding selling pay-per-view information. I wonder if that law is broad enough to cover this information?

    Also, to me, the difference between this and hit counters is that with hit counters, 60% of the time, you're annonymous.

    Sujal

  • bleh. it's getting more and more like '1984' by the day... and no one cares.
  • Why bother paying for the cable box at all? There are plenty behind the cable co. in their trash dumpster. It's how I got my collection of boxes, and pissed off the cable company at the same time. There, I killed two birds with one stone.
  • This has been around for many years. I can remember back at least 5 years ago that the shoppers hotline would give you a box to run your cable through. the box would record what you watched as far as commercials and stuff and then dial into a central system and upload the info. Then when you went to the store you were supposed to have them scan a card that you had so that the information could be tracked what you bought and how well the commercials had an effect on what you bought. Kind of scary when you really think about it. But there were ways around it. You could have the box but not use the card so they could not track what you bought at the store.
  • DirecTV has been doing this since they started. You have to connect a phone line to the box in order to be able to buy pay-per-view movies without calling them. The box then calls them around 2am (800 number) and tells them you bought the movie. It also sends them your viewing info for the last several days.

    The solution, of course, is to disconnect your box from the phone line.

    Except that if you do that, they call you all the time to ask if your box is broken.
  • I'm 16 and I've never had cable or the like. I never miss it. I do have a TV, but it's solely for home video use. I don't think not having a TV has adversely affected me much. When people find out I don't watch TV, they do generally think I'm weird. Of course, they do that anyway, seeing as how I'm your typical unattractive, self-esteemless book and computer nerd, but I think I'd rather be that than a couch potato. How many people become philosophy and religion majors in college at my age (or any age) anyway? =)

    While I'm on the subject, does anyone else here have problems with DVD's video quality? I've seen a couple, and they had flagrantly bad artifacts like a poor quality JPEG or PC video. I don't know about you, but I think it's a good idea to stick with VHS/SVHS and LD. Analog noise is a lot less obtrusive than video noise. Not to mention DVD has national lockout, and a lot of the videos I watch tend to be international-only releases.
  • This is not new. Ratings have been taken via diary and electronic device for a long time. Where do you think the "overnight" ratings come from?

    Anyway, Nielson doesn't pay a whole lot.

  • What concerns me is that programming will be tailored to the tastes of the majority. I believe that my viewing habits are in the minority. I tend to watch Nova and PBS, Discovery, etc... While most people prefer 90210, Friends and Baywatch.

    They already are! Why do you think the networks put out such crap? Because they are carefully formulated to have something for many different demographic group.

    I wouldn't worry about your favorites, though, PBS is not driven by ratings, well they are but not nearly to the extent that network TV is. The amount of pledge money a show brings in is more important than ratings.

    As for things like the Discovery/History/Learning Channel/A&E, I think set top boxes will reveal that more people watch these than the Nielson diaries would indicate.

  • Well I'm a MediaOne customer in New England, so I guess I can expect this soon. ;-(

    BTW, every other cable provider I've been with has offered Comedy Central, Cartoon Network, Sci-Fi channel and a few others as part of basic cable. For some reason MediOne thinks these are pay channels, and charges $3 extra per month for them, anyone know why this is?
  • You are exactly right: dump that useless box. We dumped ours 8 years ago (before we had any kids). We don't miss it a bit.

    Television is a waste of time. There are better and less compulsive ways to get entertainment, and there are surely better ways to get your "information" (if you can call TV's various infomercials like 60 Minutes, or the Discover Channel, or whatever, "informative").

    If you want entertainment in a box, get a video player that doesn't include a channel changer (we haven't done this, but it's a far cry better way to go than TV).

    My US$0.02,

  • Why deny kids what you grew up with?

    If I grew up with diseases or crippled limbs, should I pass those on to my children? Of course not. The obvious conclusion is that not everything *I* grew up with is WORTH passing on to my children.

    I find it interesting too that you think children can be raised in an "overly sterile environment." Shall I conclude that exposure to "just the right amount" of pornography, or senseless violence, or idiot TV, is somehow BETTER for my kids??????

    Amazingly enough (for you, I guess), I actually live in the city. I can't get enough computing power into my house for my tastes. Contrary to your very uninformed opinion, dumping TV is hardly synonymous with being anti-technology. Television is a cesspool at worst and even at best a complete waste of time because there is so very little on it worth seeing. My saying so has nothing whatsoever to do with my attitudes toward technology in general.

    Finally, my boy won't be worried about the fact that he doesn't get to waste time watching TV because he will be far too busy actually having a real life.

    I don't expect everyone (or anyone) to agree with me about dumping TV. But it's plain ridiculous to criticize anyone for getting rid of it. I can't tell you how many people (I'm thinking it's universal) complain about how "there's nothing to watch on TV" -- and yet they just sit there, staring at it, vegetating as their intelligence is continually insulted. The people who dump it aren't necessarily anti-technology, but they've certainly realized what a complete waste of time TV is. And we've decided not to put up with it anymore.

    How much high quality code can you write while watching TV? Let's compare that to what you can do while NOT having your brain drained by the tube....

  • They have the only power they need...
    *yoink*
    That was the sound of your cable being disconnected. Don't you wish that this so-called deregulation actually meant there was another cable company in town, insted of just making you pay higher rates to the only game in town....
  • I've often wondered if DirecTV didn't already do this. After all, it is already hooked up to the phone for the Pay-per-view crap. It would take to much to watch what I'm watching, even down to the exact moment I change the channel.

    Seems like the service should be free for all the marketing information I'm (probably) giving them!
  • I care very much. I don't often tell people, because they get this strange look on their face, as though they where looking at a crazy freak who has lost it. I guess what I'm saying is I know how you feel.
  • "The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard."
  • Even without this latest atrocity, the TV must be destroyed. The TV medium is the lowest common denominator crap content sponsored by crap commercials also pandering to the lowest common denominator characteristics of the human race. And all for what--the opportunity to sit and DO nothing? If one must sell their soul for something, at least one should get a return on it.

    Also, our house does NOT have any TV sets.


    Love,

    Chris

  • I agree with this. I've been without cable for a LONG time, and while there are some shows I'd LIKE to see, it's not like my life is any worse for not having seen them. Overall, I'm amused at all the whining that consumers do about things like this, all the while forgetting that THEY have the most powerful influence of all at their disposal: their wallet.
  • Now they want to automatically track what you watch and not pay you a dime while they collect?

    Put more accurately, with these new set-top boxes, you pay them to track what you watch. It's a complete reversal. But, as long as consumers are willing to let companies get away with this, they'll keep pushing the envelope.
  • OK look, why do you care that the networks will know about your watching habits? Are you worried that they'll be judgmental about how all you /.ers rack up them "Adult TV" hours?

    No....it's the arrogance and utter contempt these companies exhibit by assuming they have some kind of right to this information.
  • You're right. It's their company, their equipment, and their service. They can do whatever they want. And I, as a consumer, have every right to respond to their actions by refusing to utilize the service. That's what a free market economy is all about.

    I was responding more to the article's suggestion that people may not be aware that their "upgraded" boxes are making it possible for the cable companies to collect information that was, at one time, entirely private (except for families participating in the Nielson ratings).
  • I know it won't take long for someone to figure out how to disable this tracking capability, so, question: When this happens, will it be illegal for us to do so?

    Granted, if we are renting the set-tops then obviously, it will be. But if we buy them, and it's our box, we should be allowed to modify them in whatever manner we wish (as long as it's not to get those pay channels, since that is illegal). Would cable companies be allowed to tell us that we have to rent the boxes from them, or buy only boxes that are "approved" by them? And if so, could they also specify that we are not allowed to modify the boxes? If we do, could they detect that and cancel our service?

    So, I guess my ultimate question is: How much power do the cable companies have over our freedom to use the set-top box of our choice?
  • The reason this is a problem is not because the companies can keep track of the number of people watching a show, but because they know which show YOU watch. Unless there are legal restraints in place, we're up against another company creating a profile of you in some big database, ready to sell it to the highest bidder.

    "Bugs are harder to cope with than features, because they are less well defined and less well designed."
  • This is not motivated by the desire for an invasion of privacy by the cable people. They want to generate a demorgaphic of their subscribers - to tailor their service and make more money. That much is obvious.

    What concerns me is that programming will be tailored to the tastes of the majority. I believe that my viewing habits are in the minority. I tend to watch Nova and PBS, Discovery, etc... While most people prefer 90210, Friends and Baywatch.

    It concerns me that, if most viewers in my area, would rather view a sitcom than a science show, my sci channel may get bumped from the line-up entirely - or be 'blacked out' during prime-time hours, for the benefit of the masses that prefer QVC to PBS.

    This is akin to the Stop&Shop 'coupon' card, that gives the customer the 'privilege' of buying items at a 'reduced' cost. A cost that is on par with the other supermarket's regular price.
  • " (FUD about computer suppliers dying...) The person we have to blame for this is one of Intel's founders, Gordon Moore. "

    " Moore postulated a 'law' back in 1965 stating that transistor counts would double roughly every 18 months, bringing an exponential rise to computing power in relatively short periods of time. "

    And he is to blame for what, now? God forbid I ever state a law that will ruin an entire industry :)

    Every day that passes is another day I wish more that most of the computer-geared mass media would just go away....
  • This idea makes perfect sense when you realize what the product is and who the consumer is in TV land. The product is you, the viewer. The consumer is the advertiser. The consumer pays big bucks for access to your eyes. The shows on TV are just there to get your attention so that you will watch the ads.

    The TV companies are hoping to increase their revenue by keeping better track of how many viewers they are "selling". You can also look forward to increased junk mail as your cable company begins selling lists of "everyone who watches golf" or "everyone who watches 90210" to advertisers. This process is the TV companies breaking the product into more categories, because the consumer will pay more for a targeted product than they will for a generic one.
  • As a native of Detroit, as long as Media One sticks with this, with Comcast I may be safe. Of course, I think Media One is now owned by Comcast...

    However, if it is a separate company, again I am safe.

    If it does come to pass, we'll just have to find a way around it, should be easy enough; that kind of stuff fails all the time.

    "Society Blows." -- Nelson Muntz
  • I work for a cable company, which should remain unnamed for the purpose of this comment. A good many of our customers fall into 2 groups:

    1. Those who subscribe to the level offering the most sports;

    2. Those who subscribe to the level offering the most educational/intellectual channels (I'm counting things like the Independent Film Channel here, there's a lot of crossover between audiences.)

    Don't worry about your Discovery Channel feed being blocked off, or anything else, because AFAIK the cable company usually has to take packages of stations owned by the same company; in other words, they're forced to take a bundle of things that customers may not necessarily like in order to get the things they DO like.
  • I don't have a set top box anymore. But, even when I did, I usually used the TV or VCR tuner and not the box to switch channels. I'd only use the box to view a scrambled channel which wasn't that often. Man that was a maze of wires and switches that I had back there so that I could tape and view at the same time.
  • This is just one more reason to switch to satellite if you have to watch television.

    Welcome to 1984!

  • Read George Orwell's 1984...

    They actually just have to put a hidden camera on it now...
    --

  • Why do you assume I had and watched TV?

    Yes, we owned a TV, however I was allowed to watch perhaps 1 show a week, and we only had 3 channels (no cable). And even though I'm only 26, when I was growing up, people couldn't even say "damn" on TV. Now, well, we have NYPD Blue. (Yes, late night, but still non-premium TV).

    And actually, I grew up in the country (Pennsylvania), now I live in a small city in Pennsylvania.

    Even the News has gotten so disgusting that I shudder at the stupidity. It's not news, it's an attempt at Shock TV.

    And even if the shows are alright, the Commercials are either trying to make my kid covet something he wouldn't even think of owning, or make references to unrelated "questionable" lifestyles.


    -- Keith Moore
  • Get rid of the TV. It just wastes your time and mental ability anyway. You can get the News off the Web, and waste just as much time on a computer, but at least you have to think a little more than staring at a blinking screen.

    And yes, I have gotten rid of mine (Mostly for my children's sake though)


    -- Keith Moore
  • Look don't feel sorry for the customers affected, feel jealous. I sure do!! MediaOnes customers in Metro Detroit are getting the absolute best service at the best prices MediaOne has to offer. They all have cable modems, digital cable and pay no more than $29 a month, and some pay as little as $22. I live less than one mile from this Cable Heaven yet it might as well be a light year. I am surrounded by MediaOne here in Farmington Hills serviced by Time Warner on an expired contract paying $37 a month for analog cable we won't ever have cable modems. We are in cable hell. Let me say this one more time:
    THE CABLE INDUSTRY IS WORSE THAN MICROSOFT!!!
    But not because of companies like MediaOne, because of companies like Time Warner.
  • Last year I found that I wasn't watching my TV anymore except for an occasional rented tape. I sold it to a coworker, and after the initial two-week withdrawls, I haven't missed it at all!

    I love it when the TCI sales guy comes to the door. When I explain I don't have a TV, he's baffled and wants to know how I survive.

  • privacy (Score:1)

    by set ( 19875 )
    as long as we can have a two minutes hate for Bill Gates, what's so bad about it ;)
  • The argument for why this is bad, as seen by the claims that this is just like 1984, is an incarnation of the slippery-slope argument: once your privacy is violated in this manner, who will draw a line stopping further violations, where will the line be drawn, and how will it be drawable?

    Are slippery slope arguments valid? This is essentially the same argument that was used to justify the Vietnam War; it's like we're replaying that old nursery rhyme about how, for want of a nail, the kingdom was lost. And yet ...

    We live in a world, now, where video cameras watch the public squares in many major cities (so the police can cut down on crime). Where parents log into the web to watch their children's day care center. Where televisions record their owner's viewing habits.

    It doesn't appear that anyone _is_ drawing a line, and so the slippery slope argument is getting stronger ... because we're slipping down it. Each invasion of privacy is perfectly rationally justified, and even supported by many people; and yet, when you take them as a whole, it becomes something sinister and dark --- we are running the risk of turning into a modern-day Venice, where the authorities are watching us at every turn. And we're helping it along --- we allow our televisions to record our viewing habits, and then someday those records will get subpeanoad. (sp?) [Hey! look at him! he used to watch the playboy channel, the allegations that he's a child molester must be true!]

    David Brin suggests in his book that the solution is to throw the floodgates open, and allow _anyone_ to violate your privacy, rather than just the authorities. I'm not sure I buy that ... it scares me ... but something has to be done, and soon.
  • "The big questions will be if this happens before or after the Arabs decides to stick it to the US with higher oil prices."

    Actually, the price of our oil isn't regulated by the "Arabs," but rather by a complex system of demand and government policies that I didn't really pay attention to when it was being explained to me. Why do you think gas is so much more expensive in Europe?

  • This way we can show TV networks that not evryone watches "friends" or any of the other tripe that comes down the pike. This is inevitable. Did you expect during their inception that hit counters were an invasion of privacy? Hopefully they will just take the signals without marking demograhpics. This would be important. At least this would remove the statistical inaccuracy of Neilsen ratings (polling a small % of a populace) and it may push some channels in the right direction *coughtntcough* as far as programming is concerned.

    - just slightly mad that "ratings" rule tnt in light of Crusade
  • Are computers not just blinking screens? Or are you referring to tv's as "blinking" in a British sense?

    All I watch is SCI-FI shows and DiscoveryTLCQEDetc. I like to be impressed, not bored to death by sitcoms. This is where the rot is.

    I'm not even complaining about the pointless violence to get ratings. It has a right to be on TV. But if you guarantee that right to producers, let them put sex and language online too. 1st amendment goes a lot further than wrestling thank you...
  • They would probably be able to FORCE you to use this system. If you read the article, you'd notice they are talking about DIGITAL cable boxes. You have no choice, either you get one of these boxes or bye-bye digital cable.
  • What makes you think people don't watch that tripe? The networks aren't stupid -- they show what people watch, even if it is mindless

    I dislike parsing my own words for others. I said "not everyone", not "nobody". Please pay attention. However, I do agree with the mindset that most people will swallow these things whole without thinking. There are very few dramas around. Buffy and Ally come to mind as bad examples of TV 1 hour drama. They are essentially hour long versions of 1/2 hour sitcoms. A lot of TV falls into the "braindead" category.

    If the Neilsen rating system has any inaccuracies, they aren't from the size of the sample. A large sample isn't needed as long as the people participating are representative of the population at large.

    Luckily, Neilsen picks people at random. Our family was once chosen (they were surprised to see all we watched was sci-fi, and mostly bablyon 5) and we decided not to watch sitcoms for that week. I hope it skewed results back to the norm. Some people are even pickier than that.


  • No....it's the arrogance and utter contempt these companies exhibit by assuming they have some kind of right to this information

    Wow. You think they don't? Did you not sign some form of contract with them? Are you certain you did not give up certain rights with regard to the bi-directional properties of modern boxes? Naivete seems to abound. They have the rights, they own the equipemnt, and you RENT it. They can do whatever they want.
  • This is just one more reason to switch to satellite if you have to watch television.

    Welcome to 1984!

    uumm.. sattelite is no better. Why do you think it says "retrieving guide from sattelite"? do you really believe it's waiting for that segment of the guide to pop into the data frame? nope. It's all completely bi-directional. Dish recieves one signal, and puts out another simultaneously. clockwise and counterclockwise.

    They know what you are watching.
  • This way we can show TV networks that not evryone watches "friends" or any of the other tripe that comes down the pike.

    What makes you think people don't watch that tripe? The networks aren't stupid -- they show what people watch, even if it is mindless.

    At least this would remove the statistical inaccuracy of Neilsen ratings (polling a small % of a populace)...

    If the Neilsen rating system has any inaccuracies, they aren't from the size of the sample. A large sample isn't needed as long as the people participating are representative of the population at large.

    The real reason cable companies want this is to match personal info (address/phone/etc.) with viewing habits. They already know viewing trends.
  • Big deal... I could care less who knows what TV programs I watch. Do you hyper-active privacy people drive a different way to work every day so no one follows you? Oh, that's right you don't have a car because of that privacy violating "license plate" which is really just another way for The Man to track you down, right?
  • This might come as something of a shock to some of you, but cable companies have been able to tell which channel you're watching for *years*. Anyone with pay-per-view capability already has a bidirectional link with the cable co.

    Cable companies in general have not given this information out for several reasons. One is that it's not in a convenient format. An engineer can punch in your cable-box ID code and read the channel you're watching on an LED display, but he can't download a whole neighborhood into a file. But they can (and do) collect statistics about which channels are the most popular. In Japan, for example, the cable industry has discovered that many people continue to watch the standard broadcast channels on cable! Another reason they don't give the info out is more obvious; it would be a violation of consumer trust. But the channels your local cable co. subscribes to are based in part on these data, and the program producers are aware (naturally) of what people are watching.

    So leave your cable box on the Discovery Channel, even when you're not watching it! :-)
  • The technology for this has been available on some cable systems for 10 years!
    I know, I worked on the development of them. You could spot all the channel hoppers when the ads came on.
    What it doesn't tell you is how many people are watching or whether they are in the room or not. They'll be adding IR proximity sensors to detect viewers next.

  • .. it is discovered that the majority of people DO in fact watch "friends", and most of the other tripe they push at us?

    Do you really want TV schedules calculated by algorithms that analyze the viewing habits of the *general public*? Remember, we're talking about mostly people without University educations, and we're talking about millions of housewives who tune in to their favorite soapies every day. The networks will quickly discover (as if they haven't already) that serving anything vaguely intellectual is a waste of money, since it only covers a small percentage of the potential market.

    As for this being used only for good, really, what's the chance? Can you name a single huge corporation that *wouldn't* jump at a chance like this to abuse this? I for one can't.
  • Yes, they had this technology here back in 1992. I left my cable box unplugged for a while, and the cable company actually CALLED ME UP and asked what was wrong. The system needed to send a "bullet" (their word) down the line to adjust the scrambling key, and my box had not responded to the key update in way too long. The lady on the phone then admitted (though she said she was not supposed to) that their system could tell what channel you were watching and, if you ran your tv set power through the cable box, when the tv was on. I half expected her to finish by being critical of what I was wearing at the moment. Creepy!

    Thad


  • If satellite was completely bidirectional, then DirectPC wouldn't need an outgoing analog line for upload requests. It's a one-way feed.
  • Some things to consider:

    1. Yes, business wants to sell you more stuff, so they collect information about you any way they can. All this information goes into huge databases which are almost always for sale to whomever has the bucks to pay for the info.

    2. Certain businesses make their money by buying these databases, compiling information on individuals and groups and selling the results to whomever has the bucks to pay for the info.

    3. The biggest customer for all commercial databases for more than a decade now has been -- surprise of surprises -- the U.S. federal government. What do they want to sell to you?

    4. Those who cry and whine about privacy are much, much too late to do anything about it. You have no privacy if: you use credit cards, have an address, have a phone number, have a bank account of any kind, have a job, have a car, have a drivers license -- the only people in the U.S. who have any privacy at all are those who are homeless and who avoid shelters, charities and government assistance.

    Americans were warned by the founders of this country that they'd loose their freedom if they weren't forever viligant. When your parents and grandparents agreed to the social security system, they sold your freedom away and you won't get it back for any price less than civil war.

    And for the fool who thinks you can have freedom without privacy: Think again!
  • So, get a satellite instead of cable. And don't buy pay-per-view. Big deal. :)
  • I can easily imagine The Man building statistics of what type of programming and channel-changing patterns are common among serial killers and rapists, and communists, and perhaps using that against you if you fit the bill. You dig what I'm saying?
  • Scary stuff this. Back to 1984?

    // Simon
  • Is there reason to worry here? Yes.

    Is there reason to not worry here? Paradoxially enough, also yes.

    Maybe it'll turn into 1984. Maybe not. Personally, if it turns out that all it does is deliver a more accurate Neilsen-style rating, I'm all for it; maybe the TV companies would finally get it through their head that some people actually prefer quality TV.

    As long as MST3K, Space Ghost, and anything by Matt Groening is on TV, my box gets a stay of execution. Oh, wait, they're cancelling MST, aren't they? Blarg.
  • OK look, why do you care that the networks will know about your watching habits? Are you worried that they'll be judgmental about how all you /.ers rack up them "Adult TV" hours? I for one would LOVE the chance to make my TV watching count for something. I always watch the underdog shows (Brisco County, Buffy tVS, anyone?) and it always bothers me that my shows fold because few in the rediculously small Neilson sampling watched them with me. Just think of it as a TV "hit counter". (Hey, looks like our show just hit it's 3 millionth viewer!)

    The ideal solution of course would be TVs that have the option of reporting your watching, or not, depending on your level of privacy wonkiness.
    And those Homo Superioris in the audience don't have to have a TV at all, and then we could all be happy.

    Rejemy
  • This is not new. Here in the UK, anyone who subscribes to the Sky TV Digital 'service' (prop. Rupert Murdoch) will find they are required to connect their set-top box to the phone network (failure to do so incurs a £160 ($200) fine).

    The box contains a modem, which dials a freephone number at Sky HQ every night and downloads viewing habit information. It may download more - no one has been able yet to hack in and explore the data - but a list of the programmes you've watched seems a reasonable bet.

    As all this is in the contract, you have to agree to it if you want the service.

Slashdot Top Deals

An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.

Close