TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.collisiondetection.net/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1126
ooooh, that is so creepy. But if the cost is having one of those uber-sexy Dyson vacuums, I guess it's worth it!
The Dyson ads are incredibly compelling and even my husband lusts after those things. I guess, with a $500+ price tag, it had BETTER do something nifty other than...suck. ;)
p.s. Clive, your security settings aren't allowing me to post with my preferred email address due to "questionable content" Is there a way you can safe-list my domain?
Posted by: laura at February 24, 2005 3:39 PM
Oh, sorry, I must have accidentally thought that was a spam address and blacklisted it! Email me the domain you want whiteslisted -- send it to clive@clivethompson.net -- and I'll put you on the whitelist ASAP.
Posted by: Clive at February 24, 2005 6:07 PM
They'll be able to skip the hold-the-phone-for-me step, and simply tell their manufacturers what we've been doing with them. And you probably won't be able to buy a household tool that doesn't do that.
I don't think this is so. You can always unplug these things from whatever communication network they are on. And there's no way device makers would have their product disable itself unless it could phone home. Imagine trying to explain that to your average walmart shopper.
Frankly I have no problem with anonymous data collection. The vast majority of programs that report back to their respective motherships do so in some relatively anonymous way. I trust that the corporation on the other end doesn't give enough of a hoot about me to really track me. Only the law can do that, and if courts really do order such a thing, I have my info out there so many places I couldn't hide if I wanted to. I just rely on being a generally law-abiding guy.
On the other hand, yesterday I was trying to think of a movie to watch with my girlfriend. I was at a total loss, until I came up with an idea: visit amazon.com. Let their recommendation engine tell me what titles I might like. The generally reviled "tracking" proved useful: I got a good movie, and some computers somewhere are storing slightly more information about me. I think both sides would consider that a win. What movie was it? I'd rather only the computers knew. :)
Posted by: Peter O. at February 24, 2005 9:24 PM
They'll be able to skip the hold-the-phone-for-me step, and simply tell their manufacturers what we've been doing with them. And you probably won't be able to buy a household tool that doesn't do that.
I don't think this is so. You can always unplug these things from whatever communication network they are on. And there's no way device makers would have their product disable itself unless it could phone home. Imagine trying to explain that to your average walmart shopper.
Frankly I have no problem with anonymous data collection. The vast majority of programs that report back to their respective motherships do so in some relatively anonymous way. I trust that the corporation on the other end doesn't give enough of a hoot about me to really track me. Only the law can do that, and if courts really do order such a thing, I have my info out there so many places I couldn't hide if I wanted to. I just rely on being a generally law-abiding guy.
On the other hand, yesterday I was trying to think of a movie to watch with my girlfriend. I was at a total loss, until I came up with an idea: visit amazon.com. Let their recommendation engine tell me what titles I might like. The generally reviled "tracking" proved useful: I got a good movie, and some computers somewhere are storing slightly more information about me. I think both sides would consider that a win. What movie was it? I'd rather only the computers knew. :)
Posted by: Peter O. at February 24, 2005 9:26 PM
Sorry about the double post, got a 500 from the server. www72 on Pair, in case you want to check it out.
Posted by: Peter O. at February 24, 2005 9:30 PM
"...and simply tell their manufacturers what we've been doing with them."
Hmmm, better make sure the robe doesn't gape next time there's a midnight snack raid.
Posted by: J at February 25, 2005 1:33 AM
Can't find the link to the patent right now, but Dell has done a similar thing for customer support. Error codes are being transmitted over a telephone line in order to ease the location of the problem with the computer. Although a theoretical question without a proper USPTO link, but depending on what Dell patented, could this be a possible patent violation? We'll see.
Posted by: Mario at February 25, 2005 4:07 AM
As ever there are good and bad points - case in point is Microsoft XPs need to send info back to MS when a program crashes. An annoyance but did help me discover that I needed to update the drivers on my cable modem.
On a slightly different tack, Dyson hoovers are awesome, although be prepared to be revulsed the first time you run one of your carpet. It picks up so much extra crap that your old hoover missed it's almost embarassing!
Posted by: Gordon at February 25, 2005 5:11 AM
Hi, I just wanted to raise a point made by Peter O:
You can always unplug these things from whatever communication network they are on. And there's no way device makers would have their product disable itself unless it could phone home. Imagine trying to explain that to your average walmart shopper.
I've no idea about elsewhere, but here in the UK, Sky (Rupert Merdoch's satelite TV co, ultimate owner of the Sun) forces you to plug their digi-box into the phoneline- you're breaking the terms of your contract and can be disconnected without refund if you don't leave it connected.
Posted by: Simon at February 25, 2005 5:24 AM
Peter, sorry about the double-postings -- every so often there's a pile of lag on the server end, which doesn't seem to be fixable, and it hangs for a while during "post".
As for the unpluggable-ness of these future devices -- my assumption would be that they'd be designed to be unpluggable, and that they'd be communicating wirelessly, "for our convenience", with the only way to turn it off to hack the software, which is sealed inside a non-USB-accessible chip ... kinda like the way Tmobile runs the Sidekick right now, actually.
Posted by: Clive at February 25, 2005 1:56 PM
Posted by: alan herrell - the head lemur at February 25, 2005 4:55 PM
Dyson vacuum cleaners are well worth the money - and the guarantee. Mine has the motorhead option and a friend ignored the red light that said there is something jamming the brushes. More bits of string and rubber bands were tangled into the thing and it automatically stopped.
A call to their (free) number put me on to a friendly operator who asked me for the serial number and two days later I received a *complete new head-assembly* AND a renewal of the guarantee!!
Posted by: obert at February 27, 2005 12:59 AM
Okay, that's pretty impressive!
Posted by: Clive at March 1, 2005 11:59 PM
Ever read the fine print on any of your software? Neither do I, mostly. But when I have, I've usually discovered that the company -- Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, etc. -- has reserved the right, at whatever point in the future they choose, to have the software communicate information back to them about what sort of machine I own, what other software I run, and precisely what I've been doing with their software.
Never actually read an Apple software license agreement have you?
http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/macosxpanther.html
Can't see anything about reporting back to Apple there...
- proton
Posted by: proton at March 2, 2005 9:53 AM
ooooh, that is so creepy. But if the cost is having one of those uber-sexy Dyson vacuums, I guess it's worth it!
The Dyson ads are incredibly compelling and even my husband lusts after those things. I guess, with a $500+ price tag, it had BETTER do something nifty other than...suck. ;)
p.s. Clive, your security settings aren't allowing me to post with my preferred email address due to "questionable content" Is there a way you can safe-list my domain?
Posted by: laura at February 24, 2005 3:39 PM
Oh, sorry, I must have accidentally thought that was a spam address and blacklisted it! Email me the domain you want whiteslisted -- send it to clive@clivethompson.net -- and I'll put you on the whitelist ASAP.
Posted by: Clive at February 24, 2005 6:07 PM
They'll be able to skip the hold-the-phone-for-me step, and simply tell their manufacturers what we've been doing with them. And you probably won't be able to buy a household tool that doesn't do that.
I don't think this is so. You can always unplug these things from whatever communication network they are on. And there's no way device makers would have their product disable itself unless it could phone home. Imagine trying to explain that to your average walmart shopper.
Frankly I have no problem with anonymous data collection. The vast majority of programs that report back to their respective motherships do so in some relatively anonymous way. I trust that the corporation on the other end doesn't give enough of a hoot about me to really track me. Only the law can do that, and if courts really do order such a thing, I have my info out there so many places I couldn't hide if I wanted to. I just rely on being a generally law-abiding guy.
On the other hand, yesterday I was trying to think of a movie to watch with my girlfriend. I was at a total loss, until I came up with an idea: visit amazon.com. Let their recommendation engine tell me what titles I might like. The generally reviled "tracking" proved useful: I got a good movie, and some computers somewhere are storing slightly more information about me. I think both sides would consider that a win. What movie was it? I'd rather only the computers knew. :)
Posted by: Peter O. at February 24, 2005 9:24 PM
They'll be able to skip the hold-the-phone-for-me step, and simply tell their manufacturers what we've been doing with them. And you probably won't be able to buy a household tool that doesn't do that.
I don't think this is so. You can always unplug these things from whatever communication network they are on. And there's no way device makers would have their product disable itself unless it could phone home. Imagine trying to explain that to your average walmart shopper.
Frankly I have no problem with anonymous data collection. The vast majority of programs that report back to their respective motherships do so in some relatively anonymous way. I trust that the corporation on the other end doesn't give enough of a hoot about me to really track me. Only the law can do that, and if courts really do order such a thing, I have my info out there so many places I couldn't hide if I wanted to. I just rely on being a generally law-abiding guy.
On the other hand, yesterday I was trying to think of a movie to watch with my girlfriend. I was at a total loss, until I came up with an idea: visit amazon.com. Let their recommendation engine tell me what titles I might like. The generally reviled "tracking" proved useful: I got a good movie, and some computers somewhere are storing slightly more information about me. I think both sides would consider that a win. What movie was it? I'd rather only the computers knew. :)
Posted by: Peter O. at February 24, 2005 9:26 PM
Sorry about the double post, got a 500 from the server. www72 on Pair, in case you want to check it out.
Posted by: Peter O. at February 24, 2005 9:30 PM
"...and simply tell their manufacturers what we've been doing with them."
Hmmm, better make sure the robe doesn't gape next time there's a midnight snack raid.
Posted by: J at February 25, 2005 1:33 AM
Can't find the link to the patent right now, but Dell has done a similar thing for customer support. Error codes are being transmitted over a telephone line in order to ease the location of the problem with the computer. Although a theoretical question without a proper USPTO link, but depending on what Dell patented, could this be a possible patent violation? We'll see.
Posted by: Mario at February 25, 2005 4:07 AM
As ever there are good and bad points - case in point is Microsoft XPs need to send info back to MS when a program crashes. An annoyance but did help me discover that I needed to update the drivers on my cable modem.
On a slightly different tack, Dyson hoovers are awesome, although be prepared to be revulsed the first time you run one of your carpet. It picks up so much extra crap that your old hoover missed it's almost embarassing!
Posted by: Gordon at February 25, 2005 5:11 AM
Hi, I just wanted to raise a point made by Peter O:
You can always unplug these things from whatever communication network they are on. And there's no way device makers would have their product disable itself unless it could phone home. Imagine trying to explain that to your average walmart shopper.
I've no idea about elsewhere, but here in the UK, Sky (Rupert Merdoch's satelite TV co, ultimate owner of the Sun) forces you to plug their digi-box into the phoneline- you're breaking the terms of your contract and can be disconnected without refund if you don't leave it connected.
Posted by: Simon at February 25, 2005 5:24 AM
Peter, sorry about the double-postings -- every so often there's a pile of lag on the server end, which doesn't seem to be fixable, and it hangs for a while during "post".
As for the unpluggable-ness of these future devices -- my assumption would be that they'd be designed to be unpluggable, and that they'd be communicating wirelessly, "for our convenience", with the only way to turn it off to hack the software, which is sealed inside a non-USB-accessible chip ... kinda like the way Tmobile runs the Sidekick right now, actually.
Posted by: Clive at February 25, 2005 1:56 PM
but does it work as a vacumn?
I have two that don't
http://theheadlemur.typepad.com/product_blog/2005/02/suck_brooms.html
Posted by: alan herrell - the head lemur at February 25, 2005 4:55 PM
Dyson vacuum cleaners are well worth the money - and the guarantee. Mine has the motorhead option and a friend ignored the red light that said there is something jamming the brushes. More bits of string and rubber bands were tangled into the thing and it automatically stopped.
A call to their (free) number put me on to a friendly operator who asked me for the serial number and two days later I received a *complete new head-assembly* AND a renewal of the guarantee!!
Posted by: obert at February 27, 2005 12:59 AM
Okay, that's pretty impressive!
Posted by: Clive at March 1, 2005 11:59 PM
Ever read the fine print on any of your software? Neither do I, mostly. But when I have, I've usually discovered that the company -- Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, etc. -- has reserved the right, at whatever point in the future they choose, to have the software communicate information back to them about what sort of machine I own, what other software I run, and precisely what I've been doing with their software.
Never actually read an Apple software license agreement have you?
http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/macosxpanther.html
Can't see anything about reporting back to Apple there...
- proton
Posted by: proton at March 2, 2005 9:53 AM