It's accurate enough that TV viewers might find the supplementary content Google sends useful. Nicole Kidman fans, for instance, might enjoy knowing what dress she's wearing on a broadcast of "Extra!" or where they can buy a similar outfit. Or ads for Cooper Minis might appear whenever the car showed up in a TV rebroadcast of The Italian Job.
All of this would work only if someone first manually notated what is onscreen at any given moment in a broadcast. With the volume of TV programming broadcast every day, that would be a tedious job. But in some cases it could be worthwhile for Google and advertisers, Fink says. "Say I'm an advertiser, and I would like a link to my website to appear with a specific episode of Seinfeld. We could open each moment of audio to a bidding process. The Google model of advertisers bidding for related words on Web pages, which has proved to be very successful online, could be carried over."
And the information Google sends doesn't have to be one-way -- it could also invite viewers watching the same program simultaneously to join a chat room, and administer surveys.
When word of the research first appeared in the media, some bloggers and other technology watchers reacted with horror; many assumed that the background conversation picked up by the microphone in Google's system would be uploaded to Google. But the technology makes it impractical; at four bytes, the fingerprints don't contain enough information to reconstruct the original sounds in a room. "Some people did get the impression that we had an open microphone that was going to listen in on them," says Norvig. "Clearly, that was not what we were doing. We are transmitting a key that can be matched but not reversed. That said, users are giving up some information -- and that's something they have to decide about."
Whether users could adapt to this new form of monitoring is uncertain. But the revenue opportunities are clear -- if the system works, that is. "It's a devilishly clever way to bridge those old and new media technologies," says Michael McGuire, an online media analyst at Gartner Research. But everything would depend on how accurately Google could match audio segments, he says. "You could imagine that if they were just a little bit off, it would drive you insane, in terms of the type of advertising you're seeing. And if it was far removed from what you were watching, you'd be jarred and maybe angry."
Fink's team is working on making the false-positive rate even lower -- so users don't get Doritos ads with their Masterpiece Theatre. But there's another challenge, notes McGuire: how to divide the attention of the viewer. "Presumably, broadcasters and advertisers wouldn't want anything so absorbing on the computer that it pulls viewers away from the actual broadcast. And even though the crowd that surfs the Web while they watch TV already knows how to multitask, they might ignore or block the online media stream if it starts to get too obtrusive. So [Google] would have to find a balance between information overload and effective advertising."
Comments
i dont think i'd ever be comfortable knowing that something was actually listening to my microphone, no matter how much i trusted the company. for the same reason, i would never open the lens of my web cam unless i was using it. i also put my microphone on mute (for non-sercurity reasons) when it's not in use.
in addition, it sounds like there is very little, if any, benefit to the consumer. it's totally unnecessary to have a program that tries to figure out what i'm watching so it can give me more relevant information. if i wanted more information, i could log in to a (not-yet existent, as far as i know) real-time social networking site split up by tv channel. i think there is a lot of promise for a site such as that, and it could provide all the benefits that this google system could, without the privacy issues.
brunascle
08/24/2006
Posts:68
hmm...
idbill
08/24/2006
Posts:1
wroush
08/24/2006
Posts:6
Dacktyl
09/06/2006
Posts:1
Apparently some models of laptops had webcameras built in, that were disabled before being sold, but some hacker found a backdoor to activating these camera's to spy on the people while they surf.
I wonder if those cameras were meant to activated, but not with anyone knowing?
Sounds similar to google activating your microphone, only in this case, you'd get a lot more useful stuff from a webcam.
You can check the story out on Digg:
http://digg.com/security/Is_There_a_Hidden_Camera_in_Your_Laptop
Zaoh
09/25/2006
Posts:1