Comments on: Philips’ Window Shopper Gaze Tracking System http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/06/02/philips-window-shopper-gaze-tracking-system/ Deliciously Geeky... Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:16:56 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Erik Balcome http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/06/02/philips-window-shopper-gaze-tracking-system/comment-page-1/#comment-383607 Erik Balcome Fri, 13 Jun 2008 02:53:31 +0000 http://www.ohgizmo.com/?p=11397#comment-383607 Marketing genius. Although I do not agree with the principles involved, it is a pretty nifty idea. Invariably, however, no matter how "gizmoish (tm)" it may be, I say stuff it. Patent or no patent, this should not be allowed. Yes, we may be able to use it to catch petofiles or thiefs, but we can not forget that the majority of us are honest people - let's please, please keep some things private. Marketing genius. Although I do not agree with the principles involved, it is a pretty nifty idea. Invariably, however, no matter how “gizmoish ™” it may be, I say stuff it. Patent or no patent, this should not be allowed. Yes, we may be able to use it to catch petofiles or thiefs, but we can not forget that the majority of us are honest people – let’s please, please keep some things private.

]]> By: Richard Stallman http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/06/02/philips-window-shopper-gaze-tracking-system/comment-page-1/#comment-383423 Richard Stallman Wed, 04 Jun 2008 00:17:27 +0000 http://www.ohgizmo.com/?p=11397#comment-383423 Since this article mentions WIPO, it is relevant to point out that "intellectual property" is a propaganda term which carries both bias and confusion. Anyone that uses that term is either confused or trying to confuse you; in the case of WIPO, it is the latter. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html for more explanation. Since this article mentions WIPO, it is relevant to point out that
“intellectual property” is a propaganda term which carries both bias
and confusion. Anyone that uses that term is either confused or
trying to confuse you; in the case of WIPO, it is the latter. See
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html for more explanation.

]]> By: dave m http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/06/02/philips-window-shopper-gaze-tracking-system/comment-page-1/#comment-383405 dave m Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:17:10 +0000 http://www.ohgizmo.com/?p=11397#comment-383405 reminds me of this movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/ reminds me of this movie

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/

]]> By: Yocto http://www.ohgizmo.com/2008/06/02/philips-window-shopper-gaze-tracking-system/comment-page-1/#comment-383401 Yocto Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:07:18 +0000 http://www.ohgizmo.com/?p=11397#comment-383401 Purchase decisions, buying patterns, all the privacy details that go along with it, face recognition databases http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-566181/Hi-tech-face-recognition-cameras-used-Budgens-spot-underage-drinkers.html OUR EVERY MOVEMENT http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3945496.ece ... And now where you're looking at. Great. What other unconscious body functions haven't been commercially exploited yet? I always considered eye contact to be a rather intimate gesture. I assume these systems are perfectly able to gather their data without having to display a user interface, without needing to give you any feedback that you as a passerby are under "marketing surveillance". So, no more expectation of privacy even when you're looking at inanimate objects. Constant fear that someone is trying to manipulate me into giving them even MORE money. (Well, SOMEONE is going to have to pay for these systems. Guess who that'll be...) Wrap our eyeballs in tinfoil, or what? Purchase decisions, buying patterns, all the privacy details that go along with it, face recognition databases http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-566181/Hi-tech-face-recognition-cameras-used-Budgens-spot-underage-drinkers.html OUR EVERY MOVEMENT http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3945496.ece … And now where you’re looking at.

Great. What other unconscious body functions haven’t been commercially exploited yet? I always considered eye contact to be a rather intimate gesture.

I assume these systems are perfectly able to gather their data without having to display a user interface, without needing to give you any feedback that you as a passerby are under “marketing surveillance”.

So, no more expectation of privacy even when you’re looking at inanimate objects. Constant fear that someone is trying to manipulate me into giving them even MORE money. (Well, SOMEONE is going to have to pay for these systems. Guess who that’ll be…) Wrap our eyeballs in tinfoil, or what?

]]>