Log On To Your Computer By Laughing At It 50
pshanks writes "New Scientist reports that Scientists at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, are using laughter recognition software to track and automatically log staff onto the computer nearest to them as they physically move around a networked building."
I wouldn't want to work there... (Score:5, Funny)
Especially the ones who need to open a dozen remote sessions when they start working.
Just post a... (Score:1)
Then the problem is in making them stop....
Re:I wouldn't want to work there... (Score:1, Insightful)
This is the example they used... (Score:4, Insightful)
Thats what blackberry and other PDA's are for. Maybe you havent been in a office lately, but everyone has cubes, with people sitting at the computers. Execs are either in meeting rooms are on the go, not around peoples work spaces. Thats the problem with companies, good products, wrong utilization.
I'd like to see this at a call center with 100 people in a room, all on headseats. Imagine all the people's computers switching around.
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:4, Insightful)
With the ability to use any computer to do any of your work would change the way the office is used, and therefore why it is interested.
Granted, you could do this now just by logging in normally, but the non-computer types of a company aren't going to get it.
They need something they can walk up to and just use - they won't bother with anything more.
To say that something won't ever work or catch on because of the current way you do something is nearsighted.
Should we switch to those new motorized coaches? Hell no! The way we do it now is with horses, and those motorized coaches scare the horses!
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why won't they get it? You just say to them "you can use your username and password to login at any computer, and use it like the one in your office".
We have people here who've never touched a networked computer in their life before, and they can comprehend the idea of "whichever computer you'r
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:1)
That said, I have an office full of people that barely grasp sitting at their desks and logging into the network.
To then tell them that they can roam about and do the same thing would assuredly lose at least half of them and they would likely spend the rest of the day doing things that would never even occur to me - rebooting things, unplugging devices - I will never understand these p
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:4, Insightful)
The people I'm referring to here vary from the technically proficent, to never having touched a mouse in their life (since we're an IT training centre), and they all seem to comprehend the idea that it doesn't matter which computer they sit at.
I dunno, maybe it's that very inexperience that does it... they don't see any reason why they *shouldn't* be able to use any computer.
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:1)
These people have learned how to do their specific tasks and if anything changes, they just kind of freak out.
And yeah, it does certainly seem like it is an ape training facility sometimes.
But they tell me it is a financial services company.
Lots of people that are scared to do things differently because it might crash everything.
Although, to be fair, they aren't all that wrong in some cases.
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:2)
Ahhh! We have them as well... ... sometimes, seemingly in a fit of manic humour, they get called "IT Trainers". Most of the time I prefer the phrase "Waste of money" though. (Not of course that I'm bitter at the fact the people who are meant to be doing the training spend as much time being shown how to do basic things like comprehend the "A file with this name already exists, do you want to overwr
Re:This is the example they used... (Score:2)
Offices were set up that way long before the current type of computer ever existed. I was in cubicles with a dumb terminal, with a 3270, and with no automation at all.
If we ever get to the point where workers really do not need any material other than what's accessible with a computer, then we may find the personal workspace disappearing. Or we may not.
The very idea makes me laugh (Score:5, Insightful)
Which might not be such a good idea, not so much as it a silly idea.
Logging on should always be a deliberate and considered act.
I know how ya'all are... (Score:5, Funny)
Breaking in to a slashdotter's computer'd be easy. Just download a
*here's hoping the mods are in good humor today*
That was funny... (Score:1)
Security (Score:2, Interesting)
I was wondering about the security implications of this until I read that:
So now it's not the security implications I'm wondering about.
-- MarkusQ
Re:Security (Score:3, Funny)
mod parent up, or something.
Redundant? Turn around quickly (Score:2)
Urgent nitice to whoever modded my post above "redundant":
Turn around at once! Since I posted over an hour before the post that made you think mine was redundant I can only conclude that you are experiencing time backwards! As I'm sure you know, this is very dangerous, especially if you don't realize that you're doing it before it's too late (or should that be "after it's too early"?). Anyway, turn back now before (after?) somebody gets (got?) hurt.
Only thinking of the public's safety...
-- MarkusQ
Snowball... (Score:4, Funny)
20 sullen employees, unable to laugh
30 productivity ceases
40 goto 10
backup methods? (Score:1)
One small detail. (Score:5, Insightful)
"...For the moment, the laughter-recognition software is rather crude and cannot accuratly distinguish between different people..."
Soooo... basically you've come up with this pointless software, which is only interesting due to its novelty (I can't bring myself to say inventiveness), that doesn't work. Stop the presses! This is headline material!!
Wrong application... (Score:2)
The system currently works on voice recognition, which is capable of distinguishing people. The vision is to extend it to laughter recognition, which is not YET capable of distinguishing individuals.
So.... (Score:2)
The Friar's club will be the ultimate H4x0r clan.
Would it work? I would guess not. (Score:2, Insightful)
Laughter is a spontaneous thing - not everyone reacts the same way to different stimuli.
As a result, there is true laughter, and then there is a fake laugh. A fake laugh is far different than true laughter.
This system, unless somehow setup with an endless supply of universally funny jokes, would solely rely on fake and forced laughter - which would likely get tiredsome to the users - not to mention be hard to
Right concept, wrong implementation... (Score:5, Funny)
If they were smart, they'd drop this and develop an authentication system that works on swearing -- my computer just isn't that funny.
Re:Right concept, wrong implementation... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Right concept, wrong implementation... (Score:2)
Just wait, some day it'll be sorry. It'll be time for an upgrade and I'll be all like, Ha ha, no RAM for you funny boy!
Yeah, I know what you mean, but my PC is a chick, so try getting a straight answer out of her about ANYTHING!
Re:Right concept, wrong implementation... (Score:2, Funny)
Simpsons Reference (Score:1)
I would.
Re:Simpsons Reference (Score:1)
DOH!
Scene from an office (Score:4, Funny)
*nix user <pointing at computer> "HA-HA!"
Computer 2: "User Nelson [snpp.com] logged in".
some people might not be laughing (Score:1)
The Inverse? (Score:3, Funny)
How about a cough doing a fsck? (Score:1)
We have ways of getting information... (Score:4, Funny)
Captee: "Uh Oh... I jush had a toof filled, I can't laff."
Captor: "Bring in the Tickle Bear!"
The headline oversimplified things (Score:4, Insightful)
So what they're really saying is that this is intended to be a general purpose system for tracking a person's movement around a building, by listening for each individual's voice, footsteps, laughter, and probably other sonic cues.
While that sounds pretty cool -- and is much less silly than the laughing aspect -- it has me wondering what happens when person A is hard at work at her computer, and boss B drops by to check in. Will A get booted & B get logged in? Will B be comfortable with her desktop showing up on random desks as she walks around the office?
Okay, so the people working on this probably aren't stupid -- zany, but not stupid (hey, it is Damian Conway's school... :-). The mere presence of person B at person A's desk shouldn't force a user switch if person A is still sitting there. But the description of the system still leaves open the aspect that, as the article put it, the executive's desktop is going to be racing around the office to keep up with him, gleefully leaping several cubicles ahead in anticipation of where he is about to walk next. Other people are going to be able to trivially eavesdrop on that executive's desk, whether or not they intended to. Sounds risky to me.
As cute as this idea is for some settings (Bill Gate's famed techno-home, for example), I think the corporate office or even a university department isn't the right place for it. As another commenter noted, logging into a machine should always be a deliberate act. Maybe it would be more prudent to replace the auto-logins with a new login screen saying "hello Doctor Falken, would you like to sign in?" At which prompt the user could reply "yes please, Hal" and if the voiceprint matches, he's all set.
Here's the KEY sentence: (Score:2)
(So, aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?)
Interesting animation idea (Score:1)
Hell, you should be able to set up a crude animation by using each account as a framebuffer in sequence and then loading up a couple a' employess with some nitrous!
Prolly give epileptics a fit, though....
The real challenge... (Score:1)
Re:The real challenge... (Score:2)
Me Go Now (Score:1)
What an idea. (Score:1)
Customizable (Score:1)
Dangerous Exploit (Score:1)
This leaves you dead on the floor with your machine logged in and unguarded.