#1 Posted by Brinty (16 posts) -
#2 Posted by DeeGee (2128 posts) -

We will be watching.

#3 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@deegee said:

We will be watching.

/thread

Can you get me a high res version of that for my GB background.

#4 Posted by JJWeatherman (14558 posts) -

One of the act's proposals:

"when the device is recording it will display 'WE ARE WATCHING YOU' in a font large enough to be readable from a distance.”

I think I'll just kill myself now and spare myself any more of the idiocy surrounding the reaction to Xbox One.

#5 Posted by tourgen (4515 posts) -

government is just pissed someone else is horning in on their mass surveillance game.

#7 Posted by Tarsier (1065 posts) -

we need to support this. . . this needs to happen.

#8 Posted by ThePhantomStranger (372 posts) -

I think this is a good idea.

It'll never get through but it's a good idea. Assuming of course that the "we are watching you" only comes on when it's sending data back or actually, you know, watching you. I don't entirely agree with forcing sale of a similar product without the camera because the opt in part seems to cover that already. Although this could generally just be a brute force method of scaring Microsoft in general.

@tarsier said:

we need to support this. . . this needs to happen.

Agreed.

#9 Edited by Draxyle (1863 posts) -

The display text is a bit much, but we definitely need legislation to prevent undue spying via these devices. It's not long before these sorts of things are collecting marketing data on us without our permission.

#10 Posted by Vonocourt (2133 posts) -

One of the act's proposals:

"when the device is recording it will display 'WE ARE WATCHING YOU' in a font large enough to be readable from a distance.”

I think I'll just kill myself now and spare myself any more of the idiocy surrounding the reaction to Xbox One.

A ridiculous fear met with a ridiculous solution.

Online
#11 Edited by TruthTellah (9153 posts) -

The display text is... ridiculous. It just sounds more like yet another bill framed by out-of-touch old men who are afraid of even the simplest of modern technology.

It's a good idea to have the user informed of what the device is doing, but even the new Kinect has an "opt-out" option wherein you can stop it from monitoring.

Frankly, this is a good bit overboard, as they might as well also require laptops and webcams to do the same. If people turn on a device with a camera, they should be informed of any info sent to the Internet, but if you just have the camera on, there shouldn't be obtrusive text on the screen. Make sure people are informed so they make better decisions, not just limit functionality or obstruct people's experience with a device.

#12 Edited by TruthTellah (9153 posts) -

"You have to display 'WE ARE WATCHING YOU' if you are recording the user... unless, of course, you agree to share those recordings with us." - NSA

#13 Posted by TheManWithNoPlan (5593 posts) -

#14 Posted by alwaysbebombing (1588 posts) -

Guys. Unplug.

#15 Edited by Levio (1784 posts) -

Was this bill proposed by congressman Weiner?

#16 Posted by mlarrabee (2971 posts) -

That's silly.

Here's an idea: the NSA, FBI, and CIA must immediately cease, and forever abstain from, all unwarranted surveillance. Try enforcing the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, congressmen.

Microsoft has stated that users can choose to not allow any outbound data from Kinect. Is that entirely true? Probably not, but users have legal recourse should it be proven false.

#17 Posted by Lord_Xp (602 posts) -

Hey the people who need to get involved in this are actually getting involved in this. I like that! Even if it doesn't work

#18 Edited by McGhee (6094 posts) -

That's silly.

Here's an idea: the NSA, FBI, and CIA must immediately cease, and forever abstain from, all unwarranted surveillance. Try enforcing the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, congressmen.

Microsoft has stated that users can choose to not allow any outbound data from Kinect. Is that entirely true? Probably not, but users have legal recourse should it be proven false.

The U.S. government actually doing what the Constitution says? Pesky constitutions just get in the way when you have a terrorist under every rock.

#19 Edited by LikeaSsur (1538 posts) -
#20 Posted by Gamer_152 (14081 posts) -

The part about them specifying details on how data is used and who has access to it? Definitely, I think that's something almost everywhere should be doing. Everything else about that bill? No. It seems to start from the assumption that all home entertainment systems with cameras in them are secret spy devices for corporations and works backwards, and the big paranoia-inducing text just seems silly. Microsoft are already transparent about the Kinect and the data it collects, and have said that on Xbox One you will have to approve personal data being sent off to their servers.

Even if they hypothetically did use this device to spy on people, there will be people working out how to reverse engineer the Kinect from day one, and there will be people packet sniffing to see exactly what is going in and out of that console. If this was a secret spy device, we'd find out, and Microsoft know that if they tried to pull that kind of thing they'd be in deep trouble. Personal privacy in the modern world is a legitimate concern, but it's being met with fear and paranoia in a way that's not helping anybody.

Moderator
#21 Edited by joshwent (2218 posts) -

The bill would require manufacturers who sell devices that monitor consumers to create a similar device, without monitoring capability, and offer that as well...

So I could finally get an iPhone without the front facing camera! Huzzah!!

This is tragically out of touch. Yet again, a serious concern turned into a joke by inept people with power.

We're fucking doomed.

#22 Posted by shinjin977 (762 posts) -

@vonocourt: Your comment remind me of those "crazy" guys back in 2007 when smartphones became all the rage and they were saying how the NSA/government were watching them. I remember going "man you guys are crazy, why would they want listen to your conversation?" Now I feel like I am the crazy one for not questioning the government/corporation and I work for one. I know how far they are willing to go to fuck over consumer to get 1% profit increases. But you know in the word of the wise prostitute on south park "Fair is fair Ho", since we are the one buying into this shit without a thought.

#23 Posted by AiurFlux (902 posts) -

I'm torn on this one. On one hand it seems like a good idea to ensure the right to privacy that people do have, but on the other I feel know that this is being proposed by a couple of out of touch dopes that have no business even talking about technology.

The stipulations of the Kinect extend far beyond a breach of privacy into the realm of the really shady. I can see it being used for insidious reasons like having to pay for an extra movie license because it senses one extra person in the room or targeted advertisements because it can see what you're drinking or wearing. Yes they have said that you'll have to approve personal data being sent back to Microsoft, but how detailed is that personal data? I actually don't think their stipulations on it have been put in print anywhere as to what data it collects.

I hope it gets passed in an amended state where it's cleaned up by people that actually know what they're talking about. Not because of the rah rah rah fuck Microsoft rhetoric, but in an attempt to nip this in the ass before it gets out of hand. The remote possibility that Kinect systems can get hacked and some douche on the other end can spy on people is scary. It does happen with webcams so the possibility is there here. Except here there is a very real possibility that a kid will be using the system and a pedophile could very well be on the other end since kids rarely have access to 1500 dollar laptops.

But then again I guess people do have an opt out option. Buy a PS4. Maybe this is just completely dumb and I'm seeing it wrong on a personal level instead of looking at it objectively from a legal standpoint.

#24 Edited by Nictel (2422 posts) -

@joshwent said:

The bill would require manufacturers who sell devices that monitor consumers to create a similar device, without monitoring capability, and offer that as well...

So I could finally get an iPhone without the front facing camera! Huzzah!!

This is tragically out of touch. Yet again, a serious concern turned into a joke by inept people with power.

We're fucking doomed.

I would love for this to happen, ok not really but it would be a complete mess of multiple devices in the US. EU: LAND UNION OF THE FREEDOM :P

#25 Posted by RedCream (705 posts) -

This is hilarious. Microsoft: making our dystopian future come true one device at a time.

#26 Posted by Shakey1245 (64 posts) -

They clearly aren't serious about this. It's an American security bill with a name that isn't an acronym.

#27 Posted by EarlessShrimp (1647 posts) -