Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Sampling Your Molecular 'Aura' 149

Posted by timothy from the my-pheremones-may-overload-the-machine dept.
Logic Bomb writes: "A researcher at Penn State University has found a way to reliably examine your "thermal plume" -- the convection currents created by body heat radiation that carry all sorts of tiny molecules off your body's surface. While this plume certainly can be used to make pretty thermal images, the real use of this technology is through chemical analysis. Little bits of whatever you're wearing, anything you've touched recently, and skin are all present in the air around your body, and all available for analysis. The technology therefore has some pretty wide possibilities, including drug and explosives detection. Even stranger, the creator thinks such devices could be used to check for some kinds of medical conditions. A working version for use in airport terminals to check for explosives is only about a year away. That sounds fine to me, but a medical-screening version of the device hidden in the doorway at my insurance company sounds pretty scary. This is another very useful technology just begging to be abused. An article from the San Francisco Chronicle has more details and a link to the project Web site."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sampling Your Molecular 'Aura' More

Sampling Your Molecular 'Aura'

Comments Filter:

  • No screen (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    But does it have an LCD displaying what it's smelling? No, it just makes a sound and starts humping whatever it's looking at.

    Dogs are good, dogs are useful, dogs are cheap, but dogs aren't detailed.
    --
    AC
  • I suspect that CmdrTaco is tired of folks posting just to raise their Karma to the stratosphere. If the number doesn't seem to change (even if /.'s record does), it might make the game less interesting.

    Displaying "Karma: 25+" would probably have the same effect.

  • Or it could check if you've gotten laid recently as you enter a department store and alert clerks to your susceptibility to certain products.

    Imagine sampling the chemicals given off by your car's interior and targeting or metering the consumer in that fashion.

  • >And those that have unavoidable risk factors get
    >denied employment, get denied insurance, or pay
    >exorbinant premiums.

    Please define "exorbitant". By definition, an insurance contract is a bet upon the future between you and the insurance company. Just like any other contract, there are risks and rewards. They bet that the premiums you pay will cover your forecast risks. You bet that they will not. If this is not the case, then one or both of the parties involved would be better off not engaging in the contract. You would be better off saving or investing the money that you would otherwise spend on insurance(for a rainy day) and the insurance company would be better off gambling with someone else.

    >They would basically be unable to have any decent
    >standard of living.

    Nonsense, they just have to work harder, or be satisfied with the hand they are dealt. That's the way that the world is. People that are smarter have it easier, sometimes. People that are stronger have it easier, sometimes. People that work harder, have it better. There are already clearly defined genetic or other advantages for some and disadvantages for others. We already "grade" people based on these factors.

    This situation already exists and yet the doom and gloom that you forecast does not. Do you have an explanation?

    >That's just plain evil.

    So instead you advocate some form of socialism, AKA theft, where I am *required* by law to sacrifice my standard of living for others? Remember that there are many factors that contribute to my standard of living. These include the place where I was born, the effort of my parents in education and upbringing, my own efforts, and indeed my own genes. Which is most important? Based on my personal experience, genetic factors are limiting only in extreme cases, and people in those situations are generally dependent upon charity even today.

    So what's the big deal? This is nothing new.

    If you have a problem with "Big Evil Insurance Companies" making "exorbitant" profits, then beat them at their own game. Buy their stock and share their profits; or better yet, start your own insurance company, or co-op. That is how insurance companies and co-ops get started, someone decides to do so.
  • You need to update your stats. A recent study by a prof at the U. Chicago estimates ~2 million uses of guns each year for self defense. Most of the time the criminal just runs away.

    When someone successfully defends themselves, it is hardly ever reported in the media. See this [tuxedo.org] page for a bunch of references. Including this pertinent group of stats:

    > Each year, potential victims kill between 2,000
    > and 3,000 criminals; they wound an additional
    > 9,000 to 17,000. Moreover, mishaps are rare.
    > Private citizens mistakenly kill innocent people
    > only thirty times a year, compared with about
    > 330 mistaken killings by police.
  • Yeah, we're OT, but in a long gone discussion like this, no one will notice. Anyway, I have no email for you. If you want to keep talking, email me.
  • I still haven't figured out why some people fear or get upset about the "potential" use of technology for screening and assignment of varying insurance rates to risk factors that are derived from the results of the screening. It happens all the time. That's why teenage boys pay higher car insurance rates than I do. That's why older people pay more for life insurance than younger people. Why not charge someone that is healthy and has good genes less than someone that smokes and shows genetic defects?

    All it really is is another incentive to live a healthy life.

    Remember that the ones that gain from insurance resource pooling are the un-healthy or high risk individuals. Those that naturally are or make a daily effort to be healthy have to pay higher premiums to support those that are more frequently sick.
  • Point was that the first story was about the device as patented, the second, details from the team itself.
  • And yes, it was commented on on /.
    Many people were quick to claim it was a patent with no technology behind it...
  • This is the first we've heard beyond a patent.
    I think that definitely warrants a second story.
  • This tech certainly has potential for abusal, will the creators get sued if some company decides it is bad for their buisiness?
  • yeah; like you always use a scrambler on your portable phone. And encryption for your email. Or take that plastic knife to places where they scan.

    Only great (ahem) nations can afford to compete like they did in the cold-war

  • Airports (Score:1)

    by jjr ( 6873 )
    This can help airport security become better. I similar story ws on slashdot before. I think was not about the same person though. I could be wrong.
  • I'm for any technology that reduces the amount of invasive probing and testing that we're subjected to.

    Most technology goes through the same cycles depending on the amount of revenue that it can generate. Bleeding-edge early adopters first, porn next if at all possible, and there are some real sickies out there, medical next, military if there are destructive applications. Eventually it filters down to industrial app and then security.

    I don't think its scary at all.

    The biometric applications are much more interesting. How would you like you computer to identify you just by your being near it? No more passwords on your machine and you're safe if a user smells fishy (unless you normally smell like rotting carp. Then it may just refuse to work with you on GP. :-)
  • I wonder if something like this could be mounted near a terminal and if the oder/whatever is unique enough per individual to allow authentication. I know my dog can determine exactly who I am by a few sniffs of my shoes and pants.

    ---
  • At least you don't have to piss in a cup anymore.
  • >There is already a highly sophisticated device that can do this.

    I think you're confusing a "thermal plume" with a "crotch".

    ("No, I have not been shagging plastic explosives!")
  • I guess things quiet down when the students are gone. Only a school in the middle of nowhere could be so excited over a crane arriving!

    Penn State usually has lots of news. It was on 20/20 earlier this summer for being the biggest drinking school in the country. And it made national news a month or so ago for riots at the Arts Festival.

    Then again, the most exciting things going on at my school [cmu.edu] are: An Invisible computing aura [cmu.edu] and Fading beauty [cmu.edu].
  • >we should welcome steps to reduce the costs of
    >insurance premiums by the elimination of high >risk, high cost applicants.

    So, insurance companies should be allowed to ONLY insure those who won't actually cash in on the coverage huh? Nice racket if you can get it.... give me a freakin break...

    j
  • You are misunderstanding what it is precisely that conservatives (and libertarians, I might add) are generally complaining about. It isn't the expansion of civil liberties but the creation of 'positive rights'. That is, rights that entitle a person to the product of another person's labor. They are talking about things like the 'right to health care' and the 'right to food' which require that somebody else foot the bill. These are in contrast to 'negative rights' which merely put restrictions on the actions of people, like the rights to life and liberty, which merely seek to prevent people from killing or imprisoning each other and don't entitle people to anyone else's stuff. Eric Christian Berg
  • Speaking of plumes, does anyone have numbers on the average propagation speed of odors in still room temperature air at sea level?

    It would involve mean free paths and random walks, prolly. It just seems to me that it is _really_ fast, and I've always wondered how fast exactly. This seems like the place to ask, eh?
  • Um, the 'aura' has been photographable for nearly a century, using the well-known technique of Kirlian photography. So it's nothing new in that sense. However, if this fellow has come up more precise ways of interpreting what is seen, then good on him
  • "That sounds fine to me, but a medical-screening version of the device hidden in the doorway at my insurance company sounds pretty scary"

    Yes, that sounds scary to me as well, however there are alternative uses for this technology. Long ago I read that if you sample for the presence of Pentane in exhaled breath, it's a reliable test for heart muscle trauma as the result of a heart attack. A scanner for this mounted over the ER doors would be a good thing.

    --Mike--

  • Ah, but they would probably be able to detect the masking product and then be even MORE suspicious - what are you trying to hide?

    I seem to remember some substances on the banned list for athletes are not actually performance-enhancing drugs themselves, but substances that can be used to cover the presence of other performance enhancing drugs.
  • we're not talking heat, we're talking about skin cells, detritus, etc. these things are my possessions. heat is a non-tangible property of the body - you cannot own a piece of heat over time. conversely, skin cells can be saved, kept, tested, analyzed, etc.

    it is also untrue that by entering an non-government establishment you give up your rights to search/seizure. you must give consent. if you deny consent, they have the right to deny service. by entering a establishment without a posted warning (i.e. a sign similar to hand gun warnings) they may not collect pieces of your body b/c they would lack your explicit/implicit permission.

    the point being, this is a unique device, but it is highly unlikely that, after eventual tests in court, businesses would be allowed to collect and test your personal bodily effects.

  • This thing could even be a life saver.. If you implement it into company cars like cabs (and touring busses, an hot issue in Europe at the moment) I guess it could also detect if the driver is under influence (not only alcohol but drugs as well, which is an extremely good thing(tm) IMO) since this can save lives.

    iirc it should be theoreticly possible to detect if a person is getting tired beyond the state in which he, or she, is able to drive. This would sure make vacations by bus a lot safer (note; there have been 2 major bus accidents in Europe recently and in both cases it was due to the driver falling asleep).

  • We've seen this before (I'm sure some karma whore will post a link...)...
    The scary thing is, where will it end?
    Will employers scan me for whatever disease is the current scare? Will I get stopped at the airport because I just sat next to someone on a bus/train who had just smoked a joint?
    In airports - it'll be heralded as a "great anti terrorism" device... But with extra capabilities which will not be disclosed... How do I know it's not sniffing me for say, cheating on my girlfriend? And don't say "oh, it'll be fine it will be regulated..."... Because I trust Governments and corporations about as far as I can spit a large rat on things like this...

    Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.

  • I can see he tech New Age people having a field day... Instead of reading your aura with crystals, they'll hook you up to this machine!!!
    Still, the responses gotta beat the "oooh, your aura is soooo greeeeen!!! You must have a lot of Gaia in your karma..."

    Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.

  • when i'm mod'ed up it stays put and when i'm mod'ed down it stays put. :(
    I should keep that quiet, unless you're looking to auction the account... Some of the slashtrolls would be _very_ interested in an account free of moderation...



    [OT]Posted with M17 running on NT4.0 sp6 (the shame! - But I am at work...), stable for 3 hours so far! :)

    Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.

  • This is another very useful technology just begging to be abused.

    Practically every useful technology is open to abuse. It's been that way since some guy picked up a rock and realised he could get himself a nice fur coat through careful application of said rock.

    While it's sensible to keep that in mind when considering the uses of new technology, I can't help thinking that slashdot might be getting close to crossing the line between reasoned reporting and paranoid rambling. It seems like the announcement of any new advance in any field of research is accompanied by dire warnings about the privacy implications, the possible misuses, the increasing stranglehold of big business etc.

    I share these concerns but I also worry that when someone from general populace (by which I people who don't know that there's a difference between a "hacker" and a "cracker") stumbles across slashdot and skims or wholly misreads a post, they'll go away thinking that these forums are entirely populated by people who believe that their insurance agents are secretly checking them out for genetic deformities.

    I don't really give a damn whether people outside of slashdot take the news posted here seriously or not - mainstream recognition is not the point. What I do care about is that the public and even some regular readers of slashdot are going to gradually form the impression that communities like slashdot are just a bunch of crackpots and conspiracy theorists - a bunch of crackpots who can be safely ignored in their little corner of the web. The first warnings about the next major infringements of personally liberty by big business or government are likely to come from this quarter, and the guy on the street is going to dismiss them as the harmless ramblings of a bunch of freaks.

    Just a few thoughts...

    --------
    "Science and technology are just tools. What they do for you is entirely dependent on what you do with them."
    - Stanley Schmidt

  • I'm not entirely certain this isn't troll I'm responding to, but oh well...

    You're wailing and railing against "conservatives" who are making all these new laws. Ummmmmm...are you trolling, or just not paying attention?

    Is Janet Reno a conservative? Is Bill Clinton a conservative? How about Hillary? And just who is it calling for lots of new police powers and new laws restricting guns, information freedom, a national I.D. system?????

    Why it's your friendly neighborhood liberals!

    So...instead of putting criminals in jail, and prosecuting them under existing law, your friendly liberals want more laws. I don't think you actually hear what Rush says.

  • You must not have seen Gattaca then. The story was about companies refusing to hire anyone who was born naturally, and hiring only those who were genetically engineered.

    This has nothing to do with protecting multi million dollar aircraft, this was pure discrimination.

    As I said before this would never last long in America because if people found out this was going on, there would be civil war. People would rise up spontaneously and kill those who were putting this system into place.

    It would be very much like what happened on Romania.

    ========================
    63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
    ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,

  • ... to try and use this schlieren photography technology to detect illnesses in people.

    The moment the American public heard they were doing this, there would be an instant and very violent revolution.

    Those medical insurance execs would fear for their lives to even live in the US, once this was found out, because people everywhere would be trying to kill them.

    The police would be instantly overwhelmed by constant acts of terrorism against these companies. If they abused this system, even with all the ignorant stupid complacent Americans running around out there, they would trigger an instant civil war.

    It would be very short but very, very bloody.
    ========================
    63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
    ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
  • Anyone who thinks this could ever be used for DNA sampling to see who had entered the building or locate where you had been can relax now. Even though the technology to pull in bits of skin and do DNA testing on the results exists today, it is an amazingly sensitive tests. So sensitive that it really can't sensibly be used in a non-clean environment - the augmentation of the original DNA material is extremely vulnerable to contamination.


    Yes, that is true. For now. But in the future this technology will be refined. It always is. It will be made practical.

    Always think ahead...
    ========================
    63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
    ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
  • Nice theory but not at all likely to be implamented 'with your consent'. The problem with issues like this is they become the defacto standard. If you do NOT implictly consent...you are denied previous 'rights'.

    Example (and yes, this is a US example). We have a large retailer in the US who advertises cheap but Nationaly recognized products (on highly visable T.V. commercials) using senior citizens as smiling, friendly greeters, checkers etc. Their prices are less as a whole and the less affluant do indeed shop there. These people also DO hire senior citizens who need to suppliment their less then livable social security incomes BUT, at what cost? Seniors paid pennies above US Federal minimum wage MUST submit to drug testing to be hired! DUH! So..don't like it, don't apply right? But how many of us, would pee in a cup to join the working poor for less the $6.50 @ hour with no benefits? Don't know about you but sharing my body fluids with an impersonal group of other low paid strangers strikes me as an unacceptable invasion of my privacy. Certainly NOT a protection from some obscure danger.

    You go thru airport security with your 'Batman Factor' cool toys hooked to your belt...in the US, plan on having your leatherman confiscated. Yep! It is a weapon, not a tool! Sure if you come back thru that airport, perhaps you can retrieve it but, are you a terrorist? Who is being protected? When is the last time you heard of an airliner being hijacked by a leatherman weilding terrorist? Does anyone listen to your explanation that you are a computer tech and your handy little new Swiss Army knife is specifically designed to deal with small computer case screws? NOT LIKELY!

    These issues are always reduced to dealing with the LEAST common denominator and as such, tend to erode your personal rights not uphold your security. Our lives are riddled with these small privacy invasions. Beware, more arriving every day!

  • While I agree, generally, with your point that we should be protected from inquiry without cause rather than from the specific acts, I can also see advantages to non-invasive monitoring, so long as it is only used to enforce just laws. If I knew that the police could 'scan' me for drugs, explosives, etc. without interfering in my life or being obvious about it, I likely wouldn't complain. If they picked something up off me, I would expect them to be courteous as long as I didn't make things difficult for them.

    I'm a great believer in cooperation, and so long as authorities could co-operate with the rest of the world, I see no problem with the authorities monitoring the rest of the world.

    Owen

  • I honestly don't see how these are the same at all. Napster, while officially for finding unsigned bands and legal MP3s, has become a haven for the trade of illegal MP3s and the Napster people have done nothing to stop it, making them part of that system. (Disclaimer: I love Napster.)

    This technology, and any other new tech, can be abused, certainly, but (despite some of the more paranoid ravings) is equally valuable to those who would use it right.

    Don't make unfounded parallels, unless you can prove that they're not unfounded.

    Owen

  • ....and now I have the technology to prove it empirically.... Actually, I find this very interesting, worthwhile, and like much advanced sensing technology, a bit scary...working for a very security conscious company, I can see them adding a sniffer to the badge operated doors...doubt I would ever get through ;-)

    Going on means going far
  • Actually, the rest of the article that was cut off went on to say that they were field-testing the device over at the TKE House determining if the beer had gone skunk, but the editors of the article didn't think that that sounded professional enough.

    "Beep beep"

    "Well, this beer's skunk, give it to the pledges to finish."

    "Yes sir!"
  • "He who gives up his freedom for safety deserves neither freedom, nor safety." -Thomas Jefferson
  • thanks

    (Lesson for today-Don't post on /. while writing history papers)

  • Of course technologies can be valuable to those who would use them correctly/justly, the problem is that the benefits those people enjoy could very well be dwarfed by the consequences of the illegal use, which is exactly what happened to Napster.
  • Pretty soon restaraunts will be coming out with "**Didn't wash his hands**" detectors for bathrooms.
  • I doubt employee discrimination based on DNA/aura analysis will last very long, if it all, before an Affirmative Action-esque law is passed to protect the imperfect.
  • Settles said prototypes can do a chemical sniff test for explosives in roughly 10 seconds -- fast enough for use at busy airports.

    I'm not sure what busy airports he's been to, but in my experience holding up each and every passenger for an additional 10 seconds would probably cause a riot worse than having some piddly little airplane blow up :)

  • The same thing is true for people who claim they are 'racially profiled.' Stop dressing like a street thug and claiming it's racism when you're hassled regularly!
    For sure - that city councilman in Seattle was dressed like a street thug, no doubt. That'll teach him to wear a business suit.
  • I know this is flaimbait, but most of you who post on /. are the most pessimistic people in the world! I also feel that you have your priorities backwards.

    Just becuase a product MIGHT be abused doesn't mean that it will. Why don't all of you start a campain against Guns in the U.S. because that is a product that kills about 35,000 each year! (Approximate # of deaths due to gunshot wounds).

    What is worse, having your civil liberities being violated or being critically injured? Don't worry, the ACLU will fight for you concerning this device, but they won't fight for gun control (or at least I've never seen them, maybe they do)

    It sounds like the benefits of this device could far outweigh the potential negative misuses. Yet you concentrate on the misuses. Insurance companies installing them? My guess is running an illegal scan of your body without written concent would probably subject them to being sued.

    --the person who wrote this has now been sacked.
  • I wasn't trying to claim that a product would be put to bad ends, I just was stating that everyone jumps on the bad and rarely focuses on the good a device like this could cause.

    What is worse, having your civil liberities being violated or being critically injured?

    False dilemma. Those aren't our only choices

    This is not a false dilemma, it's an example of how people priorities fall. Just an example. Nothing more. I see it as misplaced priorities. Sorry if I offended you.

    All the company has to do is refuse to sell a policy to anyone who doesn't consent to be scanned. If every insurance company does it, what's your recourse?

    You naturally assume that all insurance companies are going to install them and the government and the people will just stand by silently while our civil liberties are being violated. To quote you from earlier, "False dilemma". We both know that people will not stand by and just watch, and we both know that the government will probably do something (Remember doing something and doing the right thing are completely different.)
  • Okay, lets talk about those 35,000 gun deaths. I'm guessing that only 1% are justified (self-defense) and warranted. But lets assume that 10% are justified. Even so you then have 31,500 people that shouldn't have died. (of course outlawing guns will not solve the problem.)

    For the record: The ACLU holds the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right.

    This may be true, but what an organization says and what it does can be two different things.
  • Okay, so guns protect 2 million people each year. I've never heard about that stat. It still doesn't explain why other 1st world countries in Europe, who have very strick gun control laws, have so few homicides. I think Great Britian was under or near 100 gun related deaths a year in the late 90's. With a population of approximately 60 million? that would be the equivalent of 500 deaths a year in the U.S.

    As a counterpoint to myself, G.B. also has much higher rates for rape, assaults, and robbery than the U.S. does.

    Think we got off topic a little? *laugh*
  • That's why they aren't popular with industry. They can't make pots of money that way.

    If you look around, there are tons of good, simple and cheap solutions to many many problems, which aren't used just because the general industry doesn't like it. e.g. the patents are expiring, so not promoting or even making them.

    What dogs can do is amazing. The difficulty is just getting them to understand what _you_ want them to do. They can detect stuff down to parts per trillion. And I think they have an understanding of smells which machines won't be able to duplicate easily. Those scientists/researchers seem to think it's as easy as looking for the exact compound the dog smells, and creating a machine to recognise it (which they can sell/license). Maybe that's fine for explosives and simple compounds, but if it's for things like detecting disease I think they're over optimistic. They can't even create proper artificial food flavours yet. Even people can tell the difference between the scent of a freshly peeled orange from reconstituted orange juice.

    For example the scent of a skin cancer could actually be a type of difference/contrast from the person's normal skin smell. So maybe if the dog could speak it might say the cancer smells like Bob, only like it's gone bad, but gone bad ala sausages with a faint hint of prawn. And the dog probably can smell how bad the cancer is.

    Cheerio,
    Link.
  • That's pretty cool, so now, when I go to the airport, I could have some cute, funky college chick feel my aura and tell me if I'm a terrorist, and then wave me through to the airplane.

    Far out man!

  • Try the procedures used in "The Andromeda Strain." A little more realistic/real than a sonic shower, and well enought described (in the book, anyway) to make one feel a little uncomfortable.
  • This is so obviously a prototype for the Star Trek tricorder.


  • What about my karma increasing with 4 without any moderation being done? And I'm nowwhere near 50... :-)

    Just wondering.
    //Frisco
    --
    "No se rinde el gallo rojo, sólo cuando ya está muerto."

  • And those that have unavoidable risk factors get denied employment, get denied insurance, or pay exorbinant premiums. They would basically be unable to have any decent standard of living.

    That's just plain evil.

  • There are many products availavle to hunters that is designed to remove all human scent. Some work better than others. Could this mask the "aura" or is there more to it than that?

  • waiting to be abused....

    like everybody's favorite way to find unsigned artists, napster.
    ----------------------------

  • Not directly. Insurance companies should however be allowed to give me lower rates because I'm a "honest, in shape, hard working, non-drug/tobacco/alcahol user, eat right, etc goody goody person" (Not all of which may be true for me)

    Those who smoke and then try to get non-smoker rates on life insurance should be caught and made to pay higher rates. (if the insurance company disoceres it they will not pay, but they can't discover all liers)

    Now diabettics and those with cancer probably didn't do anything to get it. However your looking at it wrong. If my sister walks through the door, and the scanners conclude she is a higher then normal risk for breat cancer, they would charge higher rates to her, but in return they would make her get screenings twice a year rather then the normal yearly or every other year. She pays for her treatment, but because they are screening often odds are they catch it sooner when it is cheaper to treat. I get to keep my sister, and the insurance company doesn't have to pay for 6 months of hospital bills before she finially dies. Everyone wins. (One could argue that rates are cheaper becuase they don't pay those expensive 6 month bills, but I don't know exactly how that would work)

    Insurance isn't for things that you expect, insurance is for things that you can't anticipate and save for. My odds spending 6 months (for example) in the hospital are pretty low. I pool my money with 10 other people, and when one of us spends 6 months in the hospital the bills are paid. If I knew it was going to be me nobody would pool with me because my odds of landing in the hospital do not affect theirs.

  • I think most people here have brought up a lot of very good uses for the technology. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be worried about the very real possibility (even inevitability) of it abused. Insurance companies are just one of the likely culprits. They have very little scruples from what I've seen. They, like any other corp, exist to make money. They don't seem to mind screwing people over if that's what it takes either.

  • 'Scuse me -- don't you mean Ben Franklin?

  • Re:Dog (Score:2)

    by Siva ( 6132 )
    ive seen and read about dogs being used to sniff out skin cancer. theyre also being used by people with epilepsy. they are trained to alert their owners of an oncoming attack so that they can get to a safe place in time. they are also trained to look after them during and after the attack. i believe they can predict usually around 15 minutes beforehand, and possibly up to 30.

    granted this kind of training isnt cheap (over $10,000 for a 'seizure-dog' i think), but im sure its well worth it to people who suffer from the disease.

    --Siva

    Keyboard not found.
  • The idea here is that it is not invasive, it does not require you to be detained, and is presumably not in any way harmful to your health. This is better than the cops throwing you up against a wall and being searched because they think you look like a terrorist, as frequently happens to a friend of mine.

    The only danger I see in this is that it is not as reliable as it pretends to be, and it is used for subsequent illegal searches, i.e. they think they see bomb residue on me, but it turns out that I had gardened then I cleaned my bathtub with Mr. Clean (nitrogen and ammonia, yeah!). And then they detain me.

    Anything that you have not concealed is not private when you walk outside your home. A cop can stake out your house for days and anything that can be seen from public property is fair game - and I think that is only fair. If they get better technology that allows them to "see" more of you - so be it. So long as they don't abuse it.

    -nosilA
  • "That sounds fine to me, but a medical-screening version of the device hidden in the doorway at my insurance company sounds pretty scary."

    Not a problem. I'll simply smear myself all over with tofu and organic veggies before applying for medical insurance.
  • It never ceases to amaze me that people equate the ability to deceive medical insurance companies about their state of health as some sort of privacy issue. A good analogy would be complaining that it is a violation of your right to privacy to allow someone who wants to buy a car off of you to see it and have it inspected first. Insurance companies are a business and they are perfectly within their rights to ask for appropriate information prior to entering into an agreement to pay your medical expenses. Eric Christian Berg
  • But seriously, they already have mechanical 'noses' that can detect things like drugs [barringer.com] in luggage, or the ones at UConn [uconn.edu] or CaltTech [caltech.edu] that can diagnose some ailments [brainerddispatch.com].

  • That would wreak havoc on the member administration of the mile-high club...

    //rdj
  • Okay, so what happens when this thing starts generating false positives out the yin yang?

    And generate false positives it will... At least with respect to illegal drugs.

    There was a study done a while back that showed that something like 90+ percent of US paper currency was tainted with detectible amounts of cocaine and/or pot.

    Seems that one person would use a bill to roll a joint or divide up a line. Then he'd eventually spend that currency on something. That bill would get in a cash register and contaminate the others around it. These would eventually find their way to a bank, where they are fed into high-speed money-counting machinery. The machinery is now contaminated with coke/pot residue and duely taints every subsequent bill fed through it.

    So just think. Pretty much EVERYONE is carrying, on their person, detectible amounts of illegal drugs.

    Paper currency (not actually paper, but a linnen/cotton blend IIRC), is remarkably fiberous and holds particulates quite well. Hell, it soaks up liquids pretty good too, AND is plenty durable.

    Seems like you could screw up the system something fierce by saturating your cash with whatever you plan to smuggle in the future, and just wait a few months for everyone to get sick of all the false positives generated.

    Or hell, don't smuggle anything, just fsck the anti-privacy brigade on general principle.

    john
    Resistance is NOT futile!!!

    Haiku:
    I am not a drone.
    Remove the collective if

  • So my question is:

    Can we get a midiclorian count??

    ;))

  • Naw, this can't be from penn state. If it were, there would be something about detecting beer. And there is nothing about detecting beer anywere. As a Penn Stater, I have learned that any technology can be applied to beer, no matter how obscure. And since there is no beer, I can only conclude it came from those morons over at Pitt.

    Eric
  • that this device will require consent to be used. yeah, when you enter an airport and agree to goto the boarding gates, you are consenting to allow them to search your person (without violation) and belongings.

    this is a unique device and will allow such searches to be more exact, but if you think that you'll encounter this while entering the local deli, think again. trust me - it may take a Supreme Court ruling, but that plume belongs to you and will be subject to the same rules and regulations of search/seizure.

  • Am I being trolled, or are you for real? Is this released into Slash at the minute, or is there a secret troll forum somewhere where Taco has the latest source code twists brutalised out of him?
    In any case, I have karma in excess of 50, so I'll post this with a +2 and see if I lose a point after the moderators kill it...

    Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.

  • This is yet another prime example of Americans surrendering just a little bit more freedom to make the world a vaguely safer place.

    Hmmm...maybe we can turn this around and create a volunteer organization which uses these things to track the movements & behaviors of all of our law enforcement & political leaders (and post the results on a public web site :)?

  • Conservatives often complain that Americans are constantly making up new rights. But technologies like this one are a perfect example of why our ideas of privacy and freedom have to keep changing and growing just to stay the same.

    Fifty years ago, it was unacceptable for the police to conduct random pat-down searches of anyone walking down the street. But it was perfectly fine for them to look, which gave them access only to common information that couldn't be considered personal. If I were to object to having my thermal plume analyzed to see if I (or any of my friends) use drugs, I'm sure Rush would rant about "these crazy liberals! Now they want freedom from being looked at!" But if analysis from a distance now reveals just as much private information as putting me against a wall and stripping me naked, don't I have the same right to protest?

    This has been happening for a long time. The police can't go around randomly opening up cars and searching for drugs. But properly-trained dogs can search a car without having to open it! We need to think hard: Do we want to be protected from specific acts -- or from specific inquiries.

    The recent Napster debates have taught me that I must make this explicit: I'm not just trying to make life easier for criminals. Once a precedent is set, it's hard to overturn. The more we allow the authorities to find out about us, the more they'll want to find out. The more information they have, the greater the chance that it will be used against us. By all means, let's use anything we can to examine people who are already under suspicion (a very broad category, if a crime has just been committed), but let's also make sure we hold the line agains police intrusion into everyday life.

    I suppose this reflects my belief that we have too many laws and too many people in prison already.

    - Michael Cohn
  • As the author of the "abuse" post, I would like to express my agreement. I take it for granted that there are positive uses for this technology, and I would almost never go so far as to say that something is too dangerous to be developed.

    I don't try to keep my kids from seeing porn by shutting down the internet. I'm not going to try to keep the government from abusing its power by suppressing invention. But if we are going to be this liberal in our treatment of new technologies, we are required to remain vigilant with regards to undesirable uses and to find other ways to prevent them. Hence my warning.

    - Michael Cohn
  • That was the Birmingham Six. On 21 November, 1974, 19 people were killed and 182 were injured when two bombs, planted by the IRA, exploded in the Mulberry Bush and Tavern In The Town pubs in Birmingham. Five men who left Birmingham after the bombing were found guilty of the killings. The men were later acquitted of the charges after languishing in jail for 16 years.
  • Judging purely from the time between someone who stinketh quite royally boarding the bus and sitting down, and when I smell it?

    Somewhere around c.

    Owen

  • Not sure if I saw this before here or on another site, but it made me wonder then. If they're tracking for saltpeter, whatever, on you: how long does that residue stay in contact with your body after you've left the source? If I shake hands with a demolition person, will their residue stay on my hand and be picked up?

    But I don't like the idea from the start. It's like riding home in a car full of smoking people, then your mom getting onto you, thinking that you were smoking. There's too much of a gray area.

  • There's also "cop's nose"

    Advantages: Even more portable. Doesn't require the biscuts.
    Disadvantages: Not quite as sensitive as "Dog", but still able to detect significant quantities of Alcohol, Pot, and other illicit substances.

    When this amazing new technology gets installed, I predict that the entire basis of our free society will go down the toilet, and we'll spend our lives in neo-Nazi slave camps!

    Or maybe not...

  • i'm stuck at 53

    I've noticed that too; I'm stuck at 194, and it hasn't changed in a week or so, despite some posting and moderation activity.

  • this is a unique device and will allow such searches to be more exact, but if you think that you'll encounter this while entering the local deli, think again. trust me - it may take a Supreme Court ruling, but that plume belongs to you and will be subject to the same rules and regulations of search/seizure.
    Think again. The plume could easily be construed as waste heat eminating from your body. Waste heat isn't protected by the 4th amendment. There was a case involving the use of infrared cameras on houses to detect heat emissions from basements (i.e. from grow lights). The Supremes ruled that the heat was waste and could be searched without a warrant.

    In any event, your local deli could install these if they wished. Only the government is limited by the constitution with respect to searches. If you don't wish to be searched by your local deli or concert venue you always have the choice of not going.

    Burris

  • This is yet another prime example of Americans surrendering just a little bit more freedom to make the world a vaguely safer place.

    I'm not singling out americans actually because it's happening here (scotland) too except i'm sure some big famous american type said that 'he who surrenders freedom to gain more safety deserves neither'.

    I'm not sure what we can do to buck the trend because the majority of people just dont seem to understand what free speech is, they seem to gravitate towards the popular press ideals that it will "Catch more criminals". And the few of us that feel strongly about this will be left feeling strongly pissed off.
  • Just because it isn't physically invasive doesn't mean it's not invasive.

    I would and do consider Carnivore/RiP to be infringing on my privacy since there is nothing but a code-of-conduct to prevent the uk police from doing blanket searches.

    It's one thing knowing that what's on display when i leave my house (like i walk about naked all the time ;) is fair game. But I dont expect to have miniture fragments of my skin sampled to find out if i've got certain genetic defects, been around people using drugs, using l'oreal instead of a competitors brand.

    It's just going a bit far I think.
  • Yeah by my reckoning my karma is somewhere in the 60's but always displays as 53. That way when I post crap and go down it doesn't affect the displayed value.

    How was this for a top quality piece of undecided moderating on a post :)

    Moderation Totals:Redundant=1, Informative=2, Overrated=2, Total=5.
  • The previous story begins:

    Scott_Marks writes "The New York Times today has an article on a newly-patented device...

    Where does that not mention a patent?
  • You can read all about the previous discussion on Walk-by DNA Testing [slashdot.org].

    Except i'm no karma whore, i'm stuck at 53 for some reason and when i'm mod'ed up it stays put and when i'm mod'ed down it stays put. :(
  • Warnings are all fine and dandy, but it won't stop technology from entering the culture as long as it can sell. Look at TV (decline in social activities and some learned skills), guns (out right kills people) or cars (again kills people, but has more of a benefit than guns...)

    If it can be sold, it will. Such immoral applications will surely exist as they do in any sector that has immoral people in it.

    Same thing with this. Once it is installed, and deemed workable, it will propogate. Soon all airports will have this in tandem with x-rays (same portal, two scanners) this will then open the doors for immoral uses.

    Immoral or improper uses will not stop a sellable technology. I specify sellable, as Beta died out in favour of the worse VCR format, only due to installed base. It couldn't sell enough, so it died. If this scanner can't sell, it too will die.
  • "but a medical-screening version of the device hidden in the doorway at my insurance company sounds pretty scary"

    so you physically go in to an office to arrange insurance? tell me it is not so! next you'll be telling us you read real newspapers!

  • There is always a trade off between sensitivity and 'noise' in any measuring device; the more sensitive a measurement device is the more prone it is to detecting 'noise' rather than 'signal'.

    An example of this is an interferometer - which turns out to be a great device for picking up the passing of trucks on streets in front of the building in which it is being used.

    We in the technical fields tend to have an understanding for these kinds of problems - which non technical people lack. This has serious consequences when it is non technical people making judgments based on the results of the test.

    Example: company uses one of these devices to screen for diabetes in prospective employees by checking for acetone emissions. Woman has used nail polish remover ( contains acetone ) registers false positive for diabetes. Doesn't get job. Her personal database ( shared by employers ) gets updated, and she can't find work - and she never knows why. Given the choice of hiring the ill or hiring the healthy, who gets the nod?

    Someone else, pointed out that it is very difficult to find $20 bills in circulation that don't have traces of cocaine on them; we all ought to have increasingly fun times at airport security.

    The fact that these machines would score false positives right and left won't keep the technically challenged in the world from treating them like they are infallible 'witch detectors'.

  • The kind of mistakes that can possibly made with this technology aren't new.

    Everyone remembers the problems some employees have had with drug testing and poppy seeds bagels.

    I can see problems with people who like to garden and work on their cars. Will this new device say they were working on an ANFO bomb?
  • The medical applications of this are pretty profound - image being able to do most of the blood work without needles, without having to send the work to a distant lab. Lots of diseases change the metabolism in ways that can be measured in the breath, or molecules coming off the skin. Using old fashioned evolution, there are some doctors that use dogs that can smell skin cancer and indicate which moles need more investigation.

  • "The medical uses could be more important in the long run than the security application. Any medical condition that produces a chemical signal could be a candidate"

    Man walks into doctor's office sneezing and coughing:

    "Doctor, I have a flu. Can you give me something?"

    "I don't know, let me check your aura." [takes a vacuum hose and sticks it next to the man, sucking air into a machine]

    "Just be patient....it's working."

    "Ah-ha! You've got the flu. Here's a prescription. That'll be $350"


    --

  • Speak-your-Aura machines? (Score:3)

    by kieran ( 20691 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:19AM (#872080)
    "That's not BO you're smelling, there's half a dead mouse in your coat pocket."

    Oh, what a fun concept...

    "Crack! I detect Crack cocaine! Nah, just kidding."

    "No explosives... no drugs... cheap suit..."

  • DNA sampling? Naaa. (Score:3)

    by tjwhaynes ( 114792 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:24AM (#872081)

    Anyone who thinks this could ever be used for DNA sampling to see who had entered the building or locate where you had been can relax now. Even though the technology to pull in bits of skin and do DNA testing on the results exists today, it is an amazingly sensitive tests. So sensitive that it really can't sensibly be used in a non-clean environment - the augmentation of the original DNA material is extremely vulnerable to contamination. So the skin from the person who sat on the same bus seat as you might get picked up. Or the last person you shook hands with. Or just someone you brushed against in the street.

    At the end of the day, this technology is possible but not practical for DNA testing.

    Cheers,

    Toby Haynes

  • Technology vs. Application (Score:3)

    by martyb ( 196687 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:19AM (#872082)

    Sure, like any other new technology, there will be opportunities for good and bad; and often depends on the eye (nose?) of the beholder.

    Possible applications:

    • Body odor - Improved deodorants
    • Pheremones - Perfumes
    • Decay - Food Processing
    • Environment - Air freshener
    • Skunk - Personal protection devices (ala mace)

    I'd also like to see if there's any synergy between this and the electronic-nose-chips that I seem to recall reading about recently.

    Of course, it's only a matter of time when there will be anti-smell detection devices; nanobots that dismantle the very smells this device would detect.

  • Some other uses that would actually make sense (Score:4)

    by komet ( 36303 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:30AM (#872083) Homepage
    Some other uses for this technology I would actually approve of:

    * Fitted in a hand-held unit to decide, once and for all, the age old question: "who just farted?"

    * Preventing people with strong BO from getting on the bus

    * Sounding a siren when someone hasn't washed his hands properly after using the toilet

    * Not allowing your front door to open until you've got rid of that bad breath

    * Keeping smokers out of the non-smoking section of the restaurant / train

    * Hooked up to the sprinkler system to go off when those disgustingly perfumed old ladies in fur coats walk by

    I think I could go on and on, but I won't...

  • pretty limited in airports (Score:4)

    by dilvish_the_damned ( 167205 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @04:11AM (#872084) Journal
    Think about this for a sec.
    Me the good guy:
    I used to use explosives daily for my job. And I traveled on the airlines weekly.

    Them the bad guys:
    Would it not seem likely that would be terrorists could develop procedures do deal with this inconvenience?
    Say they develop the Triple inverted ziplock explosive baggy trick. Or the ever favorite '4 Hour Power Shower'.

    In the end they would still make it on the plane and I would be held up at the strip search counter trying to explain myself to paranoid people with small firearms.
    Although I must admit that I have never had any incidents with the k-9 devices in use today.

  • The patent is... (Score:4)

    by Jetifi ( 188285 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:09AM (#872085) Homepage

    here [ibm.com]

    There was a link on Cryptome [cryptome.org] a while a go.

  • Dog (Score:5)

    by Nafta ( 42011 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:19AM (#872086) Homepage
    There is already a highly sophisticated device that can do this. Not only that, it doesn't take 10 seconds to analyse the air particles. It can do it in a fraction of a second.

    The unit is almost self contained, running on just a few buscuts a day.

  • Don't be quick to dismiss it (Score:5)

    by Matt_Bennett ( 79107 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @03:32AM (#872087) Homepage Journal
    This is a powerful technology, while many will be quick to dismiss it, condemn it, and villify it. It is just a tool. It is inherently neutral. The good or bad that will come from it will come from those that use it. The technology is there, once it has been announced, it can't be taken away, so learn it, use it, understand it, just like so many seem to say about the various hacking/cracking tools.

    Too many people are quick to assume that when it is in someone else's hands, they must be evil, but in your hands it would be good. I can see some very powerful uses of this- biometrics for one. How about a home based doctor- maybe you still will need to go to an office, but this machine will tell you which specialty you need to go to- heck maybe an HMO will even support it, since it would mean going directly to the proper doctor, without having to see some sort of gateway practicioner.

    Yes, this technology can be abused, but exploring the uses and abuses of technology is what hacking (in the classic sense) is all about.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close