Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Mementos as Document Retrieval Keys

Posted by michael on Sat May 03, 2003 06:04 PM
from the johnny-mnemonic dept.
Technology
Dekaner writes "The BBC is running a story that BT has demonstrated a scanner that can be used to retrieve digital documents by associating them with a physical object. When the digital files are stored on the server, they are associated with a scanned image of the object, for example a seashell. Later, when the user wants to retrieve the files, the memento is again placed on the scanner. The resulting image is used as the retrieval key."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Mementos as Document Retrieval Keys 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • The bane of the photocopier... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Winterblink (575267) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:06PM (#5871152) Homepage
    I can see a lot of people using their asses as the "memento"...
    • Your crappy joke not withstanding, it makes you wonder just how well it will be able to identify individual momento's. Will it be able to distinguish one person's ass from another? Or more practically, palm? Fingerprint?
      • Your abrasive attitude notwithstanding, I'm betting the thing probably takes a decent resolution snap of the object. Probably nothing so high rez to distinguish between a person's fingerprints maybe, but probably on the order of a regular home scanner.
        • You utter lack of appreciation for sarcasm notwithstanding, "home-use" style scanners with resolutions in the order of 2000+dpi are not uncommon, and resolution is only getting better. I know from personal experience that 1600 dpi can easily capture a persons fingerprint, with detail easily surpassing traditional inkpad methods.
          • Not a big surprise that police agencies use scanners now for taking fingerprints direct into their computer systems. It'd be interesting to see how this system works out, especially how it compares to conventional cryptographic key generation methods.
            • "[W]hat is the point?"

              Just trying to spark some thought into interesting alternate usses of the technology.

              How long before somebody hacks it to use a camera as the input source? You could do all sorts of interesting things with a camera able to recognise objects. You could, say, periodically rotate a camera around your room to capture the various objects in it, and make a profile for insurance records if you house is ever broken into.

              Now that scanners are available rather cheaply, you could easily ha

    • Re:The bane of the photocopier... (Score:5, Funny)

      by quantaman (517394) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:38PM (#5871329)
      Just make sure it isn't somethnig you'll have to call up in the middle of a presentation, could take a lot of explaining...
    • "I'm sorry sir... I couldn't find that document... You see, I have this condition..."

  • Ah, modern tech! (Score:5, Funny)

    by orangesquid (79734) <orangesquid&yahoo,com> on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:06PM (#5871156) Homepage Journal
    Turning the paperless office into a huge junk bin!

    "Mike, do you have the financial data for 2002?"

    "Somewhere. Help me look for the squeaky red clown nose."

    • For my documents, I will use a printed sheet... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Blaede (266638) on Saturday May 03 2003, @07:35PM (#5871575)
      ...of the file as my memento. To make the association more secure, each page will have it's own memento, consisting of the page printed out. That way when I need to retrieve the file on the computer to print out, all I have to do is scan each page, open the file, and print.

      This technology has promise.

  • Mmm... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:07PM (#5871161)
    ...Mentos. The Freshmaker.
  • Remember Dumbo and the magic feather? I can see it now, my mother will call up to say she can't access her files because she lost the shortcut object, because she's afraid to navigate the filesystem.
  • but if you used a car key, it'd suck if you forgot when you get a new one...

  • I am thinking (Score:4, Funny)

    by einhverfr (238914) <chris.travers@gmail.com> on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:07PM (#5871169) Homepage Journal
    Was the Marketing Plan associated with one of these seashells or one of these pebbles? Or maybe it was my coffee cup?

  • Patents... (Score:4, Funny)

    by silentbozo (542534) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:07PM (#5871170) Journal
    If they try to patent this idea, I'm citing Johnny Mnemonic [imdb.com] as prior art!!!

  • Keys (Score:5, Funny)

    by cybermace5 (446439) <g.ryan@macetech.com> on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:10PM (#5871182) Homepage Journal
    Guess you could have actual keys for database access. Then you can put all the keys on a keyring...

    This is more stupid than anything else I've heard this week.

  • This is just too easy (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:11PM (#5871194)
    Please put penis on scanner to locate pr0n

  • well (Score:5, Funny)

    by kingofnopants (600490) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:13PM (#5871204)
    If ten years ago someone told me that in the year 2003 i would be using a seashell to retrieve data i would tell that person that he is fscking stupid.

  • My question is why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MyNameIsFred (543994) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:15PM (#5871213)
    To me this sounds like many of the other poorly concieved ideas for indexing files. Much like meta-data fields that require me to fill out extra fields that can be searched later. The vast majority of people don't fill the fields in. And where required, they typically use bogus data.

    This situation seems much the same. Most of the files I save on a computer are NOT associated with some object I have lying around the house. For example, everytime I write a letter to Mom, I'm suppose to scan her picture? Why not just save it in a folder called, "Letters to Mom." Its easier, quicker, and I don't have to find Mom's picture. Similarly at work, most of my files are associated with some email telling me to do work on some project. Do I scan the email? Seems kind of pointless.

    In my view, like metadata, this suggestion adds steps that the vast majority of users won't do.

    • The point is you can associated meta data without having to fill out any fields. This is a good combination of digital objects/physical objects. For home users it may make filing/retrieving these objects much easier, but the killer could well be in the business world where paperless office migration is hindered by indexing rules and incomplete meta-data, yet the same people who fail to grasp these issues can manage with traditional files and systems. Merging the two this way will help with the transition.

      C
  • ....with my obligatory pr0n reference:

    I'd like to use that system to organize and search my pr0n collection!

  • Doh.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by NanoGator (522640) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:17PM (#5871223) Homepage Journal
    ... Uh dear.. well.. uh I need you to sit on the scanner... Please, don't ask.
  • If you already have to keep the keys around in the physical world, then what's the point of not carrying around the actual paper documents themselves, or a CD-R or DVD? Sure, it's sort of impressive tech, but it's a poor idea overall.
  • Next your not going to scan a picture of the object but actually drag the object to a special platform. "Mom where's my M16, I want to play American Army

  • Johnny Mneumonic (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rice_burners_suck (243660) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:33PM (#5871299)
    This is just like Johnny Mneumonic. Every day, with the bullshit being pulled by the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft and other predatory multinational multibillion dollar organizations seeking nothing more than eternal perpetually increasing profits, the world gets closer to the reality portrayed in that movie. That was the subject of Johnny Mneumonic; in that case, it was a pharmaceuticals company that let people stay sick even though they had a cure because it meant more profits for them.

    But that's NOT why I associate this with Johnny Mneumonic. I associate it because in the beginning of the movie, they're going to store 80 gigs of information (about as much as I have in /usr/home/) in Just Johnny's head. They use three random images from the television to associate with and encrypt the information. These images are then faxed to the recipient. Obviously the bits aren't being used because they would change in faxing. A more associative method is used, kind of like a human memory. I think that with time, more technologies like this will be used as our computational needs advance; That is, unless these multibillion dollar corporations have their way and our computers become merely vessels for receiving garbage information (valuable intellectual property) like the stupid movies and music being made nowadays, while "real" computers will be labeled as "professional equipment" and will cost five hundred times as much as they should so that only the corporations can afford them to keep us under control.

    In the world of the future, it will be corporations, not governments, that will oppress the people. The governments will only serve as a tool to those corporations. Capitalism is fine; I just think that one change needs to be made: The individuals should have a much louder "voice" in government issues than corporations. In fact, the "voice" of any party should be inversely proportional to its size and power. The RIAA should not have enough voice to mail a letter to a senator, let alone do the evils that they are doing.

    • In the world of the future, it will be corporations, not governments, that will oppress the people. The governments will only serve as a tool to those corporations.

      In the future?

    • "I associate it because in the beginning of the movie, they're going to store 80 gigs of information (about as much as I have in /usr/home/) in Just Johnny's head. They use three random images from the television to associate with and encrypt the information. These images are then faxed to the recipient. Obviously the bits aren't being used because they would change in faxing."

      While this is true of the movie, this is not true of the original William Gibson story of the same name it was based on. There the

  • Dear Leonard (Score:5, Funny)

    by Letter (634816) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:34PM (#5871303)
    Dear Leonard,

    Use the Memento pattern when

    • a snapshot of an object's state must be saved so that it can be restored to that state later.
    • a direct interface to obtaining the state would expose implementation details and break the object's encapsulation.

    Sincerely,
    Letter

  • old idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by g4dget (579145) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:34PM (#5871304)
    Using images of physical tokens to access documents is a really old idea. Of course, that won't stop BT from filing a patent.
  • I first read the headline as:

    Mentos as Document Retrieval Keys

    which quickly brought to mind an image of people trying to stick them into various ports on thier PCs. This could create and a whole new industry dedicated to cleaning floppy drives.

  • Demolition Man... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by da3dAlus (20553) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:45PM (#5871358) Homepage Journal
    "I went to retrieve the files, but in their place were these damn 3 seashells..."

    "Hahahah...he doesn't know what the 3 seashells are for!"

  • Let's see now (Score:5, Funny)

    by AndroidCat (229562) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:49PM (#5871372) Homepage
    When I lose an important memento, I don't have to worry because I kept all the serial number and insurance info in a file which... DAMN!
  • It's really pretty neat. I can pickup old ticket stubs and remember things about concerts that I'd forgotten for years. An old T-shirt can bring back a memory of going shopping at Target with my sister while an old girlfriend was out of town. I've got a tie another old girlfriend gave me that brings back visiting her in the hospital. I could go on, but the really cool thing, is that I've figured out how to retrieve some of this information using abstract representations of things -- drawings or pictures -- or even sometimes simply writing some words about them. I don't have to keep the mementos around any more.

    I'm thinking of maybe implementing a computer system for this, where I type in some small "key" representation, and get back some further "data" associated with it....

    Kind of wish I could clean out and delete a few things from the brain system, tho'...

  • Just what is a Type 2 security error again? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LostCluster (625375) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:54PM (#5871397) Homepage
    This is a sure fire recipe for data loss of critical data. All the server backups you can make would become worthless if the seashell/encryption key falls into the hands of a three year old with crayon or is lost/ruined in any other way.

    It's a nice novelty for encrypting your digital little black book, but it's not going to be useful at all for business databases.

  • I'd use... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 1nv4d3r (642775) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:54PM (#5871400)
    a piece of paper with the filename written on it.

    Because, really, a box full of small objects is harder to associate with unrelated files than the filename is.

    If you can say to yourself, "lessee, did I use the blue pill or the red pill for 2003 Actuals?", you would get a lot further naming the file "2003 Actuals" and looking for that. Wouldn't you?

  • Bleh, (Score:3, Insightful)

    by autopr0n (534291) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:54PM (#5871403) Homepage Journal
    This might be somewhat cool if you could use a simple digital camera, and you didn't need to worry about angle (this would require an all-angles storage, of course)

    Either way, it seems pretty useless for most people. As long as we can tell what an object is we could simply type it's name in and search that way. It could be useful for large museums and scientists, thought.

  • Great... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rorschach1 (174480) on Saturday May 03 2003, @06:58PM (#5871420) Homepage
    So now I can lose all of my electronic files along with the physical ones in the piles of junk on my desk...

  • Humane technology (Score:3, Insightful)

    by asreal (177335) on Saturday May 03 2003, @07:02PM (#5871444)

    This is one of those inventions that makes technology easier a bit more fun and a lot more personal. It doesn't make sense for every day use - you wouldn't want to use it to store office documents or your taxes - but imagine the sentimental possibilities. Associating a ring that belonged to your mother with pictures of her and a slideshow, or the seashell in question with video and music from your romantic beach vacation.

    So before you go off saying how complicated and pointless a system like this would be, remember that it won't just be geeks using it. But of course, it could make a very interesting password system in the right hands...

  • I may just be a little slow, but the purpose of this is...?
    • If you stick a crystal on the scanner, a hologram of Marlon Brando will appear and tell you the secrets of the universe.
  • Using a tangible reference that can't easily be guessed/produced by a non-authorized party is a great idea in data security.

    However, it seems flawed since you have to:
    a) determine a method to reference the objects to their locked data if you use multiple objects as associations.

    b) determine a method to securely store that object

    c) Raise the question of the uniqueness of that object.

    So for this to work, you'd have to create a secured storage location and a means to remember each items association.
    And the
  • Hazards of using a scan of an object as a key include loss of the object or the scanner. A different scanner with different resolutions and color sensitivity would ruin your day. If you just happened to keep the original scan, you would be better off. Using many objects and hiding their images with many others would reduce the chances of others discovering your keys. You would then need a data base to associate the images with files. For smaller files you would do better to simply watermark your image

  • I think it's a good idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TwinBeam (638330) on Saturday May 03 2003, @07:44PM (#5871644)
    Those of you being snide need to think again.

    To you it sounds pointless and silly and wastefully kludgy. The same sort of snide remarks were made about graphical displays and color monitors and mice. Such attitudes overlooked that people LIKED working with computers that had those features.

    The proposal is not a data retrieval system - it's a memory retrieval system. And it isn't oriented to bringing up that memo you wrote last week - it's to bring back your images of your wedding or vacation of 20 years ago. And just a data point - my wife think's it's a cool idea. So maybe this is one of those things that women will understand and want more than men. (You know - women - those odd creatures that press flowers, save invitations from weddings, make shadow boxes, save children's teeth, etc? A digital memory box may very well be a highly desirable consumer product.)
  • 1. Just crumple up a piece of paper.
    2. Trace the creases in pen.
    3. Scan the piece of paper.
    4. The image is the key to the document.
  • It seems to me like this would be most useful for cataloging. A museum, for instance, could take a scan of each item in their collection, and then use that as one means of bringing up all of their data on that item. Or a stamp collector could use it to store information on each stamp in his collection. I think the stated uses in the article are kind of silly, but I can definitely see this having some value.

  • Sounds stupid... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dfj225 (587560) on Saturday May 03 2003, @10:12PM (#5872292) Homepage Journal
    So now instead of looking through the my documents/history section on my computer for that paper on George Washington, I have to dig through all my old stuff to find his bust? Sounds like much more work with this "new" system. I think that if you organize your files in a logical manner, then it is very difficult to lose them. Personally, I would much rather have a faster/better search tool for Windows than having to dig up a physical object to look up my files.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.