Voices in Your Head 342
ceejayoz writes "MSNBC/Newsweek is running a story about a 'Hypersonic Sound System' that can 'can take an audio signal from virtually any source and convert it to an ultrasonic frequency that can be directed like a beam of light toward a target up to 100 yards away.' Sounds like something that advertisers will love - Minority Report just got a little closer." These guys (and the Audio Spotlight guys) have been hyping this technology for years with nothing much to show from it. But now, Newsweek promises, it's going to change the world as we hear it.
psych-ops (Score:1)
Weapon Systems (Score:2)
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/video_index/vide o_index.html
seems like there are a mixture of applications.
What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:2)
Dunno how they plan to stop people from doing that...
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:2)
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:2, Insightful)
Even if you don't opt out, with 300 million people receiving over 100 direct audio marketing messages each day, you'd be more likely to get struck by lightning than injured by a "faulty" ad beam.
---
On a more serious, but related and entirely factual note... while making a purchase at Barnes and Noble one day, the cashier asked if I would like to join their discount club (pay $xx per year in trade for a percentage discount and presumably a neverending stream of electronic and snail junk mail).
"No thank you," I told her. "I get enough junk mail as it is."
"Oh come on," she urged, waving my credit card in a way that scared me. "You could save five dollars right here on this purchase!"
"I said 'no.'"
"Personally I like receiving things in the mail. I know that may sound pathetic, but it makes me feel good because no one ever mails me stuff."
"Give me my card back."
"But I haven't rung your order up--"
"Give me my card back now or I'm calling the police. You have been insulting my intelligence for the last two minutes in an attempt to sell me something I have repeatedly stated I don't want and now you are holding my credit card hostage."
She just stared at me in disbelief until I pulled out my cell phone, at which point she handed my card back and I walked out -- leaving the books on the counter.
Calm Down (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want to humiliate someone or win a great battle against indiscriminate or aggressive advertizing, try addressing yourself to the book company. The $8-an-hour clerk isn't responsible. Neither are the poor high school dropouts trying to sell you long distance service. Ask for a manager, and then explain to the manager that "suggestive selling" the membership was intrusive.
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:2)
Congratulations, you're an ass. Y'know those clerks get bitched at for *not* being persistent with that stuff dont you? She was, in a roundabout way, doing her job
All salespeople are just doing their job. Does that make me an ass if I refuse to do business with a corperation that chooses to have their salespeople pester? How about if the spammer is just doing his job? Am I an ass for trying to get his email account closed? How about for putting him on my mailer's twitlist?
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:2)
Oh, wait. This is happening all the time in dance clubs - they always play at levels that cause irreversible hearing damage.
IIRC, this device uses levels similar to medical ultrasound but since it's not in direct contact with the body the coupling loss is huge (tens of dbs).
Re:What if it gets turned up to 11?? (Score:2)
We need to shut them down.
Won't someone please think of the children!
Non-lethal weapons (Score:3, Informative)
I imagine this could easily be used to 'beam' a low tone like this at someone specific (a hostage taker, etc) and make them incapacitated without any harm to others in the area.
Re:Non-lethal weapons (Score:2)
Re:no way (Score:2)
Sonic Guns? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:2)
It would be more like the exploding brain syndrome. I doubt it can throw someone in the air or knock down a wall, but possibly shatter a big hole in that wall.
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:2)
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:3, Informative)
A more 'practical' weapons application would be as a type of stun device, though. Hell, they are getting ready to start deploying a sonic based 'non-lethal' weapon, it's already mounted on a destroyer. Supposedly makes it impossible to do anything but clap your hands on your head and cry 'make it stop' over and over.
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:3, Informative)
"Stun" devices remain science fiction. In fact the idea that a person's nervous system could be somehow incapacitated with sound dates at least back to the late fifties, and you might be able to push it back to the forties or further with some research. (I know I've read fifties-era sci-fi that has sonic stun guns, though, so I'll stick with that.) In fact, it stems from the same misunderstanding promulgated by Star Trek, that everything has a resonance frequency and is just waiting to have havoc done to it by a passing vibrating object. It should not surprise you that the idea has fared about as well as the contemporary rocket jet packs and meals in pill form have fared in real life... what faint vestiges of them exist hardly resemble the '50's conception of them.
This page [stardestroyer.net] has a pretty good analysis on the topic, and should probably be considered required reading for all of the budding psuedo-science stun gun designers on Slashdot today.
(By contrast, simply blasting soldiers or rioters with high-energy sounds, distracting sounds, or even (perhaps ideally in the military sense) misleading sound is quite practical, even if less sexy.)
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:2)
A nuclear bomb produces several huge pressure waves, as do some smaller explosives, but those aren't really sounds... when you get down to small fractions of a Hz, trying to understand them as sound waves will just mislead you. You're better off modeling them as 600Mph limited winds.
Also, remember the context of the conversation... one does not use a "sonic gun" to create these waves, one uses a big-ass explosive. Any sound wave generated by a "sonic gun" as the original poster envisioned is never going to "knock anyone over". See "conservation of momentum".
Re:Sonic Guns? (Score:2)
Re:Brown Sound (Score:2)
Regarding your last paragraph, check my last paragraph. Also, watch your dB, remember, they are exponential. A gun shot tops out at around 140 [cdc.gov]... at 170, they may not have an eardrum left.
(You can get some fun results with that... a nuclear bomb is actually only in the low 200s, as I recall.)
I can see it already now: (Score:3, Funny)
Hey baby, this is your appetite speaking
</Barry White>
That technology has been around for a while (Score:1, Funny)
Have I got a product for you.. (Score:5, Funny)
This amazing device can be yours for a minimal price. Just sent me $2000 and I'll ship a couple of devices capable of producing hundreds of watts of sound. None of this crappy 1 person 100 yards away stuff.. Man, where do they get their ideas?
Re:Have I got a product for you.. (Score:2)
Re:This "speaker" Doesn't "sound" differnt either. (Score:2)
Quoth the article: "What the person across the room hears is, well, unbelievable: all of a sudden, the sound of a waterfall has materialized in his head."
I'm not sure how the technology works (they don't give much actual detail about it) but it may be vibrating the skull, which would make it sound like it's coming from inside your head. (I have a Thinkgeek "Soundbug" and if you push it against your forehead, you hear it from between your ears - very weird!)
Re:This "speaker" Doesn't "sound" differnt either. (Score:2)
Re:This "speaker" Doesn't "sound" differnt either. (Score:2)
Re:This "speaker" Doesn't "sound" differnt either. (Score:2)
The article mentioned that he was using a pair of ultrasonic beams, so it was my assumption that he was focusing the two beams on the person's head and that the person was hearing the "beat frequency" of the two beams.
Re:Have I got a product for you.. (Score:2)
Re:Have I got a product for you.. (Score:2)
Over my dead body! My company, Stevetech.com, has been awarded a patent for our revolutionary "speaker" technology. You'll be hearing from my army of lawyers soon!
Only kidding,
Steve
Re:Have I got a product for you.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Imagine window-shopping in a mall. Now imagine every store constantly broadcasting about they're products loud enough for every one around to hear. All of a sudden this has become a very unpleasant environment. Now image that as you walk passed a particular store, looking at something in the window, and the store whispers to you, just you, about some of the products your seeing. Now you've been advertised to without disturbing all the passersby around you, the ambient noise is the same, and it's targeted marketing: don't yell at every one, talk to the guy who shows some interest. And as other technologies come along, such as face recognition, it can be personalized even further.
So you go ahead and boast your current audio advertising methods, but they only place they're useful is on an ice-cream truck.
Re:Big deal! (Score:2)
And you're building them without speakers?
Broadcasting Thoughts (Score:2)
Woody Norris thinks he is most clever scientist of the 21st century...but did Woody notice the yellow eyed green creature parked in a silver disk on the limbs the green tree 100 yards outside his office...
Just Super (Score:5, Insightful)
The day I get blasted with an add for Coke beamed directly into my head while walking down the street is the day I quit my job and start organizing consumer boycotts full time.
Re:Just Super (Score:2)
The day I get blasted with an ad for Coke beamed directly into my head while walking down the street is the day that the guy running the beam gets his machine blasted somewhere that it won't fit very well.
Re:Just Super (Score:2)
Re:Just Super (Score:2)
PASTA - Post-Advertisement Stress-induced Traumatic Action
Yes, after hearing commercials in their own heads for hours, people will be so stressed out that they will go crazy and start breaking stuff.
A whole new later of temporary insanity. ;)
conversely (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:conversely (Score:2)
Re:conversely (Score:2)
You can claim "justifiable insanity" at the trial: "Yes Yer Honor, I _was_ hearing voices in my head!"
Should help schizophrenics... (Score:5, Funny)
Now i guess they just need to push the arguments towards, "No, I don't want to buy a fucking Coke" and no-one will suspect a thing...
cLive ;-)
Re:Should help schizophrenics... (Score:2)
cLive ;-)
Ultrasound this, ultrasound that (Score:4, Funny)
Newsweek Objectivity (Score:5, Interesting)
OK, Newsweek has now slipped into the same category as the TV channels that show infomercials 20 hours a day. A couple of weeks ago Newsweek touted Microsoft Palladium as the revolutionary future, now they're saying this sound wave thing will be. How much would it cost me to have Newsweek run a long article about my futuristic world-changing vaporware product that happens to be 8 to 15 years away from actual production? It's worse than biased media, it's buy-your-own-news.
Re:Newsweek Objectivity (Score:2)
It's gotten horribly bad these days. When's the last time some news was reported without the "personal" slant added in? Good thing Reuters is still around. I also think (for the most part) the BBC does a good job.
Re:Newsweek Objectivity (Score:4, Informative)
One of the provisions of the alliance was that Microsoft would publish Newsweek.com. The first reaction I heard from my coworkers was a concern for Newsweek's objectivity, or at least the appearance of objectivity. The Post's top brass assured everyone that the deal would have no impact on Newsweek's objectivity. I'm not saying it has; just putting a little insider kerosene on your fire.
One of the other provisions was that washingtonpost.com would feature Windows Media clips of Washington Post reporters on MSNBC. We were instructed to embed the video in our templates and also call a .js file hosted on MSNBC's site. The sole purpose of the .js file was to weed out non-Windows browsers. For instance, I visited the page (on our site) with a Mac and was redirected to an MSNBC page stating "Windows Media Player is not available for the Macintosh." I showed this to one of the top editors, who replied our users should know better than to buy a substandard computer. I then downloaded Windows Media Player for Mac from Microsoft and demonstrated that the video works perfectly if you take the .js reference out. The next morning the multimedia editor was waiting at my desk to get the details, and later began re-encoding the video files in Real format -- over Microsoft's loud objections.
Bottom line: Microsoft tried to use its deal with The Washington Post to prevent non-Windows users from viewing Post reporters on The Post's own site. I can only imagine what goes on at "newsweek.msnbc.com."
Re:Newsweek Objectivity (Score:3, Informative)
guttentag typed: Bottom line: Microsoft tried to use its deal with The Washington Post to prevent non-Windows users from viewing Post reporters on The Post's own site. I can only imagine what goes on at "newsweek.msnbc.com."
Excellent information, I appreciate the insider's perspective on that deal.
I've been opposed to the MSNBC agreement from day one for obvious reasons. I usually disagree with Ralph Nader, but he gave a pefect quote about Microsoft in 1995 or 1996...
I agree with this 100% and honestly think it should be made into law. Dangerous ground.
Back in 1995 or 1996 Microsoft came within a few million dollars of buying Turner Broadcasting (CNN, TBS, TNT, et al.). The Turner agreement was that Microsoft would basically purchase them for something in the area of $12 billion, then Microsoft's Turner subsidiary would use that money to buy bankrupt CBS. Imagine what kind of Microsoft we'd be dealing with if that agreement hadn't collapsed. Scary to even consider.
Is this healthy? (Score:2)
Re:Is this healthy? (Score:2)
Hey, it happened in Mars Attacks.
artist's rendition (Score:5, Funny)
HSS warning label (Score:2)
"Warning: through sound and motion you might accidently paralyse nerves, shatter bones, set fires, suffocate an enemy or burst his organs."
Can you hear me now? (Score:4, Funny)
the military (Score:2)
Mind Control..... (Score:2)
Reminds me of... (Score:2, Informative)
Mitch: And from now on, stop playing with yourself!
Kent: It is God!
Other forms already in use (Score:2)
Shell - Bastards wouldn't let me use their bathroom because they close them at 10pm.
Arco - Deceptive pricing, $0.35 if you use an ATM card, noted in very small print on the pump.
TNN - Put a black bar that blocks content without adding anything extra.
Movies on TV - "Edited for Time", removing content to put in commercials or fit a schedule.
What else do people boycot?
Travis
Re:Other forms already in use (Score:2)
What else do people boycot?
Ridiculous boycott lists.
(Seriously, I can think of about a dozen other things or companies that need boycotting more than "Movies on TV" and "Shell because they won't let you use the bathroom.")
Prior art (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Prior art (Score:2)
Not a new idea by any means... (Score:2)
"There's the soft-speaker, for instance-"
"What's that?"
"It's like a loud-speaker, only it doesn't speak loudly. It throws a super-sonic beam, modulated by the human voice to give the effect of audible sound-frequencies when it hits the human ear. Since you can throw a supersonic beam almost as accurately as you can throw a light beam, you can turn a soft-speaker on a person, who will then hear a still small voice in his ear apparently coming from nowhere..."
Re:Not a new idea by any means... (Score:2)
Surround sound.. (Score:2)
But, by using this technology, all you'd have to do is point these high-freq speakers at the spots from which you want the sound to come and *poof* you've got a virtual-speaker there.
They're saying that there are issues with reproducing bass signals, but that's where your subwoofer comes in. Now, that is often the uglies part of the system.. big and bulky, but if you could find somewhere for that to go, then that should make up for the lack of bass from the high-freq speakers. Sort of like those Bose systems with the little satelite speakers and the sub. Together, the system sounds really good.. but unplug the sub? It's not a pretty sound..
How do I tell 'em I'm broke? (Score:2)
You don't even get a chance to start a sob story about it either. They figure they'rte going to give you the same warm welcome they've been getting all day and they slam the phone in your ear.
Its great. Word gets around and they don't call anmore.
Re:How do I tell 'em I'm broke? (Score:2)
Junkbusters has an excellent anti-telemarketing script [junkbusters.com] that I'm going to put into employ when I move back to my home state in a few weeks.
It's got some pretty cool stuff. Like, if they don't answer certain questions correctly (or at all), you can tell them that they are now open to a lawsuit. And be right.
Way to block it out? (Score:4, Insightful)
If anyone has any more real information about how this supposed breakthrough actually works, I'd love to see it.
Advertising beamed into our heads? (Score:2)
I would use it... (Score:2)
to beam "helpful suggestions" to drivers in front of me that are driving like idiots...
Fighting back (Score:2)
Check out Audio Spotlight (Score:2, Informative)
I don't new about the guy Newsweek talks about, but the technology is real and I'm looking forward to hearing it.
Hmmmmm (Score:2)
Vandalism... (Score:2, Interesting)
The company website (Score:2, Informative)
If you are into "conspiracy theories"... (Score:2)
Re:uhh, TLC had this a *looong* time ago (Score:2)
Re:uhh.... how does this work? (Score:2)
Exactly how they do it? I dunno. I'm not even sure they have released their method to the public yet.
Re:uhh.... how does this work? (Score:2)
This will probably operate on the same principle -- a 51HZ beam at one waveform and a 50Hz at an opposite will partially cancel, and you get a 1Hz resonance inside your skull, which you hear much as you would your own voice while speaking.
This is how it works in layman's terms (Score:5, Informative)
Here's how it works in laymans terms. I am no science wizard, but this sounds good to me..
There are things called beat frequencies that occur when you have two frequencies present. For example, if you play 20Hz into one ear, and 25Hz into the other, your brain can be 'tricked' into thinking it is hearing 5Hz (the difference between the two frequencies).
This is all well and good, but 20Hz soundwaves don't travel too good. Ultrasonic frequencies do though. Remember those TV remote controls in the 70s and 80s that used ultrasonics? You could control your neighbor's TV. (See the start of Poltergeist 1 if you forget)
But how does sending 50Khz sound waves through the air help you hear anything? Ay, well there's the rub. The concept of beat frequencies is used once again.
If you send a 50Khz sound wave from one source and pinpoint it at a certain spot, and then send a 51Khz sound wave from another source to the same spot, anyone at the place where those two beams join up will hear a 1Khz sound, thanks to beat frequencies.
That's how you can pinpoint sounds to a single place. It just took a genius to get the connection between beat frequencies and ultrasonics to work this one out. I think it's cool.
Close, but no cigar (Score:5, Informative)
First, beat frequencies are quite real - there is no "tricking" your brain into hearing something that isn't there - the signal is there.
Specifically, whenever you feed 2 signals f1 and f2 into a system with any non-linearities, you will get four frequencies out - the original f1 and f2, and two new frequencies (f2-f1) and (f1+f2). So, if I feed 51kHz and 50 kHz into a system, you will get 1 kHz, 50 kHz, 51 kHz, and 101 kHz. This is the same principle that all modern radio receivers work on - it is called heterodyning, and a modern radio is a superheterodyne receiver.
Now, in terms of propagation, low frequency sound does better than high frequencies - hence why thunder goes "CRACK" when it is close and "rummmblee" when it is far away - all the high frequencies have been attenuated by the air. Also, this is one of the reasons why all you hear of the assholes with the ThunderThump 3000 car stereos is the low frequencies - what little high frequencies they produce are attenuated by the car's body and the distance.
However, to get any directionality from a sound transducer, it must be large with respect to the sound frequency. The problem is that the bulk of the frequencies humans hear have very long wavelengths - it is possible to make a directional beam of 20 Hz sound, but you would need a speaker system the size of a football field. Somewhat impractical if you want them all over the place, pumping out your "BUY ME NOW" message.
However, by translating the frequencies up to 50 kHz, you reduce the wavelengths down to the point where the speaker needn't be much larger than a paperback to get the directional gain you want. So, you upconvert the signals to ultrasonic frequencies, and you use the fact that just hitting a surface acts as a nonlinear mixing element.
However, I have always wondered how much of the signal is going into the (f2-f1) component, and how much of the power is in the other three frequencies you cannot hear? What kind of damage will this energy do over the long run?
Not to mention that, with the steady erosion of the respect of the right of people to be left alone, how will this be abused? Will we see "reality TV" shows freaking people out? (say, by beaming "LOOK OUT! HE'S GOT A GUN" to one person in a crowd). Let alone the targeted advertisments ("Hey lard butt! Yeah, YOU. Get your fat ass into Fred's Gym, across the street. NOW!")
Personally, if this sort of thing gets deployed in public places, I want to start carrying one of the boxes you used to downmix bat echolocation down to audible, locate the speakers, and use my Leatherman on them... Or my Browning...
Re:Close, but no cigar (Score:2)
I share your concerns about the 'pollution' that could be caused by these devices. And the amount of damage that could be caused by these is crazy to think about.
Re:Close, but no cigar (Score:2)
http://web-us.com/thescience.htm
Give that man a cigar (Score:2)
Correct - what I was alluding to was being able to hear the original ultrasound before the mixing, so as to better locate the speakers.
And I'm not sure if the bat boxes do a single-sideband on the signal - I think they just do a straight mix of a bandwidth limited input - the mike responds to 20kHz->40 kHz, and then you mix with 20 kHz, yeilding 0->20 kHz and 40->60 kHz. Who cares about the high-side signals?
Re:Minority Report (Score:2)
So, just about everything you saw in Minority Report, tech-wise, is under consideration somewhere.
I, however, am sadly certain that this will be used as a weapon. Blow a person's eardrums out with that thing, or even worse. How much sonic energy does it take to make your head blow up like an overheated pumpkin?
Is there a defence that can be devised? 180-out-of-phase speakers? What?
Physics majors, any answers?
Re:Minority Report (Score:5, Funny)
Physics majors, any answers?
A simple metal helmet should protect you. In fact, tinfoil might be sufficient.
Re:Minority Report (Score:2)
The mind boggles...
I said it before [slashdot.org] and I'll say it again [slashdot.org]. We need to use the [HUMOUR] tags.
Re:Minority Report (Score:2)
Physics majors, any answers?
Duck and cover.
Seriously, ultrasonic frequencies do a poor job of going through any barrier. It would make a lousy weapon compared with, say, a sniper rifle.
Re:Anti-sound beam hat? (Score:2)
Consider a car with active sound dampening. no road noise. No passing car noise. However, active sound dampening could be used intelligently, to allow you to clearly hear sirens, horns, etc.
Of course, with the sound beams and active noise cancelling, the driver could (theoretically, with enough sensors & speakers) hold a hands-free cellphone conversation without the passengers being able to hear.
Frightening.
Noise canx headphones don't help hi freq noise (Score:2)
The problem is that to accurately cancel a sound, you have to EXACTLY invert its phase - match it and you double the volume instead. Bass is a lower frequency with a longer wavelength and is easier to accurately match and thus cancel. You can measure the sound with a microphone a small distance from the ear canal, without causing much problem. But the high frequency sound is more directional, and you'd have to mount the microphone which measures the sound to be canceled almost directly in the ear canal to get a real measurement of what you need to be canceling. Not exactly comfortable to wear, or convenient.
As electronics get smaller, I wouldn't be surprised to see active cancellation hearing-aid-style inserts. This method would probably work perfectly. As a matter of fact, the only real high-end noise cancelling system used something like that setup, with a remote electronics pack.
Re:Anti-sound beam hat? (Score:2, Insightful)
(If that sounds familiar, you might be thinking of this article [slashdot.org])
Re:ultrasonic (Score:2)
In related news (Score:2)
It turns out that "Field of Dreams" was military testing of this sound system and holographic projection systems.
Re:If it works, many possibilities (Score:2)
Drug dealing - forget selling cheap/fake drugs, consider the drug seller options.
You could stand in an alleyway and talk only to the people you want, without worrying about being seen/heard by police.
Think about informants and other covert situations. Your informant sits on a park bench and you, 100 yards away in a car, ask him questions to which he responds with motioning.
Re:Some cool applications... (Score:2)
But to make the complex sound for each person, you must have an ultrasonic system for each person, as well as a sensor system that can track each person and the local obstacles to sound.
Then you would need emitters all around the room to improve the the ability to target people in a varied environment. Each emitter would have to be on a pivot to work best, and you would need some great software to dynamically track people's movements to prevent "falling out" of the sound accidentally.
Re:I'm inclined to think this is bullcrap. (Score:3, Informative)
Ever been to even the most basic children's museum? Then you've seen the two parabolic reflectors that transmit a whisper clearly across a crowded, noisy room.
Ever cupped your hands around your mouth to shout to someone far away? You must have looked pretty stupid, if, as everyone knows, you can't focus sound.
Ever seen an amphitheatre? They're designed specifically to focus sound to the listening audience.
Those great big flaps of flesh that stick out of your head, that just happen to be rougly cone-shaped and connected to your auditory canal? What do you think those are there for? For that matter, ever seen a horse, dog, or cat when it's listening to something?
Sound is a wave, and can be focused. Everything exhibits both wave and particle properties, light can be focused because of its wave properties, not its particle properties.
You obviously skipped 1st grade physics.
Re:What the hell is the buy lnux department? (Score:2)
Just go buy some shares of lnux, and you'll be fine.
Re:How can we abuse _this_ new toy? (Score:2)
Re:I'm too lazy to read the article (Score:2)
1) Every sentence of my post was about the article.
2) I was making a point there.