Apple phones to block you taking concert pictures in future!

Sanjuro

Biggins wrote: »

There is two things that stick out for me.

1. That the tech could be further used beyond just concerts and
2. The fact that once you've thought you have bought a product with enabled features, the makers can later turn around and take them off you.

Contentious points for some people.

Agreed. Take a look at the Arab Spring currently ongoing in the Middle East. The same tech could be used to stop people from taking footage of protests and posting it to the net, which is where a great deal of what we know about it has come from. I know it's a more extreme example of this, but step one is benevolent...

smash

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Since cameras can see this light, they can decode it just like your TV. The iPhone would turn off the camera if it sensed the correct light sequence. The emmitter would not have to be powerful, just powerful enough and positioned so that the iPhone would pick it up.

then all you have to do is get a camera app that decodes the IR sequence differently. It's simple.

Biggins

Sanjuro wrote: »

Agreed. Take a look at the Arab Spring currently ongoing in the Middle East. The same tech could be used to stop people from taking footage of protests and posting it to the net, which is where a great deal of what we know about it has come from. I know it's a more extreme example of this, but step one is benevolent...

You just know the Chinese/the North Koreans/Burma government (and others) would copy/steal the tech and do this at the first opportunity!

FungiWalsh

Guys, don't forget that this is just a patent application, which is by no means a confirmation of implementation into the iPhone operating system. Companies like Apple file patent applications constantly, and only a tiny fraction of them ever make it to market. A patent application just exists to protect an idea someone develops. I'd be very, very surprised if this ever made it into any version of iOS. In fact, if anyone wants to bet on it appearing in any version of Apple's mobile operating system within the next, say, two years, just name your amount!

EDIT: Snap!

Seachmall

OSI wrote: »

Do you believe every bit of scare mongering crap you read in the papers Biggins? No doubt you have a subscription to the Daily Mail and take it as Gospel to.

It's completely feasible that they'd implement this and is worth a discussion.

Biggins

OSI wrote: »

...Do you believe every bit of scare mongering crap you read in the papers Biggins? No doubt you have a subscription to the Daily Mail and take it as Gospel to.

While I like the Mail to wipe my arse with, I take the Times to be more honest.
And you could be right in regard to they might not do this BUT given Apples record on restricting users rights, I suspect what way they will go on this.

Your free to disagree - just don't sound so bitchy when doing so.
We're all trying to get along here and have a friendly discussion.

Amalgam

There's a big legal hurdle to disabling a feature on a phone, any feature, remotely, without a very good reason. It's the elephant in the room.

To be fair to Apple, this has been on the slate as a phone 'feature' for a good while, with Nokia mulling it years back, not with venues in mind, but schools, government buildings, hospitals etc..

Various industries are gagging to be able to do this. Employers sometimes insist on employees using non camera phones only, but that is becoming more and more difficult.. with the small issue of having no control over the public visiting your premises.

CRANK EDIT: I'm all for disabling phone cameras in schools. Puts undue pressure on teachers and pupils.

Will I Amnt

What a load of absolute sh1te.
Who in their right mind thinks they would lose a viewer for a televised concert because said viewer seen a 10 minute fuzzy,drowned out,compressed to sh1t video on youtube

craggles

Apple are a horrible company with an absolutely disgusting approach to treatment of their customers.

Biggins

Amalgam wrote: »

There's a big legal hurdle to disabling a feature on a phone, any feature, remotely, without a very good reason. It's the elephant in the room.

To be fair to Apple, this has been on the slate as a phone 'feature' for a good while, with Nokia mulling it years back, not with venues in mind, but schools, government buildings, hospitals etc..

Various industries are gagging to be able to do this. Employers sometimes insist on employees using non camera phones only, but that is becoming more and more difficult.. with the small issue of having no control over the public visiting your premises.

You have good points.
Eventually I think, it will just be a further progression of the ability in some cases to already block users from making actually phone calls (like in some prisons, etc) - might be different tech used but broadly in some cases along the same outline principle of stopping people doing what they want to do with their purchased equipment.

Krusader

OSI wrote: »

Gotta laugh at this. This is a patent for an idea, it is by no means a declaration that it is going to be created.

Do you know how many patents the likes of Apple lodge every yea? Thousands!

Do you know how many actually make it into a product? 1%. If that.

This is a case of some one in the office came up with an idea and they decided to patent it in case any one decided to do it in the future they could charge them for it.

Nail firmly hit on the head, why would apple try and alienate their customers

stovelid

How does this work. Would the phone detect the increased levels of niche subcultural smugness emissions due to the combination of multiple iPhone users and a hip concert and just disable the camera?

matchthis

I'd say this would more than likely play a role against movie piracy. Cameras on phones are getting better and would be easy to record a movie from a cinema on one. The cinema would be able to have a blocker at the screen to prevent recording. Could also work to prevent livqe casting of the wwdc:D

Biggins

Crosáidí wrote: »

...why would apple try and alienate their customers

Hasn't stopped them before when they don't allow apps, SD ports for extra abilities, digital rights managenent (DRM) to block people from utilising their music better, for example.

However, that said, I honeslty DON'T want this just to be about Apple.
My main concern is the use of such tech, to be eventually extended else where and its implications.
Its Apples (but not just them alone!) type of thinking that dictates what are the directions of companies (possible later governments) might be going too.

jester77

Seeing as IR sensors need direct line of sight, all you would need is a case that covers these IR sensor on the phone

squod

.........and not even a feckin' keyboard. Why people buy this shite is beyond reason.

conorhal

The more you tighten your grip, Jobs, the more star systems will through your fingers.......

Biggins

OSI wrote: »

...If you looked at the patent you would see they also talk about the ability of using the camera to receive information for augmented reality type stuff such as museum tour guides and stuff. The blocking of recording concerts and such is just another example of what it could be used for, and again something that has already been considered.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/06/6-2-2011appleinfraredcampatent.jpg

Cheers for that info and link.

STIG83

This is a great idea!! i can't stand people who go to concerts and watch it through their phone or camera!!

enda1

jester77 wrote: »

Seeing as IR sensors need direct line of sight, all you would need is a case that covers these IR sensor on the phone

You could quite conceivably move the IR sensor into the camera module. Or make the CCD in the camera sensitive to the IR range too.

squeakyduck

It's a **** day to be the owner of an apple phone.....this just reaffirms the fact that ANDROID RULES!:D;)

enda1

squeakyduck wrote: »

It's a **** day to be the owner of an apple phone.....this just reaffirms the fact that ANDROID RULES!:D;)

What has changed today for iPhone users that makes it so shit out of interest?

Seachmall

enda1 wrote: »

You could quite conceivably move the IR sensor into the camera module. Or make the CCD in the camera sensitive to the IR range too.

If they do this I wouldn't be surprised to see stands outside of concerts selling cheap cases with IR cut-off filters over the camera.

It is a good idea on Apple's part but the response from a large part of their market (cool, hip concert-going college students) will not be good.

kirving

They're already sensitive to IR, but could be made more so.

Getting around it is difficult if it built into the camera. It becomes very difficult to circumvent, but not impossible when the phone itself, or even just the camera will shut itself down independantly of the software installed based on a recieved IR signal. It doesn't even have to be an IR signal, it could be built into a light show and you wouldn't even notice.

As was said previously, it's only a patent and hasn't been announced, but Apple are the one company which I could see doing this. I doubt Nokia give a crap, since they're not trying to sell music on the same level as Apple.

Biggins

Please? Is its possible to have a decent discussion without having to get into the childish, petty Apple versus Android (or the world) crap yet again?
This just ruins every other thread thats tried to be posted, in order to discuss other aspects and related later possibilities.

stevenmu

steve06 wrote: »

then all you have to do is get a camera app that decodes the IR sequence differently. It's simple.

They'd probably build it into the OS/Firmware so that it happens at a level lower than apps can control, and it'll just disable the camera hardware or APIs at least so no app can work around it.

You could quite conceivably move the IR sensor into the camera module. Or make the CCD in the camera sensitive to the IR range too.

Most CCDs/CMOS sensors are already very sensitive to IR light, it just gets filtered out.

TheZohanS

Biggins wrote: »

Please? Is its possible to have a decent discussion without having to get into the childish, petty Apple versus Android (or the world) crap yet again?
This just ruins every other thread thats tried to be posted, in order to discuss other aspects and related later possibilities.

Not when your start a thread with:

If the non-fans of Apple wanted another reason to avoid their phones - its seems Apple is giving them more reasons!

Biggins

OSI wrote: »

Folks, it's not something that's going to happen.

It's quite conceivable they will build in the ability for the camera to decipher information using Infrared signals. But the idea of using it to disable features is never going to be a viable one as it's just far too easy to circumvent.

I'm absolutely sure that some work-arounds will be always (hopefully) be found.
Sadly however, companies already are already introducing and/or using disable functions quietly without any notice to a possible buyer that its there installed.

Microsoft and other company products have been doing this for some time.
Sony at one stage was even sticking stuff into the hidden rootkits of some of their stuff (see HERE).

squeakyduck

enda1 wrote: »

What has changed today for iPhone users that makes it so shit out of interest?

Personal opinion. Like the ease of use not being locked into apple....not having my travels being documented.....not having to pay a **** load for an upgrade....

Biggins

TheZohan wrote: »

Not when your start a thread with:

...In defence, I didn't further go on about rivals (advantages, etc or even names), just showed what way Apple is further thinking.
Still you have a point and my writing should have been clearer.