Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Amazon Seeks 1-Nod Ordering Patent

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the sold-to-the-gentleman-with-the-slight-facial-tic dept.

Patents 194

theodp writes "Amazon.com is famous for its patented 1-Click ordering system. But what about 1-Nod ordering? Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is seeking a patent on a system that would let people make purchases with a nod, a smile, or even a raise of the eyebrow. Bezos' invention — 'Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism' — envisions a computing device that could interpret certain facial expressions and enhance or potentially replace conventional input devices such as keypads and touch screens."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Isn't this standard practice at auctions? (4, Insightful)

cjonslashdot (904508) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468012)

I thought that simply automating a non-automated process is not sufficient to obtain a patent. At many auctions one can bid simply with a nod.

But it is on a *computer* (4, Insightful)

dsginter (104154) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468054)

The patent office will rubber-stamp anything obvious if it is done on a computer. The one-click patent is a wonderful example: for decades, bartenders have been taking a patron's credit card and setting it aside. This allows the patron to simply "run a tab" and order a beer with just one click of the finger. This can't be patented because it is obvious to everyone.

But, if you do it on a computer, you can patent it for some reason. The mind boggles.

Re:But it is on a *computer* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468116)

Whoa, you should patent that!

The force (of lies) is strong on the weak minded.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468140)

(1)... Buy a 1-Nod Patent, cost a few thousand.

(2)... Tell world about it.

(3)... Media writes stories about 1-Click Patent and how 1-Nod Patent won't work. (Media don't care it doesn't work, they get attention from talking about the news).

(4)... Amazon Profit ... from large increase in web traffic from a very obvious PR stunt story to get Amazon more press attention.

(5)... Laugh at every fool on Slashdot who fails to see through it and so takes this PR stunt seriously. :)

Re:But it is on a *computer* (5, Insightful)

qubezz (520511) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468214)

The beauty here: this is patenting the problem and not the solution.

Where are the code snippets, the algorithms to detect the motions, the heuristics to reject false positives in this patent application? [uspto.gov]

It would have been so much easier for Edison if he could patent the idea 'glass bulb that produces light when electricity flows through it', instead of actually showing that he could do it.

The USPTO seems to think that this is fine these days though - patenting an idea instead of an invention.

Class action lawsuit possible? (5, Interesting)

cjonslashdot (904508) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468282)

I wonder if it would be possible to mount a class action lawsuit against the Patent Office, listing a volume of inappropriate software patents, and challenging them all based on the same allegation of incorrect application of patent case law. The plaintiffs could be the industry of software authors who are prevented from using the "methods" in these specious patents.

Re:Class action lawsuit possible? (2, Interesting)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468460)

Please do that.

But you'll have to come up with a metric for "innovation", because the number of patents registered is what governments use today ... We know sucks, but come up with a better one.

Re:But it is on a *computer* (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468412)

It would have been so much easier for Edison if he could patent the idea 'glass bulb that produces light when electricity flows through it', instead of actually showing that he could do it.

The patent office hasn't required a physical model - a "working model" - since 1880. The sole remaining exception is the perpetual motion machine.

Re:But it is on a *computer* (0)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468388)

for decades, bartenders have been taking a patron's credit card and setting it aside. This allows the patron to simply "run a tab" and order a beer with just one click of the finger

The "one click shopper" isn't running up a tab.

He has submitted an order which may be billed and shipped within minutes.

The bartender has his single keg of beer to mind and perhaps a dozen customers at the bar.

Amazon, twenty warehouses in ten states. 27 million cataloged items in books alone. Quarterly sales around $5 billion dollars.

Try keeping track of all that in your head.

 

Re:But it is on a *computer* (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468424)

so if you do it on a computer and big then it's special?

It wasn't a patent on some kind of new system which allowed stock control and shipping over twenty warehouses in ten states, 27 million cataloged items in books alone, Quarterly sales around $5 billion dollars etc etc etc

they patented the idea of being able to order what you want with a click.

my local bartended knows my usual, I can sit down with some friends, catch his eye and perhaps catch his attention with a click and he'll deliver my order to me a few minutes later.

just doing something on a computer or with more people does not magically make it origional.

and where's the code in those patent applications?
without the code all you have is a general idea, not an innovative invention.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions? (1)

heson (915298) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468418)

My first thought was Paddington at the auktion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTQplC5E2zk [youtube.com]

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions? (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468486)

I am not a software patent or even patent advocate (they are all evil and stifle innovation) but...

I thought that simply automating a non-automated process is not sufficient to obtain a patent.

You are talking about robotics here. Of course that automating a manual process deserves a patent. That doesn't make it automatically innovating but replacing a human task by an automatic process is often a non trivial process.

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions? (1)

cjonslashdot (904508) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468520)

Exactly. It is non-trivial to implement such automation. And therefore the mere idea should not be sufficient for a patent. The Patent Office is allowing companies to patent these "mere ideas".

Re:Isn't this standard practice at auctions? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468638)

True, but when was the last time the PO did their job?

Meh. (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468018)

Sounds overbearing, but how many people (myself included) have thought "Damn, wish I had patented that 10-15 years before it hit the market"?

Re:Meh. (1)

Zumbs (1241138) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468210)

Don't patents only last 10-15 years? Or maybe that is your point?

Re:Meh. (1)

NoPantsJim (1149003) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468246)

I thought it was 17 years? Wikipedia to the rescue...

What will be next? (5, Funny)

PerformanceDude (1798324) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468020)

1-frown refund?

I'd like to see that... Now where is that patent application form?

Re:What will be next? (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468086)

I'm writing a one fart review of this whole concept.

Re:What will be next? (1)

alex-tokar (1727590) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468122)

What we need is a 1-frown patent denial system.

Re:What will be next? (2, Funny)

sycodon (149926) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468176)

I suspect there will probably be a 1 hard on ordering system for porn.

Re:What will be next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468374)

As long as there's a 1-ejaculation system for knowing when to stop billing for streaming porn.

Re:What will be next? (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468410)

Catch 22. Need the porn to get the hard-on, need the hard-on to get the porn...

Re:What will be next? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468512)

The first one is free. The following orders will come automatically.

Re:What will be next? (5, Funny)

mike260 (224212) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468352)

Parent post made me LOL but unfortunately an ad saw this, misinterpreted it, and I now own an IBM z10 mainframe.

I'd cry but I'm afraid that Amazon would notice.

Re:What will be next? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468656)

I'm sure the dude at demotivationals has that already. Now, don't you feel depressed? Go buy a T-shirt.

Re:What will be next? (1)

RevWaldo (1186281) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468666)

Facebook is looking to patent its 1-nod 'opt-in' system. Although they do have a version that relies on blinking.

.

Not exactly innovative. (5, Insightful)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468024)

He wants a patent on a centuries old auction bid technique? But on a computer? Whateva... besides, there must be plenty of published techniques for more generic movement-as-input already - it's been a popular research topic.

Re:Not exactly innovative. (1)

cybereal (621599) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468104)

He wants a patent on a centuries old auction bid technique? But on a computer?

This comment is exemplary of a common misconception in patents. They are not covering the results! They are covering the mechanism and methodology. The "machine" if you will. The patent would cover a specific method for interpreting/receiving/whatever the gesture and passing it along to the service so it would do the expected thing. There could be a thousand ways to do this, and thus, a thousand different patents that all accomplished the same thing, and that's okay. Reality is, there are usually only a handful of effective ways to accomplish tasks like these and so you end up with patent lawsuits, and preemptive licensing. Woo.

Re:Not exactly innovative. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468128)

So another software patent? Things like those should should put you on death row, just behind patent trolls and serial murderers.

Re:Not exactly innovative. (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468148)

This comment is exemplary of a common misconception in patents. They are not covering the results! They are covering the mechanism and methodology.

All well and good, but it's still pretty fricken obvious to those skilled in the art. Most of us would just think it's a bad idea right now until computer vision catches up to make it reliable.

Re:Not exactly innovative. (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468228)

All well and good, but it's still pretty fricken obvious to those skilled in the art.

If its so obvious.. then why this:

Most of us would just think it's a bad idea right now until computer vision catches up to make it reliable.

He explained to you what patents entail, and then you go on and confuse patents with results, again.

Re:Not exactly innovative. (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468304)

He explained to you what patents entail, and then you go on and confuse patents with results, again.

There is no confusion. My point is that it's a fricken obvious process just waiting for technology to catch up to make it a non-stupid process to implement (I could look at trends and go and patent some clever ways of flying to Mars, but until the scientists and engineers figure out how actually to do it...). What he needs is other people to do the hard work for him so he can leverage off their research. Call it good business if you like, but it still looks like patent trolling to me.

 

Re:Not exactly innovative. (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468276)

I'm going to patent the "raise hand to bid" auction system... but on a computer!

Suggested prior art (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468560)

In patents, it's just the claims that count (that's what the monopoly is on).

For most of the claims, the "Mind Reading Machines" display at the Royal Society Summer Exhibition 2006, and associated papers from University of Cambridge, seems like prior art. It analysed facial expressions to infer affective state, charting estimates (on the user interface) of how likely it was that the user was expressing interest, confusion, etc. (So, lots of changing the UI based on analysing video images and motion of parts of someone's face, threshholds, etc)

Various eye-tracking devices seem like prior art for other claims. For instance, there are plenty of applications for controlling a mouse or selecting text via eye-tracking.

A publication from Japan, which detected a user moving his gaze from one screen to another and highlighted the mouse location on the destination screen, seems to be prior art for a few of the ones that use the orientation with respect to the device.

It's quite possible that later "dependent claims" down the list might get through -- but they are likely to be so constrained as to have little effect.

Oh FFS (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468026)

We get it. You want to patent ordering. Brick&mortar: Walmart. Everything else: Amazon. That's how you want it to be, right, Jeff? You're part of the reason why people are increasingly opposed to the whole concept of patenting.

Re:Oh FFS (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468292)

Sometimes I think that is exactly what Amazon wants.

They secretly hate the patent system and want to bring it down entirely by demonstrating how broken it is.

Only problem is; they didn't think it would go on this long and they're running out of stupid ideas.

Why this is a classic bullshit patent (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468034)

Motion recognition is not new. The claimed "invention" here is purely the business use to which the recognised motion is put.

This is like if I invent the pen, and you then patent using a pen to sign a contract, or draw a doodle. Holy shit, you're a frikkin' genius!

Re:Why this is a classic bullshit patent (1)

griffjon (14945) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468092)

Amazon patented that last year - http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/06/Amazon_patents_electronic_pen_technology_49100176.html [techflash.com] (see patent here: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7,546,524.PN.&OS=PN/7,546,524&RS=PN/7,546,524 [uspto.gov] )

"An electronic input device such as an electronic pen is provided to annotate a paper document. The input device records an annotation and an image of human-comprehensible content in the document sufficient to identify the document and possibly a location in the document. The human-comprehensible content is used to locate a digital version of the document and determine a corresponding location of the annotation in the digital version of the document. A computer system such as a server system may receive and store the annotation in association with the digital version of the document. The server system may further augment the digital version of the document with the annotation and send the augmented version to an output device for display and/or printing."

1-Touch balls buy (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468036)

I want to buy when I touch my balls.

And if I have an erection I want to buy with fastest shipping method.

Re:1-Touch balls buy (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468728)

Nice! You just exposed the longest existing prior art in history ... based on how services are acquired in the oldest profession.

Online auctioning ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468040)

*Shrugs*

Re:Online auctioning ? (3, Funny)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468070)

SOLD!

Re:Online auctioning ? (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468074)

Profit!

What I have at http://en.swpat.org (2, Informative)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468052)

If this gets granted, the 1-click example shows that even if it's invalid, the review process is sometimes completely useful because takes so many years and often just results in narrowing the patent.

my typo s/useful/useless/ (1)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468150)

the review process is sometimes completely useful

Carp. That should read "useless". My subconscious is just so positive.

Re:my typo s/useful/useless/ (1)

PatPending (953482) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468466)

the review process is sometimes completely useful

Carp. That should read "useless". My subconscious is just so positive.

s/Carp/Crap/

only in US (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468056)

How nice that he will get this patent only in the US, but not in Europe !

It's been done before... (4, Informative)

FoboldFKY (785255) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468084)

To quote Douglas Adams from one of the HHGTTG books (forget which one; it's the one involving the Krikkit):

"Let us bow our heads in payment."

Re:It's been done before... (2, Informative)

Derek Pomery (2028) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468344)

Slartibartfast floated past, waving.

``It's just a documentary,'' he called out. ``This is not a good bit. Terribly sorry, trying to find the rewind control ...''

``... is what billions of billions of innocent ...''

``Do not,'' called out Slartibartfast floating past again, and fiddling furiously with the thing that he had stuck into the wall of the Room of Informational Illusions and which was in fact still stuck there, ``agree to buy anything at this point.'' ... [SNIP SNIP SNIP] ...

Slartibartfast floated past again at this moment.

``Found it,'' he said. ``We can lose all this rubbish. Just don't nod, that's all.''

``Now, let us bow our heads in payment,'' intoned the voice, and then said it again, much faster and backwards.

This Presidency was supposed to be competent... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468098)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/7804820/Queens-birthday-gaffe-leaves-Hillary-Clinton-red-faced.html [telegraph.co.uk]

Granted, taken by itself it seems rather trivial. But this is just one of a million data points that all add up to the sloppiness and genuine ignorance of the Owebama administration. Remember when the PM gave Obammy a pen box carved from the beams of an anti-slave ship, and the 'bamster responded by giving the PM some shitty DVDs and his kids a couple of action figures of himself? Special relationship indeed! England, I hate to break it to you, but Iran and Venezuela are closer to 'bammy's heart than you will ever be. There's just something about unconditional control of the population that really gives ol' Barry Soetoro a boner.

Re:This Presidency was supposed to be competent... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468382)

And we should listen to someone who can't even spell "Obama". Foam at the mouth more; it's cute.

Say no more . . . some bloke in the pub . . . (2, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468102)

. . . was bothering me the other night "with a nod, a smile or even a raise of the eyebrow." And his inquiries if my wife was interested in "candid photography."

Was he infringing on Amazon's patent?"

Lazy eye (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468108)

What will it do when presented with a lazy eye?

a raised eyebrow or smile? (1)

ed.han (444783) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468110)

apparently, you should no longer shop while browsing p40n!

More procedure pretending to be process. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468114)

In the meantime, nobody can possibly infringe on this mess.

" Two such cases that have found that a party cannot be liable for direct
infringement because the party did not perform all the steps are Fromson v. Advance
Offset Plate, Inc., 720 F.2d 1565, 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (finding no direct infringement
by manufacturer who performed the first step of a process claim even where its
customer performed the other step of the claim) and Cross Medical Products, 424 F.3d
at 1311 (rejecting patentees’ efforts to combine the acts of surgeons with those of a
medical device manufacturer to find direct infringement of an apparatus claim)."

The non-method claims are, as typical for the State Street family of junk patents, a laundry list of pre-existing elements not specifically used to carry out the limited activity of the alleged procedure relegated to a "machine". All in all, another non-contribution to the useful arts and sciences, claiming gesture recognition technologies never contributed to by the alleged inventor by the allegation of applicability without even carrying out the work necessary to apply the prior art.

Bilski will certainly uphold this kind of junk patent and assure that the population of petty IP tyrants will grow and flourish.

Auction house procedures? (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468132)

Be careful when raising that eyebrow the next time you are at an auction!

My simple motion ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468136)

is the raised middle digit.

Re:My simple motion ... (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468540)

is the raised middle digit.

Thank you for ordering four items using our new digital order technology.

Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism (1)

PatPending (953482) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468142)

United States Patent Application 20100125816 MOVEMENT RECOGNITION AS INPUT MECHANISM [uspto.gov]

From the claims, it looks like it is limited to a portable computing device:

1. A method of interacting with a graphical user interface on a portable computing device, comprising:obtaining a first image using an imaging element of the portable computing device, the first image including a facial feature of a user of the portable computing device;obtaining a second image using the imaging element, the second image including the facial feature of the user of the portable computing device;analyzing the obtained first image and second image, with the portable computing device, to determine a change in the position of the facial feature of the user with respect to the portable computing device; andaltering (sic) information displayed within the graphical user interface based at least in part on the determined change, wherein the information displayed within the graphical user interface excludes a representation of either or both of the obtained first and second images.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism (1)

PatPending (953482) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468170)

Ah, I now see that later claims (e.g., 18 and 31) use "a computing device" so it's not limited to a portable computing device.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism (1)

Arker (91948) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468310)

What's clear is that they have no invention here, they are simply staking out a prospective monopoly so that in case someone actually does build such a device in the future, Amazon will own it. This is what our patent system has become.

Re:Movement Recognition as Input Mechanism (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468764)

From an obviousness standpoint, that's not really interesting. A laptop is portable, for instance.

The "wherein" clause at the end is pretty amusing, though, and it actually makes it harder to reject the claim using, for example, a security surveillance system.

It should also be noted that the claims don't really have any specifics about e-commerce. They're claiming a scope that more generally encompasses any facial-feature-based input device.

Unintended facial expressions .. (1)

Johan Welin (1387129) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468158)

I wouldn't dare to use a site using this system. Just imagine what you would 'buy' whenever you've got a cold ..

WWSWHD? (5, Funny)

thijsh (910751) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468174)

... make purchases with a nod, a smile or even a raise of the eyebrow ...

I want to bet this system will be so sensitive it will lead to a lot of 'purchases', which will be defended in court with reasoning along the lines of: "our patented method can even detect the body language of subconscious wants and needs with over 99% accuracy, which is a higher success rate than our patented 'one click buy' button which has a slightly higher error rate because of accidental clicks."

>>> FAST FORWARD >>>

Year 2042 history books describing the rise of the Amazon mega-conglomerate identify this patent as the most important one in Amazon's history:

This of course would lead to the infamous landmark lawsuit of Amazon VS Stephen Hawking who had an Amazon pop-up on his wheelchair-computer and accidentally ordered everything on Amazon.com by staring blankly at the screen...
The argument of SWH's lawyers that he could not possibly operate a Segway for lack of motor control and thus had no use for it - and did not want to order it - was refuted by the Amazon legal team because, according to them, "the lack of motor control gave him the strong subconscious urge to walk an do all the things a walking man can do, and thus order a Segway".

After losing this exhausting case Stephen commented: "One cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem, but it is clear that intelligence has no long-term survival value.".

This legal tactic that set a precedent causing a new advertising phenomenon called 'drive by shopping'. Every pop-up ad from Amazon now has a mandatory purchase when you look at it, because they can prove 'without a doubt' you *want* to purchase the items they sell using their unique patented method...

Re:WWSWHD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468202)

Stephen Hawking further remarked: “When one's expectations are reduced to zero, one really appreciates everything one does have”. I guess he wanted to order the Segway after all, just to look at it.

Re:WWSWHD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468222)

It matters if you just don't give up

Re:WWSWHD? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468262)

I want to bet this system will be so sensitive it will lead to a lot of 'purchases',

Bender, in Sotheby's: "Bite my shiny metal ass!"

Sotheby's auctioneer: "Sold."

Bender: "The guy sitting next to me will pay."

Fry: "Huh? What?"

Opera ASA has prior art (3, Funny)

netux (806209) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468188)

Re:Opera ASA has prior art (1)

PatPending (953482) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468236)

Look at the dates:

Bezos filed on December 10, 2008 and the page you cited was dated April 1, 2009.

What's the point? (2, Insightful)

Zouden (232738) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468196)

Seriously, what's the point of this? Ordering things online is already easy. Does Bezos really think there's a whole untapped market out there of people who would like to buy something but find clicking links too exhausting? I wonder how those customers managed to navigate his website in the first place.

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468316)

Seriously, what's the point of this? Ordering things online is already easy. Does Bezos really think there's a whole untapped market out there of people who would like to buy something but find clicking links too exhausting? I wonder how those customers managed to navigate his website in the first place.

By thinking of their purchase and looking at the search box.

It's not my bag. (3, Funny)

saider (177166) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468218)

We see by your expression that you really like this Swedish made penis enlarger. One has been ordered in your name. Additionally, we have posted a "like" on your Facebook page as well as posting a Twitpic on your twitter account. Please smile again if you would like to cancel this operation.

Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside (2, Funny)

Laxori666 (748529) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468240)

You are sipping a delicious coffee, sitting outside your favorite cafe. "Man," you say to yourself, "who would buy a set of bleachers [amazon.com] on Amazon? $10,000! Hah!"

Presently, your friend Bob comes walking down the street. "Hey Bob!" you say, waving and nodding. Your browser starts loading a new page. "Purchase confirmed." DOH!!

Re:Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468484)

You are sipping a delicious coffee, sitting outside your favorite cafe. "Man," you say to yourself, "who would buy a set of bleachers [amazon.com] on Amazon? $10,000! Hah!"

Presently, your friend Bob comes walking down the street. "Hey Bob!" you say, waving and nodding. Your browser starts loading a new page. "Purchase confirmed." DOH!!

No need for Bob. Some offers are so unreasonable that they make you smile ...

Re:Don't browse Amazon sitting at a cafe outside (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468550)

I think that, from now on, I'll browse internet wearing a Donald Duck mask, just in case...

Haha, that's funny! (1)

Hermanas (1665329) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468250)

Oh @#!$, I just bought a Britney Spears teenage pregnancy collector's doll from the amazon landing page.

Prior Art! (1)

brianc (11901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468324)

Prior Art [wikipedia.org]

Re:Prior Art! (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468452)

That's missing the vital part: "with a computer"

the inadvertant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468334)

You send a wink and a nod to your audio/video chat friend and Amazon thinks it should send you a half-dozen used Apple II's. Whatever you do, don't scratch!!!

Patentabilty aside... who wants this? (1)

DeadPanDan (1165901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468426)

Don't move your head. Don't twitch. Just stare straight ahead. Keep staring at the screen. What a nightmare. The only possible use for this that I can imagine is for accessibility of the disabled, but there are solutions for that already.

Nothing new here (1)

Cornwallis (1188489) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468478)

Didn't Rob and Laura Petrie get suckered by this during an auction 45 years ago?

'Eight stroke' option could work... (1)

Robotron23 (832528) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468488)

for porn sites. They'd know we weren't just passing through.

2-click patent (5, Funny)

orthicviper (1800010) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468496)

i always wondered why amazon didn't patent a 2-click and 3-click ordering system to really stick it to barnes and noble

I can see it now! (1)

War Camel (1773094) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468518)

Amazon's next patent: A means to cause a person to sneeze when viewing their products.

Re:I can see it now! (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468590)

Or they patent writing a joke next to their offers ... who said that there was no money in writing jokes?

However we will have to unlearn that a smile costs you nothing.

Prior Art (0, Redundant)

MichaelJ (140077) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468526)

I can't believe that in this crowd nobody has yet mentioned this one:

"This is a remarkable replica, hand-tooled by skilled craftsmen, lovingly assembled using ancient craft secrets into a memento you will be proud to own, in memory of those who fell, and in tribute to the Galaxy — our Galaxy — which they died to defend"
Slartibartfast floated past again at this moment.
"Found it," he said, "We can lose all this rubbish. Just don't nod, that's all."
"Now let us bow our heads in payment," intoned the voice.

Douglas Adams, from Life, the Universe, and Everything.

Re:Prior Art (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468644)

I can't believe that in this crowd nobody has yet mentioned this one:

Nor can I. [slashdot.org]

Access to webcam while browsing? (1)

DeadPanDan (1165901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468532)

I wonder if they would use this webcam access for other purposes as long as it's available. Where is the customer looking? For how long? What's their facial expression? Is she hot or not? What's she wearing?

Nod system....that's a "great" idea! (1)

DeepEye (706746) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468548)

"Your Honor, my client suffers from Parkinson's and he did not order 1.2 million pieces of Depend underwear pads from Amazon"

whoops (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468600)

you> *yawn*
amazon> congratulations on purchasing your new non-refundable motor home
you> FUCK!
amazon> thank you for purchasing "bad boys on the beach 7"
you> NOOO!
amazon> no results found for "naked little boys"
you> *close window*
you> FUUUUUUCK!

I'm going to patent (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468622)

I'm going to patent making obvious claims in patents. And then I am never going to license it.

"Oh, let's patent auction signals with a computer, because, it's a COMPUTER"

It's a good thing Jeff wasn't in charge of building the first computers. We'd still be supplicating to the high priests of ENIAC to please run our computations, pretty please, and we'll get you coffee.

Maybe someone should patent "Impacting the face of Jeff Bezos with a rectilinear lump of fired red clay" and implement it.

--
BMO

Oh, I forsee a lot of return packets (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468650)

Amazon: Here's a few suggestions based on your previous choices.
Customer: Huh? What's that? (click)
Amazon: A huge horse dildo because you ordered a My Little Pony Video
Customer (eyes go wide) what the ...
Amazon: Thank you for your order.

Hasn't this already been done? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468694)

Wasn't there something like this in one of the Hitchhikers' Guide books?

Re:Hasn't this already been done? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468712)

You almost got me to nod! Next time be more careful, or I'll send you the bill!

I sneezed and bought a table saw. (1)

Lime Green Bowler (937876) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468698)

That is all.

A nod is as good as a wink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468722)

Nudge nudge, wink wink

Say no more

in other news... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32468770)

In other news... Michael J. Fox has declared bankruptcy.

Is there a 'stupid' tag ? (2, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32468844)

there should be ... for this patent thing is really going towards that way.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?