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!

Canon Blocks Copy Jobs Using Banned Keywords

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the well-isn't-that-helpful dept.

Censorship 309

aesoteric notes that a future version of Canon's document management system will include the exciting breakthrough technology that will OCR your printed and scanned documents, and prevent distribution of keywords. Documents containing the offending words can be sent to the administrator, without actually telling the user just what word tripped the alarm. The article notes that simply using 1337 for example will get around it.

cancel ×

309 comments

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

First **** (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878068)

Fuckers!

How Long... (5, Funny)

citoxE (1799926) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878070)

How long until making photocopies of your butt becomes a thing of the past?

Re:How Long... (2, Funny)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878094)

Should be fine for now unless your butt is labeled.

Re:How Long... (4, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878596)

Does the tattoo on my keister count as a label?

Re:How Long... (5, Funny)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878104)

Easy, just add (_(_) to the keywords list!

Re:How Long... (4, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878110)

They can buy the requisite genital recognition software from Chatroulette.

Re:How Long... (3, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878394)

It's amazing how versatile the Chatroulette [slashdot.org] technology concept could be. The recognition of human body parts from images surprisingly seems to have more in-demand applications than computer vision in general; and all to control people and prevent them from doing stupid things.

Genitalia image detection could stop abuse of hand-washing robots [slashdot.org] , keep certain nastiness off slashdot [slashdot.org] , AI Physicians [slashdot.org]

It's amazing people drop to the level of stupidity they'd actually try to photocopy genitals, disregarding the obvious risks involved... that makes them dumber than the computer in that action.

Re:How Long... (2, Insightful)

david duncan scott (206421) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878710)

The obvious risks of copying my buttcheeks? Care to elaborate, 'cause it's not especially obvious to me. Stupid, maybe, but not risky.

Re:How Long... (1, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878468)

That software is not worth that much at all.

I continue to put my penis up on Chatroulette quite often. Not once has Chatroulette's software determined that I have a penis. It's clearly defective software.

Re:How Long... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878492)

Clearly you do not meet the qualifications.

Re:How Long... (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878152)

How long until making photocopies of your butt becomes a thing of the past?

For maximum butt privacy, make sure you cover any barcode tattoos or corporate logos the s/w can pick up ... hmm, guess Angelina Jolie will have probs.

Re:How Long... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878700)

Or get a nigger woman. THey have big asses.

Re:How Long... (1)

williamhb (758070) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878232)

How long until making photocopies of your butt becomes a thing of the past?

How long until making photocopies of your butt so a picture of your mooning backside automatically gets emailed to the system administrator or your boss becomes the thing of the future!

Re:How Long... (4, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878310)

Attention! There will be butt lineup in the cafeteria at 2PM! Be ready to drop your trousers! We are going to find the miscreant who has been mooning the copier!

Parsing Error (1)

zooblethorpe (686757) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878328)

How long until ... your boss becomes the thing of the future!

Egads! I hope that doesn't happen. I don't hold anything against the man, but that's precisely the point. Now, if I worked one department over, for that lovely 30-something woman, I wouldn't mind so much. :D

Cheers,

Re:How Long... (2, Funny)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878356)

How long until making photocopies of your butt becomes a thing of the past?

This is the new Volvo I want!

Re:How Long... (1)

RogerRoast (1914292) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878538)

Until the machine sees "I love you" code on the butt

Just what we need... (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878074)

I guess they thought, "Well, it is no worse than IBM selling equipment to the Germans during World War II!"

Re:Just what we need... (-1, Troll)

canajin56 (660655) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878422)

What exactly is so incredibly and overwhelmingly evil about a corporate owned photocopier that is able to enforce the "CONFIDENTIAL DO NOT PHOTOCOPY" marks on important documents? A locksmith will refuse to cut a key that says "DO NOT DUPLICATE". Is this more evil than that? Less? Same?

Re:Just what we need... (4, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878464)

Maybe because the photocopier is not enforcing "CONFIDENTIAL DO NOT COPY" -- it goes way beyond that, checking a blacklist of words? It is not that this technology itself is evil, it is more that it can be used for all sorts of evil things.

You seem to think that these machines will only be purchased by corporations. What gives you that idea? How do you know that public libraries won't have these machines installed? What about schools? The problem is that this technology can and most likely will be abused. Public libraries and schools already filter websites; this will take that sort of censorship to an entirely new level.

Re:Just what we need... (4, Insightful)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878704)

Then copy your own damn papers, its not like copiers are futuristic alien technology that only high end corporations have access to.

I mean damn, I know slashdot is paranoid, but this is ridiculous; this is for corporate enforcement, nothing more.

Re:Just what we need... (1)

retchdog (1319261) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878472)

Yes, one locksmith. The rest of them don't have a problem. ;-)

Re:Just what we need... (1)

pyrrho (167252) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878562)

what idiot goes to a locksmith to copy a key? Cause I know the hardware store will copy those keys.

Re:Just what we need... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878660)

Here's a scenario.

Blocked Keywords

Conspiracy, 911, HFT, inside job, insider trading, foreclosuregate, chemtrail, corruption, malfeasance, misfeasance, cracked voting machine, election fraud, legal theft, eugenics, oath breaker, fascism, fascist, failed USD, treason, murder, propaganda, corporate media, unconstitutional, intermittent constitution, mark to market, spying, wiki, cryptome, alex jones, Geo Engineering, aluminum, barium, Depleted Uranium, Fibromyalgia, obesity, HFCS, AIPAC, PNAC, CFR, TC, UN, IMF, bilderberg, rothchild, 401k theft, masturbating cops, failed state

okay, now try printing any story about Government corruption.

I hear they have a computer which can tell when people are going to snap. Which is a fucking joke, cause if all you did was pay attention you could see the writing on the wall, this shit ain't going to end well.

Names? (1)

vikisonline (1917814) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878078)

It will be interesting to see when businesses wont be able to fax, or deal with clients whose names contains those banned words because of this technology. Once again 3 steps forward, 2 back...

Re:Names? (4, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878090)

I wonder if this sort of censorship will find its way into public libraries. You know, they'll claim there is a national security interest in prevent certain kinds of pamphlets from being printed, or something to that effect, and before you know it a routine trip to the library will turn into an interrogation in a back room somewhere.

Re:Names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878264)

this is rediculous paranoia. which means the slashbots will vote you +5, Insightful!

Re:Names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878140)

Um...why would the business configure those keywords to be banned if they did have a use for them?

Or did you not understand how the software was meant to be used, not by Canon configuring it from on high, but by the business's own administrators picking words they wanted to restrict?

This may or may not be a desired feature for you, or very good in its implementation, but do try to understand what it is.

Re:Names? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878188)

Um...why would the business configure those keywords to be banned if they did have a use for them?

Or did you not understand how the software was meant to be used, not by Canon configuring it from on high, but by the business's own administrators picking words they wanted to restrict?

This may or may not be a desired feature for you, or very good in its implementation, but do try to understand what it is.

Read his post before accusing him of not understanding it.

There are plenty of people with curse words or trademarks in their legal names (particularly foreigners, I've known a few Japanese people who ended up being referred to as ****amari or o****a in our system), turns out "Don't add Smith or Johnson to the blacklist" doesn't always work in preventing this.

Re:Names? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878280)

I am Dick Johnson and why aren't I getting any faxes?

Re:Names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878460)

Yeah, because THAT is the kind of stuff businesses will block. None of that silly 'do not copy' or 'confidential' stuff.

Re:Names? (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878656)

Yeah, because THAT is the kind of stuff businesses will block. None of that silly 'do not copy' or 'confidential' stuff.

If they go as far as to block 'do not copy' or 'confidential' I'll just have to snap a pic of the document with my phone.

Re:Names? (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878632)

It's a tool. Misconfiguration by an admin doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

Re:Names? (5, Funny)

javakah (932230) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878176)

Hey, look on the bright side, if you manage to get access to the admin side of the copier (or perhaps if you've found that they never set it up, but your copier has this functionality), you can have loads of fun. Imagine if the copier wouldn't copy anything with the letter a in it, and if someone tried to, it would email your manager (or their boss). All the fun of shutting down the copier and spamming someone at the same time!

Re:Names? (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878670)

So if I added the company's name to their own black list I could have some fun?? Very interesting ...

Re:Names? (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878210)

The "banned words" are installed by the business.

Re:Names? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878254)

So?

Re:Names? (1)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878334)

Clbuttic!

Re:Names? (5, Interesting)

Technician (215283) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878288)

If you want to block copying of some documents, you can simply watermark them with the anti counterfeiting constellation. Use something that will print the constellation and print up a ream of paper. Use the anti copy paper for the documents you don't want copied.
Print this in yellow ink in the background.
http://globalpapersecurity.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/150px-EURion.svg_.png/ [globalpapersecurity.com]

Re:Names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878458)

I once worked with some one who's last name was "Cocks", we had all kinds of trouble with e-mail filters. I kept jokingly trying to convince them to go down to the government office and legally change their last name to "Cox" to save IT a lot of headaches.

Re:Names? (1)

Mr. Freeman (933986) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878564)

Why on earth were email filters even implemented? Seems to me that if you have to put filters in place to stop people sending pornographic messages through the company email then you have a lot more problems than the email system.

I mean, anyone sending around inappropriate stuff would just be disciplined as soon as the boss sees it.

Re:Names? (1)

ehrichweiss (706417) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878658)

"I mean, anyone sending around inappropriate stuff would just be disciplined as soon as the boss sees it."

Yeah, like my secretary should be disciplined for sending those naughty pictures of herself....she's been a baaad girl and deserves a spanking..

Re:Names? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878662)

There are other things a company might not want in emails. SSN comes to mind.

Re:Names? (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878648)

I imagine there will be a lot of trouble with this at Jim's Clbuttic cars.

First entry in the blocked database... (4, Funny)

seanvaandering (604658) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878112)

Canon sucks

It's not exactly aimed at profanity (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878114)

FTA: "a prohibited keyword, such as a client name or project codename."

Sounds more like a security tool than a censorship tool. (Yes, it could be used for cens

From the "don't give them any ideas" dept. (4, Interesting)

bughunter (10093) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878132)

All a publisher would have to do is to embed a code or passphrase or optical pattern on the pages of their copyrighted publication and then arrange with manufacturers such as Canon or Xerox not to duplicate those pages. The pattern could be a watermark in the background of the content, defeating attempts to obscure it with a post-it not or some such.

I predict a huge demand for older, dumber photocopiers.

Re:From the "don't give them any ideas" dept. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878240)

They already do this for money. It's called the EURion constellation [wikipedia.org] .

Re:From the "don't give them any ideas" dept. (2, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878348)

They already do this for money. It's called the EURion constellation.

Many copiers are known to shutdown permanently - as in require a visit from the repairman (who will probably report you to the secret service or equivalent anti-money-counterfeiting police in your country) - when presented with that pattern.

It's just begging for mischief makers to abuse by putting the pattern on all sorts of regular documents.

Re:From the "don't give them any ideas" dept. (1)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878686)

Fingertip tattoos?

My Rights? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878144)

This was under the category of "Your Rights Online", but this isn't about our rights unless our governments mandate that all citizens must use copiers with this capability and the capability is deployed. In more realistic terms, companies are perfectly within reason to deploy this technology and it's a good thing. This would be a big plus for HR, legal, R&D, corportate planning. A great deal of information in the business world is compromised via copy machines. This doesn't solve the problem, but it certainly will impact and interrupt the problem in certain circumstances.

What I do worry about is how deployment impacts copyright enforcement, we shall see. I'm all for copyright enforcement, but not for infringing upon fair-use.

Re:My Rights? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878718)

This is slashdot, dude. Any time a new technology comes out that allows "the man" to block something, everyone dons a tinfoil hat and speculates on how US gov't will team up with China, South Korea, and zombie Hitler to suppress our freedoms.

Re:My Rights? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878726)

s/South/North/

Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878154)

Now another way i will be able to mess with my coworkers! Not that messing with the mouse settings and putting up gay pictures on backgrounds isn't already fun enough!

Social Problem (4, Insightful)

rockNme2349 (1414329) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878162)

You're doing it wrong. If there's anything I've learned in dealing with people, it is never try to create a technical solution to a social problem. If someone wants to make a copy of some secret document, they will quickly learn that the copiers have this software installed and will use a different machine. You need to figure out why they would want to make copies of something you don't want them to, and solve that problem. I could see this being marginally useful for preventing accidental release of information, however the article seems to state that they are trying to stop deliberate users.

A determined user who has guessed the prohibited keyword could get around it by simply substituting numbers or other characters for letters, such as z00 instead of zoo, representatives for Canon conceded.

Re:Social Problem (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878172)

Or they will do something even worse, like posting the document on their publicly accessible webpage or something equally bad.

Re:Social Problem (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878302)

"If someone wants to make a copy of some secret document, they will quickly learn that the copiers have this software installed and will use a different machine. "

Or a digital camera, which can fit nicely in a cigarette pack...

Wingdings (1)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878416)

Joke's on you, Canon! I print out all my important documents in Wingdings...

Keep those Confidential Memos confidential (1)

Flyskippy1 (625890) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878168)

I imagine the first terms to be added could be something like "Company Confidential, Do Not Copy" or "Sensitive Business Information".

That said, copiers already block copying of certain patterns, such as US currency. With a little trial and error it's not hard to figure out exactly what on the dollar bill is being matched. Just add it to your documents, and no body will even be able to print them. (Careful, as some brands of printers will lock themselves and require a service call after you try to copy money.)

why have a easy DOS attack build in (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878212)

why have a easy DOS attack build in all it takes is for some to try to copy some money and you can shut down a full center real fast.

Re:Keep those Confidential Memos confidential (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878374)

That is far to simple of a solution. As we all know the first thing almost any company will do is put naughty words on the list. Heaven help them if they have a client named Gaylord who sells canola rapeseed oil and butternut squash. The company executives will add their names to the list, along with each manager on the way down, making it a nightmare for any worker to try to get anything done without constantly coming to their bosses and their bosses' bosses for permissiong to photocopy something with their name on it.

Re:Keep those Confidential Memos confidential (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878614)

Not to mention anyone attempting to do business with Scunthorpe.

Stupidity (4, Insightful)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878178)

"The system can optionally inform the user by email that their attempt has been blocked, but without identifying the keyword in question, maintaining the security of the system."

Until the user decides to compare his blocked page with blocked pages from other letters or does a binary search for the forbidden word. Glad they thought this through.

Re:Stupidity (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878200)

Most people are not technically proficient/clever enough to do any of that. They'll just post the document on their personal webpage or Facebook profile or something.

Re:Stupidity (1)

EboMike (236714) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878230)

Binary search would be fine, except that "The server will email the administrator a PDF copy of the document in question if a user attempts to do so". It might look a tad bit suspicious if the user keeps trying to make copies of the same document with different parts blacked out.

Re:Stupidity (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878292)

It obviously isn't intended to block spies: just the usual oblivious doofus.

Re:Stupidity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878466)

It obviously isn't intended to block spies: just the usual oblivious doofus.

Umm, they're usually one and the same...

Its like router filters the *admin* sets (4, Informative)

stimpleton (732392) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878204)

From TFA: "The latest version of Uniflow has a keyword-based security system. Once configured by an administrator, the system can prevent a user from attempting to print, scan, copy or fax a document containing a prohibited keyword, such as a client name or project codename."

So its not some Canon thing where they think some words shouldnt be used. You know, dirty words like Bottom or Crevice.

The internal admin can set the words. Its like a silent alarm really. No different to a corporate spam filter with words added to a blacklist by an admin.

Re:Its like router filters the *admin* sets (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878382)

It's basically a data loss prevention product. See a string of numbers that looks like a credit card or SSN? Sorry, you're not allowed to print/copy/fax that. Contact your security admin/supervisor to explain why you need to print employee socials and how you plan to safeguard/eventually dispose of that information.

I can see this being very useful for shops that have to deal with PCI or PII laws.

Re:Its like router filters the *admin* sets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878512)

The internal admin can set the words. Its like a silent alarm really. No different to a corporate spam filter with words added to a blacklist by an admin.

With all due respect, how do you propose Slashdot gets Page Views with sensible, accurate post titles?

Re:Its like router filters the *admin* sets (1)

Cussin_IT (1143215) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878652)

That's it: it's all up to the admin. Untill Cannon decides that all admins are stupid/ unAmerican/ terrorists/ all of the above.

And don't forget all of the hardcoded keywords that'll be in there for the goverment (RRIA) to track terrorists (don't think they won't be there, as soon as politicans see this they'll make it illegal to sell without somthing they can use to spy on their populations).

Finally China can be safe from the printed word! (0, Flamebait)

kawabago (551139) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878234)

Why is Canon working so hard to help China be safe from words like freedom, democracy and truth? Oppression pays.

lazy developers (1)

Michael Kristopeit 4 (1913314) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878304)

why not automatically add "z00" to the word list when "zoo" is added?

unplug LAN? (1)

MoFoQ (584566) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878336)

what happens if you unplug the LAN cord?

Re:unplug LAN? (0, Troll)

Cussin_IT (1143215) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878666)

An excilent idear.
I have only one tiny problem with it. How do you plan of printing to it from your work station?

Re:unplug LAN? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878734)

Wifi!

Simple workaround (2, Interesting)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878340)

Just use CAPTCHAs for any banned words, phrases, or other banned content.

Re:Simple workaround (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878542)

Just use CAPTCHAs for any banned words, phrases, or other banned content.

Years ago Canon had a different security system to prevent un-authorized use (copier in a public area on campus). It was a flat plastic "key" which had a pattern of holes punched in one end, had to be stuck in a slot to make the copier work. A clever guy figured out that, if you could borrow the key once, it was possible to pull it out after the copy scan started, slap the key on the platen and copy the key! Then an easy matter to punch out the holes in the paper copy and make a duplicate key. Canon has never been very good at this security thing...?

What I can't stand.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878350)

... is the fact that standalone scanners are three to four times the price of all-in-one printers, and then the printers won't actually scan a document whenever a single cartridge happens to be out of ink.

Printer Virus (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878352)

10,000 quatloos to the first printer virus that propagates from printer to printer on the network and whose only other effect is to replace the word "strategic" with the word "satanic" in any printed output!

OCR is not a verb (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878370)

Please don't treat it as such.

Re:OCR is not a verb (2, Funny)

preaction (1526109) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878404)

Verbing weirds language.

Here is an idea. (-1, Offtopic)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878386)

How about American adults grow the frak up already so you can get rid of those moronic fascist censors at the FCC? Violence is supposedly OK but boobs and swear words are not? What the hell is wrong with you people?

Parents need to grow up and do their job of deciding what is appropriate for their children to watch and what is not. Stop relying on a nanny state to do your job.

Re:Here is an idea. (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878414)

This has nothing to do with the FCC. I think this is a terrible idea too, but this is not the FCC doing anything. This is bad because it opens the door for all sorts of abuses, not because the abuses have happened yet.

say what? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878426)

Moist (1)

Ranger (1783) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878428)

better not be on that list.

How to abuse this system (1)

masterwit (1800118) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878436)

How to abuse this system (and possibly get fired)
Step 1: Find some known banned words that are not easily noticed
Step 2: Get access to coworker's Microsoft Word.
Step 3: Set Auto-correct to change similar spelled words to these banned words.
Step 4: Don't get caught.

Visual attack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878440)

print a page with the title "Top Secret Document"... and have the rest be screenshot of a shock site [wikipedia.org] .

slashdot's still here! (0)

pyrrho (167252) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878544)

and I remembered my password?? hell yeah.

what would be funny is if you can't copy documents about weaponry... and then canon can't copy it's own documentation.

well ok that wouldn't be funny. but I did remember my fuckign psasdrowd!

Re:slashdot's still here! (1)

The Living Fractal (162153) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878608)

This is not slashdot. You've entered into an alternate universe, where things are slightly different, such as the word "cannon" being spelled "canon".

Devil's advocate (1)

adenied (120700) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878578)

Censorship == bad but...

If you have access to one of these machines at work and you can't copy something, maybe there's a good reason for it. If it's hindering your job, go up the chain (painful perhaps but such is life). If you're doing it for personal reasons, maybe you should go to a copy shop.

If you're the nefarious type, photograph the pages and print them elsewhere.

If you own the copier, you control the keywords.

I'm looking at this from the employer perspective. I'm purposely not looking at the copyrighted work angle. Though I have to say this doesn't seem to be aimed at that. Doesn't seem like a huge YRO issue though. But maybe someone can come up with some alternate arguments.

Wow, do any of you people have jobs? (5, Insightful)

JoeZeppy (715167) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878580)

This has nothing to do with foul language and everything to do with people walking out the door with account numbers, medical records, credit card info, social security numbers and other valuable private information.

Apologetically Enthusiastic (2, Insightful)

LordHatrus (763508) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878590)

This is not a privacy issue; there is little expectation of privacy in a workplace when using company property anyway. I personally feel this would be a nice help; imagine working for a government contractor and having having software automatically raise flags when someone copies documents with "DO NOT COPY" or "CONFIDENTIAL" in the OCR text. This is somewhat useful.

Re:Apologetically Enthusiastic (1)

Cussin_IT (1143215) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878716)

This is exactly what I thought too.
Right up untill the cinic part of my brian said : "anti terrorist tool". And then I had visions of anyone printing the word 'quaran' being dragged off under the patriot act after the printer phoned home.

I'm sorry to say it, but to me it looks a lot more like a clandesdine tool for the goverment to get rid of people they don't like. Even if it didn't start out that way I imagine it ending that way.

V14GR4 (1)

Compuser (14899) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878598)

Oh shit, so now regular people are going to start writing like spammers to avoid filters.
Great! Now how am I going to tell spam from valid emails? Thanks a lot Canon!

99.9% (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878610)

1337 huh?

looks they're be a huge demand for 1337157 @[]\D71575
and or other ways to write words while using characters that are more apt to represent alterior sillabances

Slashtards (1)

RaymondKurzweil (1506023) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878688)

And yet none of the technology to implement this is ground breaking or terribly new, and its just integrating a couple things. It's just another feature on the datasheet that any programmer given a decent OCR system (something anybody could buy for years, let alone Canon) and an OS capable of sending email could implement in a few minutes.

I expect the general population to be wowed by this magic.

I also like how this becomes Evil once a large company decides to put a price on it and make whoever wants it pay for it.

Exciting? (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878698)

will include the exciting breakthrough technology

I must have a different understanding of this context unless by "exciting breakthrough" they mean "censorship breakthrough", then I get it.

Canon blocks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33878722)

So what are canon blocks, and why are they copying Jobs?

More fear and control. (1)

Fantastic Lad (198284) | more than 3 years ago | (#33878724)

Just another brick in the wall.

-FL

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>