×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

426 comments

Lifetime ban? (-1, Flamebait)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014258)

Um, from what I heard, CES is on its last elbows anyway, so how is that likely to effect others?
The world of technology and business has a short memory for failed enterprises.

You heard wrong (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014344)

144K people and two of some of the largest halls in this hemisphere, not to mention hotel room suites, and so on were sold.

Last legs? Hardly.

right... (-1, Offtopic)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014634)

We all know big trade shows never [wikipedia.org] go out of business.

Re:right... (3, Insightful)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014708)

The person you were replying to wasn't asserting that trade shows never go under. He was asserting that CES seems to be a healthy trade show that still draws a large crowd. Your mention of COMDEX in no way refutes that statement since by the time COMDEX was canceled, it was pretty obvious that it had been slipping in size and stature.

I really find your post offensive in the sense that it adds nothing to the discussion and seems to be refuting something that was not said. What was the point of your post, really?

No one fucking said trade shows never go under. What the fuck?

Re:right... (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014712)

COMDEX tubed because of an ill-prepared chairman and the after-effects of 9/11. Many others still remain. CeBIT is still 400k+ attendance.

PCExpo died because of ownership mismanagement in the post-9/11 era, too.

CES is like NAMM-- a huge, trade association-driven show that waxes and wanes.

Will CES get smaller and more sane? We can only hope.

Re:Lifetime ban? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014756)

..., so how is that likely to effect others?

affect, damn it, affect, you ignorant turd; unless this is some weird creation myth [biblegateway.com] .

First Post! (1, Troll)

SunTzuWarmaster (930093) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014262)

http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/9a06/ [thinkgeek.com]
Given away for free if you buy enough things at ThinkGeek, endless fun for places where the TV just doesn't go off:
(Doctors office, Best Buy, Automotive repair, hospital, etc.).

The real questions are: How did he get caught, and why didn't he do the courtesy of turning them back on?

Re:First Post! (4, Informative)

dpete4552 (310481) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014308)

How did he get caught? Are you kidding me? He posted a video of himself doing it, proudly stating his first and last name in the intro to give himself credit.

Re:First Post! (1)

Tristanjh (1012277) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014322)

They posted the video of them doing it on their website

Re:First Post! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014718)

Technology advances... almost as fun as years ago buying a raw speaker with a strong unshielded magnet at Radio Shack and swiping the bag across the faces of c.r.t. monitors on the way by.
That magnetizes the aperture mask, causing a rainbow of tie-dye like color shifts.
No harm done, it goes away after a monitor is shut down long enough to cool the thermistor and then restarted doing a warm-up deguass cycle.

Try moving strong magnets across your c.r.t. displays, its fun!

Re:First Post! (1)

Jimmy King (828214) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014846)

The magnets don't even have to be that strong. When I used to get bored out of my mind during my phone support days I would just run the handset from my phone across my monitor and then hit the degauss button. Of course a stronger magnet makes more colors over a larger area much more quickly, but even a tiny little thing will do the trick.

Re:First Post! (1)

mooreti1 (1123363) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014336)

From what I read yesterday he fessed up to it. They made a montage video and used it in the story. Hey, honesty may be the best policy but some actions have repercussions.

I love my Spy Remote (1, Insightful)

portforward (313061) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014596)

I seriously do. We don't have a TV at home that is hooked up to an antenna or cable or Directv or whatever is out there. If we go to lunch and a TV is up, I will find myself distracted by the movement, and I hate extra noise. Just Thursday one of my coworkers and also my manager saw me turn off a plasma screen (that no one was watching) at a Vietnamese Pho place and now they both want three.

I have no problem turning off a non-watched CNN at lunch, but I wouldn't turn off a football game at a sports bar. That would be rude. But I don't understand the need to be constantly distracted by TVs. To quote Bill Cosby, "Parents don't want justice, they just want silence."

Re:I love my Spy Remote (4, Funny)

Snorpus (566772) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014684)

but I wouldn't turn off a football game at a sports bar. That would be rude.

Not to mention dangerous to one's health.

Encryption on remotes? (5, Insightful)

Bazman (4849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014264)

Yeah, or presenters sticking electrical tape over the remote sensors on the displays.

 

Re:Encryption on remotes? (3, Informative)

The_Angry_Canadian (1156097) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014442)

No need for Electrical tape. Most of those tv have a serial port in the back where you can send commands to the LCD and, in most case, you can lock the input from a remote control. On some LG models, there is a plug in the back for an IR extender and if you plug a 3mm connector in that, it locks the front IR receiver... Hell, most LG tvs have a SET ID that you can set, hook them up over serial cable and brodcast a command to all of them and they will only anwser if it's there set ID in it. You dont really need those IR anyway.

Re:Encryption on remotes? (4, Funny)

Bazman (4849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014546)

Wow. Looks like we'll have to go back to chucking bricks at monitors to turn them off...

Re:Encryption on remotes? (2, Interesting)

LoadWB (592248) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014706)

Damn... this could tombstone my Casio remote control watch...

Yes...but how many people have serial cables? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014750)

How many people install serial cables, etc. at trade shows? Not many...there's enough things to fail without relying on having a working PC with a dozen serial ports installed in it.

Re:Encryption on remotes? (5, Funny)

dpete4552 (310481) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014826)

ROFL. Yeah no need for all of that complicated electrical tape business. Just hook into the serial port on the back of the screen and send commands to the LCD to lock the IR port. And thank you to the mods who modded the parent "Informative" To think of all the time I would have wasted with electrical tape if this "informative" post wasn't pointed out to me!

Re:Encryption on remotes? (1)

epedersen (863120) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014944)

I wouldn't say most TV's. This is only found on higher end TV's. I bet you there are a lot more of the WalMart $100 TV's then TV's with a serial port.

Re:Encryption on remotes? (5, Funny)

cecil_turtle (820519) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014972)

No need for Electrical tape
What, is it really expensive where you live?

... a serial port in the back where you can send commands to the LCD ... most LG tvs have a SET ID that you can set, hook them up over serial cable and brodcast a command to all of them and they will only anwser if it's there set ID in it...
Yeah, because that's easier than using 1/2" of electrical tape. I'm sure there's a joke about engineers in here somewhere but I'm too tired today.

Re:Encryption on remotes? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014686)

Or using Bluetooth on your phone to control all the devices in your house, using the `pairing` to ensure no-one else alters your settings. It'll happen one day, and it will be an innovation someone will trademark, because it's not obvious (well, there's got to be a reason no-one's done it yet).

Encryption on remotes?-Neverending. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014824)

You got an insightful for a suggestion. You however didn't get anything for not addressing the core issues. At what point will society stop "adjusting" for malcontents and start clamping down and expecting people to act like functional members of society?

Trains, remotes, there's no limit and the amount of damage is unlimited and even if one doesn't see the extremes? There's always the everpresent irritation and resources that could be better used elsewere.

Encryption in remotes? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014268)

OK, I can see it now... I'm arrested and thrown in jail because my remote has encryption and I don't know what the passkey is.

Electrical tape (3, Insightful)

rlp (11898) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014272)

Electrical tape over the IR port at shows. Problem solved.

Re:Electrical tape (3, Funny)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014330)

Electrical tape over the IR port at shows. Problem solved.

Let me guess -- you're not in sales, marketing, or management . . .

Re:Electrical tape (2, Interesting)

tomhath (637240) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014362)

Tape and restricting access to the power strips isn't enough, because now this guy is a hero. Others will consider the increased security the next challenge.

Re:Electrical tape (1)

bheer (633842) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014488)

All it takes os a homebrew EMP device ... but those will be fairly bulky, backpack-sized at least I guess.

Re:Electrical tape (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014570)

For CES 2009 I'm taking a portable EMP generator. I'm gonna knock out everything electrical in the hall.

Re:Electrical tape (1)

grumling (94709) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014526)

What if you need to use the remote as part of the demo?

This is the Consumer Electronics show, after all.

Re:Electrical tape (3, Informative)

Jester998 (156179) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014860)

Or if the remote IS the demo (think of those Logitech 'Harmony' remotes).

Presenter: "So here we have this cool multi-device touch-screen remote, and we've programmed it to control this entire home theatre. If we press here, we change the channel..."
Audience member: *activates TV-B-Gone*
Presenter: "Hmm. Just a minor glitch..."

It could definitely have measurable financial & credibility impact on the presenters.

A smart company would put a switch on the back (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014692)

If I was in the big TV business I'd be putting little switches (with visible indicator) on the screens to disable remote input.

Re:A smart company would put a switch on the back (2, Informative)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014906)

Would be useful for parents of fat kids too. Make the chubby little fucks get up once in a while.

Wont work (1)

Casandro (751346) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014872)

There are types of IR recievers which not only recieve IR as they were designed for, but also demodulate RF. If you cover them with tape they will still work if the remote is close enought.

On the other hand, imagine someone modulating a 10 Watt transmitter the right way, you might be able to turn off all TV sets in your room, without anything looking to suspicious. And you have a good excuse, "There was no way I could have used a TV-B-Gone as I was behind the set.", etc.

I still wonder why TV companies still bother building remote controll recievers into their sets.

Encryption's going a little too far (5, Insightful)

DingerX (847589) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014280)

The only reason to put encryption in would be to prevent people shutting these things off at product demos and restaurants. Turning them off at restaurants isn't a widespread problem (unfortunately), and at product demos, duct tape is going to be a lot more popular in the future.

I wish they would stop calling these things "gates", and worry about the future of bloggers. Yes, the CES created two classes: "press" and "blogger", and yes, members of that underclass acted in a juvenile manner, bad enough to cause a stink that will appear in the "press". It will appear in the "press" tomorrow. See, yesterday it was all over the blogs, and now it's hit the aggregators. Sooner or later those with press credentials will catch on to the story.

Re:Encryption's going a little too far (4, Informative)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014578)

According to the story, Gizmodo was there under actual press credentials, not the second-class blogger pass. And I haven't heard of any other pranks, so don't go blaming a whole "underclass."

This was no big deal. They should ban the guy who did it and move on.

Re:Encryption's going a little too far (2, Interesting)

Sen.NullProcPntr (855073) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014622)

Yes, the CES created two classes: "press" and "blogger", and yes, members of that underclass acted in a juvenile manner, bad enough to cause a stink that will appear in the "press".
According to CNET's Rafe Needleman [valleywag.com] ;
Gizmodo attended the event -- and pulled their silly stunt -- with full press credentials, not second-class blogger badges.

Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (4, Insightful)

Crasoum (618885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014326)

Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act like professionals, then they won't be treated as professionals.

In the article it stated they weren't being taken as seriously as the Press; and when someone decides it'd be cute to do some practical joking, at the expense of others, it just reaffirms the assumptions they aren't to be taken seriously.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (5, Insightful)

Migraineman (632203) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014422)

Didn't they learn this lesson as a child? "If you want to sit at the adult table, you have to behave like a big kid."

For a short-term chuckle, they've managed to damage the long-term credibility of bloggers who were actually trying to earn proper press credentials. The trade show guys all know each other; the news will get around. The event organizers have a choice:
. (a) inconvenience the paying customer by recommending that they cover their IR ports on displays
. (b) inconvenience the non-revenue-generating bloggers by showing them the door

The smart ones will do both, though they'll play the good-guy with their customers and issue an article in a newsletter that provides helpful tips to "Make your booth time a better experience!" Bloggers will be downgraded to the status of the great unwashed masses ...

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014600)

The event organizers have a choice:
  1. inconvenience the paying customer by recommending that they cover their IR ports on displays
  2. inconvenience the non-revenue-generating bloggers by showing them the door
What a poor set of choices you've picked. Did you do that to try to mislead people? Are you a politician?

What does being a blogger have to do with playing a prank? Anyone on the floor can play a prank. Having a press credential doesn't make an iota of difference. Kicking out bloggers won't reduce the risk of interference any more than kicking out the white males or the booth babes would.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (4, Insightful)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014716)

While I don't agree very much with treating an entire group the same, there is a point to it. The trade shows are by professionals, for professionals. If you're working for a competitor, you risk getting fired because you exposed your employer to legal liability, because you represent a company when you're at the show. If you're a pro journalist, then you're NOT going to risk your career over a prank. In comparison, most bloggers have nothing at stake.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014936)

kicking out booth babes would reduce the risk of interference as nobody would bother to turn up (and thus be an interference risk) anymore.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014696)

Good thing there aren't any bloggers who matter, then.

Who gives a shit if livejournal isn't allowed in circuit city?

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (3, Insightful)

Andrew-Unit (798862) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014986)

Bloggers will be downgraded to the status of the great unwashed masses.

Oh please. Downgraded? I thought the neat thing about blogging was that it was done by people like me... a member of the unwashed masses!

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014508)

I have a question for you. If you wrote "blogger's", why didn't you also write "professional's"? Why pluralize with an apostrophe in one case, and not the others?

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (4, Insightful)

BeanThere (28381) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014514)

It's not clear to me why all bloggers should be lumped together or treated as a "community". A blog is just a medium, like a blank piece of paper. If one painter behaves unprofessionally, nobody assumes it somehow reflects on the "entire community of painters as a whole". Likewise for cartoonists, or movie actors or directors, or radio DJs, or stand-up comedians, or writers, or "real" journalists for that matter. Treat professional individuals like professional individuals, and unprofessional ones like unprofessional ones, and scrap this silly obsession with regarding all bloggers like one single borg-like entity.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (3, Insightful)

Crasoum (618885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014642)

Sure it's like a medium, but for blogs their revenue comes from impressions and ads served, much like a newspaper, but unlike a newspaper there isn't professional vetting.
In some cases they will act professional and not resort to juvenile tactics, in others they will resort to exactly that. (not including Yellow Papers in this, naturally.)

Really it boils down to if you want to be treated professionally, act professionally, more so when your already being scrutinized.

Vandalism. (4, Insightful)

xtracto (837672) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014606)

I just saw the video. I did not know what was this about. At first, I thought it was hilarious. Yes, the prank was nice. But then I thought that such acting is vandalism. I mean, the company (maybe motorlola?) that got their monitors turned off while it was presenting really should be able to sue these guys for vandalism. I know they should grow a sense of humour, but at the very least the guys should apologize publicaly to the companies that they affected.

This kind of stuff is what you do only *ïf* you are prepared to face the consequences, and even though maybe turning off TVs would not have a lot of effect at the doctor's office or at some random public area, in this kind of technology shows it really affects the people.

Re:Vandalism. (1)

Crasoum (618885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014780)

Mmm I see your point, but I don't think vandalism would cover it properly, you're not really destroying anything, and not trying to do it to sabotage the presentation. Trespass perhaps. *shrug*

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (1)

Crasoum (618885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014930)

Heh looks like I was wrong about the bloggers as shown by, "Sen.NullProcPntr (855073) on Saturday January 12, @10:37AM (#22014622)

Yes, the CES created two classes: "press" and "blogger", and yes, members of that underclass acted in a juvenile manner, bad enough to cause a stink that will appear in the "press".
According to CNET's Rafe Needleman
Gizmodo attended the event -- and pulled their silly stunt -- with full press credentials, not second-class blogger badges."

  Reading deeper it shows Brian Lam with a Press Pass.
So really it's just them being jerks, irregardless of Press or Blogger badges.

Re:Well if the blogger's aren't willing to act... (0)

DustoneGT (969310) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014992)

How about this?

If the bloggers won't be treated like professionals, we shouldn't expect them to act like professionals.

Griping about the TV's being shut off is like sitting in late 18th century England and complaining about the Boston Tea Party. I say this guy's a real American hero.

Encrypted remotes? (0, Redundant)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014358)

WTF? all this trouble because they didn't have enough insight to put tape over the IR windows on some tvs?

Re:Encrypted remotes? (1)

grumling (94709) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014492)

In a convention open to the general public, sure. This is an event for retailers (and press) to see what they should be stocking their shelves with next Christmas. They should expect a little more professional behavior from the attendees.

That being said, I'm sure that if the purchasing manager from Best Buy did it, he'd just get a laugh and not get tossed out.

Re:Encrypted remotes? (1)

tilandal (1004811) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014646)

No If the purchasing manager for Best Buy did this he would be fired and replaced with someone who had better judgment. Also encrypting remotes is laughable. Remotes are purposefully unencrypted so that TV sets will work with universal remotes.

Re:Encrypted remotes? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014590)

They needed insight to believe that the invitees wouldn't act like little children? Give me a break - why would you assume someone would be an asshat like that? While this is one of those things that at first seeing of the video you might think, "that's funny" - the second thing you should be thinking is "what an ass" and the third would be "I guess we will need to cover the IR ports next time to stop the next asshat".

There really isn't any excuse though for this kind of behaviour. It is flat out wrong to be interfering with the show. No "security researcher" cred for this; it is just mean.

Re:Encrypted remotes? (1, Insightful)

glpierce (731733) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014848)

Yes, and they should have the insight to wear bullet-proof vests, too, right? That's what you'd say if somewhat started shooting, I assume.

Vandalism is a crime, but the presenters are to blame? Yeah, this was clearly entrapment. Who could resist the lure of shutting off TVs with exposed IR ports?

Where are we at as a society that we blame people for being victims, when they haven't done anything to provoke an attack?

Seems like a pretty immature prank (4, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014364)

Imagine you're a company presenting your new lineup of TVs and some dickhead in the audience decides to shut them down during your presentation. How do you even begin to calculate the damage that might have caused to prospective customers or partners?

The guy should be banned for life. At least with IR remotes you can stick a bit of tape over the receive to stop it. I imagine that wireless technologies could be extremely vulnerable to similar pranks (and sabotage). Imagine the trouble someone could cause just by blocking signals, or sending spurious malformed messages designed to kill a device.

Oooo, you just gave me an idea (4, Funny)

cvd6262 (180823) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014662)

What would you give me to go to the MacWorld keynote with an Apple remote. Imagine how pissed Jobs would get if every time he tried to show a new app on an iMac of MacBook, FrontRow started up and then started browsing his shared music.

Re:Seems like a pretty immature prank (1)

pyite (140350) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014680)

How do you even begin to calculate the damage that might have caused to prospective customers or partners?

I think the only cost is buying them all a sense of humor so that they can laugh a bit too.

Re:Seems like a pretty immature prank (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014880)

If your reputation is on the line and it looks like your stuff just randomly broke, I really don't think you'd be laughing either.

Re:Seems like a pretty immature prank (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014968)

If your reputation is on the line and it looks like your stuff just randomly broke, I really don't think you'd be laughing either.

From the posted video, most of the presenters seemed more amused than annoyed (with one notable exception).

Also, with the same thing happening randomly around the convention, I think everyone realized they had a practical joker rather than defective products.

Re:Seems like a pretty immature prank (3, Insightful)

PdMYmU (1195385) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014682)

this prank was the only news i've heard coming from ces. ces used to be cool - now its just repackaged processors.

Re:Seems like a pretty immature prank (1)

iusty (104688) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014978)

If a device can be killed by "spurious malformed signals", then it's a piece of really broken hardware. I, as a customer, would be glad to learn that before buying it.

Simple really (1)

Joe Jay Bee (1151309) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014390)

All this says is if you want to be treated the same as normal journalists, stop with the damn childish pranks.

Funny, sure, but if PC World did the same their asses would be out the door as well.

Re:Simple really (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014430)

What's funny is Brian Lam's comments over on Valleywag. He's basically saying "What's the problem? We're not really the press so we shouldn't have to act professional." In essence, he's reaffirming many people's stance that many bloggers don't deserve to be treated with respect.

Or fixed in hardware.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014408)

But also this might lead to a future with encryption on remotes.

Surely it would be a simple and cheaper matter of just covering the IR sensors on the display once the unit is turned on. Bit of duct tape or similar?

A desperate attempt at relevance (3, Insightful)

thethibs (882667) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014412)

Funny, no; childish, yes.

It's a shame spanking is no longer deemed appropriate.

The difference between a blogger and a journalist (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014446)

... Is a 4 year degree from an accredited University and a couple of journalist ethics courses. Sure you can say "well the press is unethical, they dont fact check" don't judge the whole bunch by a couple *and I mean a couple) of bad apples.

Bloggers aren't qualified to report on the subject matters they usually cover. I love political blogs, some schmuck PHP programmer from NYC comments on politics as if he were Tim Russert and then wants to be treated like the press.

Don't devalue the press by comparing them as equals to bloggers. That's like comparing anyone else to your specialized career or degree that you hold. If you were a nobel prize winning physicist would you want to be held as equals to a journalist when it comes to physics? No, so don't equate a guy with laptop to a journalist with a proper degree.

Re:The difference between a blogger and a journali (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014700)

Very good point. People around here constantly go off about how someone who graduated from DeVry isn't "really" a programmer since he didn't get an MS in CompSci or Maths or whatever. Yet when it's "bloggers" vs "journalists", suddenly the guy from Des Moines who can't even properly construct a sentence is supposed to be treated the same as someone who graduated from Harvard's School of Journalism. It's funny how so few of you can't seem to draw the same parallels.

Re:The difference between a blogger and a journali (1)

unts (754160) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014988)

You don't need a degree to know how to not be a dick head.

And to suggest that a journalist needs a degree and several further courses to be called 'a journalist' is a little bit a reach too. A lot of journalists didn't set out to be journalists.

Knowledge of the area in which your writing and a good command of whatever language the publication is in are key. As for ethics and such... well that depends on the publication.

But I agree with you with respect to the statement that anybody who just feels like mouthing off about a subject shouldn't suddenly be entitled to press credentials.

Any publicity is good publicity (1)

ribuck (943217) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014536)

Any publicity is good publicity for CES, as well as for Gizmodo.

Is there ANY use of TV-B-Gone that is not mischief? I doubt it. But it's no more mischievous than, say, flipping the light switch off as they left the hall.

Re:Any publicity is good publicity (1)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014626)

Spoken like someone who has no experience in marketing.

Bad publicity has bankrupted people and destroyed companies. It definitely does exist. I'm not saying this is such a case, but that statement is just wrong.

good (1)

ImTheDarkcyde (759406) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014562)

The world could do with a little less gizmodo. If I have to sit through one more stupid reused-4chan-image-with-stupid-red-speach-bubble accompanied by some half thoughtout and entirely unfunny "joke," I might just puke. And then there is the way every article has to be about THEM. "Iphone announced, THIS REMINDS US ABOUT THE TIME WE.."

Sorry, just flaming a bit. I also hate them because they banned me when I commented about their ads, on an article where they commented on someone elses ads.

Re:good (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014714)

If I have to sit through one more stupid reused-4chan-image-with-stupid-red-speach-bubble accompanied by some half thoughtout and entirely unfunny "joke," I might just puke.
You know, you could stop visiting the site....

Not funny... (5, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014604)

Immature, unethical, and unprofessional.

A ethical line is crossed when a blogger creates the news instead of reporting it.

Re:Not funny... (1)

filterban (916724) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014920)

I agree with you to some extent, but you need to account for gonzo journalism. Hunter S. Thompson's work was brilliant.

Now, Gizmodo was just being a bunch of assholes, which is a lot different from Thompson. But stating that all times a journalist "creates" the news is bad is simply not true.

Re:Not funny... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22014932)

Actually, bloggers who create the news are a lot more interesting than those who just throw their unoriginal comments onto the work of others. Blogging != Journalism.

A more accurate statement would be:

An ethical line is crossed when a person does harm to another.

targetted (1)

youthoftoday (975074) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014624)

The video at least shows that the targets were taken on a fairly arbitrary basis. Yes it was childish etc etc but there was no deliberate targeting or discrimination. The comments about 'what would X's customers think of the company if...' are unfounded because all the screens were dying.

I hate TV-B-gone (5, Insightful)

Egdiroh (1086111) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014676)

I really think that the only reason for such a device to exist is to make a list of all the self centered arrogant people who buy one to purge them from society.

The device is designed to turn off other people's TVs. If you don't like TV, or televised sports, avoid those places that have them on. Be a discerning consumer and create a market for places that will provide and pleasant atmosphere for you. Don't be a petulant child and turn the TVs off. I don't come into your place and turn your computer, or stereo off, or slam shut the book you are reading. If I did you'd take great offense, and would feel violated. Well the world is not all about you. Get over it. Don't do things whose analog you wouldn't like done to yourself.
This might have been a rant. It might be a troll. But I really would love to hear a justification of this device that does not amount to a fascist imposition of one person's will upon others. And these things do not have enough buttons to really validate the rudimentary universal remote argument, and they are targeted at individuals not institutions, so I won't buy that some institutions with large numbers of TVs might find it useful for start/end of day stuff.

Re:I hate TV-B-gone (2, Insightful)

fireboy1919 (257783) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014912)

ut I really would love to hear a justification of this device that does not amount to a fascist imposition of one person's will upon others.

This is not normally associated with fascism. [wikipedia.org]

I would have thought this would be obvious. Are you one of those people who finds humor sinful? If your company can't handle having itself be the butt of a joke, then it can't handle business with my company. On the other hand, if it can, then we can probably work around whatever other communications problems exist.

Humor is, IMHO, the single most important facility in interpersonal relations.
Its what lets unlike people work together without fighting. Laugh it off, and the problem doesn't seem so difficult to overcome, or so personal.

Tv-B-Gone: Guranteed for next year CES (0, Redundant)

cabazorro (601004) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014818)

Not only that but It will be some sort of challenge to see who can pull the prank twice. Lashing against those who exploit obvious security holes is an incentive, not at a deterrent. An engineer would just simply shrug off and say: "mm I need to fix that". A sales person will cry foul, wet his/her pants and demand punishment for the prankster.

Just watched Gizmodo's 'hilarious' prank... (3, Insightful)

danielk1982 (868580) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014882)

What an asshole thing to do. It wasn't funny at all, and their 'apology' was worse.

Dead Gizmodo - don't expect a Macworld invite (4, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014916)

I would expect Gizmodo's chances of attending future press events are circling the toilet now. A shame, they have always done minute by minute coverage of the "One more thing..." and Macworld keynotes.

If I were a marketing staffer or PR guy I wouldn't want them anywhere near a press conference. People can lose their jobs over press demos not working, so they aren't going to take the chance of inviting four year olds in the future.

A complete over reaction (1, Insightful)

bhima (46039) | more than 6 years ago | (#22014962)

To read the comments here and on Digg, you'd be lead to think this man had raped, looted, and plundered. All he did was turn some televisions off and interrupt a few demonstrations.

He.Turned.Off.Televisions. This is now a heinous crime? It's vandalism? It deserves flogging and imprisonment?

Yes he disrupted a couple of demonstrations, how many times had the presenter been through his script? For how many days? What exactly was lost by this disruption? How will the consumer electronics industry survive this loss?

Yes he went beyond the news and created the news. This is a time honored tradition and I'm sure Hunter S. Thompson would approve, particularly in light of what CES truly is. To quote Gizmodo "a disgusting, bloated beast oozing everything that makes this industry horrible. Nay, everything that makes our culture horrible"

I congratulate the inventors of the TV Be-Gone device for coming up with a wonderful gizmo and then Gizmodo for using it to demonstrate how pathetic our society has become.

Gizmodo's assessment of the CES show is particularly interesting: http://gizmodo.com/342495/ten-reasons-were-doomed-ces-edition [gizmodo.com]

prank (3, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 6 years ago | (#22015002)

an entertaining prank to be sure, and a surprise that no one's tried it before on this scale. There's no excuse for there not to be black electrical tape over every IR receiver on that set of displays.

If you leave something THAT open to pranking at a public or semi-public event, it's going to happen. That's like leaving LAN jacks open all over the place at the conference and having an unsecured credit card processing machine on the same network. You deserve what you get for that level of carelessness.

On a completely different take, this is not possible with every remote. For example, all Apple remotes have the ability to "pair" with a computer, to prevent a computer from responding to any remote besides its own This is not rocket science, and it's not new. Pairing of remotes to equipment has been going on for years and won't cost them a nickel more to add to the chip. It involves each remote having and transmitting its serial number along with the command, and the computer can simply be told to only listen to commands from one (or a small group of) serial numbers. The only thing they will have to deal with is the occasional tech call from a customer that's managed to pair a different remote to their unit.

I for one would like to see this happen several more times until the manufactures get their heads out of the sand. This is unfortunately what it takes to motivate them. They won't lift a finger until it starts to cost them.

Additionally, it's sometimes hard to find where on a set the IR receiver is at. On the Apple's it's behind the big apple on the front of the unit or the black dot near the latch on the laptops. On some sets, where they have a large black border, it can be hard to locate. Also, the prankster should have been very easy to spot for anyone educated in such things. Most digital cameras are VERY senstitive to IR light, and to anyone with a digital camera looking at the LCD preview screen, or to anyone with a web cam pointed into the audience, that remote would go off like a strobe. It should have taken them less than 20 seconds to find this joker.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...