But Some of My Favorite Words Have Four Letters!

by Casey Lynn
Contributing Writer, [GAS]

The USPTO recently awarded a new patent to Microsoft: automatic censorship of audio data for broadcast. Simply put, it’s a way to detect “undesired words or phrases” in a speech audio stream and automatically garble them.

Just imagine! No longer must we live in a world in which our six o’clock news might be ruined by a reporter letting slip the F bomb because a real bomb just went off five feet away from him. Radio stations won’t have to worry about keeping one finger on the dump button in case a caller gets a little colorful. And tech support call centers can rest easy knowing that their customers won’t be offended by a frustrated employee who tells them to RTFM!

Of course, it looks like the major difference will be that unlike the bleeps of the past, there will be no “BLEEP!” to indicate that something has been censored at all. The offending words will simply be altered enough to be “unintelligible or inaudible.” Sort of like when you cover your words with a cough… only much more high-tech.

I wonder what Microsoft’s particular interest in this technology is. Maybe, as one of the new Mac commercials suggests, to bleep the word “Vista.”

Advertisements
Advertisement




8 Responses to But Some of My Favorite Words Have Four Letters!

  1. Maybe they don't have an interest in the technology for themselves, and are looking to license it to content providers (YouTube could buy it in a heartbeat). Or maybe MS is going to start their own video content service? Again…

  2. Maybe they don’t have an interest in the technology for themselves, and are looking to license it to content providers (YouTube could buy it in a heartbeat). Or maybe MS is going to start their own video content service? Again…

  3. "Second, define “objectionable”. One person’s “objectionable” is another person’s “OK”. Who gets to define what’s OK and what’s not? OK, porn is definately not allowed. That’s obviously objectionable. But doesn’t that then open the door for activist groups to campaign for other types of websites to be blocked next? The word “objectionable” is such a broad umberella term that covers so much. Can’t you just see the lawsuits now by “outraged passengers” who were “forced” to look at “objectionable websites” while they were on their flight? Now they are “mentally scarred for life” and only $10 million in damages, free air travel for life, and the blocking of said websites will heal their mental anguish."

    — Your own Mark O'Neill. Now, replace "objectionable" with "undesired", and enjoy.

    Also, I like a world in which newsreaders can rip up and lambast inconsequential drivel on air. It'd be a shame to have a quality rant auto-censored before it passed the producer's office.

  4. “Second, define “objectionable”. One person’s “objectionable” is another person’s “OK”. Who gets to define what’s OK and what’s not? OK, porn is definately not allowed. That’s obviously objectionable. But doesn’t that then open the door for activist groups to campaign for other types of websites to be blocked next? The word “objectionable” is such a broad umberella term that covers so much. Can’t you just see the lawsuits now by “outraged passengers” who were “forced” to look at “objectionable websites” while they were on their flight? Now they are “mentally scarred for life” and only $10 million in damages, free air travel for life, and the blocking of said websites will heal their mental anguish.”
    — Your own Mark O’Neill. Now, replace “objectionable” with “undesired”, and enjoy.

    Also, I like a world in which newsreaders can rip up and lambast inconsequential drivel on air. It’d be a shame to have a quality rant auto-censored before it passed the producer’s office.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.