Google's Creepiest Patent Yet ...

[Hum]

Google's Motorola division makes phones. People make calls on those phones. And now that mobile has eaten the world, they often reach out to business associates and loved ones in noisy situations like "large stadiums, busy streets, restaurants, and emergency situations." Which makes it harder to communicate.

Thankfully, then, Google has patented a new possible solution to the age old problem of talking with each in loud places: "Communication can be reasonably improved" by the application of an electronic throat tattoo, which could dampen "acoustic noise."

Sounds reasonable! Just look at the guy in the patent drawing. He's happy! Who wouldn't want a neck tattoo that provides "auxillary voice input to a mobile communication device"?

But it's not just a noise-canceling microphone for your telephone! The tattoo can do more. It can have a display that lights up under certain conditions.

And the other kind of noise that gets introduced into conversations is lies! Bad data. So, the electronic skin tattoo can detect those, too.

"Optionally, the electronic skin tattoo can further include a galvanic skin response detector to detect skin resistance of a user," the patent reads. "It is contemplated that a user that may be nervous or engaging in speaking falsehoods may exhibit different galvanic skin response than a more confident, truth telling individual."

That is contemplated, isn't it?

Put it all together and The User could have a screen on his throat that turns orange when he starts sweating because he's a liar. Everything will be clear to his business associates and loved ones, from the timber of his voice to the content of his character.

Who would not want to live in this world?

Some caveats:

1) This is just a patent. Patents rarely become products. Most are worthless. Etc.

2) Though it is called a tattoo, the device is really more of a sticker applied with an adhesive.

2a) Which is a good thing because everyone hates an obsolescent tattoo (see: tribal bands, frat letters, ex-spouses).

3) Other researchers are working on similar "tattoos," but for different applications, mostly biomedical sensors.

4) It's not just for humans! "Here it is contemplated that the electronic tattoo can also be applied to an animal as well. Audio circuitry can also include a microphone for emitting sound corresponding to fluctuations of muscle or tissue in the throat."

It is contemplated, then, that perhaps, your dog will be able to tell you how much he loves you in a robot voice. But then you'll look down and his little screen will be flashing orange, orange, orange. Orange for liar. :o

 

source

[ichi]

Stupid potential features aside, throat mics aren't something new. Implementing them as a less bulky sticker might come handy in some situations, I guess.

Add another sticker working as bone conduction speaker and you'll have something slightly less ridiculous to wear around (if only because it can be concealed) than your average Bluetooth headset.

[spenser.d]

...I'll pass, thank you.

[Hum]

Mark of the Beast -- thank you Google. :|

[+virtorio MVC]

I do like the idea of knowing just how much my cat hates me.

[AnotherITguy]

I wonder about you sometimes Google.

[techbeck]

Tattoo is not a new idea. Google is just taking it further.

[spenser.d]

Tattoo is not a new idea. Google is just taking it further.

And? The article clearly states that in bullet 3...

[Torolol]

why not just patenting 'thought mic' instead ?

[HawkMan]

And the other kind of noise that gets introduced into conversations is lies! Bad data. So, the electronic skin tattoo can detect those, too.

"Optionally, the electronic skin tattoo can further include a galvanic skin response detector to detect skin resistance of a user," the patent reads. "It is contemplated that a user that may be nervous or engaging in speaking falsehoods may exhibit different galvanic skin response than a more confident, truth telling individual."

 

galvanic skin reistance doesn't detect lies only nervousness. lie detectors are BS. 

[Ian W]

Mark of the Beast -- thank you Google. :|

That is something I've never quite understood - how one can compare this sort of technology with the Mark of the Beast as described in Revelation. No doubt that others will consider it to actually be such (or already have), similar to the RFID chip's reception, but what does either technology have to do with his name or number (Revelation 13:16-17)?

[HawkMan]

Isn't there another part that says he will mark his people in some way. and you know how bible people are, it's never literal, you have to interpret it, which means you have to interpret it to make everything evil.