Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Privacy Hardware Technology

Legoland Introduces Wi-Fi Tracking for Kids 347

Posted by timothy from the big-happy-smile dept.
mindless4210 writes "Lego announced today the successful deployment of a full-scale child-tracking system within Legoland Billund in Europe. The tracking system, deployed by Bluesoft, Inc and KidSpotter, allows park visitors keep track of their children using one of the world's largest Wi-Fi tracking networks. The children must wear a wrist band with a Wi-Fi tag on it, and if they become separated, parents simply send a text message from their mobile phone, and receive an automated response giving them the accurate location of their child."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Legoland Introduces Wi-Fi Tracking for Kids More

Legoland Introduces Wi-Fi Tracking for Kids

Comments Filter:

  • Privacy Concerns (Score:3, Informative)

    by frazzydee ( 731240 ) * on Monday April 26, 2004 @05:59PM (#8977137)
    The AeroScout Location System [bluesoft-inc.com] can locate the tags which I believe is in use with Lego's Kidspotter Wi-Fi tracking watch [lego.com]. The tag itself [bluesoft-inc.com] seems to be very small. Privacy concerns, anybody?

    • Re:Privacy Concerns (Score:5, Insightful)

      by eliza_effect ( 715148 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:02PM (#8977168)
      Does your 8 year old need alot of privacy at Legoland? What would they be doing which would warrant the parents not knowing where they are?
    • Wow, the FP is a tin hat poster .... what a surprise. Guess what, if you don't want to have your kids tracked you don't have to go to the amusment park. Wow, there is a shocking idea.

    • Re:Privacy Concerns (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Snaller ( 147050 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:05PM (#8977216) Journal
      Privacy concerns, anybody?

      None what so ever. You pay to borrow a bracelet, don't want it - don't rent it. And you hand it over when you leave. Only thing someone can do is track the kid while in the park, and usually most of the kids are with their parents. There are hardly anything underhanded you can do in an amusement park anyway.

    • Re:Privacy Concerns (Score:5, Insightful)

      by toiletsalmon ( 309546 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:14PM (#8977318) Journal
      I see no privacy concerns at all. I fact I think this is the PERFECT application for this type of technology that keeps the Tinfoil hat crowd up all night:

      -It doesn't work everywhere, only in the park
      -It's temporary
      -You have to opt in
      -It's actually useful

      The only drawback is that someone who is already a "Bad Parent" might use this as an opportunity to not keep an eye on their child.

      • Re:Privacy Concerns (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Nobody You Know ( 750014 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @10:44PM (#8979299)
        Okay. Let me make sure I've got this. Some anonymous paedophile may track some random unique identifier through the park from some great distance. As a parent, I'd be much more concerned with a paedophile using the decidedly low-tech approach of actually following my kid around.

        And if you're worried about said paedophile cracking the (presumably) secure system to somehow tie a unique braclet ID to a person, I'd be more worried about said cracker breaking into the billing system and getting the credit card data I used to buy the tickets.

        As the parent said, the biggest risk is that some negligent parents will decide that such a system obviates the need to actually keep an eye on their kid. As the saying goes, if you make it idiot-proof, someone somewhere will just build a better idiot...

    • Most kids have cellphones anyway. What about the old-fashioned method of meeting like calling the kid and asking "can we meet at the X building in 15 minutes?" An even older fashion would be to tell your kids "if anything goes wrong, we meet at location X every half an hour" or "Talk to a park official if you get lost, so they can help us finding each other"

      Sometimes I wonder how I have survived a youth without being tracked in a theme park.
    • I, for one, am disgusted. If children can't roam around unsupervised at an amusement park, what is this country coming to? Next the jackbooted fascists will be telling kids they can't play in traffic or go home with the creepy guy at the arcade offering to show them puppies.

    • Re:Privacy Concerns (Score:2, Insightful)

      by andalay ( 710978 )
      Am I the only one that thinks that its useless if a) the kid takes it off or b) A bad person takes it off the kid? What type of measures are there to prevent this?

  • Where's my wife? (Score:5, Funny)

    by IdleTime ( 561841 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:01PM (#8977152) Journal
    That'll come next :)

  • Think of the children! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    No, I didn't RTFA.

    I hope these things have some sort of security mechanism. You wouldn't want just anything being able to instantly locate your kids would you?

    Given the history of these types of deployments it wouldn't surprise me if there were more than a few holes in any security (if any) they have.

  • Low tech alternative: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:01PM (#8977155)
    A leash.

    • Yeah, but... (Score:3, Funny)

      by BayBlade ( 749886 )
      I built one out of legos
      But it kept breaking every time I moved.

    • Re:Low tech alternative: (Score:5, Funny)

      by Nexzus ( 673421 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:07PM (#8977233)
      Damn, I hate that. It just seems so... derogatory.

      A couple times I've seen a mother with a kid on a leash, and I've asked her if the kid knows any tricks. Every time I got a dirty look. I guess some people don't like to be reminded of their bad parenting habits.

      • The alternative is usually tighter, not looser, control. Do you say the same thing every time you see a child strapped into a buggy? In a dangerous environment, children *will* wander. A hand-hold is *not* safe enough - parents can get distracted (assuming lack of superhumanity). For a certain age-band a leash, while harmful to a dignity the child doesn't yet have, allows the maximum of freedom consonant with safety. I call not using a leash, for that age band, either overprotective (if you keep the child t
        • > BTW, do you have children?

          This is slashdot.

          There are certain things you have to do before having children... and Im not referring to painting the spare room yellow.
    • Yeah, but it's murder when they want to ride the kiddie roller coaster.

  • Giving kids IP addresses (Score:3, Funny)

    by strredwolf ( 532 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:02PM (#8977163) Homepage Journal
    Oh great. We're now giving kids IP addresses so their parents can ping them. What it going on now?

    Excuse me while I compile IPv6 on my systems. We need it now.

    • Re:Giving kids IP addresses (Score:5, Funny)

      by justMichael ( 606509 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:21PM (#8977384) Homepage
      Oh great. We're now giving kids IP addresses so their parents can ping them. What it going on now?
      Actually it's more like a
      traceroute lil-johnny
      cause a ping is only going to tell you if he's alive, not where he is ;)

      • Re:Giving kids IP addresses (Score:4, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26, 2004 @07:16PM (#8977928)
        But that's only if there's a route to the kid. If a router goes down somewhere it could look like the kid is dead.

        Police: "I'm sorry. I can't ping your son. I'm afraid he may be dead."

        Mother faints. Father starts crying.

        Police: "Oh wait. There it goes. A router just went down in seattle for a few seconds. I hope I didn't scare you. Say, is your wife OK?"
    • I don't know any of the specifics, but I can't think of any reason why they would need to assign public IP addresses to these wristbands. In all likelyhood, they've set up a wireless LAN and are dolling out private addresses set aside for self-contained networks. They could set up a NAT box with some nice interface if they really wanted external access to it.

      So, your IPv4 addresses shouldn't take a hit. I do agree we should move to IPv6 though, but this instance is not justification.

  • Peace of mind (Score:5, Interesting)

    by (54)T-Dub ( 642521 ) * <[tpaine] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:02PM (#8977164) Journal
    Wow, this sound like a great idea. The peace of mind for parents is great. Not to mention not having to use one of those horrible Child Leashes [google.com] that make it look like you are taking your child for a walk.

    • Re:Peace of mind (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      As a science teacher, I am pushing for this sort of system to be introduced in the school for which I work. We have a real problem with children sneaking out and missing lessons and are finding it hard to crack down on offenders. Often the biggest problem is finding the children: the police don't want to know and we just don't have the resources to go looking for them.

      If we can track the children then we can find out where they are and punish them accordingly. Unfortunately we can't afford fancy wifi eq
      • You are going to compare the cost of a simple Wi-Fi base station with the cost of a cell base station ?

        I also don't think you can get a cell location to within 10 m without the cell phone reporting back GPS info. Cell tracking just isn't that accurate (especially with only one base station)

      • Sounds like a great idea. I went to public high school for 9th grade and being that accoutability was nill and the school had a couple thousand kids in it, ditching class was easy. Then I went to a private school with a class of 26. In the three years I went there I only remember one incident of kids ditching class ... and a teacher recognized their car driving away and they got in house suspension for a day. Let me tell you. I never even considered ditching.

        Being accountable for where you are makes a big

    • Re:Peace of mind (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tsg ( 262138 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:15PM (#8977334)
      My only problem with this is the tendency some people have to rely on technology. In other words, I'm afraid some parents will think that they don't have to watch their children because the tracking device will do that for them.

      But that's a problem with people, not the technology.
    • I think when I was particuarly young I had a child "leash," but it was just a little thing which went arouund my wrist. A full-blown child harness is just weird.

    • Re:Peace of mind (Score:5, Insightful)

      by onion2k ( 203094 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:22PM (#8977392) Homepage
      And it has the added bonus that Lego can know exactly how long children spend in each area of the park, what to concentrate on in their ads, what to rip out if its underperforming, etc..

      Not that thats a reason not to track kids. I just think its a 'side effect'.

    • Re:Peace of mind; carelessness? liability? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by David Hume ( 200499 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:24PM (#8977422) Homepage

      The peace of mind for parents is great.


      Which may be precisely the problem. "Peace of mind" causing parents to be inattentive, incautious, and careless. And when the systems goes down, as it inevitably will? Will there be civil liability, or will the parents have to sign a waiver of liability when they rent the wrist band for their child?

      When the system goes down, will a child be lost, kidnapped, hurt, etc. that otherwise would not have been because his parents relied on the system instead of knowing that they, and only they were responsible for keeping track of their child?

      Perhaps the analogy is a bad one, but this reminds me a bit of the problem national parks are having with people who *rely* on GPS and/or their cell phones to keep them out of trouble. No wilderness or outdoor skills, no ability to use a compass or read a map, and half of the time no jacket. But they figure as long as they have their cell phones, they'll be ok. And when they can't get reception, the battery goes dead, or they drop it.....

      • Of course it will happen, but I don't think there are many parent's who are going to forgo supervision simply because they know the can get the location of their child. Every parent knows that a child can get into plenty of trouble and danger in any location. The degree of which increases without supervision. So do we ditch the technology because people might abuse it ??? See my sig for your answer.

      • Re:Peace of mind; carelessness? liability? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        OK, having actually taken a child (my nephew) back in 1999 to Legoland (California) I can comment on why I think this might be a good thing.

        Legoland has a number of "playground romper room" style attractions, which are very much kid-sized for kids. While they centralize the exits so you can watch who's coming and going from them, I was constantly pacing along the edge of it, trying to keep him in sight as he climbed around in the tunnels and bridges and such (some of these things were very large) and watch

    • Re:Peace of mind (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ps_inkling ( 525251 )
      At the 1984 World's Fair in Knoxville, TN, my brother had a fabric dog leash snapped to the back belt loop of his pants, with the other end held by a parent. (This was way before the leash reels you see today). My mother was paranoid that he'd run off and get lost, or get snatched.

      Many people looked at our family as if we were being "cruel and unusual" to the six-year-old toddler. But, we didn't spend half the day holding his hand or pushing him in a stroller, and he was able to roam in a small circle a

  • Tracking implications (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) * on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:02PM (#8977169) Journal

    [this is reasonably political - feel free to ignore]

    Whereas this is bound to be a 'good thing' (the cry 'child in trouble' is just about the most instinct-driven response any adult has), the signature is somethinng to be wary of.

    Consider that analysis of people-in-crowds is pretty easy these days. Consider that tracking (after positive analysis) is again reasonably simple (I was doing it 15 years ago - the key is to track in feature-space (region features: circularity, RGB, connectivity, 1st- and 2nd-order parameters) rather than just using image intensity. Using relations between features gives you context and thus more contextual information).

    Consider that if you can track individuals within crowds, and given a covert surveillance system (eg: London, UK) you can track indivduals from locality to locality. You can start to (automatically) build circles-of-trust where individuals who meet regularly are automatically associated.

    Consider that biometric information is now being put forward (eg: fingerprints, DNA samples, Iris scans, head ratios (eye:nose:chin parameters) and other observable information) and encoded within a compulsory identity card

    Consider the amalgamation of this automatic identification, automatic relation of associates, and automatic recognition of individuals. Consider the implications. And yet a "Labour" government (the "People's" party!) is putting this forward in the UK.

    I am fortunate. I am planning to emigrate this year to the US from the UK - previously I thought the UK (despite the lack of consitution) had a reality more responsive to the people and their ideals than the US. No more. I am one of the lucky ones that Joseph "Blunkett" Stalin will have no hold over. I feel deeply for my erstwhile compatriots. Freedom, after all, is a state of mind, and mind control is a tool of (this UK) government.

    Simon.
    • Worse, imagine them trying to geolocate IP addresses and making the database freely available. Now, they can not only track what you do in crowds but also what you do when you leave the crowds and get in an Internet cafe.

      Now, that's freaky.

      Or is it?

    • Re:Tracking implications (Score:4, Insightful)

      by radish ( 98371 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:33PM (#8977526) Homepage
      Both political (which is fine), and as far as I can tell, completely off topic :) But that's Slshdot.

      As someone who recently did the same move from UK to US - if you value your privacy this really is not the place to come. It starts when the Immigration official takes your photo and fingerprint, and just goes downhill from there. I'm not saying the UK is great, but things like identity theft are much easier and more rife here, and there no useful data protection laws meaning companies share all their data about you. You would be happier I think somewhere like the Netherlands.

      Just my 2p.
      • You would be happier I think somewhere like the Netherlands.

        Not exactly, not with our current minister of justice winning the annual Big Brother Award [bigbrotherawards.nl]

        One of the brilliant ideas of our government is to oblige everybody of 14 years or older to have identification with them at all times.
    • Granted, neither countries are utopic. It seems that both UK and US are adopting the control model of government in different ways.

      What I find more deeply disturbing however about WiFi child monitoring is the further detachment it may cause between child and parent. Marketing to children is dangerous because of the long term effect it might have to create or further increase a generational gap. Divide the consumer, create demographics, and the corporate fat-cats line their pockets selling different brand

  • well... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dreadlord ( 671979 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:02PM (#8977176) Journal
    Well, it's about time for kids to start wearing tinfoil hats.

  • I can see it now... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Johnny's location is: Wedged in the swing.

  • Well,, (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nevek ( 196925 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:03PM (#8977182) Homepage
    Its a nice step up from the Leash that some mothers seem to employ upon thier crying 5 year olds.

    I wonder how they'll get a wifi tracker out of a kids stomach?

    Thats where some of my sisters lego ended up.

    • Re:Well,, (Score:3, Funny)

      by JivanMukti ( 589480 )
      True story...

      A few months ago a woman called the police because her son had swallowed the electronic key to her SUV's alarm system and she couldn't get the vehicle to start.

      The officer thought a minute, lifted little Johnny up and put his stomach near the stearing column. It was close enough for the RFID. Security disengaged and the woman was able to drive away.

  • That's a little low-tech sounding. (Score:5, Funny)

    by I'm a racist. ( 631537 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:04PM (#8977187) Homepage Journal
    It shouldn't just give the location of the child. For a lot of people, that's totally useless. Most people couldn't tell you the difference between latitude/longitude and UTM coordinates. Instead, it should guide them to their child... let the parents page through instructions. Not only would this be more useful for them, they could get charged by the page, so our corporate overlords should be pleased as well (afterall, reuniting a parent and child isn't satisfying enough).

    Secondly, what ever happened to Darwinism? The lost children should starve and/or form their own feral societies. Only the best would survive to re-enter society, hopefully as very productive, since they'll have lots of useful skills.

    Lastly, where the hell are all the wolves? Aren't they supposed to take care of the lost children?

    First post? I doubt it...
    • Uh it gives you a location in a format that you can find on the map that comes with it. It isn't GPS or anything like that. I assume the format is like C5 sorta idea. I'd say thats pretty good, as well as giving the name of the location.

      Not like the article would have told you that....
    • RTFA, as always.

      The system reports a specific park area, partnered with coordinates that correspond to special maps. It's easy enough even for your average SUV bulldozing modern mother.
    • That's easy for you to say, YOU'RE A RACIST! ;-)

      More seriously, much of the behavior of humans is due to cultural factors (memes), not genes. With memes, killing people off is a highly crude way to get things done.

      Ideas kick the collective ass of genes.
  • "Asset Management" at its best :)

  • The good news is... (Score:5, Funny)

    by pyrrhonist ( 701154 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:06PM (#8977222)
    ...you get to put it together first!

  • Biggest Customer: (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:07PM (#8977236)
    Michael Jackson

  • They are late (Score:5, Informative)

    by Snaller ( 147050 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:08PM (#8977247) Journal
    Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen has already installed that a month ago, and before them another park in Jutland - so they are a bit late :)

    • Re:They are late (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Your Pal Dave ( 33229 )

      Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen has already installed that a month ago, and before them another park in Jutland - so they are a bit late :)

      More than a bit late, here's an article [www.efc.ca] from July, 2000 which describes a similar system. This doesn't use wifi or text messaging, but that seems to be a bit overkill to me anyway.

      IIRC this was discussed in /. at the time. I'd check, but the thought of using the /. search page for something that old chills me to the bone.

  • Have parents really gotten that lazy? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Guildencrantz ( 234779 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:10PM (#8977269)
    We plop kids in front of TVs and now we let them run around amusement parks alone? Yes, I understand that this is probably intended for kids who get away from their parents, but you know some parent is going to sit somewhere with a laptop tracking their kid and not actually keeping an eye on them. I'm horrified.

    ~~Guildencrantz
    • So, you're a parent, and your kid has NEVER gotten accidentally separated from you? Well, I'm a parent, and I don't really give a flying whatever about the parents who will do the laptop tracking, but I will get my kids the wristband...

    • Re:Have parents really gotten that lazy? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RobertB-DC ( 622190 ) * on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:55PM (#8977732) Homepage Journal
      We plop kids in front of TVs and now we let them run around amusement parks alone?

      What do you think kids were doing before TV? Sitting in the living room watching the cat, while Dad read the newspaper and Mom (in tasteful, frilly dress, of course) cooked dinner?

      I was a kid in the '70s, and my friend and I went out to the "forest" (really just an overgrown bluff) and tried to melt crayolas over a pile of matches. When we were in second grade. And we did similar things, none of which were under the watchful eyes of our parents -- though I suspect other parents were watching, back in the days before everyone moved their driveways to the back of the house and put up 10-foot-tall privacy fences.

      Taking away the TV is only part of the solution to the problem you've almost uncovered. The other part of giving childhood back to our kids is to let them *have* their childhood. That means we have to let go, sometimes -- something that's harder to do, now that all the neighbors have their blinds drawn out of paranoid fear of the "unknown".

      Now that we've moved out to the country, with eight acres of land and neighbors that keep an eye out, God only knows what my second grader and his friends are getting into. But I think my boy will be the better for it.

  • Surprisingly, a good idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PennyUK ( 309754 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:11PM (#8977284)
    I'm normally opposed to this sort of thing, but in a place like a theme park this sounds great. Assuming that the tag could be hired from the theme park, you need only use it while you are there.

    When you are in a place which the parent or the kid knows reasonably well, you can easily arrange a good meeting place if you get seperated, and the kid has a reasonable chance of finding it. OTOH, most people only go to a theme park occasionally: even if you do decide on a meeting place, you could easily get lost en route to it.

    It could also help if the child is with the other (custodial) parent: the first parent can quickly check whether other parent is still queueing for a ride, or has gone onto designated meeting spot. Dh and I have tried using mobiles, but as dh's mobile is his work phone he is too likely to get work related calls for it to be particularly useful on his day off.

  • Hmm... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Joey Patterson ( 547891 )
    Does this mean we can ping our kids now?

  • Heh. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:15PM (#8977336)
    Considering that children don't usually wander far away from their parents, it would be reasonable to assume that where the child is, the parents also are.

    Thus this is a nice way to get parents to consent to having their motions tracked as they move throughout Legoland, under the guise of helping "the children."

    Imagine it... If you had a giant database of people's movements as they go through the park, you can more strategically position the food vending carts, move the rides and displays around in order to maximize the "candy aisle effect," etc.

    • Re:Heh. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by UnanimousCoward ( 9841 )
      under the guise of helping "the children."

      As a parent, I'll take your Legoland-has-ulterior-motives angle and STILL get my children wristbands...

    • Re:Heh. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fireduck ( 197000 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:33PM (#8977517)
      don't you think they already have this information? Perhaps it's not as high tech, but certainly they have to know which routes are the most heavily traveled, which rides/attractions are the most visited, etc. Simply by how often the trash recepticles are filled, or how much waste is swept up will give you an idea how popular an area is. and that's incredibly low tech. How about line lengths at rides or how much business each food stand does in a day?

      There are hundreds of ways they can track how heavily traveled areas are and none of them involve tracking devices. The idea that this child tracker will somehow give them more info seems a little exaggerated.

      • Re:Heh. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:43PM (#8977611)
        The idea that this child tracker will somehow give them more info seems a little exaggerated.

        Not at all exaggerated. Like you said, they can already track mass usage patterns in various ways. But now they can track where you go, personally.

        You get all kinds of great things out of that. "People who eat hamburgers don't tend to ride the Crazy Lego Ship. Maybe it makes them feel sick? We should put less mayo on the burgers." Or perhaps people who shop in store XYZ don't tend to also shop in store ABC. Perhaps there is too wide an array of popular items in XYZ -- leading people to forgo any further shopping. This tells you you should move some of the popular items from store XYZ over to store ABC, and hike up all the prices a little bit. Since people arent' buying as much per location, they are less likely to notice a 3% price hike.

        Maybe you find that people who walk past a certain ride are more likely to want to buy ice cream. This leads you to put more ice cream stands in that location. Maybe you're asking "Why the hell would a particular ride cause people to want ice cream?" Believe me, the company doesn't care why, but they'll sure as hell cash in on it.

        The only reason you can't think of uses for this is because you (obviously) aren't the one getting paid to do it.

        • Re:Heh. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by glwtta ( 532858 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @10:04PM (#8979028) Homepage
          Perhaps there is too wide an array of popular items in XYZ -- leading people to forgo any further shopping. This tells you you should move some of the popular items from store XYZ over to store ABC, and hike up all the prices a little bit.

          It seems like you are really struggling to come up with reasons why this is a bad thing. (Even if you could somehow imagine that this system would give them more information about shopping habbits - you know those credit cards people tend to use nowadays?)

          If walking past a particular ride makes me want icecream, hell, I want there to be an icecream stand nearby.

          So, you go to their park, pay them money for the entertainment they provide, but somehow it's nefarious of them to more accuratly measure what the hell it is you want?

          You are at their park, you wan't what they are selling, you are not somehow bucking the system by getting extra mayo on your burger before going the the Crazy Lego Ship.

    • Re:Heh. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ucblockhead ( 63650 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:45PM (#8977633) Homepage Journal
      " Considering that children don't usually wander far away from their parents, it would be reasonable to assume that where the child is, the parents also are."


      Hahaha! Hohoho! Heeheehee!

      You don't have kids, do you?

  • You know.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Illserve ( 56215 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:17PM (#8977351)
    for kids!

  • mallrats (Score:3, Funny)

    by yamcha666 ( 519244 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:21PM (#8977387)
    Reminds me of a scene from Mallrats

    I hope his pants get caught and a bloodbath ensues.
    What is with you today ?

    I don't wish the kid harm, but his mother should suffer that horrific ordeal...

    So she'll learn how to manage her child !
    Sort of a harsh lesson.

    Man, there's not a year goes by...

    That I don't read about some escalator accident involving some bastard kid...

    That could've been easily avoided had some parent-- I don't care which one--

    But some parent conditioned him to fear and respect that escalator !

    Though these WiFi Trackers do sound like a good idea, maybe if the parents kept a good eye on their children, the need for these trackers could be avoided.

  • Accurate location? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tchdab1 ( 164848 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:26PM (#8977439) Homepage
    >"...giving them the accurate location of their child."

    Actually, it will give them the location of the wristband.

  • This doesn't belong at 2.4GHz... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:26PM (#8977449)
    The biggest problem I see is that this service is subject to a perfectly legal denial of service if anybody were to flood the place with any other WiFi signal...

    That's the advantage that licensed frequencies have, they'd could be jammed, but then the jammer would be transmitting without a license and in trouble. Here the DOS wouldn't quite be covered by that.

  • If I were a kid... (Score:5, Funny)

    by CHaN_316 ( 696929 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:33PM (#8977520)
    I'd gnaw off the wrist band and flush it down the toilet. The ensuing search in the sewer system by rescue teams should prove amusing...

  • This might work, BUT (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I worked for Openwave, you know, the Software.com and Phone.com merger baby...
    We worked with MMO2 in Britan, and they had a nicname for Fridays...SMS Fridays...

    They would send SMS (Text) messages during the week, and the lost ones (which there were a lot of) would get delivered on Friday, when they system went through housecleaning.

    So, send a text message looking for you kid at the park and MAYBE you will find out the location by Friday.

  • Switching bands? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by modifried ( 605582 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:41PM (#8977593) Homepage
    I wonder how hard the wristbands would be to remove?
    What's to stop kids from switching their wristbands?

    I can't imagine being unable to find my kid, tracking him down, and finding some other kid instead.

  • Moving target (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ozbird ( 127571 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:42PM (#8977599)
    Unless little Wally realises they are lost and has been reduced to tears, knowing where they are this instant will be useful for only a few seconds. I'm sure the mobile phone company is gleefully aware of this.

    Why not fit the rugrats with something like those electric dog collars? If their squeals exceed X decibels or they move more than Y metres from their parent, they receive a little reminder from the collar... >:-)

  • And the first response is geeky... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stienman ( 51024 ) <adavis@@@ubasics...com> on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:42PM (#8977602) Homepage Journal
    My first thought was, "What, a CF card on each kid with a little microcontroller where you have to cha[r|n]ge the batteries every day?"

    Then I looked at the website for the tags - 5 years worth of service, regular MAC address, only transmits occasionally, never receives.

    Way geeky, I think. I'd like to know what kind of 802.11 packet they're transmitting!

    Then I read the comments. Are all you guys privacy geeks, or what? What happened to all the "Cool technology! How'd they do that? etc" comments, consequences be darned (as in fixing holes in socks)

    Ah well. So much for *real* geeks.

    -Adam

  • Gee, when I was a kid... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Resident Netizen ( 769536 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:42PM (#8977606)
    ... I was more concerned with acurately tracking all of my lego pieces!

  • Tunnel Vision (Score:3, Funny)

    by nfotxn ( 519715 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:51PM (#8977682) Journal
    "Ok Billy just stay withing 30-40' of the access point and wear this Wi-Fi tracking bracelet at all times so I know where you are!"
    Solution looking for a problem, anyone?

  • Will this locate the TV remote? (Score:3, Funny)

    by 1000StonedMonkeys ( 593519 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:56PM (#8977740)
    Because if it does, they've got my money.

  • I remember seeing this in a film once (Score:3, Funny)

    by PeteDotNu ( 689884 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @06:59PM (#8977775) Homepage
    And if the kid walks outside the park boundary... kaboom! Right?

  • OH MY GOD! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Russ Nelson ( 33911 ) <slashdot@russnelson.com> on Monday April 26, 2004 @07:10PM (#8977873) Homepage
    The Tag can be mounted in many different ways on a variety of assets, including the use of double-sided tape, screws and straps.

    Tape??? Screws??? Straps???? My kid isn't getting with a hundred miles of these guys. Nobody screws a wifi tag to my kid!
    -russ

  • Security will surely be a top priority. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jerk City Troll ( 661616 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @08:11PM (#8978337) Homepage

    I'm certain that Lego will take security into strong consideration with this system. I am certain they will ensure that preditors of children will not be able to hijack the system and locate your kids as effectively as you can. Afterall, strong cryptographic authentication will be used and identifications will be universally unique, or some other such mechanisms will be in place... right?

  • i hear kidnapping is all the rage these days... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bechthros ( 714240 ) on Monday April 26, 2004 @11:05PM (#8979497) Homepage Journal
    ... and I can see a high-tech ransom outfit using this data to know where one certain child would be for quicker in-and-out kidnapping. Or knowing when that child might have been separated from it's protecive older siblings.

    Or how bout this: 5-year-old son of European royalty is playing at legoland, taken out by a sniper from a huge distance based on his location from an SMS query to their wristband system...

    OK, I'm being dystopian, and hopefully the crypto on those wristbands is bulletproof, but if the potential is there it will be abused and to think otherwise is naive.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close