Upgrade Your Dog

ptorrone writes "Engadget has glimpse in to the future, a future where your dog has a cell phone, webcam and electronic tag, and maybe even talks to you. Maybe. Some of this dog-tech isn't available yet, and some of it is (in Japan, of course). The overview includes some interesting iterations of pet technology, and they even made their own version of a dog webcam along with the first ever canine photographer's photo gallery." I'd rather see more of these things applied to infants.

Wasn't this covered...

[TWX]

...in Holy Fire by Bruce Sterling? One of the dogs in that book even had a talk show, it's support electronics were so advanced.

GPS

[Heem]

I always wanted to attach my GPS to my dog just to see where he goes. Probably around in circles chasing squirells and such, but might be interesting.

Bad Marketing

[Agret]

"On the website, the scenario presented is a woman calling her dog telling him he should be home soon." Yet another example of bad marketing

Re:Your kid first

[YrWrstNtmr]

I still want to know where my kids are and have some notification when they break boundaries or curfew.

Are they obeying those boundraies because you're taught them it's the right thing to do, or because they know dad is tracking them? Big difference. Curfew is a non-issue. Either they're home or they're not.

And yes, I have teenagers.

Infants!?

[carcosa30]

I'd like to see many of these things applied to adults.

In a world where billions don't have enough to eat, we are now giving our dogs cell phones.

Truly sick.

Ya know...

[l0ungeb0y]

I already read the engadget article much much earlier.
Saddens me to say, but is this the harbinger of the end of /.'s media relevency?

I mean, if /. continues upon this line of reposting from blogs, wy not just go to the blogs themselves? Or is /.'s future just to be an outlet/media-spokesite for Roland and engadget et al? Why are so many topics not posted here first? While I enjoy free media, is /.so unknown thhat the personal bloggers get the first scoop? If so.... what can be done to change this? Are the editors being too draconian in rejection or have people just lost faith in story acceptance?

Sorry if you think this post a troll, just a question based upon countless topics posted that have already been posted elsewhere.

Re:What's wrong with normal pets?

[nick0909]

Whatever dog you speak of must have not been very well trained. If you have ever spent much time with a "working dog" it is amazing what the well trained ones can do. In my Search & Rescue [buttesar.org] unit we have many dogs that can scent discriminate off a scent article and follow that scent trail only in a world of people. They also have different reactions to a live person, a live person matching the scent article, a dead person, a dead person matching the scent article, and a well-trained handler and dog can work very effectivly. I am not a dog handler, but work closely with them on searches, and it is amazing watching them work.

Well, I can't

[Moraelin]

Every single quality I like in a cat, I've yet to see in a dog. Such as being able to think for itself. (Being that I pretty much fit the stereotype of a Brujah myself.)

I don't know, maybe some people like the artifficial affection of a species altered and reprogrammed to _need_ a master. No matter how smart it may be, it's just hard-wired to come obey the MASTER.

(Though I've yet to see any dog displaying anything even vaguely resembling intelligence. I'll have to take it on faith that smart dogs exist, just like flying saucers, yeti and the loch ness monster. Other people swear they saw a smart dog, so they must exist somewhere. Just not near me, 'cause the one I've seen were just a sad case of the owner going "oh look how smart he is!" at just about every dumb reflex, like the dog sniffing his own butt or chewing a stick or being able to find his food bowl.)

Either way, I find it just sad. It's just as artifficial as getting an email inbox full of "I Love You" (the virus) back then. It's just a program running. It doesn't mean the virus actually loved you.

What you have there is a species which was originally hard-coded into hunting in groups, obeying the strongest in the group, and marking and defending its hunting territory. Until someone figured out basically "hey, we can reprogram it into thinking that the human is the pack leader and the garden is his territory to defend." So the poor beast continues doing that, no matter if it makes sense in any given situation.

It dutifully marks its territory on trees, even when it's a tree in the park and 100 other dogs are brought to re-mark it.

It tries to defend that territory, no matter how dumb it may be in any given situation. Like a tiny Pekinese barking its lungs out at a great dane, not because it's brave, but because it's still mechanically applying a hard-coded reflex from back when they were all the same size. Or like a shopkeeper's dog trying to keep the customers out of the shop, until she learned not to bring the dog in the shop any more.

And it dutifully obeys even the worst possible master, because somewhere in its tiny brains a circuit says "must obey the pack leader."

Dunno, I'll take a cat's autonomy over that any day. A cat doesn't have a master. It might see you as a friend if you're nice to it. Or merely a roommate. Or in rare cases an enemy, if you're really bad at that relationship.

And if you fit in the friend category, you can know that it's genuine, not some hardcoded obedience.