In the prior post related to Glenn Greenwald's interview I diverged into closed caption stream on TV.
The stream can be captured and analyzed by anyone. This gives and older explanation. Not sophisticated search. Done on world prevalence and proximity. Simple. The NSA has certainly spawned better analysis that has spun off to private enterprise contractors that developed it.
Six or seven years ago I spent a week researching closed captioning systems. The technology has come long way since then!
It enables deaf people to "hear". Wonderful. We generously spend money to enable those with a variety of handicaps. There are laws that require it. Moral obligations that invite it. Who would be against it other than a Tea Bagger? Edited later: Not necessarily only for the deaf. In noise or privacy environment for those that could otherwise hear it. It is on in the exercise room. Also for those not fluent in understanding spoken english. It has its other convenience benefits but none of them require a law under ADA or any other government program.
Is there another agenda driving real time closed caption and which came first the chicken or the egg.
The intelligence application is extremely significant as well as totally obvious. Convert an audio stream to text. TV captioning converts it all in a limited problem domain. Te larger domain of everything that is spoken over the internet (everything now, no more analog) is a magnitude of translation that is unreasonable. An artificial intelligence "sensemaking"search is the only way to filter the gross volume down to some tailored subset dictated by capacity down to something that can be retained for some length of time, only limited by capacity. The distilled potential "high proof good stuff" high value data for high probability future use, when and if it is required.
It just makes sense!
That is what sensemaking is all about. Once an audio stream is real time translated to its text stream then it can be subjected to the same artificial intelligence programs applied to all originally written text on the internet.
It just makes sense!
The source, written vs. spoken probably has a general "intelligence latency value". One giving more juicy stuff than the other. Spend the most on what gets the most.
It just makes sense!
Whoa! But what it being spoken on TV is not always "American"!
Foreign countries have CC in their video as well. I think we pioneered CC. Took big bucks. Where is the financial payback to the developers? Nobody pays extra on their cable bill for CC. Few use it. Government R&D is not based on financial profit ROI. There are other forms of return value. Our government would logically fund R&D for real time CC in foreign languages. Government associated "quasi academic" institutions do it. That is a fact. Look at funding and projects. You must select the related institution, I will not name it. Usual Suspects.
Makes Sense?
Through some corporate American middle man offer the ability to real time television CC a foreign language to the related country as a freebie or a bonus with a benevolent intent. Get the translation done at the origin to great open source intelligence. Foreign intelligence agencies cooperate as a sharing partner. Even those like Middle East Countries that like to know and control and extract intelligence from everything being said on the open media? Also applied to closed verbal media?
Makes sense?
Might concern for the deaf be a cover?
Go figure.
OSINT is a proponent of the value of Open Source Intelligence and a critic of intelligence agencies for not doing more in that domain at a cheaper and more effective cost. Perhaps the NSA is not as big and dumb.
Things even have to make sense for the NSA. (If they turn on their "increase size of type" tool to the really big letters)
TV news has become soap opera but that is where the competition for eyeballs has moved. Truth is a reminder of connections to reality. Thank you Jon Stewart.
The open source intelligence streaming into my own computer or tv in addition to my eyes and brain is raw material for analysis. I look and hear. Remember something as filtered by my beliefs. Typical human. Someone smarter than me could interpret the real meaning and truthiness in what I see and here. I seek those people and sites on the internet. Yves Smith as an aggregator and analyst, etc.
In this room alone the two most intelligent things are me and my computer. It has all the tools and application programs I need and use to look at and analyze the things I choose. I would love to have a real time CC analysis tool with a big fat artificial intelligence engine to analyze real time CC "news".
How different would the millions of lines of code be (and the final product) if designed and implemented by a Republican or a Democratic. Paraphrasing a line from "Breaking Bad": "Its chemistry". Might we trust our lying eyes and ears too much? What a computer program objectively extracts and tells us. Is the application of hard science to social science able to give some greater degree of whatever we define as "variable truth accuracy" by classic reduction of system noise? Noise that we generally can no longer detect nor correct?
What if an objective analytical computer program challenged common belief? Challenged it with logic and the application of principals of information system design and implementation?
TV CC has once again captured my interest and worth the time to re-visit it. Maybe a stream containing gold nuggets being delivered to my door step. Maybe I will turn on Fox News and turn off the audio and read the CC. What is written in black and white might get past more filters than what I see and hear? Macro analysis summation of what is seen and heard is filtered by beliefs. Macro analysis to extract and present all that is said in CC content including meta data gives a better picture than High Def TV.
High Def TV's are not TV's anymore. They are truly computers but we only see them as monitors. We believe they are still only TV's.
No comments:
Post a Comment