digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at gizmodo.com

Confessions: The Meanest Thing Gizmodo Did at CES

gizmodo.com — "CES has no shortage of displays. And when MAKE offered us some TV-B-Gone clickers to bring to the show, we pretty much couldn't help ourselves. We shut off a TV. And then another. And then a wall of TVs. And we just couldn't stop. (And Panasonic, you're so lucky that 150-incher didn't have an active IR port.)"

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jennmae, on 01/10/2008, -83/+23That is too funny...bring on the dancing girls
    • ptrcd003, on 01/10/2008, -14/+77wow, assholes
    • Ataxia87, on 01/10/2008, -3/+9Similar video here, but to people more deserving:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4d6ZwfRfBE
    • fkr3, on 01/10/2008, -5/+47I think this comment from the post sums it up. And I think digg users should not be so keen to support blogs like Gizmodo, who generally offer nothing but a re-wording of another blog's post surrounded by their own ads anyway.
      ---------------------------
      BY DAVID SCHLOSS AT 01:52 PM

      This, ladies and gentlemen, is the difference between "journalist" and "gizmodo" in a nutshell.

      A journalist spends a lot of time making sure their actions don't interfere with what they're coving.

      Gizmodo just walks around and screws up other people's work.

      It's not like people's job depend on the outcome of their trade show presentations. Oh wait, it does.
  • drysz, on 01/10/2008, -39/+183How Juvenile... hehehehehehehehehehe
    • Snowspot, on 01/10/2008, -54/+3I actually don't think so, think of gizmodo as hackers exploiting a weakness. If you can buy a cheap remote and be able to bring down an entire presentation or an entire wall of televisions... something about the televisions needs to be changed.

      I think they proved it pretty well...
      • jeo77, on 01/10/2008, -0/+26Although I did find this funny, considering this a weakness is ridiculous. These companies aren't here to defend themselves from things like this, they're here to make a presentation and show off new ideas / products.
        • Snowspot, on 01/10/2008, -24/+0It's funny I got voted down so much... but it is a weakness and I bet next year it will be solved... so this won't happen again. So then you won't have to feel so bad because of some badly edited footage of about 5 minutes out of the entire CES show o_o

          If anything gizmodo brought a huge security flaw out into the open.
          • JCSaint, on 01/10/2008, -0/+13So you're saying that there should be no such thing as a universal remote control either?
          • kinseyincanada, on 01/10/2008, -2/+9oh yes please wont someone please stop the horror that is turning off a damn tv, too many children have suffered.
          • luigi1015, on 01/10/2008, -0/+19Yeah Gizmodo brought the huge security flaw called "remote controls" to the light!!! Guys get ready to cover those IR ports next year!!!
            I mean seriously the prank was just juvenile and inappropriate.
          • actorboy, on 01/11/2008, -1/+8"So you're saying that there should be no such thing as a universal remote control either?"

            No, he's making the case that we can't handle the truth. That we live in a technological world that has screens and displays. And those screens and displays have to be guarded by dweebs with clickers. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. JCSaint? He has a greater responsibility than we can possibly fathom. We weep for CES and we curse the dweebs. We have that luxury. We have the luxury of not knowing what he knows: that CES' big shutdown, while tragic, probably saved technology. And his existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to us, saves technology. We don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places we don't talk about at parties, we want him on that clicker. We need him on that clicker. He uses words like honor, code, thermal paste -- he uses these words as the backbone to a life spent hacking something. We use them as a punchline. He has neither the time nor the inclination to explain himself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very technology he provides, then questions the manner in which he provides it! He'd rather you just said thank you and went on our way. Otherwise, he suggests we pick up a clicker and hide behind the Panasonic booth. Either way, he doesn't give a damn what we think we're entitled to!
          • andycr512, on 01/11/2008, -0/+3Yeah, you know, we should have cryptography in our TV's so that at the beginning the remote control generates a random key which is sent to the TV via IR, and from then on the command is encrypted using the pre-negotiated key, which is decrypted by the TV so if the wrong key is used the command doesn't work, preventing this kind of thing...

            You know what? On second thought, who cares for a darned -TELEVISION-.
      • Rikm, on 01/11/2008, -1/+8So what was this flaw that Giz uncovered? That some with line of sight of your TV and a specially designed IR transmitter can turn it off so then you have to turn it back on again.
        Why isn't my government protecting me from this outrage?
      • oolatin79, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Hackers my ass, more like script kiddies, all they did was go around clicking a device someone else designed. These guys are just a bunch of dick wads; I'd be furious if it was my presentation they were messing with, that was just uncalled for.
    • shinythingy, on 01/11/2008, -3/+4You know you would though
      • j1ggy, on 01/11/2008, -10/+1I would for sure. Pretty pathetic how they send out these tech gurus to do their presentations for them and they can't put 1+1 together and put some duct tape or something over the IR port. These are the brightest of the bright, representing the company they work for? Haha I don't think so.
        • luet, on 01/11/2008, -0/+7Yes because the most attractive image for the consumer is duct taped televisions.
          • robocop1, on 01/11/2008, -2/+2Electrical tape.
          • oolatin79, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1oh yeah, like electrical tape is so much more attractive.
          • drakenlot, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Your damn right it is. So smooth and sticky...
    • Incidents, on 01/11/2008, -0/+9"Blog gets sued for millions due to viral video."

      I can see that headline being up on Digg in the next week. Someone save the video before Gizmodo removes it.
    • shoguner, on 01/11/2008, -1/+6Journalists my ass !
  • lickwid, on 01/10/2008, -17/+714Bye bye ad revenue...
    • wrenchone, on 01/10/2008, -8/+453Bye bye press pass as well
    • domokunt, on 01/10/2008, -7/+210Gizmondo-B-Gone is next
      • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -3/+25Thank ***** you.
      • TheVirus, on 01/10/2008, -1/+20Gizmondo is already gone. Tiger-telematics went bankrupt long ago. :)
    • michaelb1, on 01/10/2008, -18/+326seriously. Thats not cool. Those people worked pretty hard on their presentations just to have some dueshbag come along and ***** it all up.
      • KSOVII, on 01/10/2008, -8/+136Well, that's one way to spell "douchebag".
        • kidcodea, on 01/10/2008, -37/+19thanks grammar-nazi. no one could grasp what he meant before your divine intervention.
          • JCSaint, on 01/10/2008, -4/+17Thanks and "no" should be capitalized. Just saying.....
          • getrealnow, on 01/10/2008, -9/+6No, the "n" should be.
          • soulkitchen, on 01/10/2008, -14/+2thanks to kidcodea for demonstrating the concept of a douchebag.
          • Kerrigore, on 01/11/2008, -2/+12Actually, the error was with regard to spelling, not grammar.
          • bad80shair, on 01/11/2008, -1/+25Grammar nazi? That would be a Deutschbag...
          • mbthompson, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1That's Donny Deutschbag to you sir!
        • themonkmob, on 01/10/2008, -3/+10hey hey hey. there's no need to get racist.
    • Genady, on 01/10/2008, -28/+17Maybe I'm just an odd duck, maybe it's because I read schneier's blog before I saw this, but doesn't it strike anyone that people's reactions to this tend to fall into two categories that can be allegorical to our nation's reaction to perceived threats?

      Lemme break it down, we're in two modes here "OMG that's funny" and "These guys should pay for this", broad strokes I'm sure, but doesn't the knee-jerk reaction of 'they shouldn't do that' amount to a certain naive outlook that moves blame from people who have not prepared for interruptions to people that do unusual thing that are perfectly legal?

      Where should the focus be in these sorts of situations, in banning the undesirable actions, or taking time to assess probable threats? This is a problem solved by a 1/2" of electrical tape and a little forethought.
      • rootneg2, on 01/10/2008, -10/+4yup. Sure it was kind of dick (but what sort of prank isn't?), but you would think that *somebody* should have the foresight to plan for this.

        I mean, this is the one of the densest congregations of geeks, nerds, hackers, and hardware junkies in the world, who are notorious for being pranksters as well (take Woz, for example; i'm sure he'd think it was amusing...); the TV-B-gone (and regular old remotes for that matter) has been around for quite a while now, there are youtube videos of this *exact prank/exploit* happening at tech shows (although with an appleTV and poping up frontrow i think). It's not like it was entirely out of the blue.

        You can bet that if this were DefCon, peole would be prepared...
      • SniperX, on 01/10/2008, -12/+4You're right Genady, Gizmodo should be charged with threatening our nation's security!

        Oh wait.. maybe I didn't follow correctly..

        Seriously though, excellent point and a very interesting perspective to take on this.
      • michaelz92, on 01/10/2008, -13/+25They shouldn't have to put up electrical tape on the IR receivers, I'm sure companies wouldn't have thought someone would immaturely come in and turn off the tvs. I can't believe how people think they can justify these asswipes [gizmodo] by saying the companies should've put up tape. Should the twin towers have put up walls around their buildings to prevent planes from flying into them?
        • amadeusdemarzi, on 01/10/2008, -16/+7Thats a retarded arguement.

          How can you even compare deaths and security of thousands of people to a stupid/silly/fun prank? You're just as bad a Giuliani
        • GianDoe, on 01/10/2008, -7/+4it scares the ***** out of me that your brain computes these tantamount or even remotely similar mike. begin weighting your variables when thinking and sharing in the future if you wouldn't mind. those of us who cannot relate mass homicide to tv remote pranks became confused when attempting to understand what you smoke.
        • Kerrigore, on 01/11/2008, -2/+11@amadeusdemarzi and GianDoe

          He was attempting a reductio ad absurdum argument by showing that the same reasoning employed by Genaday could be used to justify his argument about walls around the twin towers (that people should be prepared for any and all things that could go wrong at all times and take unreasonable steps in the process). It wasn't "a retarded argument", but you are for thinking that he was somehow saying that this prank was the same as 9/11, instead of understanding that he was saying that you could use similar reasoning in both cases he presented.
          • GianDoe, on 01/16/2008, -0/+1can't speak for amad but - i'd like to think we all process logic on multiple levels, obviously anyone would assume on the first go that if you would prepare for anything in one situation why wouldn't you suggest preparation in all situations. but being that this is real life, and people must make - real decisions - i find it 'absurd' (i'm really sorry i can't resist) anyone would even bother to mention it. a monkey with cymbals could just look at the world in black and white and generalize on the most primitive first thought logic that comes to mind, but wouldn't that also be the point of utmost inefficiency? i understand logic and reason aren't always friends, but just a tad of reason with a lot of logic typically suits the best results. i'm just begging the man to think ~ you're way too intelligent to be explaining this nimrod's world to me.
      • jacobsor, on 01/11/2008, -2/+17I don't fall into either category. I thought it was funny at first until I realized all of the heartache it probably caused to the victims. This was their one-a-year opportunity to shine in front of major audiences, and these jerks screwed it up for a cheap laugh.

        There's a fine line between a funny prank and being an *****. This was the equivalent of heckling a speaker during a major presentation, or flashing a laser pointer during a movie. Somehow I don't see Woz doing something like this.

        This was rude and boorish behavior that went beyond a funny prank. It may have been legal, but it wasn't right.
      • Mononuclear, on 01/11/2008, -1/+4I don't think they should pay for it but I do think they were being asses. Shifting blame? Why would I blame anyone but the person doing the stupid act. Your analogy is like blaming a school for a student cheating on a test. Or blaming video games for violence. The blame goes with the person doing the act not someone else for enabling them to do it. Is it the schools faut or the student who cheats fault? I don't think they should be responsible for trying to make rules and restrict every possible scenario to stop people from being jerks. Have some common decency and just don't act like a jerk. Next thing you know these events will be invite only or look like TSA at an airport because a few people decided to be asses and ruin it for everyone else.
        • Genady, on 01/11/2008, -1/+2The point I was trying to get across (poorly) was I'd rather live in a society where most behavior, even boorish behavior is protected, rather than a society that mandates 'common decency'. You're right that what Giz did was in bad taste, but then again so is a lot of what Larry Flynt does and most people don't call for him to be censured or wait... maybe some people do.

          Is what Giz did Tacky? Yes. Should they be allowed to do it? I think so. When does someone's right to free speech end? I'll ignore for the moment that CES isn't a government function and isn't proscribed by the 1st amendment, I'm talking more broadly about the idea that societies should treasure free-expression and liberty over all other factors.

          What really bothers me about the reaction to this is the overwhelming push to condem. I THOUGHT Digg was a huge community of libertarian minded geeks and hackers, but this incident has shown me quite plainly that adherence to libertarian ideals only survive when they don't directly impact those who ascribe to be libertarian.
          • pauldy, on 01/11/2008, -0/+2I think you biggest problem is your trying to intellectualize a childish act. Bringing in political viewpoints and clouding the issues of right and wrong with subjective philosophical debates doesn't change the fact most people realize they went way overboard what they did was wrong and most would solve the issue by simply not allowing them to participate in the future. What should be bothering is the number of adults who for whatever reason are trying to justify these juvenile acts.
    • loudintl, on 01/10/2008, -1/+23This is not the first time. I hope everyone remembers the Tubgirl/Gizmodo/Kotaku incident. I never went back to Gizmodo after that.
    • asdfuku, on 01/10/2008, -7/+7But wouldn't the advertisers get _more_ recognition after Giz made a scene and the TVs turned back on with the crowd's full attention?
    • Trav3133, on 01/11/2008, -14/+4Hopefully everyone that did it dies IRL (in a very painful way) that would be the only true retribution.
    • e2superman, on 01/11/2008, -12/+6I just emailed Brian Lam (Editor at Gizmodo) (blam@gizmodo.com)... I suggest other people do as well.

      quoted:

      This stunt by your or your team was highly juvenile and I am not surprised if once the companies whom demonstrations you affected find out they will consider action against you (either in advertising loss or worse). The large companies go there and spend butt loads of cash on this and use the venue to generate a lot of their sales for the upcoming year. You may have cost them serious money if the stunt affective people's decisions to buy their products. I don't think big companies will take this lightly.
      • Mononuclear, on 01/11/2008, -1/+7Not to be a grammar nazi but you should proof read emails before you send them. Emails showing your distaste for something a company does are a little more important than comments on digg or your chat in MSN. Treat them like formal letters or papers for school.
      • OrGoN3, on 01/11/2008, -5/+1I suggest you learn how to have fun and relax. ZO NOES! OUR TV IS OFF! HOW DO WE EVER TURN IT BACK ON! If they really were well prepared they would've deactivated the IR (just like how console demo units have the physical buttons deactivated). Doesn't take a genius to think that one through.
    • kjd84, on 01/11/2008, -9/+9You know you are right I just emailed him to....
      "Saw your video and was prompted by some douche bag on digg to express my "outrage", I thought it was harmless fun and that people are way to uptight and sensitive good on you for having some fun in what would have been very long days!!!"

      Now if this is the most you have to worry about.. ya know these PR and marketing people with 6 figure income's feelings then your life must be pretty dull.
      Do you have a hole to crawl back into?



    • dominikkom, on 01/11/2008, -0/+4Just because they get payed more and work for a big company doesn't mean they shouldn't be respected, you got to realize these "PR and marketing people" spend days preparing for their presentations to assure everything goes as smoothly as possible. Then this sort of a situation happens that just wastes peoples time and causes unneeded stress.

      The other ones were funny, I just wish they kept it at that
      • yomama6969, on 01/11/2008, -0/+4im one of these "marketing people" we spend months prepping for these trade shows. I would be fired if this happened to me. Gizmodo were completely irresponsible
    • GreenAlien, on 01/11/2008, -1/+4I've seen these devices for sale in several places. If I had a demo display I'd make sure the IR is taped over.

      I doubt anyone i really surprised that Gizmodo is behind this. Probably one of the least respected blogs anyway. I stopped reading it ages ago because of how unprofessional/lame they are at times.
    • zspeed78, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1More like Hello to lawsuit.. Im sure some companies spend upwards of $100k (hell, some even more) on the entire event.. and now they know who they can sue for damages.. sure it may cost more than its worth, but it doesnt matter to them, the offender would be brought to their knees. Wouldnt be too hard when you have a confession and clear damages.
  • getliquified, on 01/10/2008, -69/+9HILARIOUS!!! BWHAHAHA
  • fueradeliga, on 01/10/2008, -15/+778That was very funny indeed; but I think Gizmodo is going to have a hard time getting into CES next year when this video reaches some high execs at the affected companies.
    • MemeWarrior, on 01/10/2008, -1/+132That and expect presenters at next years CES to remove all the IR ports from their displays.
      • SnowBladerX, on 01/10/2008, -0/+63nah just gotta throw some electrical tape over the IR sensor
    • weareglass, on 01/10/2008, -0/+30Next thing you know they'll have to start checking everyone's electronic gear.

      Well, or better yet just obscuring all their IR ports.
      • Genady, on 01/10/2008, -1/+2If it were the TSA everyone entering would have to have their bags checked and be subject to additional security to assess 'prankster proclivity'. Here's hoping the electrical tape mafia wins out.
      • Fedge, on 01/11/2008, -0/+2Obfuscation is not security.

        ...or something like that....
    • jwietelmann, on 01/10/2008, -0/+10And it wouldn't have been that hard for them to claim they received the footage from some third party or anonymous submission. Maybe this was done by the guy who wrote that "CES: Why we're all doomed" article so he won't have to go anymore.
      • nonymous666, on 01/10/2008, -0/+2Yes, they could easily claim as much. But I doubt anybody'll be convinced.
    • Buddhaismybuddy, on 01/10/2008, -2/+24They should have posted the video without admitting to it.
      • lintmonkey, on 01/10/2008, -0/+8"Our video camera must have been emitting some sort of freak IR signal that just so happened to shut off all TVs in the nearby vicinity. We don't know how it happened!"
        • ricree, on 01/10/2008, -1/+3There's nothing in the video to identify the people responsible. Like jwietelmann said, they could just claim that someone anonymously sent them the video.
    • rezonq3, on 01/10/2008, -13/+6I felt what they did was juvenile and not funny at all...however, the people (some of them techs it looked like) immediately looked at the back of the displays for a problem, while the presenters were saying the displays were going haywire all the while it was pretty obvious someone was messing around with a remote, I thought that was kind of funny.
      • rootneg2, on 01/10/2008, -2/+10"not funny at all... I thought that was kind of funny."
        *head asplode*
        • MisterNetHead, on 01/10/2008, -7/+2If you read, you realize that he's talking about two different things...
          *face alaughing*
    • Shakermaker, on 01/10/2008, -4/+40I hope Gizmodod gets banned. THAT would be funny.
    • Proctor, on 01/11/2008, -1/+9Good, gizmodo is *****.
  • uptown, on 01/10/2008, -17/+86Journalist / Anarchist ... pick one
  • kryogenix, on 01/10/2008, -30/+1446Alright, I can understand shutting off the guitar hero, Wii and display TVs, but shutting off a TV during some guy's presentation? That's a real dick move.
    • Ngai, on 01/10/2008, -17/+216i logged in to say this...

      how very immature
      • celkin, on 01/10/2008, -4/+66dugg for logging in
      • unionaire, on 01/11/2008, -1/+2yeah, how old are they?
      • kmb1794, on 01/11/2008, -2/+3I was already logged in but It is totally immature and I get really pissed when people who are supposed to be into geeking out at a great venue like CES just end up being no-sense ass clowns, that is, once they realize they can't create what they are viewing they just turn it off. Well on you idiots.
    • Stupidumb, on 01/10/2008, -20/+4So is the mushroom stamp.
      • Stupidumb, on 01/10/2008, -0/+5A MUSHROOM STAMP IS A REAL DICK MOVE.
      • Mutton, on 01/11/2008, -1/+2Dugg because I am currently imagining a US Postal stamp featuring a picture of a badger doing calisthenics, and possibly a snake in a desert.
    • michaelb1, on 01/10/2008, -3/+61Someone. somewhere. sometime is going to F with Gizmodo like this.
    • vanscott, on 01/10/2008, -9/+354Spend thousands of dollars on space at CES and perhaps hundreds of hours preparing only to have some punk with a hacked remote eff up your presentation that culminates years worth of work and product development?? How terribly disrespectful. Gizmodo, just because you can doesn't mean you should.
      • Lyph5, on 01/10/2008, -26/+17The only presentation they ***** with was a 5 minute long one that they repeated every day all day.
      • SniperX, on 01/10/2008, -3/+55thousands of dollars? Try tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands for the big guys, including set and display designs.
        • narcofiche, on 01/11/2008, -0/+12Tens of thousands of dollars? Try a gazillionbillion dollars and a quadrakazooblion for the big guys.
        • bad80shair, on 01/11/2008, -4/+3And 5 cents for some electrical tape to cover the IR?
      • widgetmaker, on 01/10/2008, -0/+2Think thousands of dollars for a small stand without much electronic gear at a small show, the stands alone will cost 100's or 1000's.
      • rootneg2, on 01/10/2008, -12/+4"hacked remote"?
      • allfatherblack, on 01/10/2008, -13/+2Just because you can doesnt mean you should, but if the benefits (funny) out weigh the determents (your whining) then go nuts!
      • nogami, on 01/11/2008, -9/+5Maybe in all that preparing and money spending, covering the IR ports should've occurred to them during the planning process?

        If it kept happening, they could just point a videocamera at the audience and see who's doing it. IR remote lights usually show up very well.
        • Scaryclouds, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Seriously? Your really being serious that a professional trade show, that only invites members of the press should prepare for contingencies like this?
    • LostRiot, on 01/10/2008, -26/+3I agree, however that motorola presentation is the worst most BS, jargon filled pile of crap I've ever seen.

      So they sort of deserve it.
      • supermansuper, on 01/10/2008, -3/+14Your comment is just BS. Your digg account must be banned. That is what you deserve.
        See what I did there?
    • MasterPlayer, on 01/10/2008, -5/+67This is part of the reason the show is not open to the general public, because they know childish people will pull off stunts like this one. For a once respected website like Gizmodo to do this is just intolerable.
      • RyeBrye, on 01/10/2008, -3/+4They don't talk about it much, but on Sunday - the last day, it is open to the public.

        Also, getting into CES is not hard. You just need to have a business card with your "company name" on it to match your registration.
        • nogami, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1Except the last day is actually Thursday, not Sunday... And I haven't seen anything about it being open to the public on Thursday, just that students can get in that day (with a $100 pass).
        • RyeBrye, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1oh... My bad. It's changed since I went there last. (I've stopped going, it's really quite boring - same old crap every year, with one or two products to look at and then a whole ton of people trying to show who has the biggest HDTV)

          The afternoon of Sunday was a day they opened it up to the public, but they never advertised it. The only reason I knew about it was because someone at the Sony booth mentioned it to me in conversation. I guess the presenters are all extra careful that day because there is a higher incidence of theft that day... So - maybe they just convinced CES to stop opening it to the public.

          But seriously - if you have to pay to get into CES - you are doing it wrong.
      • GreenAlien, on 01/11/2008, -0/+7"For a once respected website like Gizmodo to do this is just intolerable."

        Since when was Gizmodo ever respected?
    • allfatherblack, on 01/10/2008, -14/+9And yet somehow still hilarious.
      Pass.
    • NaziHatinChimp, on 01/10/2008, -2/+4Yeah cram more products down my throat.
    • davidkeithjones, on 01/10/2008, -7/+61This is why bloggers have a hard time gaining credibility as legitimate journalists.
      • Hartman27, on 01/10/2008, -4/+25Also maybe because most aren't legit journalists...hmmm....now there's a thought.
      • bad80shair, on 01/11/2008, -2/+1This and this alone?
    • tdhurst, on 01/10/2008, -4/+25If that had happened during a presentation of mine, I would have throttled them. What complete dicks.
      • Darklighter, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Well, yeah but then again, shocking the hell out of the bystanding customers and dealers might be a bad way to boost sales leads. Just a thought.
    • shinythingy, on 01/11/2008, -5/+4i agree its a dick move to do it during a presentation but any other time is fine with me mainly because i'd do it.
    • potisreallygood, on 01/11/2008, -12/+3in other news, you are all a bunch of uptight pussies with no sense of humor
    • javajunkee, on 01/11/2008, -1/+5Agree on this comment!!! I have one word Gizmodo,

      "Karma!"
      • Godlesswanderer, on 01/11/2008, -0/+2I'd be more inclined to agree if you didn't tell me to agree.
      • staffrocket, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Oh you're a fan of Carson Daly too?
    • neodorian, on 01/11/2008, -0/+11I'm gonna laugh when someone hacks Gizmodo to stop displaying the ads or just DDoS the site during MacWorld or some other big ratings period.
    • GreenAlien, on 01/11/2008, -1/+1Now THAT would be funny. Someone should ***** with them during the Macworld keynote. Would be sweet justice. Their coverage was lame last year but this might make me look at the site.
  • Sithseth, on 01/10/2008, -38/+16That's awesome, I lol'd. But, You'd think that the stage builders at CES would know stuff like this is available, and would prepare for it.
    • madk, on 01/10/2008, -2/+21I think that since they are in a professional setting they would assume that they wouldn't have to deal with this sort of immaturity.
      • PathDaemon, on 01/10/2008, -7/+2True, but many of the bigass panels have serial ports that can be used to disable IR — at least in presentations and gaming comps, this is a necessity these days.
  • suprememilo, on 01/10/2008, -11/+499Kinda screwed up that they are doing it in the middle of presentations...
    • bad80shair, on 01/11/2008, -10/+1Not doing it during presentations would just have been weak. Anyone can screw with a wall of TVs when no one's looking and no one cares, but it's an amazing prank when you can pull it off during a presentation.
      • luet, on 01/11/2008, -3/+3That's like saying it's "weak" when you rape someone in an alley, but it's "amazing" if you rape somebody in front of their family and friends. Rape is rape, regardless of when and where you do it.

        http://rapeawareness.com
        • bad80shair, on 02/04/2008, -0/+1If you're equating rape with a remote control prank, then I think you're the one who needs the awareness URL.
      • Shrubber, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1Uhhh...OK...
  • overnow, on 01/10/2008, -11/+211This screeen is going whacko macko? Must be the technical term....
  • mrroarke, on 01/10/2008, -12/+749That was about as funny as a DDoS attack on gizmodo.com.
  • Braingoo, on 01/10/2008, -48/+14You Just got Gizmodowned
    • Braingoo, on 01/10/2008, -21/+1What you guys prefer TV-B-OWND
      • Braingoo, on 01/10/2008, -5/+24hmm guess not, just not my day for comments
  • rmanla, on 01/10/2008, -41/+8THE GIZ FOR THE WIN!
  • DFENS, on 01/10/2008, -6/+189I feel so bad for the tech guys who probably got called in because 'Something is really wrong with our TV's - they keep turning off randomly'. And since nothing was ACTUALLY wrong...just seems that would be a nightmare lol.
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 01/10/2008, -2/+79Next year they'll put tape over the IR receivers.
    • Braingoo, on 01/10/2008, -21/+3Umm turn it back on. Man that was hard.
    • FoxOrian, on 01/10/2008, -20/+6I wonder why no one at CES really came up with the idea beforehand "What if some kid comes in a remote and decides to have fun?"
      • pauldy, on 01/10/2008, -2/+74Because, this is supposed to be a gathering of professionals, not children.
        • rootneg2, on 01/10/2008, -2/+9you don't have to be a child to be immature
          • Rikm, on 01/11/2008, -0/+3But you do have to at least act mature to be professional.
      • SniperX, on 01/10/2008, -0/+2They have, there is stories of this type of thing happening at every CES in the past 10 years, ever since those damned universal remote watches.
    • seeyounorth, on 01/10/2008, -0/+7Makes me glad 95% of computers don't have IR ports that can be shutdown like that.
    • joegibes, on 01/11/2008, -0/+2http://www.ninjaremote.com/
      Not the same as a TV-B-Gone, but possibly better.
  • nutzngum, on 01/10/2008, -27/+7one part of me was shocked and a little disappointed.
    the other, darker part of me fondly recalled my younger days living in England hanging out with punk rockers and denouncing everything as "bollocks"...
    • Totalchaos02, on 01/10/2008, -0/+6What a rebel you must have been...
  • IphtashuFitz, on 01/10/2008, -20/+12A very handy device, but used in a very inappropriate venue. Having said that, I admit I laughed!

    I may just get one of these so I can turn off loud tv's in bars/restaurants when I'm trying to have a conversation, but I would never (admit to) do what the Gizmodo folks did.
  • scabbers, on 01/10/2008, -13/+190I'm so incredibly conflicted.
    • Necoras, on 01/10/2008, -19/+13Don't be, just laugh with the rest of us.
      • Darklighter, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Are you *reading* the overall comments genius?
    • nutzngum, on 01/10/2008, -13/+4i said pretty much the same thing (but in more detail) and got -11 and you get +30?!
      NOW i'm conflicted :P
    • Scaryclouds, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1I'll admit I laughed, however I do strongly disagree with what they did.
  • pwnerofnoobs, on 01/10/2008, -11/+72That's about as funny as Maya Angelou doing stand up.
  • invisiblehat, on 01/10/2008, -26/+5TV is the Devil. I have a similar device (TV turn-offer) that I acquired from thinkgeek.com. Lots of fun at Sports Bars!
    • ,,|,_, on 01/10/2008, -4/+24What is the point of going to a sports bar if you're not going to watch sports... on a TV?
    • patw85, on 01/11/2008, -1/+1Good way to get your ass kicked by a random drunk.
  • iVision, on 01/10/2008, -17/+4I'm going to buy one of those. Turn off peoples tv's in their homes and appartments.
  • modeloxpto, on 01/10/2008, -8/+339Sure it was funny but they took it way too far by doing it at press events. There must be people whose work was preparing those things so that everything ran smoothly. Gizmodo just flicked them the finger and batted their mailbox for no reason at all.
    • joegibes, on 01/11/2008, -0/+6I know... If I had gone to CES, I'd totally do this -- but not during press events or people's presentations. Maybe while some kid's playin Wii or something though...
    • chacar0n, on 01/11/2008, -3/+1keyword: funny
  • superheroboy, on 01/10/2008, -23/+3why didn't they just protect against something like that. I prevent people from using SQL injection in my web sites, why not just disable the IR ports, or at least put duct tape around them!
    • weareglass, on 01/10/2008, -0/+16Because up until this year, no one was immature enough to try it perhaps?
    • Mononuclear, on 01/10/2008, -1/+10Yes but you don't expect professional journalists and other professionals in the electronics industry to try and do SQL injections just like they didn't expect Gizmodo to be immature enough to try this.
  • FoxOrian, on 01/10/2008, -7/+36Wow, I can't help but laugh at this but at the same time feel a little sorry toward the people that had to put up with it, especially that Motorola guy who probably didn't count on someone messing up the organization of the presentation. I'm not sure how to walk away from this, I'm laughing, but in a "ouch" kinda way. I know if I had one of those devices, I'd probably try it once on one of the big walls -- but Gizmodo went kinda clicker-happy with it.
    • Dax420, on 01/11/2008, -1/+3With great power....... comes great responsibility.
  • pintomp3, on 01/10/2008, -3/+258i guess there will be a lot of black tape sold before next year's CES.
    • diggrim, on 01/10/2008, -1/+5live and learn
    • anderaaron, on 01/10/2008, -8/+1IR will go thru black tape. Needs to be Aluminum foil, or something that is opaque to IR.
      • pintomp3, on 01/10/2008, -0/+16electrical tape usually works just fine. it's not like aliens are controlling the monitors.
    • Rikm, on 01/11/2008, -0/+3But electrical tape will look ugly in all the press shots. It needs to be something that is opaque to IR while also being invisible.

      (this counts as prior art, no one go patenting that ***** unless you give me a cut)
  • ivorylion, on 01/10/2008, -20/+6Best use for a product ever! This is hilarious.
  • Xanadude, on 01/10/2008, -15/+528Like myself, I suspect a lot of people on Digg have been involved in CES booths and presentations. It's fun, but it's hard work - you show up almost a week early, spend days working pretty much nonstop to get everything set up and working right. For smaller companies and startups, it can be the peak experience, the really tough struggle that brings everyone together.

    And then some douchebags show up with a toy to ***** with your show because they think it's funny.
    • lotsotech, on 01/10/2008, -3/+92What really shows their lack of professionalism is that CES and universal remotes have both been around forever and this hasn't been a problem in the past. I've had to do tech support at trade shows and there's a lot of pressure to not have things "break" in front of clients.
    • neverender, on 01/10/2008, -4/+59Thats ok, the guy at Panasonic at least has an excuse to why his presentation failed. But Gismodo on the other hand, just opened themselves up to huge potential of revenge griefing.
      • NSResponder, on 01/10/2008, -4/+40Damn right. If I caught someone doing this at a booth I'd paid for, I'd make sure that they were not only ejected forcefully from the show, but also banned from ever attending it again.

        -jcr
    • underthewether, on 01/10/2008, -33/+9waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
    • endlessoul, on 01/10/2008, -4/+18Well, I think it's funny too.

      Only because it's not me. Gizmodo, you ***** up.
    • Konrad9, on 01/10/2008, -15/+5They turned off a TV.
      Hit the ***** power button and OH MY GOD IT TURNED BACK ON!!!!!!!!!!!
      • 42Vindictive, on 01/10/2008, -1/+10Wanna continually turn on 40+ wall-mounted LCDs with hard to reach power buttons? I don't.
      • Frustian, on 01/10/2008, -2/+4I'm sure they have their own remotes to turn them on again just as easily as they were turned off.
      • Croaton, on 01/11/2008, -0/+2Great job at missing the point...

        The problem is not in turning them on again. The damage has already occured when they purposely made them behave irratically. At shows like these apperace is everything and companies prepare for weeks to have everything run smoothly.

        Having people at a "closed" proffessional revenue purposely ***** up other companies presentations and technology is way to much... it could hurt peoples carriers and make them loose their jobs...
    • Daiken, on 01/10/2008, -10/+2You actually think a lot of Digg members go to CES? You must be crazy. I'd say 98 or 99% of the people have never been to CES and even though many of us would want to, you sound kind of like a snob assuming everyone goes there.
      • Xanadude, on 01/10/2008, -1/+6Did you eat breakfast this morning? It's the most important meal of the day.
    • gawilcox, on 01/11/2008, -1/+6The part that concerns me watching this clip, is someone probably lost their job because of the havoc caused. I really hope not, but with that much money on the line, in that kind of pressure cooker b/c they wanted a cheap laugh someone could have really been professionally and personally harmed...not cool.
    • skyroket, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1You show up a week early, and put in all that work, and you STILL can't figure out how to foolproof your presentation.
      • int19h, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1The scale is logarithmic. As the time spent foolproofing the presentation increases linearly, the rate of foolproofness slows down.
  • Yellow2k7, on 01/10/2008, -9/+178Considering the importance of these events, Gizmodo are pretty idiotic for doing it in the first place and even more so for admitting to it. They would have made a lot of people very angry.
    • ArachnidDude, on 01/10/2008, -22/+0Importance?
      • widgetmaker, on 01/10/2008, -0/+12Uh the chance to show case new products gain contacts etc, these things happen for a reason other than to make nerds on the net get excited about stuff they can't afford.
    • Thing2, on 01/11/2008, -0/+3Yup - if this keeps getting around they can bet motorola wont ever be a sponsor or give them preview merch.
  • manergy, on 01/10/2008, -13/+3That was almost funny.
    • mercury187, on 01/10/2008, -1/+1yeah that was the least funny thing ive seen in so many years. what a bunch of tards
  • Stupidumb, on 01/10/2008, -23/+5MY NAME IS STUPIDUMB
  • djdigital, on 01/10/2008, -25/+2http://snipurl.com/1x3id

    Mirror in case it goes down.
    • blakeshannon, on 01/11/2008, -0/+6In case Gizmodo Goes down? Are you kidding me?
      • drakenlot, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Yeah, they just don't get enough views.
        Although he might've figured a DDoS attack on them was coming.
  • morphie, on 01/10/2008, -16/+4That was funny. All those technicians start to look behind the screens as if the power shut down...
  • Mejari, on 01/10/2008, -8/+121Wow, that's the kind of tech-dickery that launches you up to Jack Thompson-levels.
  • halfgook, on 01/10/2008, -19/+157not funny. ***** move.
    • Rekzai, on 01/10/2008, -9/+4Seriously.
    • shakbhaji, on 01/11/2008, -2/+1lighten up. did you hear the music? how can you not just say "aww, those mischievous little monkeys" with that music in the background?
  • EllisAshbrook, on 01/10/2008, -13/+8That was fun!
  • Lou3000, on 01/10/2008, -14/+234Yeah it was really hilarious, especially when they turned off a wall of TVs.

    But seriously, I would love to see these guys get banned next year. How incredibly childish.

    • madk, on 01/10/2008, -6/+5agreed.
    • hugeposuer, on 01/11/2008, -3/+2I'm sure they've learned their lesson. They did apologize below the video. I think Gizmodo is a very important part of technology in that they report on anything and anyone who's made something new, innovative and interesting.
      • bitbytebit, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1fsck them - other people report too, gizmodo can just die and no one would care
        • hugeposuer, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1I guess that's why there's a new article from them on digg every day.
      • Scaryclouds, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1No, they haven't, not even close.
  • adambadam, on 01/10/2008, -4/+168Its pretty funny until next year when Giz doesn't get invited back and gets no coverage.
    • Mejogid, on 01/10/2008, -6/+14I'd say the second bit's pretty hilarious too - they deserve it.
    • Genady, on 01/10/2008, -2/+8There's always Engadget. SSDB.
    • nogami, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1It's not like it's especially difficult to get in. They'd just register under a different company name, get some business cards printed, and they're in.
    • Rikm, on 01/11/2008, -2/+3Get no coverage? Giz is a blog. All they'll do is wait for the other sites who are allowed to attend to post their articles, and then re-post them.
  • dansmeek, on 01/10/2008, -8/+239shutting off guys video during presentation is not cool.
    • MAGZine, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1Althought it isn't cool, I do still think its funny. (Although no matter how childish, I couldn't help by crack a smile watching the guy's last TV shut off.)
  • nadialei, on 01/10/2008, -15/+2geeks hearts exploding -- i can hear them blipping out now.
  • nateGOES, on 01/10/2008, -12/+3Hilarious!! If I were giz though I wouldn't have claimed it.
  • cusoman, on 01/10/2008, -11/+132Dugg for messing with that egomaniac John "Fatal1ty" Wendel.
    • alkajazz, on 01/10/2008, -6/+14I second that
    • Fragalishus, on 01/10/2008, -2/+19Roger that. Would have been even funnier if they'd shut off the monitor he was actually playing on.
    • pelayostyle, on 01/10/2008, -2/+4word
    • 42Vindictive, on 01/10/2008, -1/+9Yeah, I can't stand that guy. Total sell-out.
    • MixMastaKooz, on 01/10/2008, -4/+17I know I'm going to be dugg down, but I've met him at a LAN Party Warfactory and the STL Science Center organized about 2 years ago: he was a real gentleman and really nice to everyone. (disclosure: I was the organizer on the SLSC's part).
      • cusoman, on 01/11/2008, -0/+10I've actually met him too, at E3 2005 when I used to do a bit of beat writing on the side for a gaming website, I did an interview with him for his ABIT hardware line that was coming out. I can actually vouch for what you just said except for one thing: when it comes to his endorsements and his name on things, he's the opposite of humble, pimping stuff whenever he possibly can.

        I don't know if he has some sort of agent that coaches him on this stuff, because you're right, under it all he seems to be a pretty nice guy, but that sort of rubbed me the wrong way. Since then I've seen his name on even more stuff and it just irks me. It's really no different than sports advertisements and the player endorsements, it inflates heads to immense proportions.
    • babybitch78, on 01/11/2008, -0/+8I watched that whole situation happen from the right side of the demonstration and you could see people confused and frustrated as hell. I heard a few "WTF's" being thrown around and a few snickers. I felt bad for the people who are putting on those demonstrations, I'm someone who does production for shows and I know someone was worrying about whether or not they still had a job the next day...so yeah not cool regardless of who it was done to. A lot of work, money, and time going into an already stressful environment. Calling them a douche bag is being really nice.
    • TremorX, on 01/11/2008, -0/+2For that, I give them a FATAL-1-THANK-YOU! But the rest of it was pretty lame.
  • david76, on 01/10/2008, -7/+96Pretty lame. Companies spend thousands to present and Gizmodo comes by and f*cks it up.
    • cawpin, on 01/10/2008, -21/+5They should have spent $1.50 on a roll of electrical tape.
    • davidhildreth, on 01/10/2008, -4/+5then they should teach their presenters how to use the ON button on their displays
    • fixedcoma, on 01/11/2008, -0/+1it b ok
  • diggdat, on 01/10/2008, -4/+26I may not have been able to resist, clicking it once...dunno if I would have blogged about it though.
    • hANDoFdEVIL, on 01/10/2008, -3/+3Agreed. Wonder if this is not a prosecutable offense.
    • undersky, on 01/11/2008, -1/+7legal expert comes to rescue:
      this is not a prosecutable offense, because a prosecutable offense has to be criminal with the plaintiff being the people (government). a criminal offense is based on statues, and unless a person breaks a statue, no law could be applied.
      a civil suit on the other hand is completely different as anyone could file a complaint against anyone and the plaintiff's case is valid as long as it satisfies all five requirements of tort negligence:
      1. duty 2. breach of duty 3. cause in fact 4. proximate causation and 5. damage.
      since giz. et al has a duty under the reasonable man test to act professionally with integrity, req. 1 is valid. giz et al also breached the duty by maliciously interfering with the plaintiff's business operation. 3 and 4 are both valid since the video has proved giz action is directly responsible and also foreseeable by giz. lastly, plaintiff could easily claim damage as a result of failed presentation in front of client and loss profit. giz will be responsible for restitutionary, compensatory and incidental fee, as well as punitive damage.
      i strongly recommend all victims unite and file a class action suit against giz. with such a damning evidence and admission of fault, the suit will be quickly settled with a nice payout.
  • soil, on 01/10/2008, -8/+20hope no one sues them for loss of revenue....that could sure make it look like the product was defective!
    • aussieNickuss, on 01/10/2008, -3/+10I actually hope they do.....maybe it would make Gizmodo realize they need to grow up.
      • itsthebrod, on 01/11/2008, -5/+1Yes that's what the US legal system needs: more idiotic lawsuits clogging the courts up.
        • fkr3, on 01/11/2008, -0/+6An idiotic lawsuit is when I sue you because I take a shower at your place and slip over in the bathtub because your mum dropped the soap.

          A valid lawsuit is when I ***** with your business and cost you money, and you sue me.

          See the difference?
          • itsthebrod, on 01/11/2008, -3/+1You couldn't prove that them "***** with your business" cost them a dime. No I don't see the difference because that logic is terrible and no damage was done. Period.
          • soil, on 01/11/2008, -1/+4@itsthebrod (b/c of the fun "session has expired" tag...

            Have you ever been to a trade show? or tried to sell anything?
            In general marketers say you have seconds to convince people that you're worth their attention. We ignore subpar performance almost as a matter of course! If you represent a buyer and stroll by my booth, see me demonstrating my cool new gadget, then you see my TV shut off without me intending to do it you might think I don't have my act together and move on.

            You're right that it's hard to prove a loss, but business is tough stuff and new products are a dime-a-dozen. Showing how cool you are and how much your company has their act together is the name of the game at tradeshows.

            Maybe it was different in real life, but I don't remember the videos giving any indication that it was obviously a hack or a joke. That makes a difference too.

  • hiimcliff, on 01/10/2008, -31/+6between this post and the rant about CES 08 sucking so bad i think i made the switch from Engadget to Gizmodo. These guys rock!
  • footfwd, on 01/10/2008, -15/+4

    So where do i get one? I know a few TVs that could use some downtime.

  • adamchristopher, on 01/10/2008, -10/+3wacko macko?
  • micro23, on 01/10/2008, -18/+4The thing is they will never really get any actual "heat" for this. They will say someone did it on their own and Gizmondo did not know themselves until after the incident had occurred. One person will loose their job thats all. First comment I have made in a long time. Great freaking job guys, I applaud you.
    • LostRiot, on 01/10/2008, -1/+2umm, turning off tv's isn't illegal.
      • undersky, on 01/11/2008, -1/+2you don't need to violate a law to be sued. as long as you cause damage to another person, then that person has the right to seek reimbursement from you. (this is the fundamental principal of civil tort law)
        • itsthebrod, on 01/11/2008, -4/+1And yet no damage whatsoever was caused by turning a few TV's off. Please, get a life.
  • N3tw0rk, on 01/10/2008, -12/+6That was rather entertaining with Tchaikovsky's music as the background.
  • doogly, on 01/10/2008, -16/+3Well, I personally found it very amusing. However, I think that with great power comes great responsibility and I don't think that they used their TV-B-Gone clickers in a very wise manner. But sometimes it's ok.
  • peersu, on 01/10/2008, -7/+72meh, next year they will probably put some black tape over the IR receivers... most companies don't get revenge, they get smarter
    • TheNik, on 01/10/2008, -3/+5Yeah, really. Who hasn't heard of these TV-B-Gones? They've been around forever and if a sweet-ass magazine like Make is handing them out, it would be wise if the TV manufacturers bought a roll of electrical tape and covered the IR receivers.

      While I'm not condoning what Gizmodo did (although it was hilarious), someone forgot to cover all of the bases in terms of making the booth go without a hitch.
    • MasterPlayer, on 01/10/2008, -3/+6I can imagine a Gizmodo Rep saying, "uh..yeah, that's why we did it...to show how easily the TVs can be shut down so companies can protect against this next time..."
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 232 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.