[Michael]

This is dumb. The price tag of $120 makes it even worse.<br><br><br><br><a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=573&ncid=757&e=1&u=/nm/20030321/od_nm/bizdogs_language_dc" target="_blank">http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...gs_language_dc</a>

 

[ObsidianZebra]

How ironic, I just saw that thing on a site that sells all sorts of stuff from Japan the other day, and I was wondering when they were going to come out with an english version and release it here. I'm quite curious to see how it works myself. I dunno about that price tag though .. *ouch*

 

[soilman]

It's quite clear that dogs vocalize there feelings, even in reference to specific things, and that say yes/no to offers of things, and express their desires of (1) want or (2) want to avoid, quite clearly, and that vocalization alone is sufficient if one can't perceive the rest of their body language. While such a device would be superfluous for most people, it might help those who are in denial about dogs having feelings, to learn that they are mistaken, if they are subjected over a long period of time to the inescapable consistency between certain dog-produced sounds and the translation of them.

 

[kpickell]

Why do you think it's dumb? I thought it was neat.

 

[Michael]

Cause it's $120 for something that doesn't really do anything and probably cost 50 cents to build. I don't know, it just sounds like a waste to me. I just hope it's not uncomfortable for the dogs.

 

[spud]

I hope the dogs learn to say other things that humans ought to hear, like "your feet smell", but I expect this gadget will just have six pre recorded stock phrases like talking dolls.

 

[Michael]

That was kind of my point, it's $120 but it's pretty much like some gizmo you'd pick up at the gas station for $4.99. Seems like a waste. I mean, come on, anyone who cares about their animals has some idea of how they're feeling. You don't need a stupid gadget to give your animal a personality, and one that is probably way off at that. I wouldn't strap one on a baby, I just think it's kind of demeaning.

 

[kpickell]

I'd like to get one when the price drops to $10 and take it with me to the animal shelter.

 

[Michael]

Now what would be cool is if you could program it to say what you want.

 

[soilman]

Someone ought to invent a computer program that runs under Windows that does the same thing. all you'd need is a decent sound card and microphone -- then you can analyse the a series of frequency spectrums and decibel measurements -- taken over a period of dog-vocalization, to see if they match a list of pre-supplied phrases identified with different spectrum-sequences.

 

[kpickell]

isn't that what it is? except that it's handheld so you can take it to the dog instead of hoping your dog is near the computer when he speaks.

 

[soilman]

"isn't that what it is? except that it's handheld so you can take it to the dog instead of hoping your dog is near the computer when he speaks."<br><br><br><br>
Mus' be.<br><br><br><br>
But since the dedicated handheld unit is so expensive, and the programming may not be extrmemly huge, it seems reasonable to think that there might be a freeware version, or at least elements of a freeware version that you could string together, or that someone could come up with one -- so you could have a "dog-translator" for no additonal cost (to the cost of the computer).<br><br><br><br>

 

[soilman]

Isn't there a way to take the program that is "burned" into a comuter chip and transfer it to an exe file on a fixed disk? I know there is hardware that does the reverse -- "burns" a program into a chip that you plug into the hardware.

 

[kpickell]

It'd be difficult, and illegal (copyright laws and all), but not impossible. I sure wouldn't know how to do it.