On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 06:09:24 +0200 Arne Renkema-Padmos <[email protected]> wrote:
> As an alternative to audible communication you could also try > ultrasound, but I'm not sure how well that works quality wise. > Regarding end-user agency in determining when their device broadcasts > their signal: if you don't want broadcasting to happen all the time > (very understandable), then you probably want some kind of explicit > action from the user (tap button, gesture, wiggle phone in a certain > way, etc), or some implicit action (e.g. wearables that detect the > performing of a handshake: http://zenodo.org/record/11163). > > As already noted, the "fun" factor might also play a role in going for > audible fingerprints, but how do you keep it fun the 20th time that > you're pairing devices? Ultrasound is a good idea. I imagine the audible frequencies are good for short exchanges like keys, and ultrasound for something longer like a conversation. The software to do both is essentially the same. With a good enough microphone and speakers that sample/emit at 48 kHz, the 4 kHz band above 20 kHz is inaudible, so it can be used in the background without getting annoying. Mansour _______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list [email protected] https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
