[...] Raph’s Website » Google files patent on analyzing your gameplay [...]

When the hell did the public cry for “personalization”? They cried for the ability to personalize, and there’s a difference there. We’ll take care of ourselves, and we want the ability to do so. People who think that we want them to spoon feed us by sticking their nose in our business can jump in a lake. They can choose the lake of their choice, I’m not keeping records.

In the year 2525, if man is still alive…..it’ll be because man refuses to be pigeon holed and controlled.

[...] that virtual worlds offer tied in with lifelogging, yesterday I saw on Raph’s blog that Google has registered some patents on data mining player behavior in online games to build psychological profiles and target [...]

The thing is, Morgan, we’re not talking mere psychographics. We’re talking potentially detailed, individual-level tracking of behavior.

The public cried for personalization.

And now they’re upset that businesses want to *gasp* serve them better!?

I can’t help but laugh. There’s simply no pleasing some people.

Plenty of industries patent thier algorithims, specifically data mining techniques.

Data Mining can and does actually help make products better, refines and iterates processes and improves production. Furthermore it allows for predictive modeling not only behavioral patterns, but preferances. This informs research as well as marketing and even thoretical constructs defining what types of players play games….

If 100bn dollar industries can be improved for consumers and businesses, why should the game industry be any different?

I think the primary concern is privacy and consent not derived benifits.

Google is only maximizing its investment of thier in-game advertising aquisition doing what they do best, indexing. As to thier ability to accurately execute algorithims representative of players, there are significant issues they’ll have to get past.

[...] of himself specialized in computer game design, blogging, and offering mugs from cafepress), we see a post on Google patenting the process of, well, uh.. watching [...]

It depends on why it’s done. is it consistent with Thiroux’s practical imperative [Always act so as to treat rational nature(i.e., other human beings) as an end, never as a means only]?

“At a more general level, everyone operates this way. In business, even auto salespeople monitor and track consumer behavior… in real time.”

This may be a justification for a company to do it [I'll reserve judgement for the moment] but it seems a poor basis for saying that the watched shouldn’t be upset by being watched.

I do hope Google gets this patent – it means we won’t have to endure it in every single game we play, just those that Google deals with (which we can then studiously avoid).

Who wouldn’t avoid a Google game? Every application Google produces is permanently in the beta stage or earlier.