ThinkGeek Baby Cry Analyzer: Is it Bunk?

  • Thread starter Thread starter flatmaster
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the ThinkGeek Baby Cry Analyzer, a device that claims to interpret the reasons behind a baby's crying. Participants express skepticism about the device's effectiveness and accuracy, sharing personal experiences and opinions on the ability to discern a baby's needs based on crying. The conversation touches on themes of parenting, technology, and the implications of relying on such a product.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express doubt about the device's claims, suggesting it may not accurately interpret the nuances of a baby's cries.
  • One participant shares personal experience, indicating that recognizing a baby's needs is often achievable through attentive observation, questioning the device's ability to generalize across different babies.
  • Another participant highlights the potential risks of parents relying on the device, suggesting it could lead to neglect if parents misinterpret the monitor's readings.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of the technology, with one participant arguing that even advanced signal analyzers struggle to distinguish between different emotional states of babies.
  • Some participants dismiss the product as unnecessary, asserting that parents can easily assess their baby's needs without technological assistance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the effectiveness and necessity of the Baby Cry Analyzer, with some expressing skepticism about its claims and others questioning its potential impact on parenting practices. No consensus is reached regarding the device's utility.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference personal experiences and anecdotal evidence, which may not account for individual differences in babies or parenting styles. The discussion does not resolve the technical feasibility of the device's claims.

flatmaster
Messages
497
Reaction score
2
This device claims to monitor a baby's crying and interpret why he's so upset. Usually think Geek is pretty good, but this sounds like bunk to me.

http://www.thinkgeek.com/geek-kids/newborn-infant/bea5/
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
Yeah and I'm beginning to suspect that the C.H.I.M.P doesn't really have invincible monkey powers.

http://www.thinkgeek.com/computing/accessories/2940/
 
I can't speak for the product, but with babies I have spent time around it is not difficult to learn how to recognize what a given cry is about, most times. I can't imagine how such a device would determine differences in individuals. Though it might work to some degree, the difference in babies alone makes it nearly impossible without knowing the baby. I can't imagine it even coming close to the accuracy of someone actually paying attention to the baby for any length of time.
 
wasnt this an episode of the simpsons?
 
The technique is certainly possible -- I have a good deal of first-hand experience doing this. But just because it's possible doesn't mean the product actually does it.
 
Even one of the best, fastest, and most complex pre-programmed signals analyzers in the world can't accurately distinguish between "stressed, sleepy, annoyed, bored, wet, or hungry," even after years of training. They're claiming this $40 device can?

I think the claims are hyped.

As far as the babies themselves are concerned, there's only one condition: "Something's wrong." Admittedly, the tone of that "something's wrong" cry is different depending on whether the baby is tired or just ticked off, so at least a couple of the product claims are theoretically possibly.

My concern is if parents attempt to use it to justify ignoring a baby's crying if it's not "wet or hungry," figuring the baby will eventually move on from stressed to sleepy, or bored to content with being bored, if not just tired out from crying.

Regardless, what if the monitor is wrong and the parents allow their judgement to be supplanted by an only partially correct, $40 monitor, even to the point of neglect? Will the courts allow the parents' neglect to also fall on the shoulders of the company who made the monitor and sold it to be correct?

Or does it behoove parents to use their "best, fastest, and most complex pre-programmed signals analyzers in the world" to put their feet on the floor and walk into their children's bedrooms, check the diaper and hunger, and even then, if the child is still crying, to simply hold them in their arms for a while?
 
Stupid product I would say.
We can easily tell what is happening. Whether the baby is wet? It can be surely be checked. Hungry? of-course not, he has just eaten. Sleepy? Perhaps, since he is awake for hours. Annoyed/stressed? Oh! yea, please don't make noises. Bored? maybe, let's play with him.

I think every one can do those analysis. Useless and senseless machine. Perhaps they also sell a machine which will tell you its time for you to go to restroom.:-p
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
14K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
16K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K