IN A BREAKTHROUGH that could have far-reaching implications for fashion, healthcare, law enforcement and even espionage, scientists have developed a remarkable new fiber that can hear and transmit sound, including human speech.
In a report in the journal Nature, a group of scientists working at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and various other prestigious universities reveal that they have perfected a fabric that operates as “a sensitive audible microphone while retaining the traditional qualities of fabrics, such as machine washability and draping.”
Without going into too much detail about the “elastomeric cladding that concentrates the mechanical stress in a piezocomposite layer with a high piezoelectric charge coefficient,” let’s just say that the acoustic fabric, unobtrusively woven into a sweater or skirt or pair of socks, doubles as an ear and might conceivably be used to monitor a person’s heartbeat or aid with hearing. That would certainly be an improvement over the maladroit devices that exist today. There is more. Though the scientists do not discuss this application, it is logical to assume that acoustic fibers deftly concealed in designer label suits could be used to listen in on mobsters’ conversations and help put hit men, drug dealers and corrupt union leaders in the slammer. This would be far more effective and less expensive than using wiretaps or hiring informants. The fibers could also be used to spy on America’s most nefarious adversaries overseas, who often wear cheap T-shirts that could easily be kitted out with surveillance fabrics.
That’s the upside to the advance. But then, as civil libertarians will immediately start grumbling, there is the downside. What is to prevent parents from spying on their duplicitous teenagers by tracking their movements and conversations through the sensitive acoustic fibers planted in their hoodies? What is to prevent duplicitous teenagers from tracking their parents so that they can get all the controlled substances out of the way before Mom and Dad get home?
Parents already plant spyware in their kids’ computers. But are we ready for a world where parents spy on their kids through their Steph Curry or Ed Sheeran T-shirts? Or where parents monitor the nanny with a pair of acoustically sensitive yoga pants? It gets worse. What happens when courts have to decide whether the lyrics to a new song about growing up bored in New Jersey are the original work of a talented young songwriter or material stolen by eavesdropping on Bruce Springsteen, lounging in his bathrobe and working on “Wendy from Weehawken”?
What happens when scamsters start harvesting aging frat boys’ passwords and credit card numbers via acoustic fibers woven into their sleeveless sweaters? Or when front-running scoundrels start dumping Treasurys after monitoring Warren Buffett’s conversations through the fibers in his argyle socks?
Or consider this: Baseball is still trying to live down the scandal when the Houston Astros won the World Series thanks to an elaborate sign-stealing ploy. Once the Astros realize they can steal the Los Angeles Dodgers’ signs by using Clayton Kershaw’s uniform to listen to his conversations with his catcher, the national pastime will lose what little credibility it has left. And thanks to snooping shoulder pads, the New England Patriots can always know when the safety blitzes are coming.
Eavesdropping evening gowns and slinky surveillance sarongs may sound great the first time you hear about them, but do any of us want to live in a world where our laundry itself might be listening in on our conversations? It’s bad enough that our personal assistants and laptops and cellphones are keeping tabs on us. Do we really want to be held hostage by our pajamas?
MOVING TARGETS
JOE QUEENAN
.
.