or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters - Page 4

post #121 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by coollector View Post


I've been super excited when I've heard that Google launched the project Glass. But now that I've seen the product, I know that I won't buy it, and even worse, I know that I will be annoyed by the persons who'll buy it 1frown.gif

Yea, I wouldn't buy one either but I'm definitely excited that this technology is being pursued. I'll wait until the device is built into a normal pair of glasses, impossible to tell the difference between a normal pair or Google Glasses.

I'd want to see legislation that would exactly prevent that sort of thing. The issue with GG is not that it looks geeky, that's just a matter of morphing fashion ideals, but what it means. GG that's even more stealth would be worse than what GG already is. So any sort of "integrated into regular glasses" technology should be mandated to have neon-green frames or something like that, which warns people from half a mile away that some wanna-be-spook with his "I record my life stream video because I can't handle the fact that I'm mortal" device is approaching.

Everyone seems to be brainwashed into this idea that the loss of privacy is "inevitable". That's like brainwashing serfs into the idea that slavery is "inevitable". Everything is inevitable until people decide that it's undesirable enough to make a ruckus about it. It's high time that people start making a ruckus.
post #122 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post


I'd want to see legislation that would exactly prevent that sort of thing.

Agreed. I feel exactly the same as you.

 

I was pleasantly surprised by reading this forum to discover that most of us are not ready to give up their right to privacy.

post #123 of 231

For the moment, people are surprised and don't know how to react, but it'll soon be a know fact that it's ok to break the toy of the GG owners who ask for it. I'll be happy to shatter one or two myself.

post #124 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by coollector View Post

Agreed. I feel exactly the same as you.

I was pleasantly surprised by reading this forum to discover that most of us are not ready to give up their right to privacy.

I'm afraid that it's too late in places like the US or UK, legislation in these countries have already authorized the use of digital surveillance without the need of a warrant. You guys can all come and live here if gets to be too much. I have a spare bedroom, I can install bunk beds if the numbers start to grow.1biggrin.gif Our property is right up against the lake of Zug, very beautiful and majestic. I do have to warn you though, my kids have a problem with clothes, don't worry though we've implemented naked time.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #125 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post


I'm afraid that it's too late in places like the US or UK, legislation in these countries have already authorized the use of digital surveillance without the need of a warrant.

I'm from France, and we also have a lot of security CC cameras. CC cameras are not a problem. The images are only seen by a bored security agent, or not seen at all, and in the future the images will be processed by Artificial Intelligence Programs only. Also, CC means "closed circuit", which is the opposite of "broadcasting to the web".

 

In France, unless you're a public person, you must be asked permission to be filmed. Whether it's a news report or candid camera, the persons must sign an autorisation to allow the images to be broadcasted on TV. We have a french documentary maker who travels around the word with 3 cameras on his body, it's called "j'irai dormir chez vous", and he has to ask permission to broadcast what he has filmed. If a person just appears in the background, of course that doesn't count, because who cares (I'm probably in the background of several pictures without knowing it).

post #126 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by coollector View Post

j'irai dormir chez vous

Bien sûr, quand et où! 1tongue.gif
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #127 of 231

Outside of military applications, I don't see a big need for this product. 

post #128 of 231

They are just plain crap.

post #129 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordy View Post

Outside of military applications, I don't see a big need for this product. 

First person porn?
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #130 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post


Bien sûr, quand et où! 1tongue.gif

1biggrin.gif

post #131 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post


I'd want to see legislation that would exactly prevent that sort of thing. The issue with GG is not that it looks geeky, that's just a matter of morphing fashion ideals, but what it means. GG that's even more stealth would be worse than what GG already is. So any sort of "integrated into regular glasses" technology should be mandated to have neon-green frames or something like that, which warns people from half a mile away that some wanna-be-spook with his "I record my life stream video because I can't handle the fact that I'm mortal" device is approaching.

Everyone seems to be brainwashed into this idea that the loss of privacy is "inevitable". That's like brainwashing serfs into the idea that slavery is "inevitable". Everything is inevitable until people decide that it's undesirable enough to make a ruckus about it. It's high time that people start making a ruckus.

 

Better off getting used to the idea of having them around whether you like it or not.  Unless you want to pass a law that all cell phones, cameras, and video recorders need to be outlawed or neon green too.  These are going to have a big impact on the world, just like twitter had on news.  Whether it is for better or worse is the question.

post #132 of 231
It may very well fail as a consumer product, but I can imagine it working very well for people on certain jobs outdoor.
post #133 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

 

These are going to have a big impact on the world

It's certainly a device that will hit barriers, but I doubt it's a device that will break barriers. We have more to lose than to gain.


Edited by coollector - 7/8/13 at 7:17am
post #134 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by eat@me View Post

one woman who was wearing google glasses said she often got comments from people on street as a 'f**king cyborg'

That might be because of the online campaign:

http://stopthecyborgs.org

I find it to be a bit rude when people at parties hold up phone cameras and pan them around the room - people should be allowed to freely reach a state of indecency without the fear of it going on the public record. For people to be wearing these casually without it being clear if they are recording is quite obnoxious. What everyone should start doing is holding up their phone cameras at every Google Glasses wearer and see if they like the idea of potentially being filmed without their consent.

I like the idea of Google Glasses from the point of view of wearable head-mounted computing but some people will just use it as a glorified head-mounted webcam and it can get people into a lot of trouble for illegally recording video/audio. It should have an easily identifiable light that shows when video or audio is being recorded or uploaded to the web rather than just passed-through to the user.
post #135 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post

I never saw the appeal of Google Glass, and if someone were wearing it on their face while interacting with me, I would be concerned about not having their full attention, or getting recorded without permission. 

 

Mind you, Google Glass is just the beginning and it's only a matter of time before we get a HUD with all types of information integrated into sunglasses, windshields, goggles, binoculars, etc etc.

 

With Google Glass, it's just not seamless or naturally integrated, so it not only makes you look stupid, but it makes others uneasy.

 

And given that Google is a personal information peddler, it's easy to see why people would not want what and who they see stored in some Google server for advertisers or the NSA.

There is a big different, having cameras in/on your home/property or business recording what others who visit your home and business are doing is one thing. However, walking into a someone home or business and recording them and than posting it for all to see is a complete violation of people's personal right to privacy. 

 

Put another way, when you are in someone else's home or business you have no right to have expectation of privacy, it is there home, however, owner of the home or business has a complete expectation of privacy. I know a business is a public place, but even law enforcement can not search it without a warrant.

post #136 of 231
I'm surprised there's talk of using these while driving. Wouldn't it essentially be the same as "texting while driving"?

Without using it, I'd assume it would be similarly dangerous, as it's in your field of view and dividing your attention.
post #137 of 231

This product is DOA.

 

Besides the obvious problems that people think you are either filming them or watching something else, the glasses bear an unfortunate resemblance to those worn by Edward Snowden in his iconic photo.  His leaking has hit a nerve with Americans concerning with the government watching and listening to them, and the coincidence that Google Glass may be a tool for just that makes it very unappealing.

 

There once was a diet candy called Ayds, but then there was a similar-sounding disease (that was actually much more effective weight-loss method, except at the end) that pretty much ended that product's existence.  Google Glass looks like spywear, just when that concept has become repellent.

post #138 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post


People may get upset but they dont care about their privacy. Look at the NSA stuff. Google spyware is selling by the millions everyday.

 

People are in denial about the NSA and they don't think it really applies to them.    They think, "why would the Government care about my emails or phone conversations?"   Plus they don't think there's anything they can do about it.     And even though people put all kinds of personal stuff on Facebook and other sites, they're making the decision to do so.    But when someone is in your face with Google Glass, it's quite another situation and I think people will exhibit the kind of paranoia exhibited in this article.   And the first moron who walks into a public restroom with Google Glass is going to get punched out by somebody.  In fact, just as some retail establishments have signs that say, "no cell phones", if GG succeeds, I think we'll see signs saying something like, "To protect the privacy of our customers, Google Glass is not permitted in this establishment."   

 

And while we have gotten used to people talking on their cellphones and we've gotten used to people talking on tiny bluetooth headsets and we've gotten used to all the idiots who cross streets with their heads down looking at a Facebook page or whatever, I'm not sure we're going to get used to someone staring at us from Google Glass, although I suppose some years in the future, this will be an almost invisible accessory to regular eyeglasses and we won't even know.

 

Personally, I'm hoping for a social backlash to all this stuff or that it's really bad for your eyesight and it will be rejected.    Do we really all have to look like the Borg?  

 

The issue isn't just privacy.   It's the feeling that, "why does this asshole feel like he has to be connected to the web ALL the time."     

post #139 of 231
Why
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I disagree with this.  As much as I don't want to be filmed secretly myself, I think it's an invasion of privacy and personal freedoms to do this.  I particularly don't like the way in which cellphone and smartphone manufacturers were forced (yes forced) to make the camera make a shutter sound because of these same over the top concerns.  I think it's inherently wrong whenever you are forcing things like that.  No one should have the right to tell me what equipment I can use or buy or what I can do with it unless they can prove that I'm some kind of problem or causing some kind of problem.  

"Perverted" uses aside … there are lots of times when you want to take a picture and you don't necessarily want to alert the other person to that fact.  

Just the other day there were a bunch of thugs on my train harassing an older woman and I knew that taking a picture of them would just make them turn to me, possibly for a beating, or even worse.  It would exacerbate an already tense situation.  So I had to switch to doing that thing where you take a movie (silent if you turn the sound down), while holding the phone in such a way that it looked like I wasn't taking a movie.  So what results is unusable "jelly" video with a thumb in the way half the time.  

A clear picture of the thugs would have been very helpful in getting them caught.  I want to always be able to turn off the shutter sound if I want or need to and rely on myself to protect myself from any surreptitious filming.  If I can't, I'm basically living in a Fascist society IMO.   Besides which, it's always been okay to film in public up until the big government crackdown after 911.  Public space is public space.  If we start saying that no one can film anyone else without their consent then … well we're fucked basically.  Seig Heil.  

Why wouldnt you have just put ur phone on silent? No shutter sound.
post #140 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

There are going to be some bumpy reactions ahead for Glass. It is going to be tough to ban them though. If they try to pass laws against glass they are going to apply to cameras and cell phones with video recorders as well. Try and tell people those are banned >1smile.gif

 

No such thing. It's perfectly legal to discriminate against devices. You can ban Glass and still accept cell phones. Devices are not people. And a private business can ban anything it wants to, even people, if they are disruptive to the business. So no, it won't be tough at all to ban Glass. Of course some industrious individuals might try to claim some ADA dependence on Glass. We'll see how that pans out in the courts.

 

Bottom line, though, is the creep factor. We all should know that a certain segment of the techie crowd will flock to this thing, but they are used to being thought of as creepy. Did anyone see the SNL skit about Glass? Imagine if everyone had a Glass (or equivalent) instead of a smartphone. It would look like something right out of the Matrix. Even if this were an Apple device I would be thinking the same things.

 

This is the money quote from the article...

 

"I arrived at the paintball shop to fill CO2 canisters for use with my modified SodaStream carbonator. The owner behind the counter viewed me with suspicion, and asked exactly what I was wearing on my head. He had never heard of Google Glass.


"Basically a cell-phone for the head," I explained. "I get driving directions, e-mails and phone calls to it."

Unfortunately, the owner then became concerned that I might be filming him, without even knowing it included a camera. I explained to him that the batteries had died, so I couldn't film anything. But he wasn't buying it, and he became angry."

 

 

 

It will all boil down to public acceptance and THAT is the problem. I think the public will balk at this as too creepy. Smartphones are one thing. Having someone stare at you while wearing this device and you have no idea what they are doing with it is another thing all together. Wearable tech will have to be very careful about crossing social boundaries and red lines.

post #141 of 231

All I know is the first person that walks into a public bathroom (or one at a sporting event for example) wearing one of these Google Glasses is going to get punched. 

Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad (2nd gen), 14G Ram, Two DVD-RW Drives, OS X 10.9
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.7
1TB Time Capsule

Reply

Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad (2nd gen), 14G Ram, Two DVD-RW Drives, OS X 10.9
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.7
1TB Time Capsule

Reply
post #142 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

The product is already dead. Any business owner who doesn't ban Glass is asking for trouble. If I were a bar owner, I'd ban them and have the bouncers toss anyone wearing them, and if they "accidentally" get broken in the process, oops!

 

If I am ever approached by someone wearing a device like this, even if I know them, my first words to them will be, "take it off and put it in your pocket or this conversation is ended."

 

I think we can already gauge the public response to this technology by the comments in this thread.

post #143 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Imagine when hiking and you get directions from GG.
Or better, where flora and fauna are recognized and GG explains you everything about it.

Going around in musea can be much more fun and instructive

WOW! It's JUST like what I can do with my iPhone or iPad that I already HAVE!
Quote:
The thing is, the possibilities with a device like GG are just limitless

WOW! It's JU–I think you get it.
Quote:
...therés just too much value in the proposition that it'll be DOA.

Google's business will be propped up solely by FBI, CIA, NSA, and TSA officials buying Google Glass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

you're using the exact same arguments as those used 40 years ago against calculators

Not a single person on the planet has ever or will ever claim that a calculator invades their privacy. Come off it.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #144 of 231

In typical Samsung fashion they just one ups Google and beat Apple to the real next great invention. NSFW

 

post #145 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

 

Better off getting used to the idea of having them around whether you like it or not.  Unless you want to pass a law that all cell phones, cameras, and video recorders need to be outlawed or neon green too.  These are going to have a big impact on the world, just like twitter had on news.  Whether it is for better or worse is the question.

Vegas has already passed laws against the use of GG, you are not allow to have them in Casinos, but you can have a phone, but do not pull it out will playing and begin using it, they will tell you to turn it off. Also most gym now ban use of cell phone in locker rooms and such even if it does not have camera. So Laws are already on the book and are being up held in courts.

 

I actually went to one Casino out side the US and they would put tape over the camera and this was prior to smart phones, not sure how they deal with that these days.

post #146 of 231
Some men don't use an umbrella for fear of looking unmanly. Value judgments are often illogical but perhaps part of the geek ethos is to place value on usefulness ahead of social convention. Glass is an opportunity to underscore the point.
post #147 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

WOW! It's JUST like what I can do with my iPhone or iPad that I already HAVE!
WOW! It's JU–I think you get it.
Google's business will be propped up solely by FBI, CIA, NSA, and TSA officials buying Google Glass.
Not a single person on the planet has ever or will ever claim that a calculator invades their privacy. Come off it.

Talkedt Skill doesn't understand, again.
post #148 of 231
You know the one thing that everyone has missed.......? He's wearing while he's driving! WTF we have enough problems with morons checking out whats going on between their legs whiteout having to worry about dweebs reading their emails and surfing porn while behind the wheel of a 3500 Lbs ball of death.
I say no.

OUT!
post #149 of 231

This guy is the perfect candidate for GG

 

post #150 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1 View Post

Talkedt Skill doesn't understand, again.

I understand that you're pathetic for resorting to username editing. I understand that I already own devices that can do everything in which you have claimed Glass is innovative. I understand that you don't seem to understand what a calculator is and how it relates to Glass.

Now, if you'd like to rewrite your argument such that someone could "understand" what you're trying–but apparently not succeeding–to put across, that'd be super.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #151 of 231
I think all the reviewers misunderstand what kind device Google Glass really is. Google Glass is not a cell phone. It is simply a bluetooth accessory. It won't function without connecting to a real smartphone. When the reviewers have this true understanding then they may actually write a review without all these negative observations.
post #152 of 231
Bluetooth or not, paired with a cell phone or not, it still won't stop goofs from using them while driving.
post #153 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

I think all the reviewers misunderstand what kind device Google Glass really is. Google Glass is not a cell phone. It is simply a bluetooth accessory. It won't function without connecting to a real smartphone. When the reviewers have this true understanding then they may actually write a review without all these negative observations.


Bluetooth or not, paired with a cell phone or not, it still won't stop goofs from using them while driving.

(Sorry about the double post thang, getting used to iPad and forum thang)
post #154 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeybutt View Post


Bluetooth or not, paired with a cell phone or not, it still won't stop goofs from using them while driving.

(Sorry about the double post thang, getting used to iPad and forum thang)

Of course, we still see many people using bluetooth headphones.  The reality is a bluetooth accessory is not a  must have gadget for every people.  You use it only if you have particular needs.  

post #155 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMacMan View Post

I think cameras, cell phones are a little different from a privacy standpoint. When using a phone or a camera, it's a little obvious your filming or taking a shot. With Glasses, you're just wearing it and people don't know if you actuly recording or not. So privacy concern is real. Besides, I wear eye glasses and I really don't like to, if I could I'd wear contacts but I can't. It will get tiresome quick and will be useless as a paper weight.

The thing is, you can very discretely photograph or record someone with a phone. As I attempted to point out in the other Glass thread, you can point a phone in a direction totally separate to where you're looking and get a shot. I think the difference is how the technology was introduced. Cell phones got introduced without cameras and then had crappy cameras until having decent cameras. The addition of the invasive technology of a camera got lost in the rapid ubiquity that cell phones acquired.

Meanwhile Glass was introduced with the camera being a major feature and thus impossible to ignore. The demo videos show a red LED being active while recording, but I'm sure it could easily be hacked or just broken to not turn on.

As for the issue with Glass and regular glasses, I think the obvious thing is for Glass to allow for having the lenses swapped out for proper prescription lenses.

To steal a line that gets used all the time with non-Apple products, Glass is ugly. They should have done something stylistically to balance out the black housing on the right side, even if it didn't serve a purpose. As it is, Glass looks lopsided.
post #156 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I understand that you're pathetic for resorting to username editing.

Maybe his finger hit the "k" and "d" instead of the "l" and "s" since both pairs of letters are right next to each other. And maybe he typed his response on a device that automatically corrected Skil to Skill. And maybe you could not jump to douche assumptions. It's not like he rewrote your name as Lacks Skil or Lamest Skil.
post #157 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

First person porn?

Won't work. Anyone wearing these glasses would lose any residual shred of sex appeal they might have - and never get laid.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #158 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Meanwhile Glass was introduced with the camera being a major feature and thus impossible to ignore. The demo videos show a red LED being active while recording, but I'm sure it could easily be hacked or just broken to not turn on.

I've never seen the light on it. Is there a demo video that shows it coming on? If it's very small, someone could just dab paint over it or something.

There's a perv here that's been walking into toilets with them:

http://news.yahoo.com/what-happens-when-you-take-google-glass-into-the-men-s-restroom--174639978.html

post #159 of 231

Places the glasses will be banned/scrutinized:

- restrooms

- anywhere near a women's restroom

- playgrounds

- meeting rooms

- the bedroom

- any customer service areas

- cash registers at every store or bank

- clothing stores

- school campuses

- airports

- anywhere in/around a military base

- anywhere in/around business operational areas

- beaches

- anyplace where a man with the glasses happens to glance at a women's chest or crotch

- and the list goes on...

post #160 of 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


I've never seen the light on it. Is there a demo video that shows it coming on?

I've searched too, and I've found nothing. I think the red light is only shown to the GG owner (this I have seen on a video), which is irrelevant to this conversation about privacy intrusion.

 

The red light was the bare minimum. If there's none, then Google has fucked up.


Edited by coollector - 7/8/13 at 11:46am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters