Some people purposely don't pull out their phone for every little thing. I personally don't do text messaging. I know some do, but I don't. If I did, it would only be with a VERY limited number of people and it would be only for serious issues.
That's how I try to use my smartphone. I limit with whom gets the number in the first place.
I also don't do Facebook and Twitter. Those are for kids with nothing better to do.
he might be onto something in relation to the idea that folks are always looking down at their phones and not at the world
but on the 'emasculating' part. has he looked in the mirror lately
Yeah, he's probably talking from first hand experience. I don't know if I would use that term. I think he shouldn't be playing down something his own company sells and supports so he can show off his Glass, which are definitely antisocial, emasculating and will most likely fail.
I can see that the phone has for many become a nervous habit akin to smoking. Checking the phone is like a nervous tick, or a distraction. Don't know what to do? Check the phone.
Not taking advice on how to look cool from a guy who looks like a douchebag wearing that thing..
The stupid thing is "emasculation" literally means "taking away one's manliness." He's not even saying that Google glasses look cooler or less dorky, he's saying that people who use smartphones are somehow gay or effeminate and implying that "real men" would use Google glasses instead.
I mean what kind of a f*cked up comment is that to make? Is it still 1950? Guys are all supposed to worry about how "manly" they look using this or that technology?
I'm surprised more women haven't jumped all over the comment and beat the sh*t out of him for saying it.
The main reason I believe that he probably just doesn't understand the meaning of the word is that it's such a colosally offensive thing to say if he actually does.
To be fair, the primary modern meaning of the verb "to emasculate" is just "to weaken". It does derive from an archaic word meaning castrate, and, specifically in relation to males, it can have the meaning that you quoted, but he may have been using it correctly in the sense of weakening interpersonal interactions. Still a dorkish comment though.
Some people purposely don't pull out their phone for every little thing. ...
I try to do the same, but the worst offender is email. If it goes off in your pocket or your bag it's hard not to check because although it's more likely to be SPAM than anything else, if it's a real email, part of the point of having the smartphone in the first place is being able to immediately answer it.
Personally, I could see a wrist notification system like Apple is purportedly working on, being very useful in that regard. If an email comes in, a discrete look at your wrist will show you whether it's spam or not.
With Google Glasses (BTW, yes I know they are called "Glass" but no one is going to call them anything but "Google Glasses"), you literally can't do much or anything without talking to the thing and tapping the side of your head.
To be fair, the primary modern meaning of the verb "to emasculate" is just "to weaken". It does derive from an archaic word meaning castrate, and, specifically in relation to males, it can have the meaning that you quoted, but he may have been using it correctly in the sense of weakening interpersonal interactions. Still a dorkish comment though.
Well, that's the "modern" meaning, but as recently as the 1970's it meant "unmanly." That's just a very recent veneer of PC language really.
The literal meaning of the word is to "remove one's masculinity."
Besides, "weak" is hardly any different. It's somehow culturally okay for women to be weak, but not men. "Weak" is a dig against "wimpy" men.
If you want to insult a woman you use macho adjectives like "pushy" and "angry," if you want to insult a man you call him "weak" or "sensitive."
Which is why it's offensive, but also just so over-the-top stupid when you consider a skinny, nerdy geeky guy is who said it.
It's just a horrible, horrible, thing to say IMO but more stupid than anything else.
It doesn't even make sense at all because how is checking your phone all the time "weak" or unmanly? Checking your phone all the time is actually a power position thing. It's purpose is to let everyone in the room know that you have a cool smartphone, that you know how to use it, and that important messages might be on it for you. It says that you are rich, important, and connected.
A bold but weird move. Surely he's not ready to trash Android phones in hopes that the world moves to google glasses. It would be fascinating to see Google go all-in on Glass.
Bluetooth headsets also looked good, before they were sold and people wearing them looked like idiots. This one is even worse than those. You must be getting a VERY important phone call to walk around not only with a Bluetooth strapped to your heads, but also a glass next to your eye...
Closer to becoming part of the Borg collective with some internet-connected facial prosthetic, no that's not emasculating at all. We need to start making aircraft glass out of whatever bubble material this twit is using.
To be fair, the primary modern meaning of the verb "to emasculate" is just "to weaken". It does derive from an archaic word meaning castrate, and, specifically in relation to males, it can have the meaning that you quoted, but he may have been using it correctly in the sense of weakening interpersonal interactions. Still a dorkish comment though.
Well, that's the "modern" meaning, but as recently as the 1970's it meant "unmanly." That's just a very recent veneer of PC language really.
The literal meaning of the word is to "remove one's masculinity."
Besides, "weak" is hardly any different. It's somehow culturally okay for women to be weak, but not men. "Weak" is a dig against "wimpy" men.
If you want to insult a woman you use macho adjectives like "pushy" and "angry," if you want to insult a man you call him "weak" or "sensitive."
Which is why it's offensive, but also just so over-the-top stupid when you consider a skinny, nerdy geeky guy is who said it.
It's just a horrible, horrible, thing to say IMO but more stupid than anything else.
It doesn't even make sense at all because how is checking your phone all the time "weak" or unmanly? Checking your phone all the time is actually a power position thing. It's purpose is to let everyone in the room know that you have a cool smartphone, that you know how to use it, and that important messages might be on it for you. It says that you are rich, important, and connected.
It's about as manly as it gets really.
I don't disagree that his comments were very strange, with the rubbing allusion etc.. I was just trying to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one word. Maybe he is just projecting.
I wonder if they have left and right versions as some people see better with one eye or the other. Plus, as stated before, they need to explain how the focal distance and the variety of prescription vision correction lenses are going to interact with these devices.
I wonder if they have left and right versions as some people see better with one eye or the other. Plus, as stated before, they need to explain how the focal distance and the variety of prescription vision correction lenses are going to interact with these devices.
I'm sure they'll tell you lasik is required for you to see the Emperor's new $1400 clothes.
A bold but weird move. Surely he's not ready to trash Android phones in hopes that the world moves to google glasses. It would be fascinating to see Google go all-in on Glass.
Good point. And is Google planning to change its business model? It currently makes money selling desktop advertising quite successfully, and it tries to make money selling mobile advertising but not all that successfully. Does it plan to sell advertising with its glasses? Are they trying to put advertising as close to our brains as possible? Or are they abandoning their only successful business model and trying to out-innovate Apple as a device maker?
None of this is clear to me, except that Google looks incoherent and immature.
I think the Borg pic above is telling. Now look at the other items from Star Trek that did become popular like the communicator and tablet. Can this make into normal culture? I think eventually, but not as Google Glass looks today.
And a fucking thing on your face isn't emasculating at all.
Brinn's wife...
No, there's nothing rude, antisocial, or awkward at all about constantly iterrupting a conversation with "OK GLASS!!" and tapping your glasses. That video shows just show creepy and stalkerish that thing is. She pretty much recorded him and shared it without his knowledge.
The interaction seems like it won't catch on but I liked Anne. She seemed nice even though she was clearly wearing it to the party to pimp it to high-profile guests. It does mean that it's ready enough to at least do some basic tasks with enough ease. I think we can take it out of the vaporware phase after seeing that video of Anne.
Comments
Some people purposely don't pull out their phone for every little thing. I personally don't do text messaging. I know some do, but I don't. If I did, it would only be with a VERY limited number of people and it would be only for serious issues.
That's how I try to use my smartphone. I limit with whom gets the number in the first place.
I also don't do Facebook and Twitter. Those are for kids with nothing better to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
he might be onto something in relation to the idea that folks are always looking down at their phones and not at the world
but on the 'emasculating' part. has he looked in the mirror lately
Yeah, he's probably talking from first hand experience. I don't know if I would use that term. I think he shouldn't be playing down something his own company sells and supports so he can show off his Glass, which are definitely antisocial, emasculating and will most likely fail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
I can see that the phone has for many become a nervous habit akin to smoking. Checking the phone is like a nervous tick, or a distraction. Don't know what to do? Check the phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150
Not taking advice on how to look cool from a guy who looks like a douchebag wearing that thing..
The stupid thing is "emasculation" literally means "taking away one's manliness." He's not even saying that Google glasses look cooler or less dorky, he's saying that people who use smartphones are somehow gay or effeminate and implying that "real men" would use Google glasses instead.
I mean what kind of a f*cked up comment is that to make? Is it still 1950? Guys are all supposed to worry about how "manly" they look using this or that technology?
I'm surprised more women haven't jumped all over the comment and beat the sh*t out of him for saying it.
The main reason I believe that he probably just doesn't understand the meaning of the word is that it's such a colosally offensive thing to say if he actually does.
To be fair, the primary modern meaning of the verb "to emasculate" is just "to weaken". It does derive from an archaic word meaning castrate, and, specifically in relation to males, it can have the meaning that you quoted, but he may have been using it correctly in the sense of weakening interpersonal interactions. Still a dorkish comment though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Some people purposely don't pull out their phone for every little thing. ...
I try to do the same, but the worst offender is email. If it goes off in your pocket or your bag it's hard not to check because although it's more likely to be SPAM than anything else, if it's a real email, part of the point of having the smartphone in the first place is being able to immediately answer it.
Personally, I could see a wrist notification system like Apple is purportedly working on, being very useful in that regard. If an email comes in, a discrete look at your wrist will show you whether it's spam or not.
With Google Glasses (BTW, yes I know they are called "Glass" but no one is going to call them anything but "Google Glasses"), you literally can't do much or anything without talking to the thing and tapping the side of your head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
If it goes off in your pocket or your bag it's hard not to check because although it's more likely to be SPAM than anything else,
You're kidding right? You get spam? Dude, get some spam blocking or you are just going to go insane.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Google's Brin says smartphones are antisocial, 'emasculating'
Perfect text/image combo. Bravo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
To be fair, the primary modern meaning of the verb "to emasculate" is just "to weaken". It does derive from an archaic word meaning castrate, and, specifically in relation to males, it can have the meaning that you quoted, but he may have been using it correctly in the sense of weakening interpersonal interactions. Still a dorkish comment though.
Well, that's the "modern" meaning, but as recently as the 1970's it meant "unmanly." That's just a very recent veneer of PC language really.
The literal meaning of the word is to "remove one's masculinity."
Besides, "weak" is hardly any different. It's somehow culturally okay for women to be weak, but not men. "Weak" is a dig against "wimpy" men.
If you want to insult a woman you use macho adjectives like "pushy" and "angry," if you want to insult a man you call him "weak" or "sensitive."
Which is why it's offensive, but also just so over-the-top stupid when you consider a skinny, nerdy geeky guy is who said it.
It's just a horrible, horrible, thing to say IMO but more stupid than anything else.
It doesn't even make sense at all because how is checking your phone all the time "weak" or unmanly? Checking your phone all the time is actually a power position thing. It's purpose is to let everyone in the room know that you have a cool smartphone, that you know how to use it, and that important messages might be on it for you. It says that you are rich, important, and connected.
It's about as manly as it gets really.
Really.
Closer to becoming part of the Borg collective with some internet-connected facial prosthetic, no that's not emasculating at all. We need to start making aircraft glass out of whatever bubble material this twit is using.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
To be fair, the primary modern meaning of the verb "to emasculate" is just "to weaken". It does derive from an archaic word meaning castrate, and, specifically in relation to males, it can have the meaning that you quoted, but he may have been using it correctly in the sense of weakening interpersonal interactions. Still a dorkish comment though.
Well, that's the "modern" meaning, but as recently as the 1970's it meant "unmanly." That's just a very recent veneer of PC language really.
The literal meaning of the word is to "remove one's masculinity."
Besides, "weak" is hardly any different. It's somehow culturally okay for women to be weak, but not men. "Weak" is a dig against "wimpy" men.
If you want to insult a woman you use macho adjectives like "pushy" and "angry," if you want to insult a man you call him "weak" or "sensitive."
Which is why it's offensive, but also just so over-the-top stupid when you consider a skinny, nerdy geeky guy is who said it.
It's just a horrible, horrible, thing to say IMO but more stupid than anything else.
It doesn't even make sense at all because how is checking your phone all the time "weak" or unmanly? Checking your phone all the time is actually a power position thing. It's purpose is to let everyone in the room know that you have a cool smartphone, that you know how to use it, and that important messages might be on it for you. It says that you are rich, important, and connected.
It's about as manly as it gets really.
I don't disagree that his comments were very strange, with the rubbing allusion etc.. I was just trying to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one word. Maybe he is just projecting.
I wonder if they have left and right versions as some people see better with one eye or the other. Plus, as stated before, they need to explain how the focal distance and the variety of prescription vision correction lenses are going to interact with these devices.
"I'd rather look like a Borg than look like someone using a cell phone..."
Patent denied.
Previous artwork
I'm sure they'll tell you lasik is required for you to see the Emperor's new $1400 clothes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb
A bold but weird move. Surely he's not ready to trash Android phones in hopes that the world moves to google glasses. It would be fascinating to see Google go all-in on Glass.
Good point. And is Google planning to change its business model? It currently makes money selling desktop advertising quite successfully, and it tries to make money selling mobile advertising but not all that successfully. Does it plan to sell advertising with its glasses? Are they trying to put advertising as close to our brains as possible? Or are they abandoning their only successful business model and trying to out-innovate Apple as a device maker?
None of this is clear to me, except that Google looks incoherent and immature.
The interaction seems like it won't catch on but I liked Anne. She seemed nice even though she was clearly wearing it to the party to pimp it to high-profile guests. It does mean that it's ready enough to at least do some basic tasks with enough ease. I think we can take it out of the vaporware phase after seeing that video of Anne.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
Patent denied.
Previous artwork
Careful there.
Resistance can be emasculating.