Using Google Glass: A series of awkward encounters

16791112

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 235

    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.

  • Reply 162 of 235
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member
    frood wrote: »
    rcfa wrote: »
    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.

    As annoying as mobile phones can be, they are not stealth. If someone points their stupid phone at me, I see it.
    If someone wears something like GG integrated into normal looking eyeglasses, then it's very stealth.

    If someone points a camera at you, you can confront the person to stop doing it, delete the footage, and if things are harassing call the police.
    If someone walks around with camouflaged GG, you can do exactly nothing, because you don't even know it's happening.

    HUGE DIFFERENCE.
  • Reply 163 of 235
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member
    tzeshan wrote: »
    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.

    No. Because what matters is WHAT the device does, not HOW it does it.
    I don't care if it had a super-computer built-in, or needs to connect via a BT-interface to a phone, that connects to your home computer, which connects to a satellite uplink , which connects to supercomputer...

    All that matters is that it's a massive invasion of privacy as the device stands. How it does so is utterly irrelevant.
  • Reply 164 of 235
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    caliminius wrote: »
    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.

    There are coincidences and then there are improbabilities. :no: At any rate, proofreading should occur.
  • Reply 165 of 235
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member
    jragosta wrote: »
    relic wrote: »
    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.

    That's why porn actors get paid :P
  • Reply 166 of 235
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,036member


    okay a new term add to the US lexicon  --- Glasshole... image


     


    I just like all the videos showing the really bad part of this type of product and Google is doing nothing about it either. This is worse than the who ipad being a famine hygiene product

  • Reply 167 of 235
    sambirasambira Posts: 90member
    I think this is totally ridiculous use of technology. People have for years been trying to get rid of wearing glasses of any kind and all of the sudden this is going to be accepted? Over what? So I can do stuff "hands free" and look like a dork doing it? I just can't see this as being a big consumer winner. I can, however, see the application in a manufacturing situation or something like that, especially when coupled with safety glasses or something on that order. Maybe a consumer application would be to couple these with real glasses that people use or sunglasses but as they sit, holy crap!!!!
  • Reply 168 of 235
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member


    I think the bottom line, at least for now, is one can certainly think up specific applications for these devices where they would be very useful. However, wearing them in any kind of uncontrolled environment, social setting, or any situation where there is any kind of expectation, either of privacy or of awareness of breaches of privacy, may well be poorly tolerated. They combine the social weirdness of BT headsets with additional connotations of surveillance, voyeurism, potential YouTube humiliation etc. Not a great combination.


     


    It's not at all the same as just having a camera in ones cell phone, because it both advertises its presence as a recording device constantly targeted at ones field of view, and gives no obvious indication whether it is recording. Even if it has a little red light, that is unlikely to help much. I suspect that most people on the receiving end will find that distracting, possibly offensive, and a real invasion of personal space. It seems like it will need a significant culture change for this to become acceptable in general society.

  • Reply 169 of 235
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sambira View Post



    Maybe a consumer application would be to couple these with real glasses that people use or sunglasses but as they sit, holy crap!!!!


     


  • Reply 170 of 235
    maccherrymaccherry Posts: 924member
    The pervs are loving this crap. The only goddamn thing GG is useful for is recording people.
    Now, who out here haven't figured out that Google is working for the federal government. This is just what our crumbling society needs. Stealth surveillance under the guise of wearable tech.
  • Reply 171 of 235
    If Google had just kept the camera aspect out of the equation it would have worked better.

    A voice recorder for dictation would have been more acceptable and simply viewing emails and directions on screen without your hands would still keep it above other devices. Ever since the general public was made aware of the constant monitoring being done on our lives, any camera is now looked at as an invasion of privacy.

    This may be destined to be a product that comes and goes without the impact it could have done without the hyper-awareness present in the public today.
  • Reply 172 of 235
    blitz1blitz1 Posts: 413member
    So, tallest, your iPhone or iPad is translucent? Can you explain me how I can turn my iPhone/iPad into being translucent?

    Thanks!
  • Reply 173 of 235
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    blitz1 wrote: »
    So, tallest, your iPhone or iPad is translucent? Can you explain me how I can turn my iPhone/iPad into being translucent?

    Ugh, what are you pretending I've said now... :no:
  • Reply 174 of 235
    am8449am8449 Posts: 376member


    I don't think I'll ever have use for Glass, but I hope it succeeds.  I'm sure there are other people out there who could really use this for work or for their personal lives.  Bio-chemists or quadriplegics, for example.

  • Reply 175 of 235
    panupanu Posts: 135member
    I'm an early adopter. I bought the first Intel iMac, the first Intel MacBook Pro, the first Retina MacBoo Pro, and the first iPhone on the first day they came out. And that's just the Apple stuff.

    However, in the case of Google Glass, I'm a never adopter. They only work for people whose vision can't be corrected without glasses.
  • Reply 176 of 235
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    blitz1 wrote: »
    So, tallest, your iPhone or iPad is translucent? Can you explain me how I can turn my iPhone/iPad into being translucent?

    Thanks!

    It's not translucent, but if you turn the camera on, the screen shows whatever it's pointed at - which amounts to almost the same thing.
    panu wrote: »
    I'm an early adopter. I bought the first Intel iMac, the first Intel MacBook Pro, the first Retina MacBoo Pro, and the first iPhone on the first day they came out. And that's just the Apple stuff.

    However, in the case of Google Glass, I'm a never adopter. They only work for people whose vision can't be corrected without glasses.

    I think you mean 'can' be corrected without glasses. For anyone over about 40, their near vision is gone and it would be difficult or impossible to focus on the screen. Plus, anyone who is naturally far sighted wouldn't be able to use it.
  • Reply 177 of 235
    flipkalflipkal Posts: 28member


    Great comparison, Glasses to Newton. I have a Newton. I remember using it at a meeting back in 1998, trying to take notes. I felt like a dork, and I think others thought the same. With Glasses, I would feel the same, and probably get the same reactions. BTW, my Newton is safely stored away, awaiting its value to increase as the years go by. (and it still works)

  • Reply 178 of 235
    fast fredfast fred Posts: 24member


    Can you ware glasse's with Glass? Lot's of people with bi fokels .

  • Reply 179 of 235
    blitz1blitz1 Posts: 413member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    It's not translucent, but if you turn the camera on, the screen shows whatever it's pointed at - which amounts to almost the same thing.

     


    Thank you for making my point. This is where a device like GG and iPhone/iPad (which I both HAVE) are different.

    And this feature will make that using a device like GG will be different than using iPhone/iPad. This feature allows for enhanced reality and creates


    a whole new breed of interfaces.


     


    During hiking, when performing surgery, whilst visiting a museum, when repairing a car, star gazing at night, ... enhanced reality has an edge.


     


    Tallest Skill may claim that GG is irrelevant because of iPhone and iPad, clearly he doesn't understand the value of interfaces.


    And actually, his miserably failed attempts to humiliate people are no proof that he does understand, on the contrary.

  • Reply 180 of 235
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,674member
    drewys808 wrote: »
    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...

    So, life, then.
Sign In or Register to comment.