Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Input Devices Google It's funny.  Laugh. Technology

Google Glass: Future of Movies Or Monkey Cam 2.0? 77

Posted by timothy
from the had-no-idea-monkeys-could-rollerskate dept.
theodp writes "When it comes to Google's futuristic Glass goggles, people seem to fall into two camps. On the one hand, you have people like NY Times Arts critic Mike Hale, who goes gaga over how fashion designer Diane von Furstenberg put Google glasses on models who walked in her recent Fashion Week show, enabling them to capture video from their point of view as they walked the runway. 'For a preview of how we all may be making movies in a few years,' Hale breathlessly writes, 'take a look at DVF Through Glass .' On the other hand, you have folks like NY Times commenter JokerDanny, who says he's seen this Google Glass movie before. 'David Letterman used to call this Monkey-Cam,' quips JD, referring to the mid-1980's Late Night bits in which Letterman mounted a camera on Zippy the Chimp, enabling the monkey to capture video from his point of view as he roamed the studio. Thanks to the magic of YouTube Doubler, here's a head-to-head comparison of POV video shot by Zippy in 1986 — the year Larry Page and Sergey Brin celebrated their 13th birthdays — to that taken by a DVF model in 2012."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Glass: Future of Movies Or Monkey Cam 2.0?

Comments Filter:
  • Neither (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Andrio (2580551) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:10PM (#41342961)
    It's not either, but it is going to be one of those things from sci-fi that'll end up everywhere in our lives (like cellphones).

    In a decade or two, they'll cell them in drugstores like prepaid phones.
    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      In a decade or two, they'll cell them in drugstores like prepaid phones.

      Right next to the pet rocks and lava lamps.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      A decade or two? I bet it's more closer to 5 years. This tech will be cheaper to manufacture than smartphones, expect sub $500 prices in 2-3 years, most of the processing will be from the linked smartphone and in about 5 more years or less, the vast majority of 1st world people will have these without a smart phone.

      The article is missing the entire point of this new tech, it's like showing home videos shot from a smart phone and saying how smart phones suck.

  • Jackass cam 1.0 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Grayhand (2610049) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:11PM (#41342975)
    It's like cheap video cams brought filmmaking to the masses Google Glasses will mean anyone can act like an idiot and provide a first person view of the disaster. There's already been some intensely cool helmet cam videos but that's because it's mostly pros or semi pros using them. Like with cheap video cameras we didn't see a rash of Citizen Kanes we saw mostly films that shouldn't have been made. We're likely to see something closer to Strange Days. It'll be guys getting laid and failed attempts to jump between buildings where you'll watch the POV all the way to the ground. I'd like to think people would sick of it after the first hundred bicycle riders face planting into walls but morbid curiosity never seems to die.
    • Re:Jackass cam 1.0 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fustakrakich (1673220) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:24PM (#41343065) Journal

      Still, it makes it easier to keep an eye on the cops.

      • They'll just make you take them off in their presence. What we need for spying on cops aren't borg glasses, what we need are spy cams that fit in a shirt button.
      • by dumcob (2595259)
        Well...Eric Schmidt has already said if a cop is interested in you, must be doing something you shouldn't be doing. So I can't see why that would be required.
      • by rasmusbr (2186518)

        Okay, but for how long?

        Apple is already working on technology that would turn off [zdnet.com] all civilian cameras in an area. Governments everywhere are going to implement this as soon as they see a chance to do it without pissing off the majority of the population. It looks like a relatively trivial change if you legislate that manufacturers have to ship the feature inside everything they make that has a camera. Of course you and I may be able to disable it by googling how to, but what are the odds that you or I or a

  • by theodp (442580) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:16PM (#41343009)
    • by Dyinobal (1427207)
      I agree lots of potential but I worry that it is just too far ahead of it's time right now. Still with luck they can find niche markets and industries to work out the kinks in these glasses with while further pushing the hardware and getting people to see just what they are all about.
    • by Nerdfest (867930) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:27PM (#41343089)

      WSJ and Forbes both seem to have a bit of a hate on for Google these days though, so I'd take their comments with a grain of salt. I think they're right in the 'they need the killer app' comment though ... something to make them something that everyone wants.

      • by jo42 (227475)

        'they need the killer app' comment though ... something to make them something that everyone wants.

        Duh, Porn. Killer app for VHS. Killer app for The Internet. Killer app for The Googles.

        Is that creepy Gnerd at the coffee show browsing the Internet or is he watching a porn star get her bunghole stretched out? Or is a virtual porn app stripping the clothes off of the teenage barista he's staring at?

        BTW, I've already patented, copyrighted and trademarked all these ideas and their implementations, so bugger off trying to copy my innovations!

    • by Baloroth (2370816)

      They are also really, really, really new technology. I'd be incredibly shocked if they weren't disappointing to someone who isn't looking at them for their potential, but rather for what they can do now. What they can do now is little more than gimmicks. What they could do, and what this kind of technology (not necessarily Google's, but someone's) almost certainly will do in a few years. Hopefully at the very least Google's efforts will help shut down the patents that trolls will inevitably try to use to st

      • by Haxagon (2454432)

        They're not new tech, no more than Apple's "retina" brand is. It's new that they're becoming mainstream. Mann has had similar (and better) tech for the better part of the last thirty years.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Killer feature? The tech is already here to make that happen so I think it'll be the first release that hits it big, especially for business!

      Scenario: An old client can walk up and says hello, they have a multi-million dollar deal pending so either make sure your memory is up to scratch or the glasses use facial recognition and bring up their profile.
      "Oh hey Dave, you're new kitchen remodelling looks fabulous, how's the wife Jean? Now lets get down to signing that new deal since we're such good friends"

  • by kiriath (2670145) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:19PM (#41343039)

    In my opinion, Google Glass is one of the absolute most awesome new pieces of tech to come about in years. I look forward to this technology with great anticipation.

    I find myself not getting too excited about tech recently, this is the only thing that has even remotely piqued my curiosity and I'm hooked.

    I think it is something to get excited about.

    • by Darinbob (1142669)

      Slightly confused. Large amounts of optimism on slashdot is suspicious of sarcasm but no snarky comments present. Writer could be serious. Warrants further investigation.

    • Why do you hate google glasses??? STOP THE HATING!!!!!!!!
  • Both were boring (Score:4, Insightful)

    by honestmonkey (819408) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:26PM (#41343081) Journal
    I didn't make it through the doubled-up video, but both were kind of boring. I guess I was wondering how they felt, being trained to show off for an audience like that, but then you can't feel too sorry for models. The chimp looked like it was having fun, though.
  • Not just a camera. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    It would be one thing if the Glasses were simply a camera, but it's more than that. It will be the first mass market wearable computer. Overlays will provide notifications in the form of navigation prompts, restuarant reviews, contact information, descriptions of art, and much more.

    • Overlays will provide notifications in the form of navigation prompts, restuarant reviews, contact information, descriptions of art, and much more.

      In other words, things you could have done with your smartphone instead of wearing annoying glasses all the time.

      • How many times have you bothered to scan a QR code?

        Now imagine it happening with a double blink.

        Those cool magazine covers with augmented reality codes... Also double blink.

        Want to take a photo. Just look at the scene and blink one eye.

        Just a few examples.

        • How many times have you bothered to scan a QR code?

          Several. When I am interested. I do not need nor want to see the contents of EVERY QR code in my field of view.

          Now imagine it happening with a double blink.

          Not impressed. In fact rather annoying.

          Those cool magazine covers with augmented reality codes... Also double blink.

          Again, it doesn't happen enough that I want to double blink to do so and CERTAINLY not worth the bother of wearing any kind of headgear all the time.

          Want to take a photo. Just look at th

        • by Kenshin (43036)

          "Want to take a photo. Just look at the scene and blink one eye."

          In normal human world that is called "winking". It can be taken several different ways. Use extreme caution around human subjects.

    • by Bieeanda (961632)
      I'm thirsty. Could I have a sip of your Flavoraid?
    • by citizenr (871508)

      It would be one thing if the Glasses were simply a camera, but it's more than that. It will be the first mass market wearable computer. Overlays will provide notifications in the form of navigation prompts, restuarant reviews, contact information, descriptions of art, and much more.

      There is no overlay - there is only small rectangular display inside. No head tracking, no eye tracking, no augmented reality.

      • It will be the first mass market wearable computer.

        Totally disagree. The iPod Touch /iPhone is already that. You can easily have it on you all the time you would glasses, including jogging. I don't see why it doesn't count in the same way or have the same level of importance, just because it's not on your head.

        • by oakgrove (845019)
          Do you 'wear' your car keys too?
    • navigation prompts, restuarant reviews, contact information, descriptions of art, and much more

      While it has the potential to do all this, its primary function will be to research what we look at, and serve ads to match.
      If you think the billboards and neons are bad already, just wait until you put on one of these...

  • Not as interesting as chicken cam. Apes have poor image stabilization properties.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UytSNlHw8J8
  • by theodp (442580) on Friday September 14, 2012 @09:45PM (#41343179)

    Microsoft's answer to Google Glass, as modeled by Count Homer [staticflickr.com].

  • It's probably the future of movies and Monkey Cam. I weep for the future.

  • The future (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Friday September 14, 2012 @10:52PM (#41343489)

    I think Google Glasses are more of a short-term gimmick and proof-of-concept than anything else. But one of the guys Google just hired (away from our university, as a matter of fact) is Babak Parviz - who's been working towards what could probably be called "Google Contacts".

    The tech's nowhere near ready; but I think the idea of an unobtrusive HUD on a contact lens would be far more likely to garner widespread adoption than Glasses ever will.

    On a side note - all this focus on the "camera" functionality is mostly missing the point. What's cool about the concept isn't the ability to take portable movies - we can already do that. It's the information right in front of your eyeballs that's the future.

    • by jo42 (227475)

      It's the information right in front of your eyeballs that's the future.

      No, the Real Future (c)(tm) is having the hardware jacked right into your brain. No need for dorky eyewear or sticking things in your eyes. The hardware would see what you see by tapping your optic nerve. Your brain would interface directly with the hardware, augmenting your intelligence. That is the future that I want. Not this horse and carriage, post dark ages, middle of the industrial age, steam powered nonsense you call The Googles.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by wurp (51446)

        By the time we're doing that, we'll be stimulating memories directly and expanding your imagination with DirectX48 at 120fps, while giving the answer to any question you briefly consider instantly in full multimedia a la Google+Wolfram Alpha+Wikipedia+Mathematica.

        And the future *I* want involves my enhanced, uploaded mind occupying a few metric tons of atomically precise computronium distributed across the solar system, with continuous incremental backup a few light years away.

        (Of course, from my point of v

    • by Daetrin (576516)
      Presumably this is like the contacts in Vernor Vinge's "Rainbows End". My thought on the matter is that i'd much rather have the glasses. Glasses that beam the image into my eye rather than displaying it on something in front of me would be fine, but i don't want contacts.

      Because i can just image the first time they get hacked and they load up, say for example, goatsecx, and refuse to turn off. And you probably can't even close your eyes to shut it out because they're under your eyelids. (I presume the co
    • by Hentes (2461350)

      VR headbands have been there for quite a while, the thing that prevented them from taking off was their prohibitive cost, which Google Glass didn't manage to fix.

  • This is going to be amazing in sports. Not just to the viewer at home (which itself will be fascinating), but also all the real time in game possibilities that might open up.
  • Who cares about video. I mean, yeah fine, it can record video, great, great great.

    But if the Project Glass video [youtube.com] is any indication of what we're going to be seeing out of these, video is about on par with the colours it comes in, in terms of importance of features.

  • I'd rather see a monkey with a VHC cam than anything any of my friends do ever, lol. They're just not as interesting as a roller skating monkey. Not even close actually.
  • .. the answer is still "No", apparently.

    No, Google Glass is neither the Future of Movies nor Monkey Cam 2.0? This is just an example of uncreative minds failing to see the potential that's apparent to engineers and other creative minds at Google. Of course, that's no guarantee they will succeed with this product, but I think we'll see a couple of big things within the next couple of years where people will say that "it started with Google Glass".

    And addressing the specific question: the camera mounted on Zi

  • With ubiquitous cameras it may be possible for victims of group stalking or webcam spying to capture their tormentors behaving badly. This is a bigger problem than currently acknowledged. It is easy to spy on people nowadays, but much harder to capture the experience of being laughed at by strangers after having private moments published on the net.
  • This won't be the future of movies (unless you count movies about this tech like Strange Days), but the future of Americas Funniest Home Videos. We are already see this trend with cars, some countries require dash cams for insurance purpose and thus we have a rise of all kinds of car videos on the net. Head mountable cameras like the GoPro also already do the same thing for sports and recreational activities.

    But anyway, I consider all those to be side effects, that will not be why people are wearing those c

  • I don't think any Glass demo could have been more utterly pointless than this.

    Literally if you gave a hobo on the street a pair of those glasses it would be more compelling than this demo. Yay, congrats, you know how to walk up and down on a piece of level floor while wearing something unwearable. I can't help but think that this is the point where Google gets *completely* lost in their own hype.

  • I think that's a bit silly. How can you tell he was writing "breathlessly"? spin that top!

If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization.

Working...