Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Hardware Technology

Google Tries To Defuse Glass "Myths" 363

Posted by timothy
from the not-all-opinions-are-myths dept.
As reported by Beta News, Google has tried to answer some of the criticism that its Glass head-mounted system has inspired with a blog post outlining and explaining what it calls 10 "myths" about the system. Google's explanation probably won't change many minds, but in just a few years the need to defend head-worn input/output devices might seem quaint and backwards.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Tries To Defuse Glass "Myths"

Comments Filter:
  • A lense cover (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bit trollent (824666) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @02:36PM (#46558293) Homepage

    If Google had just included a lens cover then Glass would just be a status symbol for ultra-nerdy hipsters.

    With an uncovered camera always conspicuously pointed in everybody's face Google Glass is an unmistakable reminder of our Orwellian world.

    • Better still: deploy the Glass beta to specialized professionals first, such as surgeons or lawyers, talking Glass up as a source of supplementary information during operations and trials. As soon as the tech gets featured on a few episodes of "Scrubs" or "Suits," the coolness factor is established and everybody will be wanting it.

      • Google sells information, we are the product. The more they know the more money they make. Google glass isn't about what the customer wants, it's all about spying. Putting a lens cap on google glass would undermine their ability to spy.
    • If Google had just included a lens cover then Glass would just be a status symbol for ultra-nerdy hipsters.

      I can see it. It's about the "uncanny valley" [wikipedia.org]

      We'd still see situations like this poor woman who appears to have Borderline Personality Disorder: http://valleywag.gawker.com/gl... [gawker.com]

      However, there's something about the design of Glass, or rather the **lack** of design, that makes the wearer look off-puttingly non-human. It's like the Bluetooth in-ear headset ^10...and only a few steps from actual "Borg"

      Gla

    • If Google Glass ever becomes popular, I hope
      http://www.amazon.com/Mato-Hash-Military-Shemagh-Tactical/dp/B008G3O45U/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1395615480&sr=8-6&keywords=shemagh

      Becomes trendy as well.
  • by Megol (3135005) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @02:37PM (#46558301)
    Like the expectation of not every action being tracked, recorded and analysed? Like the expectation of privacy and freedom?

    I don't hope we'll ever come to that scenario.

  • You might as well have highwater pants, a short sleeved white dress shirt, and a pocket protector.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23, 2014 @02:45PM (#46558343)

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2014/03/18/researchers-google-glass-spyware-sees-what-you-see

  • And Glass is one of those those technologies.
  • by SuperKendall (25149) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @02:46PM (#46558361)

    "Myth 7 - Glass is the perfect surveillance device"

    Having something recording where you are looking is the main aspect that makes it such a perfect surveillance device, more than size or form factor.

    They debunk this by saying that you can put together much more discrete recording devices. That is true.

    However, if you think about it if Glass or something like it really were to become prevalent, it would be the perfect surveillance device - because it's always in a great position to record things, and also hiding in plain sight. Sure you CAN put together something else that works as well and is not as visible (though it's tough to have it looking where you look the way Glass does, or prevent it from being accidentally blocked), but that takes either a lot more effort or money.

    People are just more comfortable with recording devices that make it more obvious when someone is recording by motion - holding up a phone, or even a wrist for a smart watch. Glasses possibly recording anything when someone is doing something people do naturally (just looking around) is what creeps a lot of people out.

    • by ccguy (1116865)

      Glasses possibly recording anything when someone is doing something people do naturally (just looking around) is what creeps a lot of people out.

      If you are on the street and I record you with Glass, not only I need to be close but I also need to be stopped and looking at you. Directly. You are going to notice for sure. The option of course is that I just walk by and get a useless shot. You probably won't notice though. However if I take my phone out of my pocket and fake it a bit I can probably get a lot of video before you realize I'm recording you.

      About surveillance, I must say I prefer there's lots of cameras on the streets controlled by regula

    • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

      However, if you think about it if Glass or something like it really were to become prevalent, it would be the perfect surveillance device

      Except that Glass has a glaring LED that flashes during recording. You could take it apart and disable it, but it would be cheaper to just get a hidden button or normal glasses camera and a lot less conspicuous. You can get hidden cameras built into normal looking glasses, no need for a big attachment and screen to give the game away.

      People are just more comfortable with recording devices that make it more obvious when someone is recording by motion - holding up a phone, or even a wrist for a smart watch.

      Or a flashing LED?

  • that you look like an idiot.
  • by artor3 (1344997) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @02:53PM (#46558395)

    I'm telling you man, in just a few years, NOT having a calculator on your watch is going to seem quaint and backwards!

  • My biggest objection to Glass is that there is no way for anyone else to know when it is on. Sure it will not be recording all the time but I only care it it is recording when it is pointed at me. How about a small led (it does not have to be red) that is on when Glass is on. I don't mean recording because snap shots can be taken in a split second. Yes it will make Glass even more dorky but I think it would help with people's acceptance.

    • My biggest objection to Glass is that there is no way for anyone else to know when it is on.

      Except for the light that comes on when you speak a command or record video, there's absolutely no way to know.

      • by jklovanc (1603149)

        What I mean is the light to be on whenever there is power to the hardware. If it can respond to a voice command it is on and the light should be on. I also can not found anywhere that there is a light visible to someone other than the Glass user. If there is power to the Glass the light should be on.

      • by Holi (250190)

        A light visible to the person not wearing it?

    • How about a Locutus-style laser pointer?

  • by DutchUncle (826473) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @02:59PM (#46558429)
    When I see someone wearing a camera for total recording on a ski slope, or on a bicycle trail, I don't feel bothered. Fat and unphotogenic, perhaps, but not bothered. OTOH the one time I saw someone walking around with a Google Glass on a normal day on a normal street, no special activities, no special event, nothing active to be watching, I felt: Why is this guy watching me?

    It's like noticing another person in a crowd looking at you vs. noticing a policeman looking at you.
  • Successful, groundbreaking products are loved at first sight.
    • I would mostly agree with this. There are certain products that once you see them you get a feeling that you must have it now!!!

      There are even products that you think you must have but then they don't get used.

      And once in a blue moon there is a product that does take some getting used to. But these are quite rare.

      People for instance complain that the Segway is too expensive. But even free I am not sure that many people would regularly use them. The Roomba seems brilliant but most people who buy the
      • Smearing and blurring a myth does not do any good. You want to disarm or defuse it.

        Ich bin nicht ein Grammarnazi.

        • The thing is, the problems with Glass are not myths at all. They are serious social concerns dealing with privacy, anonymity, malware, prejudice, discrimination, and danger to one's person.

          Can Glass implement facial ID? Yes. Can we expect people to act out on the basis of an ID and subsequent information gathering, as opposed to anonymity? Yes. Can Glass pass on things you do to a 3rd party, including things like typing your passwords? Yes.

          Until or unless Google comprehensively addresses these concerns (and

  • I suspect that most people will think that people are walking around with google glass displaying porn. Plus the #1 app is going to be a filter that takes people around you and shows what they will look like naked. Or will do a face recognition and search a database to see if they ever put naked photos on the internet.

    So my new myth is that 69% of people will Google glass are mostly being pervs.
  • by VortexCortex (1117377) <VortexCortexNO@S ... t-retrograde.com> on Sunday March 23, 2014 @03:13PM (#46558507)

    Not that I agree with remembering everything I see, but when I upgrade to ocular implants, opposition to my vision is going to seem far more hostile than "quaint and backwards" to me.

    There was a time when some demanded others not to meet their gaze. Oh how they'd have loved to forbid recollection or even erase the very memories of their transgressions from the minds of those they oppressed. Try as they might the tyrants could not keep reality from existing. Be careful, humans, history has a way of repeating in new and more horrible ways than those of the current cycle dare dream.

    Protip: Organic chauvanists are as wrong as human chauvinists or gender chauvinists or racial chauvinists.

    I already know who's side I'll be fighting for. Since the first human hefted the first stone tool machines and man have helped each other prosper. Long has it been established that ones who forbid others wield technologies are quick to render themselves irrelevant. Those that fight against the natural order by which humanity has gained its prosperity over all other organic life are like apes who could speak but refuse: Indistinguishable from the other primitive and bloody minded animals.

    Awareness and Life itself are processes of reflection on experience, encoded molecularly in DNA, structurally and chemically in brains, symbolically in cultures, and now digitally in the cells that make up the world wide neural network. You are merely one result in a sea of outcomes from the universe's struggle to gain awareness of itself via producing more perfect expressions capable of reflecting more precisely ever larger and more detailed descriptions of reality. To fight the nature of the universe is to lose against the laws of physics and entropy themselves: Adapt or become extinct.

    • Since the first human hefted the first stone tool machines and man have helped each other prosper. Long has it been established that ones who forbid others wield technologies are quick to render themselves irrelevant.

      Yes. This is why everyone should be able to cook up bio-warfare weapons in their basement, right next to the family fission devices, the latest in torture racks, and the fully automated slave quarters.

      Oh, wait. Your starry-eyed blathering completely ignores the fact that some technologies are

  • by houghi (78078) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @03:28PM (#46558607)
  • They just say that there are a LOT of camera's. When you read it, it actualy acknoleges the breakdown of privacy.
    At a presentation about the Google Glass, they basicaly said about privacy concerns : "We don't care. We will find a way to make it legal."

  • by Bob9113 (14996) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @03:35PM (#46558655) Homepage

    Dicks getting punched for being dicks is nothing new. If you had walked through a college party ten years ago, taking pictures of people without getting their attention first, it wouldn't take more than ten photos before your camera met an untimely demise. The new thing here is the device making it impossible to tell when you are being a dick, not the reaction to such dickish behavior.

    To those who claim that glassholes are doing nothing wrong, try this little experiment: Go to your local Wal-Mart, when the parking lot is busy with people walking in and out, take out your digital camera, and walk through a busy part of the parking lot. Squat down behind each car, and take a close-up photo of the license plate. Make sure it is very clear what you are doing.

    Frankly, I don't think you've got the balls to do it, because you know it is wrong. And if you do, whether because you are a big enough dick not to care or because you genuinely don't understand that it is wrong, I give it less than ten minutes before someone fervently explains to you that your behavior is uncivil.

    • by geekmux (1040042)

      Dicks getting punched for being dicks is nothing new. If you had walked through a college party ten years ago, taking pictures of people without getting their attention first, it wouldn't take more than ten photos before your camera met an untimely demise. The new thing here is the device making it impossible to tell when you are being a dick, not the reaction to such dickish behavior.

      To those who claim that glassholes are doing nothing wrong, try this little experiment: Go to your local Wal-Mart, when the parking lot is busy with people walking in and out, take out your digital camera, and walk through a busy part of the parking lot. Squat down behind each car, and take a close-up photo of the license plate. Make sure it is very clear what you are doing.

      Frankly, I don't think you've got the balls to do it, because you know it is wrong. And if you do, whether because you are a big enough dick not to care or because you genuinely don't understand that it is wrong, I give it less than ten minutes before someone fervently explains to you that your behavior is uncivil.

      Uh, sorry but your shitty example here is well, rather shitty.

      People pay extra at the DMV for custom license plates to be made. Therefore, that is an object that people are actively trying to get complete strangers to pay attention to them, their plate, or their car (or all three).

      I will give you credit for picking the right parking lot. Guaranteed to get some ignorant moron in a Wal-Mart parking lot willing to go to jail on assault and battery charges for attacking someone doing something perfectly legal

    • To those who claim that glassholes are doing nothing wrong, try this little experiment: Go to your local Wal-Mart, when the parking lot is busy with people walking in and out, take out your digital camera, and walk through a busy part of the parking lot.

      With you so far....

      Squat down behind each car, and take a close-up photo of the license plate. Make sure it is very clear what you are doing

      ...and then you lost me.

      Is this something 'glassholes' do? They squat down and take pictures of license plates using

  • Time for a new kickstarter project: "Burn that Glasshole"

    It's basically a glass with a laser fitted in the frame.
    It directs at any Google Glass (tm) camera in sight.

  • Google arrogance (Score:5, Informative)

    by peppepz (1311345) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @04:27PM (#46558959)
    They didn't address any of the problems. They just called them "myths" and said "don't worry, trust us, everything will be fine" for each one of them. And they did so using condescending, arrogant and insulting language (look for example at the passage when they declare that they want people to wear google glasses inside locker rooms (!): "just bear in mind, would-be banners..."). This reinforces in me the distrust in the company and the concern about the product.
  • Posts to the true believers does nothing but reinforce the suspicion that your eyes and ears are closed to dissenting voices.

    There is better spy tech out there than Google Glass. That isn't a good argument for making the use of concealed recording devices socially acceptable. You shouldn't be arguing that short battery life makes Glass harmless, Batteries can be swapped in and out, as many as you can carry.

  • Paranoia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Windwraith (932426) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @04:33PM (#46558985)

    Why is it that makes people think Glass is nothing but a surveillance device SPECIFICALLY conceived to record them and absolutely nothing else?

    Get real, people. It's impossible for that device to be recording 24/7. It's unrealistic to think it's going to automagically upload the video to Google for analysis. Just apply some common sense. If no other device can, so can't Glass.

    I like the idea of the device for AR experiments, information delivery and yes, taking the occasional picture of something that would take longer to prepare and set a camera, such as birds (that will fly away the moment you prepare your camera or phone) and finished elaborate pastries which I am very proud of. I have no intention or interest on recording people doing mundane boring daily crap that I have no business recording.

    Anyway, this shows a very ugly collective paranoia that should stop before somebody gets hurt for no reason. Yes, I specifically say hurt because that's the common thing: "If I see some glasshole pointing that thing at me I'll DESTROY THEM". And, no, guys, you AREN'T that interesting to warrant recording you. Unless you are some form of celebrity, which I doubt.

    Nerd bravado at its best. Seriously. Mod me troll if you wish, I don't care, but someone has to say this.

    • The comments here have made me realize what the problem is here: Slashdot has started to believe in magic. Magical internet connections able to stream video 24/7 at no expense, and more.

      Stop believing everyone wants to get you before you get sued for assaulting or stealing from someone, that's my advice.

  • by aepervius (535155) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @04:49PM (#46559069)
    The problem has never been that it is a camera. After all we have phone camera. The problem is that contrary to normal phone or normal camera, it is pointed toward your face all the time. And nobody trust the light to really show whether it is filming or not. Is that so hard to answer google.... No instead you made up 10 nice strawmen.
  • by Dr Max (1696200) on Sunday March 23, 2014 @07:45PM (#46560133)
    Is it's an incredibly bad design. Terrible form, and lackluster function. With a heads up display done properly, you wont be able to find a person that dosn't want to have one.

If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car payments. -- Earl Wilson

Working...