Sergey Brin Demos Google Glasses Prototype 122
MojoKid writes "Folks have been clamoring for more on Google's Project Glass and Sergey Brin — one of the co-founders of Google — is now burying himself in the R&D department associated with its development. Recently Brin appeared on 'The Gavin Newsom Show' with the prototype glasses perched on his face. The visit was actually a bit awkward as you can see in the video, as it's a lot of Brin and Newsom describing what they're seeing via the glasses with no visual for the audience. However, Brin dropped a bomb when he stated that he'd like to have the glasses out as early as next year."
Google Glasses? (Score:5, Funny)
I'll pair these with the hated headphones from the previous story, and occupy my own, private digital HELL!
Re:Google Glasses? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dr. Seuss, will you please claim prior art?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I will not claim it in a van, I will not claim it as a fan.
I do not like this prior art, I do not like it Sam Thou Art.
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent.
Re: (Score:1)
Google Goggles is already the name of a fairly cool adroid app.
Re: (Score:2)
Which would be perfect if these glasses ran Android and had some of the same kinds of functionality, searching for images based on where your eyes targeted. Popping up Terminator-style narratives for things you see would be awesome.
Re: (Score:3)
It does make me wonder as to the business plan. I can imagine these things being given away free, but with small discrete text ads in your top right peripheral vision.
On the other hand, imagine if Google subsidiary Doubleclick gets to handle the business. They'll be inserting hallucinations of monster movie serial killers into your left side periphery, and then using the right eye to advertise psyc
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, now there's a fun thought. How long before the first X-Ray Specs app is released, I wonder.
Re: (Score:2)
"Hell is other people."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Exit [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
âoeWhat is hell? Hell is oneself.
Hell is alone, the other figures in it
Merely projections. There is nothing to escape from
And nothing to escape to. One is always alone.â
â T.S. Eliot
Want. Now. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Want. Now. (Score:5, Funny)
Couple these with the Google butt-plug, and Sergey will have covered all the exits!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I believe they've already canceled Google Wave.
Re: (Score:2)
Wave goodbye... At least they didn't make a comic for it.
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p30/mrstash/Picture6-1.png [photobucket.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I thought Larry Page was the Chief Orifice Officer of Google! I mean, with the whole shouting-down-Brin-over-how-much-to-track thing and all, I think he'd fuck us over first.
Re: (Score:2)
They called it "Microsoft Orifice".
"It looks like you're trying to stick something in your arse..."
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
where you can set a threshold for events to be displayed
Great idea, in the future when I ask "where are my glasses" out loud they could SMS "on top of your head you silly old fart" to my phone.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd much rather have a functional piece of equipment than a "geeky" piece of equipment.
Has 'functional' and 'geeky' suddenly become mutually exclusive now?
Citation needed.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a start. I hope they get on with it, I've been waiting since the 1990s where we had all the basics (but even the iphone would not have been viable back then - no suitable ecosystem to thrive in).
First generation: virtual telepathy kinda there, but needs brain computer interface for to be more seamless.
Missing: control via thought macros (need brain computer interface for that). Also missing: ability to recall and store stuff by linking them with arbitrary thought patterns/sequences.
Missing: virtual te
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Telepathy will be more like voice communication. Reading other people's minds against their will is still going to be difficult.
See:
http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/12710 [caltech.edu]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1081332/The-Jennifer-Aniston-brain-cell-How-single-neurons-spring-action-pictures-favourite-celebrities.html [dailymail.co.uk]
One person's "Jennifer Aniston" cell is going to be different from another person's. Or it may not even be present till that person knows more about her...
The only way you can figure ou
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
i dont understand. what is this thing useful for? except looking stupid in public. why can't i just whip out my for for much better quality info?
Re: (Score:3)
...what is this thing useful for?
For the average person, perhaps not so much. But it's not that these, as they exist right now, are particularly useful. It's the possibilities, when a world full of geeks and nerds says "hmm...I betcha I could make it do something crazy..."
With a pair of these, a surgeon now has the ability to pull up live info about a patient while they are elbows deep in viscera. With these, a machine operator or plant manager can see heat readouts, fuel use, and downtime reports. With these (and a bit of software hac
Rare footage of them out and about (Score:5, Funny)
Here was see an early version of Google Glasses [youtube.com] out and about! I can't wait!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
And here's footage of what you'll look like while wearing them [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:3)
If it were that intrusive, I am pretty sure people would opt for an adblock.
Re: (Score:2)
All those people that got lasik eye surgery will now be kicking themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Here's another great video [youtube.com] I'm sure you will also despise and others enjoy!
There are others, but oddly even though those two videos came out very shortly after the first Google Glasses video, they are still the best.
Have a great life! I mean that non-sarcastically, I hope things look up for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the link!
You know what's funny? I watched this parody video and was just mildly amused. But then I went to watch the "official" real video on YouTube, and youtube gives me ad popups over the top of the video. So essentially, the official video now looks almost identical to the parody!
Suddenly the parody isn't as funny anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Price? (Score:4, Interesting)
VR glasses are nothing new, the big question is whether this one will be actually affordable by the general public.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it's probably going to be two parts an eye piece and something in your pocket.
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait for the apps! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
No usb interface? (Score:2)
Or other way to demo what the user is seeing and send the signal to a nice big projector screen for Steve Balmer to scream about? I realize it is super small but this just seems like a pretty basic aspect. How do I debug the thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Or other way to demo what the user is seeing and send the signal to a nice big projector screen for Steve Balmer to scream about? I realize it is super small but this just seems like a pretty basic aspect. How do I debug the thing?
you cant show picture using wooden mockup.
headache inducing? (Score:5, Insightful)
If so, count me out.
Google Rx glasses? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have prescription glasses too. Might consider getting lasik if a) the glasses live up to their hype and b) my poor vision impedes my usage of them
Re: (Score:2)
Worked wonders for me. Before I couldn't see a clock radio the far side of the bed. Haven't needed glasses the last 14 years, but old age is kicking in now.
Two downsides. Firstly you do lose a bit of clarity in low light situations due to the scarring scattering light. Secondly, the aftermath of the procedure is pretty unpleasant (eyes get watery and itchy for a couple of days), although the compensation of immediately being able to see much more clearly is amazing.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it as amazing as putting on prescription glasses and avoiding the unpleasantness, cost, and the low-light clarity side-effects?
-dZ.
Re: (Score:2)
For one, technology is now a lot better than when the OP had it done. With advanced wavefront LASIK, you have basically zero night vision problems.
For two, LASIK will actually SAVE you money over the long term, because the whole procedure is tax deductible and you will never again have to purchases glasses or contacts - which adds up... do the math for 20 years of optometrist visits and glasses / contacts. When you get LASIK, your optometrist visits are now covered for life through the company.
I got my LASI
Re: (Score:2)
I've got prescription glasses (and have had for many years) but find it's not the happy utopia you depict, so it's interesting to hear about the downsides to LASIK.
For example, scratched lenses => headache inducing; with high-powered lenses, not getting exactly sitting right all the time => headache inducing; dirty lenses => headache inducing; frames => far more limited field of view.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, when the Goggles were introduced, Google said they'd have a pair that were designed to clip onto regular glasses instead of be stand alone glasses unto themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, gettin old sucks. I've had to wear bifocals for about 15 years now. Lasik scares the hell outta me. Lasers are cool and all that, but I get the willies thinking of anything coming at my eyes.
Re: (Score:1)
Seeing the surgery(?) demonstrated, requiring the patient being awake while they peel away the outer layer of skin on your iris, scares the shit out of me. .... but no way I can go through that while being awake!
I know the eye is numbed, I know they are really good at this, that there are computers ensuring precision etc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I recall reading somewhere that they specifically said that there will be a model to use with regular prescription eyeglasses.
Re: (Score:2)
Never going back to contacts again, not even for groovy sci-fi VR glasses.
When was the last time your tried contacts? Materials science has come a looooong way in the last 10 years or so.
Much more comfortable than they were in the 90s.
Re: (Score:1)
The early 2000s, actually. But my problem wasn't with the comfort or feel; that was never a problem. It was more that I missed the protective aspects of my glasses, and also I had trouble with distance focusing after I'd been looking at a computer screen for a while. (Which made driving home from work a dicey proposition.)
Really it comes down to the fact that I actually enjoy my glasses and have no desire to get rid of them, which is also why I haven't gone for LASIK. But it sounds like Google will have o
Borg (Score:3, Interesting)
He's the freaking Borg. Please retire the Microsoft icon and apply it to Google. kthxbai.
OMFG (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ya, they do. But so what. I very much enjoy using my bluetoof headset while driving, or whilst typing with both hands, or while working on a cabling job, or any other sort of thing where I need to be on the phone and require both hands. I imagine there would be very many applications where the google glasses could come in handy as well. That being said if you're wearing either a bluetoof or google glasses to make a pretentious fashion statement alone, you should be slapped.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't take yourself too seriously man. It's just the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Blue touffe [jeremyriad.com]
*sigh* and here go my future possible claim as any sort of respectability as a member of this community...
Brother AirScouter (Score:3)
When I first heard of the Project Glass, I thought they had found a way of doing what some Japanese companies have been doing for a while...rather than displaying the image in *front* of your eye, they actually draw the image line by line directly *in* your eye on your retina with lasers. I still hold out hope that this is the long term goal of Project Glass, but who knows. A bit of reading Here [slashgear.com]
And Here [engadget.com]
And Here [brother.com]
A Minor Customer Request (Score:2)
This is old technology. (Score:5, Insightful)
Newer technology integrates the image directly into normal sunglass or prescription glasses lenses through optical waveguides to create an image focussed at infinity that is stable even if you're moving around.
Vuzix has already made prototypes and the lenses look normal - though they did have a projector on the side of the lens. It was technology developed by Nokia and to see how impressive it actually is, take a look at this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atTqT7z00Kc&list=UUXV7-Fjn7hdQcINo7-T3mWQ&index=1&feature=plcp [youtube.com]
That's some video I got *through* the glasses at CES in January - And you'll notice that even though I can't keep the camera still, the image is rock steady within the active area of the glass lens. ( The lens is just a few millimeters thick ).
The newer technology looks almost holographic and can certainly be made to provide a 3D image...
Though if Google's glasses were really cheap, I'd still buy them. There's something to be said for a older but functional technology in a pair of glasses for $100 compared to the latest tech for more than $1000.
GrpA
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was an exotic dancer of some sort, so concur with the "underwhelming" and "barely make out" comments.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a baseball player and an exotic dancer. The limitation of the system was that they were using a small projector ( 320x200 LCOS I thought, from the look of it ) to inject the image into the glasses. Though the lack of dynamic range in the camera and brightness control on the prototype made it difficult to work out - basically, it's designed to work in full sunlight and was bright enough to do so, but we were inside where I took the video so it just overwhelmed the camera and came out "overexposed"
Re: (Score:2)
And what was the other thing?
Old news (Score:1)
This was news almost two months ago when he wore them here [pcmag.com] at an event for The Foundation Fighting Blindness.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the new news...that being a bit more concise release date, and the fact that he finally let someone else try it on on camera.
ddos (Score:1)
Inevitable (Score:5, Interesting)
These glasses are definitely coming.
From the video, they look small enough to be practical very very soon. Nice work, Sergey. :)
Presumably they will connect via bluetooth to a smartphone or keypad in your pocket for an easy finger-based UI. And of course there will be a voice UI, like we have now with a small & simple BT headset.
The big questions are a) battery life, b) how the various governments will assess this as a potential driving hazard, and c) whether Apple will steal Google's thunder by doing the same thing, only sleeker.
I, for one, will be happy to buy a set of these glasses if the price is right. Hopefully less than US$1000.
Re: (Score:2)
Watch closely how Sergey operates the glasses. The side of it is actually a trackpad.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I got that impression, though I wasn't sure if he was working a trackpad or jog-wheel or something else.
I'd rather have the trackpad as a separate wireless controller, so I could keep my hand in my pocket, or on the steering wheel, or wherever else, instead of reaching up to my temple every time I need to control the glasses.
Economy of motion will be a critical factor of adoption.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you find this deplorable, I am not sure why you find media coverage undesirable. If more people find it deplorable (and learn about this through the media), someone could take the best parts of this idea, and remove the bad parts and come up with one you would like. Say someone could completely drop the eye projection, camera, and simply retain the earpiece and still provide excellent voice commands support for Android (I am not sure if you would like this or not, but this is something I would like)
Re: (Score:1)
The big questions are a) battery life, b) how the various governments will assess this as a potential driving hazard, and c) whether Apple will steal Google's thunder by doing the same thing, only sleeker.
It seems they solved [slashdot.org] that problem. :)
Re: (Score:2)
WTF Google article... (Score:1)
Interesting that the multi-billion dollar company that produces YouTube and things of that nature would choose some shitty no-name video player that can't even load properly.
Re: (Score:1)
And you're too stupid to figure out that's not a google website.
I'm sure it will be a technological marvel (Score:2)
Old News (Score:2)
It's already been done [fanboy.com].
I applaud the early adopters. (Score:2)
We are now in a post-tablet era (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
What does this post have to do with reality television?