Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Google Input Devices Technology

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sergey Brin Demos Google Glasses Prototype

Comments Filter:
  • by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:16PM (#40161803) Homepage Journal

    I'll pair these with the hated headphones from the previous story, and occupy my own, private digital HELL!

    • by K. S. Kyosuke ( 729550 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:43PM (#40162077)
      More like Google Goggles. Or just Googgles?
      • Googoggles.
      • by Anonymous Coward

        Google Goggles is already the name of a fairly cool adroid app.

        • by Thuktun ( 221615 )

          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.

    • I'll pair these with the hated headphones from the previous story, and occupy my own, private digital HELL!

      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

    • "Hell is other people." []

      • 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)

    by jakimfett ( 2629943 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:17PM (#40161809) Homepage Journal
    Every geek wants a pair of these yesterday. As soon as Google can get a version of them ready to go, I predict they'll sell like...well...not hotcakes, but probably like Android based phones.
    • by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:22PM (#40161861) Homepage Journal

      Couple these with the Google butt-plug, and Sergey will have covered all the exits!

    • These would be cool. I'm still not sure about the interface though. I don't really want to dictate my interactions and I doubt head nods would be less annoying.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Meh. I don't really see the first couple of generations of this making a difference on how I compute today. I'd much rather have a functional piece of equipment than a "geeky" piece of equipment.
      • 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.

      • by TheLink ( 130905 )

        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

    • 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?

      • ...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

  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:17PM (#40161819)

    Here was see an early version of Google Glasses [] out and about! I can't wait!

    • Just an FYI, with well over 2 million views, it's hardly rare. That being said, I'd not seen that vid yet - thanks for the link!
    • If it were that intrusive, I am pretty sure people would opt for an adblock.

    • by htnmmo ( 1454573 )

      All those people that got lasik eye surgery will now be kicking themselves.

  • Price? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Hentes ( 2461350 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:28PM (#40161933)

    VR glasses are nothing new, the big question is whether this one will be actually affordable by the general public.

    • These are not VR glasses. They aren't even augmented reality glasses. They are essentially your smart phone on your eyeball as opposed to a small video screen.
      • Did anyone wonder where the cpu will be contained? I mean, even the bluetooth headphones are relatively big because of the battery and radio needed. The teaser video implies that it would have GPU, Internet access, storage etc. I'm starting to think, that the only reasonable way this could be feasible to do today would be if it would be simply an accessory to the Android phone (perhaps using bluetooth or the WiFi direct?) What do you guys think?
        • Yes it's probably going to be two parts an eye piece and something in your pocket.

          • I'd really prefer if it was a two part system with the goggles talking to something in my pocket, or on my desk, or in my car, with painless way to transfer between them. I'd like a contextually aware display please.
  • by sandytaru ( 1158959 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:29PM (#40161941) Journal
    I'm wondering how these will fare compared to some of their sci-fi counterparts did, actually. So far the most interesting take on augmented reality I've read/watched has been from the series Denno Coil [], but this sort of technology has featured in a few other dystopias, too.
    • Augmented reality has figured prominently inJapanese cartoons. Ghost in the Shell is a more famous example of wearable augmented reality. However, augmented reality can take more conventional forms, such as a cellphone camera that can automatically place tags (identifieers) on the landmarks you point it to. Such already exists in low-tech form in some app(s) I'm too lazy to Google for right now.
  • 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?

    • 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)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:40PM (#40162031) Homepage Journal

    If so, count me out.

  • I'm tentatively excited about Google Glasses, but if they don't come up with some way to make it work for people with prescription lenses, I'm going to have to let the ship sail without me, I think. Never going back to contacts again, not even for groovy sci-fi VR glasses.
    • []
      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
      • 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.

        • by dzfoo ( 772245 )

          although the compensation of immediately being able to see much more clearly is amazing.

          Is it as amazing as putting on prescription glasses and avoiding the unpleasantness, cost, and the low-light clarity side-effects?


          • by brunes69 ( 86786 )

            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

          • by Jaffa ( 7714 )

            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.

    • There have been a lot of advances in contact lenses over the past decade. These days, I wear a pair for a few weeks nonstop, and when they start to get itchy, peel em off and toss em and start with a fresh pair. About the only time I notice them is when I first wake up, and a few drops of solution solves that problem.

      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.
      • And for those of us who wear bifocals?

        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.
        • by GNious ( 953874 )

          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.
          I know the eye is numbed, I know they are really good at this, that there are computers ensuring precision etc .... but no way I can go through that while being awake!

    • I recall reading somewhere that they specifically said that there will be a model to use with regular prescription eyeglasses.

    • 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.

      • 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)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @07:44PM (#40162097)

    He's the freaking Borg. Please retire the Microsoft icon and apply it to Google. kthxbai.

  • Some states are trying (ineffectually) to ban texting while driving... any bets on how long it will be before the first muppet causes an accident/kills someone due to having his/her vision impaired by Google Glasses!
    • I'm not sure there was ever an epidemic of people dying while texting. It was more politicians who want to look like they are doing something proactive. In California they refused to ban cell phone driving until all the legislators got bluetooth headsets
  • by matty619 ( 630957 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @08:40PM (#40162479)

    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 []

    And Here []

    And Here []

  • Aside from looking like a confused refugee from the Borg, could someone work on some kind "styling?" There are several applications that this item, if not intrusive looking, would work nicely. I would think of it as a personal diary application.
  • by GrpA ( 691294 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @08:49PM (#40162541)

    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. []

    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.


  • This was news almost two months ago when he wore them here [] at an event for The Foundation Fighting Blindness.

    • 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.

  • At 4:00PM (local time), we all put the glasses on and look into our old school kaleidoscopes = hourly DDOS?
  • Inevitable (Score:5, Interesting)

    by optimism ( 2183618 ) on Wednesday May 30, 2012 @09:09PM (#40162661)

    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.

    • by Artcfox ( 557726 )

      Watch closely how Sergey operates the glasses. The side of it is actually a trackpad.

      • 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.

    • I think that both the idea and implementation of this idea are deplorable at best. The problem with fame is that every stupid idea one has and every move one makes becomes a cornerstone for bland stories to be covered by the mainstream media (this now includes slashdot thanks to GeekNet), and gross over speculation/valuation of said ideas.
      • 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)

    • 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 [] that problem. :)

  • 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.

  • Certain kinds of tech such as bluetooth headsets, Segways look great on paper but make the user look like a complete dork. I think Google's glasses fit into that category too. Perhaps they will find a use in business, e.g. for people driving (as a kind of HUD with directions) especially for couriers, warehouses and so on but I see little utility for them in every day life.
  • It's already been done [].

  • I'm eager for a future when my glasses or contacts have some magic screen that can overlay high res holographic images in my field of view, and this may be a step in that direction. However, it looks like the kind of tech that is more of a complication than a convenience. I'm supposed to walk around with that stupid thing on my head, taking up 33% of my field of view with it's screen all the time just so i can surreptitiously take a picture? At least my phone is only visible when i need it's information. At
  • I hereby declare it. (or you could call it a post-post-pc era, but the term post-pc didn't make sense in the first place).

"The Avis WIZARD decides if you get to drive a car. Your head won't touch the pillow of a Sheraton unless their computer says it's okay." -- Arthur Miller