By 
There’s no question that, in the quest to augment our lives with always-on wearable tech like Google Glass, the internet search giant definitely has their work cut out for them. Aside from technical hurdles Google still needs to address before Google Glass is ever “consumer ready” (battery life being a major one), there’s now a social stigma finding itself attached to wearable, one that may have the Project Glass team scrambling to perform some damage control.
It was a few weeks back when the Project Glass team put together a nice list of Glass etiquette tips users should be mindful of when using this device out in the real world. Whether online or by word of mouth, we’ve all seen/heard the headlines of Glass wearers getting kicked out of bars and/or restaurants, receiving tickets for driving with Glass, running into Homeland Security, or the rare user generally acting like an ass because they absolutely refuse, under any circumstances, to remove their Glass for anyone — no matter the situation.
It’s because of this, the term “Glasshole” is now being associated with many Glass adopters. A far cry from “techie,” “geek,” or “nerd,” names many expected would follow Glass Explorers before the headset actually became available last year. Glass users are now synonymous with dudes who wear Ed Hardy shirts, a modern day Silicon Valley douche-bag.
Word has no doubt gotten back to the Glass team, who’s poured their blood, sweat, and tears into making Glass not only functional, but socially acceptable piece of technology. Google’s already done a great job at getting the word out on Glass, no one can argue that. But because very few people actually own the headset, there simply aren’t too many people who can say they have firsthand knowledge of the device. It’s because of this, people have formed all sorts of weird opinions about Glass.
If Google hopes for their product — which we can all agree is pretty damn cool — to gain mainstream appeal, they’re going to need to address some common misconceptions first. Set to “clear the air” on a few common myths associated with Glass, the Project Glass team is back with another handy list. As Glass Explorers ourselves, you’d be surprised how many of these we’ve heard from people during our casual run ins, which is why we’re also bringing to you our own experiences while wearing Glass. Let’s take a look.
Myth 1: Glass is the ultimate distraction from the real world
This couldn’t be further than the truth. In fact, Glass was built as a solution to modern day society with our heads constantly buried in our smartphones/tablets. Instead of always looking down, Glass keeps your head up and engaged with the rest of the world.
It’s one of the reasons why Google says “Glass is off by default” (we think sleeping is a better term). The display only activates when you want it to be, either by tapping the touchpad, or tilting your head to a predetermined angle. Like Android Wear, this allows users to quickly get in, and back to whatever it was they were doing.
We’ve all seen the “Then and Now” meme of the inauguration of Pope Francis, a crowd of people holding their phones and tablets in the air. Google mentions that important moments in life “shouldn’t be experienced through the screen you’re trying to capture them on.” We couldn’t agree more.
Myth 2: Glass is always on and recording everything
As we mentioned in myth #1, Glass’ display is off by default. Google built Glass to record video in 10 second increments, with the option to record longer. But because Glass’ battery is so limited, it’s technically not built for recording videos of long length, let alone “always-on” video recording. It’s a question every Glass explorer hears at least once (if not jokingly): “Are you recording me right now?” Chances are no, because you aren’t worth the juice.
Myth 3: Glass Explorers are technology-worshipping geeks
The fact that being a Glass Explorer is such an exclusive club at the moment, lead many to stereotype Explorers as either being… well, weird. Paying money to have your smartphone attached to your face? You must REALLY like technology. Well, yes and no. Google mentions that Glass Explorers “come from all walks of life.” Everything from firemen to reporters and doctors.
Sure all these people more than likely have a love of technology (maybe “respect” a better word?), but they also feel the need to use it more effectively to help enrich their lives, not be subject to it. As we mentioned before, this helps keep us stay engaged with the people and/or loved ones around us. Unlike your smartphone, Glass should never be a distraction, but instead help free you from it.
Myth 4: Glass is ready for prime time
Despite rumors that Glass will be available to the public at the end of this year, let us be very clear: the current version of Glass is still, very much, a prototype. The Glass team mentions how Glass is still being shaped through the crucial and vital feedback of early Glass adopters (“Explorers”), and how the technology will continue to evolve until it’s one day “consumer ready.” They go onto to mention that the final or future versions of Glass may look vastly different from the current model — still in the prototype phase — liking the evolution to mobile phones from the 80’s compared to what we see today. Above, you can see for yourself the evolution of Glass over the course of 2 years.
Myth 5: Glass does facial recognition (and other dodgy things)
Google says that although technologically feasible, they made the decision to not release or even distribute through the official MyGlass store, any kind of facial recognition apps. They go onto mention that just because a “weird application” has been created by a developer, doesn’t mean it’s endorsed by Google. All apps that make it into the MyGlass store have been properly approved by Google, which means you wont find any sketchy apps violating anyone’s security on Glass. At least, not through official channels.
Myth 6: Glass covers your eye(s)
It’s a very common misconception that — like those scouters from the Dragon Ball Z series — Glass covers your right eye. Not true. Google carefully designed Glass so that it stays out of the user’s line of site, placed above the right eye — not directly in front of it. Once again, Glass were purposely designed this way to keep user’s engaged with the world, and not have their head buried into a phone display.
Myth 7: Glass is the perfect surveillance device
While it may be easier to get away with recording short snippets of video using Glass thanks to it’s always outward facing camera, I guess the same argument could be made with the smartphone. Simply pretend you’re firing off an email or text message, while “secretly” recording video footage.
Google was quick to point out that if someone really wanted to secretly record video, there are far better products out there for that sorta thing (spy pens anyone?). Also, if someone were recording you with Glass, it’s possible to look into the tiny display from the outside (which would remain on the entire time by the way), and you’d see yourself and a timer by looking directly into it. The more you know…
Myth 8: Glass is only for those privileged enough to afford it
Okay, in its current prototype form — Glass does not come cheap. For anyone looking to pick up a pair, it can currently be purchased for the low price of $1,500. Google’s acknowledges that while this might not be in everyone’s price range, it’s not only the “wealthy” or “entitled” who have picked up a pair (in my case, work paid for it).
Still, there’s no getting around the fact that this is a very expensive piece of technology, and might have something to do with the negativity surrounding Glass Explorers. Like those girls who love nothing more than to flash their Gucci/Prada handbags, we’re sure some people probably feel the same about lofty Glass Explorers.
Also worth noting was Google not even giving a hint that the price of Glass would come down (even a little bit) when the retail version is finally available. But it’s something we believe will (and needs to happen) if Google expects Glass to become a success.
Myth 9: Glass is banned… EVERYWHERE
This might sound crazy, but the other day while visiting the barber shop, the fella cutting my hair mentioned that he had heard “Google Glass was illegal,” and that it wasn’t allowed in stores. Of course, this simply is not true, but highlights a lot of misinformation and the power of word of mouth. But there are a lot of places you simply can’t (and shouldn’t) wear Google Glass. Whether it’s in the locker room, or while playing Black Jack, once again the same rules that apply to your smartphone, also apply to Google Glass.
When it comes to policy makers, Google reminds them that with prescription lenses now available for Glass, it probably be best to require only Google Glass be powered off, not removed completely from one’s head. Locker rooms can be a dangerous place to find yourself stumbling around blindly.
Myth 10: Glass marks the end of privacy
Look around the net, and you’ll find plenty of privacy advocates fearing technology like Google Glass will be the end of privacy. With camera technology becoming increasingly smaller with every passing year, you can find a camera attached to everything from our cars to smartwatches. But the Project Glass team doesn’t see it as something to be feared (or worse yet, banned).
Instead, Google sees the good outweighing the possibility of bad. Being able to capture life’s precious moments, completely hands-free, then sharing it with the people you love — that’s the true intent of Glass. Not uploading your face to a police database. Let’s not forget there were similar concerns back when the first camera phones began hitting the market. Now, here we are years later, demanding not just 1, but 2 high-resolution cameras be attached to our smartphones and tablets.
Conclusion
And that folks, are the common myths associated with Google Glass, many I’ve had firsthand experience with during my travels. As an Android blogger who writes about mobile technology every day, I ever expected to see Glass suffer such backlash from the public. What was once, “Wow. This is going to change the world!” has quickly turned into distaste and even ill will towards, not only Glass, but those who have adopted it.
Whether it has something to do with the high cost of entry or that, for many, Glass simply “looks silly,” is tough to say (probably a little bit of everything). One thing is clear: no matter Google’s intentions with Glass, their plan of creating demand for an innovative new product being teased for the masses may have backfired on them. There’s still plenty of time to turn the ship around before Glass is finally available to the public. If nothing else, it seems at best Google Glass users may soon find themselves lumped into the same boat as Prius-driving hipsters. Guess there are worse labels, right?
[Google+]
I am in the same boat as you. I am wearing Google Glass right now and there is no way I could afford them or that Louis Vuitton bag that is pictured. I get to play around with them because of the job I have. I was wondering though are those the actual prototypes of Glass?
That they are. Those are all the Glass prototypes over the course of 2 years.
The hardware of the first prototype is a Nexus One. That’s just awesome.
Makes you wonder what kind stuff Google is working on NOW that wont be revealed for another 2 years… *head explodes*
I believe the current guts of Google Glass are borrowed components from the Galaxy Nexus.
I haven’t really read up on developments but what type of material is used? Like is there talk of going with Corning for some durability?
Great read, Chris! Alot of those myths were really becoming a pain in the glass. Thanks for debunking many of them.
I have no idea why people are scared of facial recognition. It doesn’t assist in illigal/immoral behaviours. A person would have to stretch pretty hard to come up with a way this is worse then looking up people on facebook on a phone by hand. Unless your just worried people will know your name by looking at you and that creeps you out. *rolls eyes*
Well, I guess if “Len Waugh” has no idea why people are scared of facial recognition, then people just shouldn’t be afraid of it anymore. After all, you are “Len Waugh.” *rolls eyes*
That honestly sounds like what NSA program supporters say on the reg. “If your not a criminal/nothing to hide why are you afraid?”
Your lack of even an attempt at rebuttle just strengthens my point. Why you tried to make this some kind of personal ?attack? with the use of my name, I have no idea.
It’s not the technology on its own that scares people. Like many other types of advanced mobile devices it’s the potential for abuse that’s worrisome and rightly so.
The same wonderful technology that makes our lives a bit easier and more enjoyable can and is being abused by criminals, governments and all types of unsavory characters in between.
I can appreciate caution, especially from thoughs who do not understand… (things are scary if you think someone can look at you and see your bank pin)… but most on this site are details people. Surly google and us know that an app that checks your facebook friends and their public friends does no harm, even in theory.
And if, say, someone developes an app that say, searches an illigal copy of a licence registry or somthing, then that app is different, and could be banned. Banning all facial recognition is like banning cloning or stem cell research instead of just the small negative aspects of them. I hate to think tin foil hat wearers are preventing new progress.
I haven’t seen myself or dizel123 advocating for Glass to be outright “banned”. That’s like suggesting other mobile devices to be banned because of their potential for abuse. No, I certainly do not believe Glass should be banned.
I’m not sure if your implying that I do not understand Glass:
“I can appreciate caution, especially from thoughs who do not understand..”
I’m not a dullard nor am I one of the general consumers who are casual Android or other mobile tech users. Just because I express caution for the potential abuse for a device like Glass does not mean I don’t fully recognize the big positive potential it offers. Like mobile phones Glass has the potential to make many people’s lives a bit easier and more enjoyable. It’s a great piece of technology and I applaud its engineering.
My main reason to response to your initial comment was to question something you said:
“I have no idea why people are scared of facial recognition. It doesn’t assist in illigal/immoral behaviours.”
Yes it can. The potential for abuse is there. May I offer a similar question on another popular product?
“I have no idea why people are scared of Facebook/Google/Yahoo/Microsoft/(insert app) having so much personal information. I’m sure they’ll protect our privacy…”
Mobile phones are abused. Web cameras are abused. CCTV is abused. Glass is another example of something that can be abused to the extent where personal privacy is even further tarnished even though it’s a brilliant product with a lot of positive potential.
“Surly google and us know that an app that checks your facebook friends and their public friends does no harm, even in theory.”
You and the general public cannot afford to be that naive.
Expressing concern and asking more questions about Glass’ privacy issues should continue all along its development. I feel that’s being responsible. Doing that Google and other developers for Glass will be responsible to the safety of consumers as it should be.
When you create wonderful products like Glass it’s your responsibility to answer questions about its safety and security. Consumers deserve that. We all deserve the efforts from Google and developers to strive to protect privacy at every stage in its development of Glass and related products.
“And if, say, someone developes an app that say, searches an illigal copy of a licence registry or somthing, then that app is different, and could be banned.”
Banning apps hasn’t stopped abusers.
You cannot simply dismiss these questions from other consumers because YOU do not hold such concerns for safety and security. These people do not wear tin hats nor are they attempting to prevent new progress. I’m certainly not wearing one.
We are all just saying it’s important to point out and ask questions about any privacy and security issues related to Glass at every turn. It’s worth the effort to ask question. Always.
No, what I was referring to in regards to being banned was always on facial recognition technology.
In addition to helping you access your friends Facebook statuses at a glance, this technology can be used to assist in Amber Alert/Kidnapping cases as well as identifying high risk situations like when your talking to someone with similar features/similar location/similar time of day as a serial rapist.
It’s a shame Google straight up banned 100% of all facial recognition apps from their store, simply because people think an app to retrieve Amber Alerts will obviously also double as an app to help stalkers get their name.
Everything is always about the details, and in this case, Google has chosen to ignore them and just ban it all.
Seeing how some police departments are exploring the potential benefits of Glass like using it for assistance in locating missing children is another example of the positive things it can do for people.
Amber alerts on their own has a lot of room to improve without the use of Glass to assist it.
Myth #1: You feel manlier and cooler when wearing Google Glass
Fact, you DO NOT!
myth #11: glass is awesome!
pffft, you can have it.
Google needs to just release it otherwise people will continue to have misconceptions about it. Imagine the first ipad taking a year to launch after it was labelled with all the feminine product jokes and how nobody needs a tablet. Those talks stopped pretty quickly after launch. Might not have been so successful if they had waited. The same fear was there when cell phones with cameras became wide spread. All the gyms had signs warning against the use of cell phones in lockers and how its illegal and you will be fined or go to jail. That kind of stuff was on the news every week. I certainly see plenty of people on their phones in my gym inside and outside of the locker. Doesn’t seem to phase anyone anymore.
While for me I don’t see a personal use for glass (at least in the near term) I can certainly see their value for fire fighters, law enforcement and medical staff just to name a few. And to prevent their productive use because people have stupid fears of technology is just dumb and lacking in the wider view of technology. One complaint about glass is that its too big and looks stupid….remember the early cell phone bricks??
Itd be fun to have a terminator heads up displa y on glass.
Unrelated but I have to ask what you think about the proposal to change your national flag?
A new proposal? There was one movement a few years back that gained momentum and when it finally came to vote for it – they had a referendum during the national elections, it did very poor. It looks like Kiwis were all talk and no action. It would be good to have a national flag that wasnt mistaken for Australia or even part of the UK. Canada manage to do it.
:-)
Your right, Canada shook off the yoke of the English in that way. I was just reading this:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11224362
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9857725/Ditch-the-flag-New-York-Times
A few design proposals you might have already seen. I like them.
Hey where did my honest candid comment go? Anyone who doesn’t worship the glass is not welcome here!
I predict there will be a giant issue with people looking at my kids thru these glasses, and I’ll do what’s necessary to immediately neutralize such a significant threat to my kid’s safety via potential pervs using these with “unofficial” recognition software. I don’t know if a stranger has the software and I don’t know if they’re recording, but I can’t afford to care. It’s going to be a giant problem that you guys have conveniently glossed over thus far. As a parent I will never ever rule out direct physical confrontation, just as I’d do if a stranger walked up to my boys with a cell phone recording. And that’s no myth.
As a parent myself I understand your concern for the potential abuse for something like Glass. It’s ok to do so. Please don’t allow others to dismiss your fears because they do not have the right to do so. Simply because THEY don’t share your concern doesn’t mean your in the wrong for asking question.
ALWAYS ask questions. Like I’ve said here before, Glass is a brilliant product and has lots of POSITIVE potential but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ask questions regarding the safety and security for those that are not wearing Glass.
Continue to ask questions.
What do you think someone will Google Glass will be able to do that they can’t already do more effectively with a smartphone? If someone wanted to film your children, they’d use a smartphone and pretend to be writing a text message. They’re not going to use something that means drawing attention to themselves and staring directly at your child, just like they’re not going to walk up to your boys holding their phone like a camera obviously recording.
The bad news is that perverts already have a million opportunities to film your children that are far more effective than anything Google Glass will offer. The good news is that this is largely an invention of sensationalising tabloids.
No, if they point a smartphone at my kid, I can clearly see that, esp for an extended period.
And it’s really tiring reading the same repeated excuse, “well other technologies can technically do illegal pervy things, so glass should be allowed to do it more easily.” That lame weak justification is on this site at least 50 times. When discussing different types of firearms and gun deaths do you use that logic as well?
I have bad news for you. If a perv wants a picture of your kid he has it. Like Quboid has already stated, its easy to pretend to make a text message… take a picture of your own kid, play angry birds etc.. and a picture only takes a half second to take. That and you can’t be looking in every direction at every moment. And even f you did ‘catch’ some one… it would be you in jail not them if you try and be a tough guy.
The best prevention is to keep your kids off social media. If there not on the grid, theres nothing pervs can find.
The counter point here is, if the reigns come off the google glass store, facial recognition software can warn parents like you who is on the sexual offenders list. The list is public and is perfect for software recognition. Even if your guard is down, google glass (and some battery innovation) could tell you theres a creep in the park. It’s a bit like the argument for guns, the bad guys will use technology reguardless, best to make it easier for the good guys.
Look Len, I know I’m in the uber-techy lion’s den here and zero will agree with me. Sure everyone who’s testing these and promotes google’s ‘mythbusting’ as gospel already have their mind made up on this. But I don’t. I have huge invasion of privacy concerns, and the fact that other types of cameras exist out there don’t minimize those concerns at all. Google will not only be datamining the people who wear these, they’ll ultimately (and very quickly) be datamining whoever’s in their line of sight, and for folks not to expect that is supremely shortsighted.
Can you imagine the day where a ‘govt-proclaimed fugitive’ (Ed Snowden etc) is announced as public enemy #1 and everyone with google glass is like a robot looking for the guy on any streetcorner? Do you think that’s so far-fetched? I understand “that day will get here someday anyway”, but doesn’t mean I need to support it or be a part of it.
Until then I’m just another dad who will do whatever I can to protect the privacy and safety of my kids, and if I end up in jail a few times so be it as long as they’re a bit safer. In the real world outside of this blog, that’s not as paranoid or weird as you may think.
Accept you have yet to show any real reason to back up your fears. Now, I know you will never change your mind. Your anti google glass and that is your agenda. But your concerns should be addressed so other people reading can make proper informed choices.
Also, there are already laws in place limiting what google can and can not do with data mining. You may remember how much trouble they got in just for recording info people were publically broadcasting from their wifi’s.
As far as your tough guy ideas. No one takes internet tough guys serious… but letrs say you were willing to assult people for wearing google glass in public. You would do the following:
-People would wear it more, especially around your kids. Trying to tell some one no is the best way to make people passionate about things.
-You would goto jail. Your kids would be at higher risk to all kinda of danger. With you in jail, thats one less person watching over them. Also, the manner of why you went to jail would attract extra attention to you and your kids.
-You drag down your cause. Right now privacy concerns are a big and respected topic. If one side starts using violence then they lose support.
Now I respect your desire for privacy, but I strongly recommend more research and less reaction. The best way to protect your kids is not to keep them off cameras. A face is just a face. Its to keep them off facebook. Facebook is were all their data is.
Len you’ve obviously had plenty of time to spin your talking points, as this is your life. I’m just a guy who stumbled onto this site, however I’ll try again to explain my position.
First, you’re getting too caught up in the “tough guy” stuff. There are plenty of stressed out overprotective parents out there who will lash out far quicker than me when it comes to strangers with glass pointed at their kids. Google has a huge image problem in this regard, and you trying to belittle me won’t begin to solve it. I’ll protect my kids the way I see fit, and you’ll never bully or ridicule me out of it.
Next, you’re disingenuous use of the word “agenda” to marginalize my opinion is transparent. You know I have no “agenda”, I don’t work for a competing “glass” maker and could care less about whether it’s Google or anyone else making them. What I have is called a “valid reasoned opinion”. “Agenda’s” belong to folks who have a vested interest in something and are quick to dismiss anyone or anything that doesn’t fit their narrative towards achieving their goal, regardless of truth. Not saying that’s you, but if the shoe fits…
Finally, good point about the wifi’s. Google got caught illegally recording private citizen’s wifi’s after a very long time, and the punishment was, well nothing. A tiny fine & admonishment? That’s the only thing protecting us from Google datamining us illegally….if and when we even catch them. What makes you think me or anyone else is comfortable with that?
You’re still attacking my opinion because it stands in the way of your hope that glass will just be accepted everywhere. You’re telling me I should just ignore my privacy concerns because some mystical thingy has my back, but can’t say what that is (it sure ain’t the gov’t). You constantly deflect “blame” towards Facebook or other social media. And you seem to think I have some “cause”. I’m a dad, with an opinion, who’s saying to you this “10 Myths” propaganda put out by Google and regurgitated on many tech sites doesn’t begin to address many folks’ true issues with glass.
On the contrary. I have been trying very hard to speak to you respectfully. It’s very difficult however as you are coming from this with a “laymans” point of view. Which ties into my use of the word “agenda”. You do not seem interested in learning anymore. You know enough about this now and and have strong enough opinion that you want to show your opinion to others. (for whatever reasons, I can only guess, but thats your agenda)
Now, either of thoughs points on there own are fine. But together are not good. You say this subject is “my life”. If that’s so, maybe I know a bit about what I am talking about. I never claimed a mystical thing has your back. I would never state somthing with out facts. The facts in this case is, glass can take low quality pictures very overtly. Any threat from glass pales in comparison to even a cheap smart phones as they are easier to hide and cheaper. By being scared of glass (combined with many others) you slow innovation and stop the many good things glass can help us do, while not slowing devient behaviour at all.
Now, I have an agenda too. But it’s pretty noble in my opinion. I want to teach people about technology so they know how things can help, and how things can hurt. In this case, the parts your scared of are the least harmful… while the things you have already accepted are the higher risk technologies.
You kind of shrugged off what I said about facebook, but since you have it attached to your disqus account, I was able to find out some information about you. If i was a dangerous person (And I am not, I legitimatly am just here to help and have an interesting conversation) I would no how to find you, know who your friends were, etc… The other side to that, if I had a picture of you, or even your kids…. then I woukd have a picture. Even with facebooks facial recognition, unless your already “my friend” , I can not use an image to get anything.
Len, in what way have you or any of the Glass Ambassadors been respectful. You have basically demanded that everyone kowtow to what you want with little regard for anyone else’s worries. Well so far your devices ambassadors have been anything but confrontational. Please understand that us mere mortals have our worries about companies that claim to “do no evil” sucking up massive amounts of data on us. And don’t bother with the no one wants to record me crap, because obviously Google does. It wants all the information on everyone it can get and that my friend is incredibly creepy.
In what way has anyone on this site not been respectful? At worst they voiced that they felt you were being paranoid. We are not “ambassadors”, just people who love technology and want to share our interest with like minded people. You voiced concerns over google glass and we happily addressed them. A few of us pointed out why glass was not a threat, or at worst, nothing more then a camera. After we address issues you add more. This started with worry about perverts and children, then moved to worry about goverments and google.
To be honest here, I don’t know what would make you happy here. Help me out.
Now I can mention how people like us, normal people who just love technology, track all the data going in and out of our devices. Things like wireshark and what not make it very easy. We can tell you all about googles meta data. What it does and doesn’t include. But at this point I suspect that that wouldn’t be good enough. Google Glass is not a threat. Google infact has more privacy safe guards on Google Glass then on todays smart phones. Your not going to read worse on here because were not going to lie to you.
Anyways, I am done feeding the troll. You have a nice day.
Jesus Len, you could have said that from the start and we coulda saved a lot of words. If you just want to “share your interest with like-minded ‘normal’ people who love technology”, then by definition you have no interest in hearing opinions from a guy like me. This was never a reasoned discussion.
But here’s my response anyway. I’d still like to know regarding glass or any Google product, who has our back Len? Given they already got caught illegally recording private data for years and were fined $7mil (on revenues of $13bil, which is equal to you making $100,000/yr for several years and being fined ten bucks once), who’s guarding the chicken coop? Are my fears that irrational? What. Is. The. Answer. To. That. Question.
Your line about “only recording low quality pics” is a bit funny. That’s like ten years ago when my town responded to privacy concerns with, “We’re just putting up one camera, and it’s only to monitor traffic at this int”). Ya know, the cameras that are now on every road and can read license plates. So let’s not continue the “low res” chat.
Re- Facebook, my kids don’t have accounts, I have almost nothing on there and what is there is false (and yea I know you could still find stuff somewhere). You don’t know my friends, and even if you did FB has nothing to do with the glass discussion. It’s a diversion that I guess works in some discussions because it keeps coming up here. Social media does not equate to face-recognition software easily available thru “dubious” channels to every glass wearer who’s looking at me. And even if it did, you argument still seems to be “Well since my neighbor has a rifle, it should be OK for me to have a grenade launcher.”
I’m not “slowing innovation” Len. And I have no beef with Google, I have a gmail and plenty of other crap. Take the prying camera off the front and I have no issues with it (guess until my kid gets killed by a distracted driver). But I have a real problem with a camera lens pointed at me by every cretin who looks my way (and sure, some harmless people too). Smart phones don’t do that, and you know it.
You really hold your phone up like your taking a picture when you type a text or play a game. That is the stupidest claim I have heard yet.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/120608071916-minimize-cell-phone-radiation-smartphone-story-top.jpg
Is she texting or waiting to snap a picture the second you look away? Better call the cops just to be sure. You really think it’s much of a strech to lean back a bit more while you use your phone?
I didn’t use any such excuse, I repeated pointed out that this would be more difficult, not easier. How could you possibly have failed to read or understand something that I made very clear several times? No wonder you read it so often, you see it when it doesn’t exist.
No one has to point their smartphone at your kid. Not for an extended period of time, not for a second. I’ve filmed things I wasn’t supposed to (pictures in a museum) by putting my phone in my shirt pocket with the camera lens just poking out. It looks natural, like I’ve just my phone away as I was supposed to. If you start getting physical with anyone who has their phone in their shirt pocket, you’ll get into trouble very quickly.
Glass doesn’t allow anyone to do this more easily. It would be more difficult. It’s a lot easier to see someone staring at your kid for an extended period than someone who has a camera effectively invisible in their bag.
“Hey, I know what would be great for secretly filming children at the park. Something that requires me to stare directly at them the entire time I’m recording” – you really think this is what they’ll think?!
Your post is ridiculous. It’s irrational and silly as well.
You’re not stopping the future no matter how much you huff and puff and anyway, being paranoid about Google Glass is like anti-gun people forgetting that there are other ways to kill people.
His concerns are valid. We shouldn’t dismiss them because we hold no such fears. He’s got a right to be concerned as a parent. There’s nothing wrong with that. He’s not advocating for anyone to “stop the future” or prevent innovation. That’s too much a knee-jerk reaction.
It’s OK to ask questions. No harm in that.
If I want to record your kids, there are a hundred products I could use that you would NEVER notice, unlike Glass, which is obvious.
The fact that you are a parent and can’t be bothered to educate yourself about REAL risks — and instead choose to focus on nonsense — is really sad. Your kids deserve better.
Wow so all you do to defend this device is insult other people. You really are a great ambassador for this device.
A quick search on amazon finds me several glasses frames that are pretty much indistinguishable from normal that can record high def video without even alerting anyone to the presence of a recording device. It also finds me several cheaper knockoffs that are obviously video recording glasses, but there are some quality ones on there too. At least with Glass, you know the person next to you is wearing Glass.
Sad but real fact. Wear Google glass = no one in public will trust you.
Nothing I can do about the irrational fears of other people. Screw ’em.
You want people to respect your choices but you refuse to respect theirs. I guess glass hole is appropriate.
Maybe the person who is against glass is the real A-hole.
Two people with different views. But you suggest that one view should get respect and the other should not.
I can respect that someone may not like Glass. But I cannot do anything about people’s irrational fears. I’m not going to change my behavior just because of other people’s irrationality. The irrational people are the ones who should not be respected.
Let’s start down the road of respecting every irrational fear and see where we end up.
This isn’t 9/11 son
I respect the choices of others. If someone were to tell me that it makes them uncomfortable while I’m wearing it in their presence, I would gladly remove it – then let them try it on to show them it doesn’t do anything until you command it to do so.
Anyone else notice Google chose the name “Android Wear” instead of something like “Android Watch” or “Android Wrist”? Is this just coincidence, or is Android Wear the future of Google Glass? We already know that Android Wear was influenced by Google Glass, but could Wear be the actual OS that Glass ships with just slightly modified? It would seem to make sense to lay the framework with Android Wear so that when Google Glass launches there is already tons of compatible apps.
Fact : what glass is not — a useful standalone device
It’s not ment to be stand alone. Why require a simcard when all moile devices can be used as a hotspot. I am sure they will eventually come out with connected versions but I dont expect they will see much use. Everyone has a smart phone these days.
As a mainstream consumer device, I hope Glass, and other products like it, bite the dust.
If a surgeon can perform their job better or a pilot, firefighter, etc. then I’m all for technology making our lives better & safer.
When concerning day-to-day AR type of stuff, I see this as the douche bag single-ear bluetooth headset / Blackberry belt clip on steroids. You look like a tool, and you smell like one, too.
Your opinion. Thanks?
I’ve run into people like you before, and when I approach you with Glass (due to your snide remarks that you won’t say to my face) and say “Hey try it on”. Nothing but smiles are returned. I know I don’t look like a tool, but hey you’re telling the story, right?
I know you’re not shocked to find opinions in the comments section of a website. You can’t be.
Also, I’ve got no problem telling someone they look like a tool to their face. I don’t fear physical retaliation, if that’s what you’re suggesting would be on the table.
Not shocked. After all, it’s the comments section.
I’ve got better things to do than fight people – so no physical retaliation isn’t my thing either, especially for someone’s verbal opinion. Lay a hand on me and we’ve got a problem, otherwise, carry on.
I feel sad to say I agree, I enjoy the new wearables coming out but I saw glass in person and it did not look good. I can’t see myself using it really even if they do perfect it down to a smaller size.But I guess only time will tell, there is still much development to be done.
Fact: if Google Glass came free with every new smartphone purchase they would sell well.
glass is not ready for prime time, have you seen that thing in person? It looks horrendous. Honestly I’m all for new ideas in tech coming out, i’m all about the smartwatch, but glass just doesn’t seem like it will catch on. I mean EVEN IF we got it to where glass looked like a normal pair of glasses and you couldn’t even tell what it was I would still not be sure the total use I would have for it about a smart watch. I mean I guess having notifications on my glasses would be interesting but that’s really about it. However I guess others may see it differently.