Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Glass

dcurt.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 180 posts

Re: Glass

#11

Post by saurik »

tomasien wrote: post #6

Anyone want an unsolicited opinion? waits for everyone to leave I hope Google Glass is an experiment, because voice reco isn't particularly important outside of when you're driving. When I get tired of texting and consider voice reco, 2 things hit me (and others, I've done solid research on this) 1. Voice reco would be slightly better now that I'm tired of texting, but not much. 2. It is nowhere near socially accepta…

(I agree with you, and want to be clear that I do not bring up this example with the goal of showing you are "wrong", but someone I know brought up the example of "while cooking, and your hands are messy", and it made me think that there were at least a few other non biking/driving examples where voice recognition would be valuable. Still, however, I agree with you.)

Re: Glass

#12

Post by rdl »

I'd personally settle for a voice-output-only Glass (maybe with chording for text input to avoid the "talking to yourself crazy person" problem, and with a camera/microphone built in for ambient data gathering).

Hardware we could have built for the last 10 years, and really unobtrusive. You'd need better UI and software than with video, since information needs to be more closely tailored for a lower bitrate channel, but I think Google (or a smart startup) could do it.

99% of the reasons I use video are because I need to do the filtering and postprocessing in my head. If I had complete trust in a great software agent, I could just let it tell me what to do, vs. showing me enough data to make a decision. e.g. for driving, you can give directions by voice (if you're a talented codriver) which do NOT require any visual information to the driver during a high-speed rally. Almost no car nav systems are that smart, but if Google can build a self-driving car, they should be able to make an awesome codriver/navigator.

Extends to almost anything. I don't need to see a picture of someone and a dossier; just remind me of the most critical facts as needed, by voice.

This should be just as good as having a clone of yourself, or an entire team of ops people, watching/listening to what you do, and giving you voice prompts, just like a video game, or being the President on TV in a live debate, or whatever.

The hardware is trivial; it's all software and back-end processing, which Apple sucks at and Google/Amazon/Startup should rock at.

Re: Glass

#13

Post by metaeaux »

PiersonBro wrote: post #9
koko775 wrote: post #4

You might want to check which of your eyes is dominant. At Google I/O they mentioned that if Glass shows on your dominant eye that it might be a safety issue - but if it's on your non-dominant eye, it'll be more of an overlay and less of an obstruction to your vision. They're working on a mirrored version that goes on the other eye.

Interesting that Sergey Brin called Glass basically done when something as major as a mirrored version is in the works. That doesn't bode well for the project.

A mirrored version is relatively trivial. It does not introduce any new technical challenges. From a technical point of view, the hardware is done and that's what google[x] focuses on.

Re: Glass

#14

Post by Volpe »

tomasien wrote: post #6

Anyone want an unsolicited opinion? waits for everyone to leave I hope Google Glass is an experiment, because voice reco isn't particularly important outside of when you're driving. When I get tired of texting and consider voice reco, 2 things hit me (and others, I've done solid research on this) 1. Voice reco would be slightly better now that I'm tired of texting, but not much. 2. It is nowhere near socially accepta…

sitting at a table messing on a computer in your hand used to be socially unacceptable.

Re: Glass

#15

Post by maddddddddddddd »

if the new google+ interface is any indication of the future of google development, it's quite obvious they don't know what they are doing. nothing works anymore. littered with bugs. the only features i enjoyed before (hangouts), have been reimagined to cripple only the features of the service i enjoyed or used. google is butt.

Re: Glass

#16

Post by dag11 »

ars wrote: post #2

Can you retitle this to "Google Glass"? I know the policy is to copy the original title, but "Glass" is too generic.

I figured it was about Google Glass from "Glass" alone.

Re: Glass

#17

Post by sliverstorm »

tomasien wrote: post #6

Anyone want an unsolicited opinion? waits for everyone to leave I hope Google Glass is an experiment, because voice reco isn't particularly important outside of when you're driving. When I get tired of texting and consider voice reco, 2 things hit me (and others, I've done solid research on this) 1. Voice reco would be slightly better now that I'm tired of texting, but not much. 2. It is nowhere near socially accepta…

Voice reco isn't very important now, but it is important to the future of computing. It enables a lot of things in fields like wearable computing that aren't really doable right now, because the HID becomes a microphone instead of a keyboard or other input device, which is much easier to stuff into small awkward places.

Re: Glass

#18

Post by gwillen »

rdl wrote: post #12

I'd personally settle for a voice-output-only Glass (maybe with chording for text input to avoid the "talking to yourself crazy person" problem, and with a camera/microphone built in for ambient data gathering). Hardware we could have built for the last 10 years, and really unobtrusive. You'd need better UI and software than with video, since information needs to be more closely tailored for a lower bitrate channel,…

You don't even _need_ Glass for that -- just an unobtrusive bluetooth headset, and a good backend.

Re: Glass

#19

Post by timcederman »

This reminds me a lot of PDAs, etc, 10 years ago. Not sure how long until we solve the ubicomp issues of something like glass, but I'm bullish we will.

Re: Glass

#20

Post by rdl »

gwillen wrote: post #18
rdl wrote: post #12

I'd personally settle for a voice-output-only Glass (maybe with chording for text input to avoid the "talking to yourself crazy person" problem, and with a camera/microphone built in for ambient data gathering). Hardware we could have built for the last 10 years, and really unobtrusive. You'd need better UI and software than with video, since information needs to be more closely tailored for a lower bitrate channel,…

You don't even _need_ Glass for that -- just an unobtrusive bluetooth headset, and a good backend.

Video and ambient mic would be nice, and data. We could have had this 10+ years ago, although it really only became practical with 3G I think.
Post reply on HN