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

Glasshole

penny-arcade.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 106 posts

Re: Glasshole

#21

Post by Zikes »

BurritoAlPastor wrote: post #18
enraged_camel wrote: post #16

I think there is good discussion to be had here, but holy shit , I have never been able to get over how utterly pretentious Jerry's writing is. The comics are usually fantastic and at strange odds with the accompanying news.

It's always been my understanding that he writes that way simply because he enjoys it, and he's perpetually incredulous that he can make a living doing so.

I certainly enjoy reading it. I've always found his articles insightful and well-reasoned, and if I happen to learn a new word or two in the process then all the better.

Generally when I read something and judge it to be pretentious, it's because the author is using words that are out of his/her depth, in an attempt to impress the reader. When Jerry writes I get the impression he's choosing his words carefully and with equal intent to entertain and to inform.

Re: Glasshole

#22

Post by derefr »

enraged_camel wrote: post #16

I think there is good discussion to be had here, but holy shit , I have never been able to get over how utterly pretentious Jerry's writing is. The comics are usually fantastic and at strange odds with the accompanying news.

It has never occurred to me to call the way Jerry writes "pretentious." Most of the time I would call it "comedic" (specifically, containing great amounts of bathos)--he makes very creative, unexpected, and over-the-top use of the English language to convey relatively normal opinions on relatively boring subjects, in a way that makes me want to read his thoughts on things I couldn't otherwise care less about.

Re: Glasshole

#23

Post by [deleted] »

enraged_camel wrote: post #16

I think there is good discussion to be had here, but holy shit , I have never been able to get over how utterly pretentious Jerry's writing is. The comics are usually fantastic and at strange odds with the accompanying news.

[deleted]

Re: Glasshole

#24

Post by gaius »

apashee wrote: post #10
gaius wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over and above the privacy issues, you can never have the undivided attention of someone wearing Glass. That's deeply off-putting. Imagine trying to have a conversation with someone as they listened to headphones and stared at their phone the whole time.

I think that's going a little too far. Already we've embedded ourselves in a world where many people break open their phone in the middle of a conversation. Yes, it's rude. But it's still a change that's happening in the world. However, Glass isn't always on, at least not right now. You have to manually turn it on, which means it'll be akin to taking out your phone.

But can you see if someone else's Glass is displaying them something or whispering them something? At least with a phone it's obvious.

Re: Glasshole

#25

Post by Zikes »

Kylekramer wrote: post #13
enraged_camel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cellphones are in people's pockets or purses most of the time, and even when they are being used the camera is mostly pointing at the ground or the person's lap. Google Glass will show The Watchers exactly what the person is looking at. Even when the person takes it off and puts it on, say, a table surface, it will be showing something , as opposed to a phone which either points downward or up towards the ceiling. I…

Doesn't the sheer amount of noise (in the intelligence agencies' eyes) produced by Glass make it a fairly useless data source? If I worked for the secret shadowy three initial organizations I rather have access to call logs and email. At least it would have some curation.

I think that's the key point here. The sheer amount of data being stored is surely almost completely useless when it comes to preventing crime, but would be invaluable when it comes time to investigate a crime, or if you want to target a specific individual to harass.

Re: Glasshole

#26

Post by easong »

gaius wrote: post #24
apashee wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's going a little too far. Already we've embedded ourselves in a world where many people break open their phone in the middle of a conversation. Yes, it's rude. But it's still a change that's happening in the world. However, Glass isn't always on, at least not right now. You have to manually turn it on, which means it'll be akin to taking out your phone.

But can you see if someone else's Glass is displaying them something or whispering them something? At least with a phone it's obvious.

Yes, actually. The screen lights up and it's pretty obvious. Most of the people I talk to while wearing glass notice it immediately when it comes on.

Re: Glasshole

#27

Post by [deleted] »

enraged_camel wrote: post #16

I think there is good discussion to be had here, but holy shit , I have never been able to get over how utterly pretentious Jerry's writing is. The comics are usually fantastic and at strange odds with the accompanying news.

[deleted]

Re: Glasshole

#28

Post by RyanZAG »

gaius wrote: post #5
ironchief wrote: post #3

He brings up a very good point that a lot the information humans pickup is from each other's faces. The nonverbal feedback facilitates turn-taking in conversation as well as emotional feedback. Perhaps Glass causes visceral reactions because of the combination of its foreignness (unlike glasses) and proximity to the face.

Over and above the privacy issues, you can never have the undivided attention of someone wearing Glass. That's deeply off-putting. Imagine trying to have a conversation with someone as they listened to headphones and stared at their phone the whole time.

I'm not sure why this is a problem - do you feel conversation with you would be boring enough that people would want to escape to Glass? If a conversation is interesting, it has my undivided attention regardless of what loud music, landing airplanes, or waving shop attendants are doing. If a conversation isn't interesting, I'm already looking around for other more interesting ways to get away from the conversation.

Glass is hardly the problem there - if the conversation is interesting, people will turn off any music being played and ignore whatever is happening on Glass.

Re: Glasshole

#29

Post by doktrin »

It will take a while before I am comfortable with others wearing Glass around me. The thought of speaking to someone wearing the device makes me a little uncomfortable. I realize that may sound a little luddite-esque to certain members of this community, but there you have it.

This is a resistance that I'm sure is shared by many in the general public. It's something we all may get used to eventually, but I honestly predict a fairly grating and occasionally unpleasant transition period.

Re: Glasshole

#30

Post by [deleted] »

enraged_camel wrote: post #11
cookiecaper wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is already carrying a remote tracking and recording device called a cell phone, optionally including video (which may or may not be useful). Admittedly Glass gives a much better vantage point for videos, but that's the only added aspect.

Cellphones are in people's pockets or purses most of the time, and even when they are being used the camera is mostly pointing at the ground or the person's lap. Google Glass will show The Watchers exactly what the person is looking at. Even when the person takes it off and puts it on, say, a table surface, it will be showing something , as opposed to a phone which either points downward or up towards the ceiling. I…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN