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

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: Glasshole

#91

Post by sliverstorm »

mitchty wrote: post #77
showerst wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting thing about glass is how quickly it blurs the definition of 'public'. I know that anything I say out loud on a street corner is fair game, and (less explicitly) in a restaurant or bar, but what about a house party? At a friends' dinner table? While watering my back lawn in my gym shorts? Right now the obviousness of (most) recording sets the social norm at "don't point a camera at someone in most situ…

Spot on, the issue that people have with the concept of everyone always recording (or at least being able to obtain what they saw over the past N minutes) has to do with an implicit part of the human social contract up until this point. Basically you could go outside in "public" and within legal bounds do what you wanted with minimal repercussions or lasting impact. But if someone with these devices records you, now…

Unless we jump right to, "Everybody does and says crazy stuff, so it doesn't matter what you said" (which we won't) we are going to go through a period of being extremely cautious. Any time someone with Glass is around, or any time you think someone with Glass might be around, you are speaking the Queen's English and watching what you say & do as if you were on TV.

Re: Glasshole

#92

Post by acchow »

lmkg wrote: post #41

So I just remembered that I actually have some personal experience with this issue. My girlfriend is getting her PhD in computer vision, and one of her labmates was working on summarization algorithms (imagine a program that could take 6 hours of continuous footage, and spit out a 1-minute highlight reel). She volunteered to wear a camera for a day to gather data for him, and she asked me permission to do so while we…

Glass is simply paving the way for the future forcing us to deal with the privacy and social issues now. Eventually we will have video recording devices smaller than a grain of rice. What then?

Re: Glasshole

#93

Post by Jach »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #82
Jach wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if I ever get a glass, that little feature is being hacked right out one way or another. Many others will do the same. In the meantime I get to watch and laugh as people forget there are billions of people in the world. People who are afraid of being "The Guy" because once upon a time your small social group was your entire world... Yet the vast majority of people in the world have no idea who Lena Söderberg is o…

> And if I ever get a glass, that little feature is being hacked right out one way or another. Why would you bother when you can just by a micro camera today that is already easily concealed? Honestly, Google Glass is being unfairly crucified here, the cat was already let of that bag a few years ago.

I agree, though presumably Glass will be useful for things other than continuous recording, whereas a camera is just that.

Re: Glasshole

#94

Post by Pelayo »

oinksoft wrote: post #33
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.

I've always found the comic pretentious and unfunny. Probably because a character almost always is given a mouth-breathing look of stupidity in at least one panel. The joke of the comic has always seemed to be, "look at this thing I've seen people doing, wow that's idiotic, here's the flawed thinking that led to that." This is only based on the Penny Arcade comics I've seen that have gone viral, so perhaps it is not…

In this case, Mike (Gabe) has been using Glass for a couple of days (week?). He actually posted his thoughts on it and one of the issues was the rudeness in pointing a camera an mike at everyone.

Re: Glasshole

#95

Post by alanfalcon »

sliverstorm wrote: post #91
mitchty wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot on, the issue that people have with the concept of everyone always recording (or at least being able to obtain what they saw over the past N minutes) has to do with an implicit part of the human social contract up until this point. Basically you could go outside in "public" and within legal bounds do what you wanted with minimal repercussions or lasting impact. But if someone with these devices records you, now…

Unless we jump right to, "Everybody does and says crazy stuff, so it doesn't matter what you said" (which we won't) we are going to go through a period of being extremely cautious. Any time someone with Glass is around, or any time you think someone with Glass might be around, you are speaking the Queen's English and watching what you say & do as if you were on TV.

If people who consent to be in documentaries and reality TV shows often admit to eventually "forgetting the cameras are there" and acting semi-normally despite their presence, then how will Google Glass be any different? There will be a short time period in an individual's life where it's new and they're processing it and they act differently, but then surely we'll all reach the point of "forgetting the cameras are there" and stop minding our Ps and Qs. (Whether this is a good outcome or a bad outcome is left as an exercise to the reader.)

Re: Glasshole

#96

Post by octatone2 »

acchow wrote: post #92
lmkg wrote: post #41

So I just remembered that I actually have some personal experience with this issue. My girlfriend is getting her PhD in computer vision, and one of her labmates was working on summarization algorithms (imagine a program that could take 6 hours of continuous footage, and spit out a 1-minute highlight reel). She volunteered to wear a camera for a day to gather data for him, and she asked me permission to do so while we…

Glass is simply paving the way for the future forcing us to deal with the privacy and social issues now. Eventually we will have video recording devices smaller than a grain of rice. What then?

Invisibility cloaks.

Re: Glasshole

#97

Post by marcosscriven »

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.

I don't think the writing is pretentious, it's simply bad and awkward. People are commenting he just likes to use words, but there are ways of doing that, while at the same time crafting something that flows well.

Re: Glasshole

#98

Post by jholman »

jacques_chester wrote: post #90
aeontech wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy shit, you just made me realize Snow Crash is coming to reality (for certain parts of it) faster than expected :)

People who work at places like Google have been known, from time to time, read science fiction. A lot of it comes true because someone says "yes, good idea".

If only someone would make real-life versions of those flip-open communicators from Star Trek TOS. Maybe someone at Motorola could do that.

Or, on the subject of Snow Crash, if only someone would make that thing in Snow Crash called Earth. (Though if they did make it and then Motorola bought it, I expect they'd name it Motorola Earth, which sounds dumb. Unless someone bought Motorola first.)

Re: Glasshole

#99

Post by icebraining »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #83

I think I am in the minority when I say I am looking forward to continuous backup of my day to day activities whether it be through sousveillance or from others. I am not in the "if you don't have anything to hide crowd..." in the least and am certainly aware of the ability of those in power to abuse it. My take on it however is, I am going to just slough off the mores which I would have previously been concerned wit…

I think you and I are privileged to live in relatively open societies, and to fit in well enough such that the worst that can happen is to be embarrassed for things we've done wrong.

But what about people in less open societies, and who don't fit what society thinks should be the norm? For a gay man in a more conservative place, the "honesty policy" may imply great physical harm.

And even if you actually fit in to the stereotype of the Good Citizen, what about misunderstandings? What happens if a clip of a few seconds gets taken out of context of a conversation (even by accident), which makes you sound like you support some terrible thing, helpfully linked to your name by Google's algorithms?

Re: Glasshole

#100

Post by jacques_chester »

jholman wrote: post #98
jacques_chester wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who work at places like Google have been known, from time to time, read science fiction. A lot of it comes true because someone says "yes, good idea".

If only someone would make real-life versions of those flip-open communicators from Star Trek TOS. Maybe someone at Motorola could do that. Or, on the subject of Snow Crash, if only someone would make that thing in Snow Crash called Earth. (Though if they did make it and then Motorola bought it, I expect they'd name it Motorola Earth, which sounds dumb. Unless someone bought Motorola first.)

And I first read about iPads in Futuretrack Five.
Post reply on HN