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

Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

news.cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 51 posts

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#21

Post by stcredzero »

potatolicious wrote: post #6
jonny_eh wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were laws really the reason why the Segway didn't take off? I figure it didn't take off for the same reason non-overly obese people don't use Rascal carts. People were worried about being perceived as lazy. They're also really expensive, so you'd be perceived as snobbish as well. Just look at Gob's character in Arrested Development. They didn't stick him on a Segway because he's a prudent person that needs to get to…

I've always thought Segway's failure was simply because it created more problems than it solved. It was expensive, large, you had to find somewhere to park it, you had to remember to charge it, it came with an aura of snobbishness (at that price tag, not entirely undeserved). And it solved... what? In suburban America it doesn't go fast or far enough to get you anywhere in reasonable time. In urban America the distan…

It solved problems for cities and city planners. A Segway user could be like an enhanced pedestrian. You could have fewer stores serve a larger populace. It didn't get to do this because it didn't solve its own chicken and egg problem.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#22

Post by hfsktr »

jspark wrote: post #18
Snoptic wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is idiotic opposition. Spy cameras exist. Bluetooth earpieces exist, Glass is interesting for what it receives (the server software integration) and for its HUD, not what it caputures and transmits.

Google Glass will make recording others openly acceptable. Spy cameras and earpieces don't exist with the intention of ubiquitous use while Glass does. Can you imagine everyone you know who wears glasses now using a camera at all times?

Wouldn't it only be the people who want to use a camera? Unless you are suggesting that all glasses in the future will have video/audio technologies?

I don't think much of Glass. Just doesn't appeal to me but I am curious about what makes it special for others.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#23

Post by greetings »

mgkimsal wrote: post #17
hosay123 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more interesting question is how many multiples of existing growth will it be before Google start to use the data they collect in incredibly unfriendly ways. How will they push their stock price above $1000? $1200? I'd like to suggest another metric: September 11s (or "9/11s"). How many 9/11s will it be before Google's reuse of the data they collect is popularly legitimized, in their new role as the nation's bigg…

Maybe they could create an RSS reader, and keep track of analytics and behaviour on how people read and consume their favorite sites' content, then insert relevant ads in that experience?

And then after it is widely used they could discontinue it.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#24

Post by Silhouette »

jspark wrote: post #18
Snoptic wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is idiotic opposition. Spy cameras exist. Bluetooth earpieces exist, Glass is interesting for what it receives (the server software integration) and for its HUD, not what it caputures and transmits.

Google Glass will make recording others openly acceptable. Spy cameras and earpieces don't exist with the intention of ubiquitous use while Glass does. Can you imagine everyone you know who wears glasses now using a camera at all times?

Google Glass will make recording others openly acceptable.

Or it will result in a literally violent backlash against constant privacy invasion.

Or hopefully something in between, like the village who just ran the Google Street View car out of town when they heard it was coming (though it was disappointing to hear that Google later went back and got the footage anyway).

Mass surveillance is not OK, and is a Pandora's box situation where once the data is out there, realistically it's never getting deleted again. Privacy has evolved as a valued concept in just about every civilised society for good reasons. It's just a shame that a generation of Facebook addicts are too busy getting their hit to notice all the negative consequences to the kind of culture they're inviting.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#25

Post by kalkat »

Like all things, it would have some good use and bad use. But technology WILL evolve, and many people would adopt. It ultimately settles at a healthy balance.

In general though, privacy has been dead on the net for a long time now. In life outside the net too, the guy opposite you could have the camera on while he holds the phone in his hand. So yes, some people would have issues with this, but generalizing that response to a majority would be exaggeration.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#26

Post by silentOpen »

greetings wrote: post #23
mgkimsal wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they could create an RSS reader, and keep track of analytics and behaviour on how people read and consume their favorite sites' content, then insert relevant ads in that experience?

And then after it is widely used they could discontinue it.

As they push their own walled garden to compete with the decentralized model that nurtured them into their power.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#27

Post by [deleted] »

Silhouette wrote: post #24
jspark wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Glass will make recording others openly acceptable. Spy cameras and earpieces don't exist with the intention of ubiquitous use while Glass does. Can you imagine everyone you know who wears glasses now using a camera at all times?

Google Glass will make recording others openly acceptable. Or it will result in a literally violent backlash against constant privacy invasion. Or hopefully something in between, like the village who just ran the Google Street View car out of town when they heard it was coming (though it was disappointing to hear that Google later went back and got the footage anyway). Mass surveillance is not OK, and is a Pandora's…

[deleted]

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#28

Post by smtddr »

Snoptic wrote: post #12
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a consumer, I'd have less problems with Glass if it were developed and sold by a company that has nothing to do with advertising and has little interest in users' data (maybe like Canon, Nikon, or JVC). But even then, I wouldn't want to use it. I also won't interact with people while they are wearing Glass. I do not like it when people take my picture without my permission, and Glass is practically a spy camera. W…

This is idiotic opposition. Spy cameras exist. Bluetooth earpieces exist, Glass is interesting for what it receives (the server software integration) and for its HUD, not what it caputures and transmits.

The glasses are already getting banned...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2013/03/10/the-ban-...

I drink gallons of Google-Koolaid, but even I can see(pun intended?) that Google glasses is going to have some social issues. Even I will be a bit uneasy talking to someone wearing them.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#29

Post by GHFigs »

hfsktr wrote: post #22
jspark wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Glass will make recording others openly acceptable. Spy cameras and earpieces don't exist with the intention of ubiquitous use while Glass does. Can you imagine everyone you know who wears glasses now using a camera at all times?

Wouldn't it only be the people who want to use a camera? Unless you are suggesting that all glasses in the future will have video/audio technologies? I don't think much of Glass. Just doesn't appeal to me but I am curious about what makes it special for others.

Many people are interested in Glass as a heads-up display or wearable computer, not as a camera. "Many" may end up being a very small number, but it stands to reason that it's larger than the number of people that actively desire to record strangers.

Unfortunately, the current model requires both a microphone (to hear you) and a camera (to see gestures), so even well-intentioned users will still be brandishing recording devices in ways that make others uncomfortable.

Re: Google Glass: The Opposition Grows

#30

Post by kybernetikos »

silentOpen wrote: post #26
greetings wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then after it is widely used they could discontinue it.

As they push their own walled garden to compete with the decentralized model that nurtured them into their power.

Standards are the way that little players compete against near monopolies. They help the small companies and the consumers.

That's why it can't be too surprising that when a little player turns into the main player, they suddenly lose enthusiasm for standards.

Post reply on HN