05-06-2013, 09:13 AM | #1 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Google Glass: Good or Bad?
So Google Glass is becoming a thing, with glasses including a built in HUD and camera and various mobile tech functions such as social media sharing.
Positive move towards a better and smarter future? Or just another step towards Big Brother state and zombification of our culture? Speak, denizens of the internet! |
05-06-2013, 09:15 AM | #2 |
Primordial Fishbeast
|
Are they available in prescription lenses?
Because if so then I'd like a set of glasses that allow me to watch tv and stuff, but given that I shun social media I can't really see any other benefit. Also this existed in Back to the Future Pt. 2 so it makes sense that it's happening two years before. Only flying cars to go! |
05-06-2013, 09:17 AM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Yeah you will be able to get prescription ones.
Flying cars are a thing. They're just a really shitty thing. |
05-06-2013, 10:12 AM | #5 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Humans are, I will argue, not evolved to make social blunders which will haunt them for the rest of their lives b/c they'll be witnessed by all and remembered / accessible for all time. On-person video recorders are so amazing in so many imaginable ways, but I think they can definitely ruin ~everyone's lives given YouTube. Consider the following:
A kid you knew shit his pants in the 2nd grade. This is all but a hazy memory now, and you certainly can't show the world it. But imagine if one of his classmates had Google Glass and then uploaded the footage? Even changing schools wouldn't save this kid from the torment of the other children: he'd have to be home schooled for years, until such time as his face was no longer instantly recognizable as The Kid Who Shit His Pants.These are the sorts of things about on-person video recorders which concern me. Thing is, the technology is already out there. It just isn't widely accessible. Barriers to entry in the form of cost, portability, etc. Things like Google Glass could change that, for worse ... ... or for better. 'Cause like, it's a double-edged sword. Consider the following: Your beloved grandmother is dead. Your little brothers hardly even remember her. Wouldn't you love to be able to share with them, wouldn't you love to re-experience for yourself, the times you shared with Grandma?So like, there are boons to always-on video cameras too. I realize that Google Glass isn't (as yet) an always-on video recorder, but I don't think we're too far off from that, which is why I bring it up.
__________________
|
05-06-2013, 10:32 AM | #8 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Or not at all, helping to prevent the objectification of fellow humans (or whatever else) and stimmying the move towards a society more comfortable with touching themselves in private than touching another human.
|
05-06-2013, 11:09 AM | #10 | |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
05-06-2013, 11:18 AM | #11 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Mm, I know Tdos. And you're right (as are you Talon).
|
05-06-2013, 11:52 AM | #13 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
And even then, there will probably be ways to do it. Really, all you need in this era to record people illicitly is the concealed portable camera. Turning it off and on is the easy part, I would think. I'm pretty sure that even with conventional methods, people just press a button in their pocket to activate or deactivate a camera peeking out from their breast pocket or lapel. I don't see why Google Glass couldn't be made to operate any differently: you have a wireless trigger in your pocket, you click it silently, it sends a wireless signal out, your Google Glass is configured to interface with said signal, and voilŕ: it starts recording. (You can also put it on the inside of your shoe if you want and press it by pressing your big toe up against the roof of your shoe, I imagine.)
The point is, getting the thing to turn on and off isn't the hard part. The hard part is mobilizing it and making it look perfectly ordinary. Google Glass hasn't quite achieved this yet -- iirc the prototypes stand out pretty obviously -- but the idea is there. "Make it so that as far as you can tell the person is just wearing an ordinary pair of glasses."
__________________
|
05-06-2013, 12:00 PM | #14 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Or lenses, which will be fun.
|
05-06-2013, 02:42 PM | #15 |
The Path of Now & Forever
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
|
If you didn't need prescription glasses before, you will have you get these!
|
05-06-2013, 04:05 PM | #16 | |
Silver LO
|
Quote:
Clearly Big Porn is the new Big Tobacco |
|
05-06-2013, 05:10 PM | #17 |
大事なのは自分らしいくある事
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Determined
Posts: 5,840
|
Can I turn them on by striking a pose?
|
05-06-2013, 05:19 PM | #18 |
Not sure if gone...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
|
I am deeply against this. All the huge privacy violations outweigh any possible benefits in my mind, especially because it seems like the privacy violations would be constant and the benefits would only be in very specific situations.
|
05-06-2013, 06:11 PM | #19 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
Aren't there already these identical problems on a somewhat smaller scale with the prevalence of video cameras and surveillance as it is?
|
05-06-2013, 06:14 PM | #20 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
As I've stated numerous times in this thread already, yes. The only difference is lowering the barrier to entry. (Cost, portability, etc.)
__________________
|
05-06-2013, 06:20 PM | #21 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
Here's the question though: will Google Glass ever be affordable (and stable!) enough for this to be an issue?
|
05-06-2013, 06:38 PM | #22 | |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Quote:
In my anti-defense, the "probably" in that second sentence is a big deal. I have no idea what the actual cost is of Google Glass. But I assume it can't be more than several thousand dollars.
__________________
|
|
05-06-2013, 06:43 PM | #23 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
It's hard to say, really, especially since if Google knows what's good for them, all the data taken and produced by Glass will have some sort of restriction or will be coded in a way where it won't be readily accessible. That being said, I'm sure there will be plenty of people eager to reverse engineer it and use it for malicious activities, but if they're going through the trouble of doing that, they were probably an issue even without Google Glass.
|
05-06-2013, 07:10 PM | #24 |
大事なのは自分らしいくある事
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Determined
Posts: 5,840
|
The developer version is $1500.
Yeah. |
05-06-2013, 07:17 PM | #25 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Don't you have your thinking backwards? I always thought the developer kit was more expensive than the retail model, not less. So if the developer kit is only $1,500 (which fits in perfectly with what I said before -- "think of this purchase like the purchase of a new computer"), then wouldn't we expect the retail model to be anywhere from $1,500 on down to (say) $1,000? Correct me if I'm wrong. I admit I could be. But usually with technology, the price of components falls rapidly over time (rapidly compared with other markets, that is), so like ... parts that actually physically cost $1,500 in 2011 (and thus, if you sold them, you'd be selling them at cost and not even making money back to pay your laborers) tend to only cost maybe $1,200 by 2013. It's what we see happen all the time with the video game consoles, for instance.
__________________
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|