 StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
 ·CenturyLink
| reply to KrK
Re: Google Glass: The opposition grows said by KrK:If you're doing something that will be 1) Embarrassing or incriminating and 2) is interesting enough to be posted on YouTube,
The trouble with that is that it's in the eye of the beholder.
Here's an example for ya. A woman is crossing the road, or whatever, on a windy day. A gust of wind raises her skirt. Seconds later it's on EweToob. Her fault?
That worked for Marlyn Monroe but then she wanted the publicity.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
| reply to KrK
said by KrK:If you're doing something that will be 1) Embarrassing or incriminating and 2) is interesting enough to be posted on YouTube,
then perhaps you should ask yourself if you should be carrying out that type of behavior in public (or period).
Oh no you don't. This blame-the-victim mentality has to stop.
Or have you forgotten all the pervs who shoot women in restrooms, or up their skirts, etc? Just as one example. Paparazzi would be another.
It's every bit as likely the people with the cameras are the ones with behavior issues or downright creeps, and these glasses enable them. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T DSL Service
| Will it potentially be abused? Yes, but there are laws for that.
It's not a blame the victim mentality either.
You can't stop progress by claiming it could be abused, or that it enables misuse or law breaking. If that was the case, the we'd have to ban the Internet, computers, guns, etc etc because criminals and pervs are "enabled" by these devices and technology to carry out their activities.
As for upskirts using Google Glasses.... huh. Just huh.
Do you thing people having CarDVR's and then posting a vehicle causing the the accident somehow is an invasion of their privacy? Who's the victim you wish to blame? The guy who's bad driving caused the crash, or the guy he collided with?
All these things are tools, nothing more.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
|
|
StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
| said by KrK:Will it potentially be abused? Yes, but there are laws for that. Well the law is often behind technology.
I'm not for banning this or any other technology. I am however for awareness and social pressure. If some people use Google Glass in an inappropriate way and find their $1,500 purchase in small pieces then so be it. In extreme cases the wearers may require some reassembly.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Don't get sued.  |
|
StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
| Reminds me of a somewhat related story.
Some years ago I had trouble with a local teenager trespassing on my property (my place was between his and his friends--shortest distance ya see). I caught him numerous times and asked him to stop. It didn't make a difference. I called the police only to be told that law enforcement had to personally observe the behavior before they'd do anything.
One day he did it right in front of me. Didn't give a sh*t. So I went to his house and asked to see his Mom (no Dad). Kid almost started crying "I'll never do it again! I promise!". Seems fear of his mom was greater than anything I could do.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
 BlackbirdBuilt for SpeedPremium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to StuartMW
Hmm. Maybe we need Federal registration of all Google Glass purchasers, local Google Glass user permits, and the watermarking of all images created by the glasses. That oughta do it...
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville |
|
 SnowymIRC unix.ro UnderNetPremium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Clearwire Wireless
| reply to goalieskates
said by goalieskates:Oh no you don't. This blame-the-victim mentality has to stop.
I too am a victim, so don't blame me!
No one has the right to observe, photograph, film or in any other way create or preserve a record of my public space activity without my express prior consent.
When that anti-surveillance drone technology gets scaled down for personal use, sign me up! |
|
StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
1 edit | That's the solution
Every pair of Google Glasses come with a "morality drone". Do anything unacceptable and *zap*, 10kV to the head 
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
SnowymIRC unix.ro UnderNetPremium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Clearwire Wireless
| reply to Blackbird
said by Blackbird:...and the watermarking of all images created by the glasses.
I'd be totally surprised if a digital watermark isn't already in place.
I can't say with 100% certainty that that they do but IMO it's 99+% certain. |
|
 beckPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-29
On The Road
kudos:1
 ·Stablehost.com
| reply to StuartMW
I can record anything if I have clothes or a purse to put the smart phone or camera in. And if people can record from their shoe...
This is like closing the barn door after the horses have escaped.
I can and do object to being recorded at any time, without my express written permission ahead of time, by any device. But that doesn't make google glass bad itself. I'm probably recorded anytime I'm out of my house.
--
Damn spy drones!
They are interfering
with my sun spots.
|
|
 MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1 | reply to StuartMW
If you're in public, you forfeit privacy. Expect to be recorded.
Solves that. |
|
SnowymIRC unix.ro UnderNetPremium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Clearwire Wireless
| said by Mike:If you're in public, you forfeit privacy. Expect to be recorded.
In every discussion there's always the person that will not confuse personal preferences or bias with fact.
Damn thread killers they are  |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to Mike
said by Mike:If you're in public, you forfeit privacy. Expect to be recorded.
Solves that.
that is generally how I see the world. The moment that garage door opens or I step out the front door I know privacy no longer exists.
I bet the MPAA is just going to love advancements in augmented reality tech.... Once this stuff fits neatly into a normal set of everyday glasses and can film in 1080p.... hello HD cam jobs that cannot be seen by an usher.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
 Grail KnightQui audet adipisciturPremium
join:2003-05-31
Valhalla
kudos:6
·Time Warner Cable
| reply to StuartMW
quote:
If some people use Google Glass in an inappropriate way and find their $1,500 purchase in small pieces then so be it. In extreme cases the wearers may require some reassembly.
So what is inappropriate outside of obvious things like up-skirt shots, changing room video, porn videos made without your approval (although I would suspect any women wearing glasses well screwing might be up to something unless that is your kink)?
Will you attack someone who takes video of you when you are on public property or out in public? Will you break their glasses then find out they had no camera and your paranoia cost you some money and jail time?
--
"One conspiracy tale deserves another." |
|
| reply to Mike
said by Mike:If you're in public, you forfeit privacy. Expect to be recorded.
Solves that.
No.
Up until recently any photograph that was sold for commercial purposes was required to have model releases from anyone recognizable in photographs before it could be published. The exception was photography for news purposes, with those purposes clearly defined. Those laws are still on the books.
YouTube isn't automatically a news venue. Embarrassing strangers isn't automatically newsworthy. The public doesn't exist for the pleasure and use of stupid people with tech toys. As long as people are minding their own business in public, they haven't given up any rights. And while a person has the right to give up their own privacy, they'd don't have the right to take away someone else's. |
|
MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
Host:
W.O.W.
FairPoint
World of Warcraft
Site Tools
Verizon Wireless
| So when someone takes a photo in public I should demand a release form?
Also, YouTube is generally not commercial purpose. It's private citizen.
It's not going to happen.
--
"If something about the human body disgusts you, complain to the manufacturer" - Lenny Bruce
What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon. |
|
Reviews:
·WestNet Broadband
|
I think to that extent it is about the time and the money, there can be permissions put in place if money it to be made off it, or you can organize a court request for a photo to be removed. The law is there, it just isn't enforced, unless a person or citizen requests it, and that in itself takes money and time. Most people just give up right there.
You have to fight for privacy.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke
|
|
MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
Host:
W.O.W.
FairPoint
World of Warcraft
Site Tools
Verizon Wireless
| If you're in a public place, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
In the US the right of the photographer is quite strong. I can photo anyone and anything (except military installations) in public. I own the photo and it's not public domain.
The unwritten code of honor (aka not being a jerk) is to ask the subject if they can take their photo.
--
"If something about the human body disgusts you, complain to the manufacturer" - Lenny Bruce
What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon. |
|
| reply to goalieskates
said by goalieskates:said by KrK:If you're doing something that will be 1) Embarrassing or incriminating and 2) is interesting enough to be posted on YouTube,
then perhaps you should ask yourself if you should be carrying out that type of behavior in public (or period).
Oh no you don't. This blame-the-victim mentality has to stop. Or have you forgotten all the pervs who shoot women in restrooms, or up their skirts, etc? Just as one example. Paparazzi would be another. It's every bit as likely the people with the cameras are the ones with behavior issues or downright creeps, and these glasses enable them. We actually had one jerk that got caught hiding in portapotties. You can guess where.
People won't learn and will still think they are the center of everyone's universe, or won't think at all.
I don't want idiots wearing these while driving. Phones are bad enough when people don't pay attention.
Businesses will ban them if there is any chance of a competitor getting information. |
|
