dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5677
share rss forum feed


carpetshark3
Premium
join:2004-02-12
Idledale, CO
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
reply to goalieskates

Re: Google Glass: The opposition grows

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.

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.


DrModem
Trust Your Doctor
Premium
join:2006-10-19
USA
kudos:1

If the business bans the glasses they will have to ban smartphones too.

As far as the purpose of taking information goes, they are essentially the same. You can covertly record quite easily with a smartphone, despite the protestations of "WELL I CAN SEE YOU WHEN YOU ARE RECORDING ME WITH YOUR PHONE". Yea, you can. If I'm holding it up to your face. But maybe I'm at a distance. Maybe I have it at an angle where it looks like I'm texting. Maybe I'm above you on a crosswalk in a mall or whatever. Maybe I have it in my front shirt pocket where it's just shallow enough to where the camera lens is in the open. Just because I don't have a camera mounted on my head doesn't mean it's hard to sneak video of you if I want too.

From what I've seen as far as pictures of Glass these things are anything but stealthy. It's not like it won't be obvious what you're wearing.

What I think of glass:

It's no different than wearing a smartphone on your face. It causes no alarm to me. I think for general purpose use it's dumb, however I can see great use for it in many occupational capacities.



Smokey Bear
veritas odium parit
Premium
join:2008-03-15
Annie's Pub
kudos:4
reply to StuartMW

Enjoy the walk with Google ads in your Google glasses



StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

1 edit

Plus you won't be able to block the ads

»Adblock Plus for Android removed from Google Play store
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!



CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
reply to DrModem

Actually- it is very noticeable when someone is recording something on a smartphone - it has to be held up - especially if you want to get something other than legs and feet. It decidedly does not look like texting unless you are recording feet.
--
Brian

"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain



Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

1 recommendation

reply to Mike

said by Mike:

If you're in a public place, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
...

+1
Merriam-Webster:
Private: adj -- restricted to the individual
Public: adj -- not private
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville

Gandalf4503

join:2002-06-27
Cohoes, NY
reply to StuartMW

I'm all for the augmented reality tech that is in the works at the moment, though I'm leaning more towards the Oculus Rift (this is 3D tech and not the same as google glasses, though). I wear glasses normally, so walking around with something like google glasses on would be a bad idea for me since the corrective lens version probably won't be out for a while yet.

I love technology and don't want to be held back by those afraid of change.



StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

2 recommendations

said by Gandalf4503:

I love technology and don't want to be held back by those afraid of change.

Gotta love comments like that

I've been in the high-tech industry for over 25 years as a developer. I love technology. I'm not "afraid of change". The issue is how new technology can be used by anyone to invade others privacy and/or be a security risk.

In the past many technologies were beyond the reach and/or understanding of the average moron. Nowadays any idiot can use them. That is the issue.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
reply to StuartMW

And it just keeps getting "better"...

Google Glass could one day let you control objects around you

quote:
You may eventually be able to operate your TV, refrigerator, or garage door through Google Glass.

Published today by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, a Google patent application called "Wearable Computer with Superimposed Controls and Instructions for External Device" describes a technology in which a Google Glass wearer could control a real object via a virtual display.

Beyond merely showing you details about an object, Google Glass would present a virtual control panel to let you interact with that object.

--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


NotTheMama
What Would Earl Do?

join:2012-12-06

"May the Glass be with you."
"Use the Glass, Luke."



StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

That was good. You should work for Google's marketing dept.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!



notanewthing

@cox.net
reply to StuartMW

Covert wearable recording devices in eyeglass form have been available for years at a sub $500 price point so this is nothing new from that standpoint. The one thing that changes this is that since Google Glass is useful for more than recording you end up with a lot of potential recorders.



Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by notanewthing :

The one thing that changes this is that since Google Glass is useful for more than recording you end up with a lot of potential recorders.

That should be a real concern for people with anti-social tendencies.
They'll probably protest it under the guise of 'privacy' or something. LOL

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
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).

Aha - if you're not doing something wrong then you shouldn't object to being recorded, eh?

Your position is inherently that it is unreasonable to expect non-publicity (and note that I don't define it as unreasonable to expect privacy: this is not a binary attribute).


Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by dave:

Your position is inherently that it is unreasonable to expect non-publicity (and note that I don't define it as unreasonable to expect privacy: this is not a binary attribute).

I know I'm not KrK See Profile but since we share that same opinion...

Yeah, it is unreasonable.
Were not talking about a hidden fixed location recording device.
Were talking about a device attached to another person in plain view in a space open to the public (defining the scope I'm talking about).

I don't understand why people believe that it's unreasonable of others to share, publicize, broadcast etc... an event of the day they experienced first hand.

For sure, certain events should be treated with respect as a matter of decency but it's the generalization that anything & everything one does in public that's observed is a private matter between themselves & whoever just happened to be present.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to dave

My position is that if something happens in public and within view of other people it should not be surprising if said events or actions have been recorded or captured and that recording or images could be published.

Often people who noticed they are being recorded or photographed get angry at the photographer IF they know they are acting in a manner that they know they should not be doing, and said images will expose that truth, making them look bad (rightly so.) That's really what my point is/was.

If you're out in public, you should not expect your actions to be private and/or anonymous.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini



Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

1 recommendation

reply to StuartMW

To reiterate: "public" is defined as "not private". So there should be an inherent expectation that when one is in a public place, they are in a not-private place. As a result, one's reasonable expectations (if any) of "privacy" should be strongly bounded or limited when "in public," by the inherent meanings of the terms. The real question boils down to what, if any, reasonable expectations of privacy exist in a public venue? On that, there will probably be considerable variance of opinion simply because of the intrinsic contradiction of the terms involved.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 recommendation

I understand the concept that I may be filmed in a public space, and that I may show up in a photo or two. But it doesn't follow that I want a society where everyone's continuously filming everyone else.

The differences between wearable cameras and smartphone cameras are likely about the same as between smartphone cameras and 35mm SLRs. Sure, when we all used film, one could have had one's every move recorded, but in practice, the inconvenience made that unlikely. Ubiquitous pocketable cameras have upped the ante considerably. Wearable cameras are the next step towards everyone being on camera all the time.

There's nothing really objectionable about the individual event of being filmed. It is in the aggregate that the problems arise.

Speed and convenience of use change the game. Just look at the difference between government tracking of people now and in, say, 1950. And why? Because it is now faster and more convenient to keep records.



Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by dave:

There's nothing really objectionable about the individual event of being filmed. It is in the aggregate that the problems arise.

I agree with that.
If its the aggregate of a single individuals taping output I'd hope a stalker law would come into play.

If the aggregate refers to 'stitching' video or stills from different sources together to create a composite of an individuals daily activities then that would be unsettling regardless of the activities involved.


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to StuartMW

The "tipping point" for stalking usually involves behavioral details that, in aggregate, cross a line and together constitute "harassment". That is, a variety of actions, legal in themselves, taken together can be deemed as an illegal action. This is, in some ways, the core issue with something like Google Glass... 'innocent' actions of wearing recording-glasses that could lead to an arguable illegal, harassing action. The problem is determining when, where, or how that line into legal harassment gets crossed... and the law in most places is singularly unequipped at this point to deal with such technical innovations.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to Snowy

People are worried now about 'the government' building up data on individuals by mass data analysis. Imagine how much more fun the spooks can have with access to google's photo banks. Or the advertisers, I suppose... choose your own threat-to-civilization. But google would never sell user's data for private profit, so we have nothing to fear there.

What's the difference between surveillance cameras on every building in London, and sureveillance cameras on every other head in Mountain View, except the latter saves taxpayers money?



Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by dave:

People are worried now about 'the government' building up data on individuals by mass data analysis. Imagine how much more fun the spooks can have with access to google's photo banks.

I've seen it referenced in this thread & granted I haven't researched it but where is it coming from that all video/stills captured by GoogleGlass is uploaded to Google for their use?

said by dave:

Or the advertisers, I suppose... choose your own threat-to-civilization. But google would never sell user's data for private profit, so we have nothing to fear there.

sarcasm noted

said by dave:

What's the difference between surveillance cameras on every building in London, and sureveillance cameras on every other head in Mountain View, except the latter saves taxpayers money?

I'm a staunch opponent of fixed cameras on public buildings filming out of doors public space.
If a private owner chose to film the public area immediately adjacent to their property that should be their decision as well as their expense.
That might sound like I object to the use of taxpayer money for taping but it's actually about the creep factor.
An individual can act creepy, that's what individual freedom is about, within limits of course.
But when the government acts creepy that's when it crosses into unacceptable.


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

1 recommendation

reply to dave

said by dave:

...What's the difference between surveillance cameras on every building in London, and sureveillance cameras on every other head in Mountain View, except the latter saves taxpayers money?

For that matter, what's the difference (apart from labor costs) of a human "Bobby" on every building in London, surveying the scene below and surveillance cameras doing the same thing? Most of us have no objections to the "cop on the corner", keeping an eye on things... but thousands of cops (or cameras) begin to make many of us instinctively uneasy. It comes down to a concern over the potential for how they (in either scenario) might ultimately be used or misused with regard to ordinary citizens.

While I'm not particularly comfortable with some nerd wearing Google Glasses wandering around watching (and possibly recording) me, I've not given him the "power of the gun" over me as I have the police or other agents of government. The potential for him doing me harm remains at an essentially one-on-one balance; the potential of government doing me harm exists at a far higher power deficit for me. Consequently, wise men apply - or ought to apply - strictures to government and its agents at a much higher level than they do others in society.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1
reply to Snowy

FUD, that's where...



StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
reply to Snowy

said by Snowy:

I've seen it referenced in this thread & granted I haven't researched it but where is it coming from that all video/stills captured by GoogleGlass is uploaded to Google for their use?

From

»www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article···ies.html

quote:
According to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, the company plans to have Google Glass fitted with an automatic picture-taking mode, snapping photos at pre-set intervals. This could be as often as every five seconds.

I have no doubt that Google with do everything to collect data from these things. I'm sure, buried in small print in the TOS, that Google will say that the wearer agrees. Who needs cars, equipped with cameras, driving around to create Google Earth street views when you have an army of "lookers" to do it for you for free?

And of course Bob will get it all too.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by StuartMW:

said by Snowy:

I've seen it referenced in this thread & granted I haven't researched it but where is it coming from that all video/stills captured by GoogleGlass is uploaded to Google for their use?

From

»www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article···ies.html

quote:
According to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, the company plans to have Google Glass fitted with an automatic picture-taking mode, snapping photos at pre-set intervals. This could be as often as every five seconds.

I have no doubt that Google with do everything to collect data from these things. I'm sure, buried in small print in the TOS, that Google will say that the wearer agrees. Who needs cars, equipped with cameras, driving around to create Google Earth street views when you have an army of "lookers" to do it for you for free?

There is a difference between "an automatic picture-taking mode, snapping photos at pre-set intervals"
&
"an automatic picture-taking mode, snapping photos at pre-set intervals automatically uploading these photo's to our servers"

I'm not saying the possibility is out of the question - I'm just looking for the source of the contention that the output is uploaded to Google (which your quote does not supply).


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

Well since Google Glass is not a released product, yet, I doubt you'll find the proof you seek. That said, given Google's (and others for that matter), history with this sort of thing I'd say it's highly likely.

But don't worry I'm sure you have nothing to fear...


--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!



Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by StuartMW:

Well since Google Glass is not a released product, yet, I doubt you'll find the proof you seek.

So were really discussing the 'what if's' rather than actual fact?
"what if" discussions should begin with "What if..."

Still an interesting topic well deserving an extended discussion.

Edit to add: IMO, you diminished the value of your post with the addition of that photo.


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

said by Snowy:

So were really discussing the 'what if's' rather than actual fact?

True, none of us know 100% for sure. But we have a good amount of history to show a probable course...

I wonder where Google Glass will be released first? Kailua, HI maybe
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
reply to Snowy

said by Snowy:

IMO, you diminished the value of your post with the addition of that photo.

Ok but I think it fits. Anyone who's read 1984 and/or has seen the movie knows that everyone was watched at all times. In fact the characters were being watched even when they thought they weren't.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!