|
The best part is glassholes getting all pissy and posing as political activists because of their choice to use a consumer product.
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
There was an article on Valleywag a couple of weeks about a guy on the subway in Hong Kong who was taking pictures of women with Glass and then uploading them to Twitter. I commented on it about the issue of consent here - none of these women wanted him to take a picture of them and some of them looked visibly concerned about him looking at them in the pictures. I commented that the concern is still consent - that while you may be in public without expectation of privacy, it's still a concern that Google could use these photos to figure out who you are and where you're at. Another commenter introduced themselves as someone who worked at Google, specifically on Glass, and said that facial recognition software was banned from Glass. But at the same time a friend of mine sent me a photo on Google Hangouts and the service asked me if I wanted to turn on facial recognition so that I could be tagged in any other photos of me that may be on the Google+ service. This strikes me as the crux of the problem. Even if I haven't signed up for any Google services, I could still have my facial data uploaded into their recognition engines, and getting my picture taken with Glass and uploaded and indexed by Google could easily mean that Google can build a record of who/what/where I am without my ever consenting to use their service.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:Battery technology will improve over time - just because it can't record & stream 24/7 now doesn't mean that people's concerns about being surreptitiously recorded are without merit.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:What the hell is with the backlash against Google Glass? Why does wearing a mildly silly-looking thing on your face make you apparently Literally Hitler, The NSA, And Communism At The Same Time? It's easy for people to ignore the surveillance implications of the internet age when they're punching their weird fetishes into Google or taking geotagged photos on their phone which automatically uploads both the photos and your location to Google at all times. People are still disturbed by it on some level, but they manage to rationalize it because there's an element of choice involved - they chose to turn GPS on, they chose to turn 3G on, they chose to buy a smartphone, and they chose to carry the phone with them. They don't avoid the surveillance because it's too convenient to have, but the idea that they could avoid it if they really wanted to is just reassuring enough that they can tolerate it. Glass removes that illusion of choice. Suddenly they're not the one holding the surveillance device; they can't comfort themselves with the illusion of being able to turn it off if they so choose. They can't ignore it like they do with other people's phones, either, because it-s so blatantly worn and they can't infer what the device is probably doing from the person's posture. Of course, no one's going to run and duck for cover if someone raises their phone in a camera position, but the ability to do so if they wanted to gives that same feeling if choice. The surveillance is under someone else's complete control with Glass, and that draws out all the tons and tons of buried and rationalized anxiety those people have toward "new tech" surveillance (no one complains about security cameras!), resulting in a gigantic backlash - usually aggravated by the fact that most people with Glass right now are self-righteous nerds who aren't very sympathetic to those misgivings and instead whine about how "cyborgs" are a persecuted minority and generally make intolerable asses of themselves. Main Paineframe fucked around with this message at 21:55 on May 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:Battery technology will improve over time - just because it can't record & stream 24/7 now doesn't mean that people's concerns about being surreptitiously recorded are without merit. You'd need battery storage capacity increases that we haven't managed to achieve in 100 years and several changes in battery chemistry in order to have it run all the time dude. There is minimal room for batteries with something that can be expected to sit on your head like glasses comfortably, and the only other option would be to have wires running down the side to bulky batteries worn elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
I don't actually see a large conceptual problem with privacy in public spaces, etc. It's sort of creepy to record people in public, but it's public, if you're walking down the street you have no reasonable expectation of privacy from other citizens. I don't think it should be illegal to record conversations held in public, etc. I like the idea of a legal distinction between public and private spaces. Harassment is covered under harassment laws already. But beyond that yeah Google Glass is pretty hilariously tone-deaf. It shouldn't be illegal to record people in public but expect them to get pissed off if you do it. It's completely reasonable to ask someone to not wear it in your restaurant.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
twodot posted:Being concerned about being surreptitiously recorded is a valid concern. Google Glass is about the worst possible product to use if you are trying to surreptitiously record someone (we have technology specifically designed for this purpose), so concerns about being surreptitiously recorded by Google Glass are without merit, and specifically the post I responded to claimed that Google Glass does a thing which it simply does not do. Potential future technological advances have zero bearing on what it does today. At what average battery life will we be permitted to express concern or distaste?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Anyway Google Glass looks stupid so businesses should be free to tell people to take it off for that reason alone, I mean restaurants already refuse to serve people who don't meet dress codes.Nessus posted:I assume the scouter has at least some battery life. What you are saying sounds a lot like "Why are you so unhappy about getting put on someone's camcorder they shoved in your face in a semi-private location? The tape's only got like two hours on it!" Ok are you like not aware that you can buy a tie or hat or sunglasses or something from China with a concealed camera in it and wear it probably most places that wouldn't allow Google Glass in? And these things cost like under 10% what a Glass costs, often have better battery life and even better recording quality. And they've been around for years now versus Glass. When your complaints are based on things it can't do because of battery life, the battery life angle is really quite relevant! Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 22:02 on May 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I assume the scouter has at least some battery life. What you are saying sounds a lot like "Why are you so unhappy about getting put on someone's camcorder they shoved in your face in a semi-private location? The tape's only got like two hours on it!"
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Anyway Google Glass looks stupid so businesses should be free to tell people to take it off for that reason alone, I mean restaurants already refuse to serve people who don't meet dress codes.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What bugs me is the people making some kind of transhuman rights argument or whatever because they're asked to turn off or put away their drat recorders. It's particularly hilarious to me when it's painted as some kind of cyborg oppression. If someone had a rig up for Google Glass to be getting used as a substitute optic nerve I suppose that would make some sense. Well the thing is Google Glass users were able to be suckered into paying $1500 and waiting for months on a list for product that many current estimates say costs $100-$200 to put together because it's made out of very low end components and other cheap materials. So they're going to be insufferable about it no matter what you do. And it's funny because it really is quite useless even for them.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What bugs me is the people making some kind of transhuman rights argument or whatever because they're asked to turn off or put away their drat recorders. It's particularly hilarious to me when it's painted as some kind of cyborg oppression. If someone had a rig up for Google Glass to be getting used as a substitute optic nerve I suppose that would make some sense. robot whores come before a cure for cancer
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What bugs me is the people making some kind of transhuman rights argument or whatever because they're asked to turn off or put away their drat recorders. It's particularly hilarious to me when it's painted as some kind of cyborg oppression. If someone had a rig up for Google Glass to be getting used as a substitute optic nerve I suppose that would make some sense. I've heard Glass Bans claimed as ableist, because people who wear them are poorly socialized or something. The take away is you can't make me put my toys away because I'm not used to being told no. e. That being said, I am deeply in favor of people getting these things surgically imbedded in their skulls to make good on their claims of being "cyborgs". Yessss, carry that shame with you forever.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
One of the biggest benefits of Google Glass is that often the people whining about being discriminated against are recorded on their own camera showing they were clearly being assholes and in the wrong. Well, I suppose that's not a benefit to them, but it sure is a benefit to society!
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I don't actually see a large conceptual problem with privacy in public spaces, etc. It's sort of creepy to record people in public, but it's public, if you're walking down the street you have no reasonable expectation of privacy from other citizens. I don't think it should be illegal to record conversations held in public, etc. I like the idea of a legal distinction between public and private spaces. Harassment is covered under harassment laws already. Sure but the policy doesn't make any sense if you then accept that people fiddle around with their phones pointing the camera(s) every which way. Recording people in public while it looks like you are just reading something on your phone happens literally constantly and that's just when they bother hiding they are filming/recording. We have put a camera with internet access in every hand and people have been super excited about it but when can put it on your face it's getting a little uncomfortable. Yeah too little too late, you don't have any privacy in public anymore. But sure make them take it off if it looks stupid.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Prosthetic eyes are decently close to being available, and eventually they will allow this to play out in a scenario where you can't ask people to stop recording, or even be aware of it. Hell, recording surreptitiously is easier than wearing Glass, so the people that are making a big deal of it kinda missed the bus. If you're worried about people knowing that you visit gay bars, it would be more productive to change society to not care about gays than to try to vent about privacy rights.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What bugs me is the people making some kind of transhuman rights argument or whatever because they're asked to turn off or put away their drat recorders. It's particularly hilarious to me when it's painted as some kind of cyborg oppression. If someone had a rig up for Google Glass to be getting used as a substitute optic nerve I suppose that would make some sense. Transhumanists are loving crazy people who are so unfit for and unable to handle the real world they're basically counting down until they can put their brain in a sexy robot body and float off to Jupiter or something, of course they have no sense of scale. They're the kind of people who take an article that says 'we 3d printed a very prototype, very niche, limb replacement that's basically just a glorified tin hand done faster and less heavy, and it didn't shatter in the first use' and go 'WE'RE SOON TO BE PRINTING BODY PARTS'
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Man, I hope we can tempt Eripsa in to explain cyborg discrimination for us.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Transhumanists are loving crazy people who are so unfit for and unable to handle the real world they're basically counting down until they can put their brain in a sexy robot body and float off to Jupiter or something, of course they have no sense of scale. To be fair I hope they can float off to Jupiter soon too.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:They're the kind of people who take an article that says 'we 3d printed a very prototype, very niche, limb replacement that's basically just a glorified tin hand done faster and less heavy, and it didn't shatter in the first use' and go 'WE'RE SOON TO BE PRINTING BODY PARTS'
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Ah Pook posted:Unless you and your girlfriend run the establishment, this is probably a stupid argument you should give up on. Well, we will complain to the owners, who will undoubtedly ask you to turn off your cellphones. Because, you see, cellphones make us uncomfortable, and our comfort is more important than your convenience.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
How is a google glass convenient again?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:How is a google glass convenient again?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:How is a google glass convenient again? It isn't, as the interface methods are really quite annoying to use. You can use the side of the thing as a teeny-tiny touchpad device, or you can use limited vocal recognition for some other actions but then everyone will have to hear you saying it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Well, we will complain to the owners, who will undoubtedly ask you to turn off your cellphones. Because, you see, cellphones make us uncomfortable, and our comfort is more important than your convenience. It's funny that you don't realize this sounds ridiculously whiny and entitled.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Well, we will complain to the owners, who will undoubtedly ask you to turn off your cellphones. Because, you see, cellphones make us uncomfortable, and our comfort is more important than your convenience. We disagree, and We think you sound like a doucheknuckle.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Google Glass is essentially to today as the overly huge and gaudy bluetooth headset was to 2004.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:It's funny that you don't realize this sounds ridiculously whiny and entitled. That's the entire loving point. I sound just as whiny and entitled as the patrons who complained about being made uncomfortable by the previous "Glass Explorer." Really, guys. How about we let people wear whatever the gently caress they want to wear? I hate Glass as much as anyone else, but what this restaurant did was loving dumb and they deserve all the backlash they get. I mean, if she was staring at the other patrons with the red light blinking (indicating recording), it would have been fine to ask her to take off the thing, but as far as we know, she was minding her own business and the owners wanted to preemptively quell further complaints from their technophobic patrons.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
The place isn't getting any actual backlash though. Some nerd won't go there again and a couple of people who have never been there and will never be there left bad reviews.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:That's the entire loving point. I sound just as whiny and entitled as the patrons who complained about being made uncomfortable by the previous "Glass Explorer." So to be clear you're down with yelp brigades that basically get told 'I don't like place' and leave poo poo reviews, which can legit hurt smaller places? Like even if this wasn't about super stupid glasses, that's a poo poo position to have
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:So to be clear you're down with yelp brigades that basically get told 'I don't like place' and leave poo poo reviews, which can legit hurt smaller places? When this poo poo happens to a blind man with cyber-eyes I will proceed to officially give a poo poo, myself.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Really, guys. How about we let people wear whatever the gently caress they want to wear? I hate Glass as much as anyone else, but what this restaurant did was loving dumb and they deserve all the backlash they get. I mean, if she was staring at the other patrons with the red light blinking (indicating recording), it would have been fine to ask her to take off the thing, but as far as we know, she was minding her own business and the owners wanted to preemptively quell further complaints from their technophobic patrons. It's not unreasonable for a restaurant to ask a customer to stop behavior that is upseeting others, nor is it technophobic or discriminatory to ask a person wearing glass to stop. If you are in a nice restaurant and loudly talking on your phone they will ask you to stop. All the glass wearer had to do is take them off and put them away. Why is that an unreasonable request? Why is this a political statement? I get that you think this is hypocritical behavior but my stance is that it's a ridiculously trivial thing to be upset about and that pro-glass people are showing their rear end and being whiny babies over something petty. boner confessor fucked around with this message at 00:09 on May 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:I remember when cell phones first hit mainstream popularity and stopped looking like The Football. People in restaurants outside of douchebag hives like New York and LA would never bring them out in public and always excused themselves from the table. Fifteen to twenty years later we wouldn't even give them a second thought. Within 5-10 years things like Glass will be completely integrated into daily life and this thread will seem bizarre. I don't think that's a great thing any more than I think the proliferation of people staring into cell phones during meals is a great thing, but it seems inevitable. Any efforts to contemplate how they should be integrated will crumble before whatever convenience they represent by then. People didn't take too kindly to Bluetooth Headsets though.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Well, we will complain to the owners, who will undoubtedly ask you to turn off your cellphones. Because, you see, cellphones make us uncomfortable, and our comfort is more important than your convenience. The owners won't do poo poo for you and your girlfriend, because nearly everyone has a cell phone in their pocket/bag and they're not going to make everyone turn it off just for you. The situation is basically the mirror opposite of what you're describing, where no one in the restaurant wants Opticon around and one lone moron couldn't deal with removing a clunky nerd fetish for a single meal.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Well, we will complain to the owners, who will undoubtedly ask you to turn off your cellphones. Because, you see, cellphones make us uncomfortable, and our comfort is more important than your convenience. Agreed! Oh wait, that was supposed to be biting sarcasm? holy loving poo poo... Its at times like this I'm reminded that past a few short decades tech fetishism will run into finite quantities of rare earth metals concurrent with a few other ecological catastrophes where if we acted upon them ten years ago it'd be too late, and its at times like these where I relax since clearly God is real and His hand is evident in the track of our increasingly poo poo-stupid lives.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:Agreed! Rare Earths actually aren't that rare (one of them is about as plentiful as copper) it's just that until recently there was no demand for them so hardly anyone had mines.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate Disco > Banned from McDonalds for refusing to take off my Optimus Prime Vocoder Mask?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
What godforsaken TGI Fridays are y'all eating at where the host/ess won't ask you to get off the loving phone if you're having an indiscreet conversation that harshes other peoples' mellow? Since I'm assuming that's the hypothetical this D&D tangent is taking, that the use of technology in space is the issue and not its physical presence? Because the only places I've been to where the host won't accomodate a request for a ratchety table to shut the gently caress up are dive bars where such things are instead accomplished through the expedient of the offender's loose teeth flying into their windpipe.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:What godforsaken TGI Fridays are y'all eating at where the host/ess won't ask you to get off the loving phone if you're having an indiscreet conversation that harshes other peoples' mellow? Since I'm assuming that's the hypothetical this D&D tangent is taking, that the use of technology in space is the issue and not its physical presence? If TGI Fridays kicked out annoying loud people they wouldn't have much of a business left. That's why they leave the music up so loud.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
If I'm at a restaurant I'd actually prefer nobody pull out their cellphones. Can't you shut off for an hour and, if you're eating with someone else, just enjoy their company and the food? Glass just exacerbates this problem, but makes it worse, since it adds this creepy sort of surveillance to the whole thing. You could use your dumb eyewear to record my conversation or take pictures of me surreptitiously, which just bothers me. If someone has a camera I can at least know that they're taking pictures with them. Glass? It's over before I can even notice, even if I'm looking straight at you. I'm also a person who finds it disruptive when people take pictures of food or gently caress around with their phones at restaurants, so maybe I'm just the old-fashioned technophobe? I'd like it if more restaurants had the policy a bunch of jazz clubs have: no cell phones. computer parts posted:People didn't take too kindly to Bluetooth Headsets though.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 00:25
|
|
