Google Glass: Strictly for
Pervs and/or GCHQ/NSA.
Google Glass: Reg man tests tech specs
Ever since Google revealed its Glass tech specs, the more enthusiastic members of the technological commentariat declared that we are only weeks away from devices that not only calculate just how much of that Ben & Jerry's triple-cream treacle fudge delight you just ate, but can also figure out its impact on your cholesterol …
-
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 10:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Google Glass: Strictly for
Then you are one of the plebs that simply don't get it.
Where much media focus has been put on the camera in Google Glass, it's not it's primary function, that is the HUD, that's what makes Glass unique.
Spy-wise, Google Glass doesn't offer anything that's not already out there, and not already in a billion people's pockets..
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 21:14 GMT GitMeMyShootinIrons
Re: Google Glass: Strictly for
"Spy-wise, Google Glass doesn't offer anything that's not already out there, and not already in a billion people's pockets.."
Difference is that cameras in a billion pockets will sit there taking photos of keys, loose change and snot rags. Millions of cameras on peoples heads? Now that's a surveillance solution to make any secret policeman swoon.
The HUD? Well, the Gestapo/KGB/SMERSH etc won't care about that - it's secondary to them.
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 15:38 GMT Ian Michael Gumby
@Jake Re: Lexical extension
"Glasticle" is sexist.
There are women in IT. ;-)
But then again, if Bikini Babe Kate Upton was walking down the street in a sexy outfit, wearing a pair of Google Glass, what would you call her?
Or rather more to the point, would you even notice that she was wearing a pair of glasses?
(and on that note. I am being sexist! But did you see the vid of her in the Vomit Comet?)
-
Sunday 2nd March 2014 08:10 GMT jake
@ Ian Michael Gumby (was: Re: @Jake Lexical extension)
a) My wife looks much better (to me!) than any so-called "bikini babe". If I even noticed the bint strolling Sonona's Plaza, I'd probably point & giggle at the idiot for wearing inappropriate clothing & shoes.
b) I wouldn't actually look all that closely. Air-head bimbos aren't worth the effort.
c) it's "glass" not "glasses". Singular. It's not binocular. Yet.
d) No. I couldn't care too much less about celebretards trying to pad their resume with purchased thrill-rides.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 28th February 2014 10:44 GMT jinx3y
Re: "glass" is a useless bit of kit.
Google DID steal the idea. Ever seen "Appleseed - Deus Ex Machina"? It's an animated movie (the newer version) in which an entire population is wearing glasses with similar functionality. Some anime freak (like me) at Google, probably watched it once and then "dreamed" up the idea, sold it to the management and BINGO - 3 years later here it is...
As Glass is right now, yes - it's useless - but it won't be for long. Wait another couple of years when it starts to move into mainstream sales and then you'll see interesting changes, as well as competition,
-
-
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 12:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Solid day of use?
You mean that phone with the big colourful screen that drains the battery if you keep the screen on all the time, but will last a day if you don't keep the screen on for extended periods of time ...?
It's not like that Android phone, no. The one with the big colourful battery-draining screen.
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 13:04 GMT Shrimpling
Re: Solid day of use?
Glasses are much smaller than an Android phone... One thing I don't know is if the battery is contained within the Glass unit or if you need to carry a separate battery pack?
If the battery is contained within glass I see no reason to assume it will last all day without charging, especially if you are using bluetooth.
-
-
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 10:20 GMT photobod
I actually came up with a genuine business use for this the other day
On Monday, I had to visit a venue to assess it's suitability for an event I'm planning. Part of the time, I run a business putting on cabaret shows with a partner who happens to be based the other side of the country. It occurred to me while I was being shown around the venue, discussing details and terms with the owner and shooting some pictures for reference, that being able to do the whole thing without having to physically hold a device such as a camera or phone, and also being online the whole time with my remote partner so he could also take an active part in the meeting, would have been extremely useful.
As it stands, I can't think of any existing technology which would be as convenient, unobtrusive and effective for this particular task.
It's a start...
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 10:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
The unfortunate thing about glass is that...
Had you left the venue, someone probably would have punched you. I am not saying that they would have been justified in doing so mind you. But it would be a bit like travelling home from a comic conference, on the tube, at pub closing time, wearing your superman costume, at the age of 40.
It is those kind of people who will consider wearing glass in public.
Everyone else, without Asperger's type traits, will have more personal dignity and will probably avoid glass
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 15:46 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: The unfortunate thing about glass is that...
Times change: 15 years ago I remember using my mobile phone in the supermarket to check something with my other half, and feeling VERY self-conscious about it! Now people wander around pretty much everywhere with mobies stuck to their ears, or sometimes BT earpieces in, without a second thought.
-
Friday 28th February 2014 11:50 GMT Neil Lewis
Re: The unfortunate thing about glass is that...
Going back a (good) few years, I can remember that being the exact reaction some folks had when people began using mobile phones in the street. Doesn't seem to have stopped them catching on though, does it?
BTW, if the events you describe had actually happened.I would have no problem defending myself, either. i.e. decking whichever self-important prick thought it was any of their business if I choose to wear such a device in a public place.
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 10:33 GMT badgames
Re: Speech Recognition
@Spearchucker Jones
You were trying the wrong American dialect. Google and its Glass are from California.
The universal dialect for California, at least for younger members of the distaff crowd, is ValSpeak, like, you know. I have even heard that it is spreading across the country among young fems.
-
-
-
Friday 28th February 2014 10:54 GMT I ain't Spartacus
Re: I'm not letting Motorola scan MY ring!
I doubt you will want to considering their price, although I have supplied said devices no-one uses them as they prefer guns.
What a dilemma for the Rapper about town, who wishes to do a drive-by barcode scanning. Does he for the bling ring, or the big gun?
-
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 20:21 GMT Chris G
Re: I'm not letting Motorola scan MY ring!
"devices like the RS409 Ring Scanner (depicted in this video)"
An up vote for beating me to it!
Just a thought but if glassholery takes off in a big way, what happens when a crowd of glassholes get turned on by one wearer shouting 'OK glass!', or will wearers have their own switch code? In which case there will be numerous members of the public apparently suffering from Tourettes syndrome.
-
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 15:20 GMT South
Why are there so many Luddites on the Reg forums?
Why are people trying to kill this before it's been given a chance?
I can think of countless situations where Glass would be useful. This is a bit of interesting tech and chances are Google won't be the company to get the most out of it, leaving a void for either a competitor or a new starter to push it further. This could go somewhere interesting and perhaps leed to a truly useful gadget.
Those that think it will be used for unsavory activities are absolutely right. It will be. But so are all other technologies. Cameras are everywhere, there is no real escape from them. Home computing also is a key area where nefarious BS takes place. Having something visible on your head that people can see from a mile off isnt being sneaky to me. I'm sure people if asked would remove them just the same as with camera's and mobile's. The threat's to violence is the reason for my Luddite comment. Seriously? you would punch a fellow human being on the off chance they might be filming you?
-
Thursday 27th February 2014 19:21 GMT Charles Manning
Re: Why are there so many Luddites on the Reg forums?
Having played with this stuff, people want their real Planet Earth lives back.
In the past, for the most part, our technology was limited and that prevented it from interfering in our real lives. Now the technological limitations are either gone or are going at a remarkable rate. Society has to develop etiquet to deal with technology, and that takes time.
After a few months of Facebook, many people realise this is cutting into their real socialising - a few mates in a pub having a couple of beers and a bit of banter. Even that is not what it used to be with constant texting and any decent discussion being wrecked by people looking up what Wikipedia has to say on the subject.
-
-
-
Friday 28th February 2014 00:24 GMT The Wegie
They are supposed to be making them compatible with prescription lenses.
However, as I've spent the last couple of decades spending ever more money to get the perfect invisible pair of glasses (contacts and I no longer really get along, alas), the glassicles completely defeat the purpose as far as I'm concerned. Not to mention the weight factor -- the aforementioned invisible glasses are rimless, have ultra-thin-and-light lenses, and earpieces titanium wire, and they still feel heavy and uncomfortable after 12 hours or so -- the glassicles would mean a return to the days of earache.
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Friday 28th February 2014 14:22 GMT IT Drone
Not just the people wearing them...
Surely the correct British response to Google Glass is a slight raise of the eyebrows or at most a barely audible tut. All this upvoting and downvoting shows a lack of sang-froid, chaps.
If Google Glass takes off at all it will probably just be a passing fad. Only a couple of years back taxi drivers, white-van men and salemen used to have bluetooth headsets permanently attached to their heads.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
