Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
> Plus, it’ll alert you when its lens is blocked via intelligent notifications to your phone.
One of these statements is inaccurate.
(Comment edited to be more easily demonstrable.)
The point he was trying to make is that the photo selection is done on the device and not by Google servers. Obviously the device has network connection, it just doesn't use it for that specific usecase which is analyzing images, but it can use it for other stuff.
Bluetooth is not normally considered a network connection.
(I work at Google, but have nothing to do with Clips)
>the phrase before the "so" does not imply the phrase that comes after, meaning the sentence still is not factual.
This seems highly pedantic, unnecessarily so in fact. Sure if you take "so" to mean "implies" then your statement is reasonable, but "so" doesn't solely mean "implies".
The point seems to be that you're in control of the photos, and they aren't being sent off to a secret google dark site to mine for data about your toddler. Do you disagree with that, or just have further grammatical quibbles?
Edit: apparently it is a thing but not really, like very low bandwidth.
Can we be sure that the compromised clip isn't uploading images to the phone? Not the little video clips supported by the standard device, images created by additional software.
Of course this is pedantic, but is also a useful way of analyzing what internet of shit products might end up doing (that is, reasoning about the capabilities in addition to the advertised features).
Listen, this statement clearly is made to address privacy concerns, and it does so in an irresponsibly misleading way.
What I, and I believe others didn't like, is the text and the message, which is not even hidden at this point: Google sees and knows everything about you, your family, your favorite moments. I didn't even see how that was useful for the user -- I certainly want to categorize my Moments so I can easily find them again, but I'm not sure I want Google to _know_ about it. And yet that's exactly what it says.
In 2017 v) is solved, i)/ii)/iv) are easier, google should be able to do vi) as well as anyone, let's see about vii). Anyway good luck to them and I'll be buying one.
The Xiaomi Yi's (and other Chinese cameras using Ambarella/HiSilicon/Allwinner SoCs) are cheap and pretty scriptable, but a bit too big/obvious. Anyone know of a camera that would work? This Google one doesn't take pictures of everything, and is pretty expensive for what it is.
Having my family all gathered in the same room ripping apart gifts on Christmas always had a camcorder, if we had Google Clips set up in the tree then we'd probably have more footage of my dad in those years than we do now because he was always behind the lens.
Google just needs someone to spin the market appeal better. Passive surveillance is definitely a sore spot. Ease free family memories are way more of a positive spin.
I did feel the creepy vibe, but I've learned a long time ago that I'm more sensitive to that than others.
> ... uses machine learning to key in on certain people and pets of your choosing and only capture them, so you don’t miss out on adorable moments. Clips is designed to be clipped anywhere, however, including around the house.
This is part of the manifestation of Google's big bet on hardware; the same way they used to put out tons of shitty software just to see what stuck, now they will do the same with hardware. Luckily, hardware breaks, so it will be less painful when your camera dies and is discontinued than when Google pulls the plug on their dead services with little ceremony or redress.
In addition, the movie has already reminded me of Google...
A post privacy future.
Cameras have become more and more automated over the years. Auto focus, auto-exposure, auto-iso, burst mode hdr, portait lighting, and pretty soon, computational photography and AI on camera devices is going to just let you take a continuous burst of images, recognize the best compositions, and choose those.
Some people will scream death of art and creativity, but true auteurs can still go manual mode if they want. Other people will be freed up to do other things while not having to worry about taking bad shots.
The only thing is that I would probably only use it if I expected there to be something capturable, like Christmas morning or a first day on the school bus or some special outing at a Playground or Disney or something. I'm not sure it's worth it for just those occasions. If something spontaneously adorable happens, it probably will be in a drawer and out of battery. But I'm sorely tempted. Hanging it on the Christmas tree might be amazing.
But I can imagine my grandma using this to take family photos. What's your solution for her? A phone stand and a timer that she has to quickly jump and move around? And then someone blinked, so she has to do it again?
Has anyone needed something that is "candid" but also "not candid" (because you placed the camera there...)?
Maybe if they targeted sports, or security it'll make more sense?
Parents.
> All the marketing material on Google's site seemed to be aimed towards a family oriented theme.
That's not accidental.
> Have you ever thought, "oh, let's take a few photos while we make cookies in the POV of the kitchen table"...?
Not that specifically, but, as a parent of a young child, I have thought “I wish I had a camera that I could basically place and forget” quite a lot.
I'm skeptical about the AI choosing good shots to capture, but if it's even remotely good at that, I suspect it will do pretty well.
A lot of fun stories while baking cookies and other mundane household chores when you have pets and kids.
EDIT: I won't buy this at this price point, but definitely get it at $150.
It's also probably very good for going out with your friends. It's always a pain in the arse to take out your camera/phone, interrupt whatever people are doing and have them pose for pictures. If this captures good pictures, it would be so much better.
Re privacy, I don't know if you check every line of source code in every app you've got installed on your PC/devices. If you don't, they could be capturing all the data they can and sending it over to big brother.
Link for the curious: http://getnarrative.com
1) Meant to take video of your family
2) Identifies 'moments' and cuts them up for you so you don't have to do all the video editing yourself.
Coincidentally, the police in my current hometown are also trying out a Google product for their body cams.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-jersey-city-using-cell-p...
1) Spoken word
Every spoken word is transcribed. Every word is tagged to the right person. All speech is automatically analyzed for intonation and emotion (perhaps, in part, by the AI analyzing facial expression).
2) Written word
Every word that is read/seen by the camera (as in books, magazines, receipts, brochures, highway signs, TV commercials, license plates) is OCRed and stored.
3) People
Every person is tagged (something like the way Google Photos does it). Since there is now audio for every frame/video, Google's machine-learning AI will make it super accurate. Facial expressions will be analyzed, along with vocal intonation, to tag person's emotions, mental state, etc.
4) Location
Everything will be GPS-tagged.
Great start, but so much more I'd like to see.
I'm excited what the second one will be.
>It also doesn’t use any kind of network connection, so it’s not broadcasting the stuff it captures anywhere. You can connect to your phone to check what you’ve got.
I'd add:
and, once connected, undoubtedly upload everything captured automatically to google for ad services, datamining, and machine learning.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20644764/prevent-google-...
Whenever it showed shots from the camera POV in the promo video, it looked like the pictures would be pretty low res.
Let the people buy what they want.
We know that you could build something similar with a $6 Aliexpress camera, $1 motion sensor and a $5 rpi zero from Microcenter but we're not the market.