Google's Project Glass - it's not for the young
notes.kateva.org
notes.kateva.org
Some of these personal devices take the form of little square boxes you carry around. Maybe others you can wear, like a pair of gloves, or sneakers, or glasses.
If you were taken on a quick visit to this awesome place, can you imagine looking at any of these devices and thinking, "Omg, that alien looks ridiculous. Its telebox is 7 inches instead of 4 or 10." Or, "Omg, that alien's glasses have a box thingy on the side. It looks aweful." No, you would not do this. Not in a million years. The thought would not even cross your mind. You would be so impressed and awed by the simple fact that the technology exists that it really wouldn't matter what form it took. And you would be dumbfounded by anyone letting those details get in the way of shaping their opinions about these amazing technologies.
If you were on this vacation, and you overheard one alien make fun of another because of the way one of his devices looks, you probably wouldn't even understand what was going on. Why do they care about those specifics? The technology is just so obviously cool that picking on the details seems... below their intelligence.
But we, here, on Earth, do this. We have the future in our fingertips, and now on our heads, and people actually take the time to criticize it for the way it looks. "Glasses look stupid." "Phablets are disgusting." Etc. As if not looking ridiculous is of higher value than anything new technologies can provide.
I think that way of thinking is a little sad. If you don't want to embrace new technology because you think it'll make you look silly, then don't. Why on Earth would you take the time to criticize those who don't give a fuck, who are willing to embrace new technologies because of what they do, and not how they look?
As a 26 year old, I can't wait to get my hands on a pair.
Maybe your aliens evolved in a different environment, maybe their species was not shaped by millennia of sexual selection. But ours was, so until we change our very natures, "looking cool" and all other kinds of signalling will trump quite a lot of real benefits.
How does it look better for a group of teenage girls with parents sitting around the dinner table in a high class, $200/person meal restaurant all staring in their SIII's, glow of Facebook on their faces than them wearing these classes and having at least the appearance of them caring about the food/ambiance?
How does it look worse for the suave business guy with the chiseled cheekbones, reeking of male oils, lotions and other useless crap crashing with his iPad HARD into a lamppost (it moved!)? (saw this a number of times; I bet if you live in a big city you see this daily)
Let's not talk about the, normally vain people, who want to 'experience their music' and thus wear HUGE headphones on the street for high-end sound on their Dark Side of the Moon.
I don't see how these glasses make you look worse than that? Newsflash; you already look like a moron anyway with the electronics you use NOW! What does this do to make it worse? If anything it improves (a few) of the above use cases if executes well (which does not seem to be the idea Google has with it, but luckily we have hackers and I guess they trust them to make it work).
Google's Glass looks GREAT - I hope it doesn't go the way of Bluetooth headsets (which are for douchebags, you see) for the general populace...
Google glasses say to people that at any time I am recording every move that person makes and potentially (a) putting it on Youtube, (b) laughing about it with my friends, (c) handing it over to the police etc.
It is unquestionably for douchebags.
I wonder how those laws and courts will deal with Google Goggles there.
What I care about is you not recording me without my permission. And that's what these glasses represent to a lot of people. One selfish person invading the privacy of a lot of other people.
The reality will probably be that people actually watch back only a small amount and share less than that. The interesting application is a kind of augmented memory, or TiVo for your eyes. In which case it's going to be personal encounters or extremely novel public situations that will get reviewed. The average man on the street doesn't need to worry unless he's riding a unicycle.
Charlie Brooker's Black Mirror explored a pretty dark outcome for personal recording devices http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror_%28TV_series%29#3.... This seems a more likely danger than privacy invasion, people tend to be egocentric on the whole, they care more about themselves than a random person on the street.
Then again, I never thought about it, because the goal of Glass is exactly the very LAST thing I would use Glass for. I don't take pictures as it is and doing it from my POV doesn't seem interesting at all. What I want is being able to walk (and sit without getting my mobile office out) and do some (!) work. Like for instance when I have team meetings via Skype and I need to see occasional demos and slides, there is NO reason at all why I cannot do that on the move. If I can walk through the mountains and occasionally look up/right or wherever to see a slide or screen, it would allow me to do a LARGE % of my daily work in nature while walking. And I see a lot more things which can be done now with Glass without needing complex and weird human interaction.
And when you need to do something real, you just sit down, flip open a tiny computer (openpandora is my poison) which you connect to the glasses (for instance, via VNC which is the most obvious option) and presto you have a full screen without opening some big laptop or disturbing the peace with (power) cables etc, nor do you appear to stare into a laptop in public; you never have to actually look at the pandora to do your work.
I can record you with a phone in my pocket and half of the people around you have a smartphone capable of video recording. The only change Google Glass will introduce in this regard is a better angle.
If it makes you feel any better, the sheer amount of data you get out of these devices makes it unlikely your image will ever be misused or shared around on purpose. The worst you can expect is to be the extra in somebody's holiday recordings. I walk through central London on a regular basis and I'm sure I must be ruining the shots of several dozen tourists with traditional cameras by now.
I think the thing is it quickly becomes not the focus. It's not like you have a TV crew following you, or even a video camera pressed to your eye. It doesn't draw attention very much, aside from the initial question about what it is. So people are able to quite quickly forget about it and act normally.
On the other had I suppose if I frequently uploaded pictures of people from it, especially if those where unflattering or embarrassing, people might start to mind more.
Given the history of the internet and humanity - its clear that this will inevitably happen.
As the cross section of people using glass and the members of humanity grows, chance of misuse approaches unity.
EDIT: The discussion on invasions of privacy were also raised when (Nokia?) camera phones first came out. People were concerned by the possibility of someone surreptitiously filming/photographing you.
People did adapt and camera phones are a mainstay today. They just have audible clicks when a picture is taken. (I believe that was the mandated solution)
But for the other things you are right; I don't get that, but I see what they are doing. So I see what you mean, and that was exactly what I meant; this guy is trying to look cool and attract the babes while he crashes into a lamppost reading his 'urgent' iPad content. That's sending a signal as well and that's what I meant.
It can (and will probably) be cool to wear those glasses in the end, if not from Google, maybe from Apple or someone else.
Putting it this way - if it works, and is useful, enough people won't care.
As long as the leading edge of the population thinks its worth using, it will have acceptance. If it enough good applications are there for it, people will flock to it.
Because as this thread has pointed out, $200 meals aren't cool to everyone. Those kids couldn't care less; they'd rather be socializing with their friends (on Facebook, obviously) than talking to their parents.
Peer pressure, conformity, being cool and fitting in are huge factors for teens, and if their role models use them then they will be open to them too.
Heck people can wrap their heads around wearing their underwear visibly, I think cyborg glasses could be an easy sell.
(Alternatively If younger kids start using it (perhaps unlikely) then the older kids may even say "that's for kids" and stay clear.)
If the peer group approves, then the product will be fine.
edited for clarity.