How Google Glass Will Change Porn

Because absolutely everything has to be framed as a dichotomy these days. Drama and conflict are, apparently, the only way to hold the reader's interest.

I wouldn't consider a private recording a "Big Brother" thing. It's when recording is mandated and that you have no choice in sharing it, that it becomes "Big Brother"-ish.

Personally, I could see a passive recording feature (say, the last five minutes) as useful in this way. But then we're talking battery life, and I haven't read enough to know about such things for Google Glass.

"crime witness aid for police" would probably be beneficial by itself, if it is possible to limit the privacy and surveillance concerns. So essentially the situation, where a witness starts to film a crime and then gives this video to the police. Or the police could be required to document everything they do (by taking a full video of each shift).

On the other hand, the surveillance potential is of course scary. And once Google glass is out, I really do not know how to limit the impact.

advantage over what? a GoPro?

in terms of Glass as a tiny camera, that technology already exists and has for a long time.

You're not misunderstanding. The field of view I am referring to is for viewing not recording, I should have probably made that more clear. Of course some will try and view porn on Google Glass, heck if you could view porn on a calculator I'm sure some people would try. As for filming I list a few questions in regards to quality, space and bandwidth. Will it seriously be possible to record a high definition long-duration POV porn movie on Google Glass? It doesn't sound plausible to me, not in high definition anyway.

That's a little bit of confirmation bias, there are plenty of xs that have never become as good as ys.

Not true. I can think of many cases where they're wrong, but I can also think of many where they're right. With cameras and suchlike you're running limitations of physics, as far as image acquisition is concerned; the other issue is that there's a huge body of knowledge on how to move a camera properly, whereas a head-mounted camera is kind of painful to watch because you don't have the kinetic cues to go with it, and every little twitch or movement of the head becomes a distraction for the viewer who has to filter out the irrelevant movements in their visual cortex. Look at all those videos on youtube where people don't know how to hold a camcorder and it is just waving all over the place even when they're aiming it at a static object in front of them.

The musical instrument world is abuzz with new analog synthesizers right now, because over the last couple of years several major manufacturers have just gone back to manufacturing it because SMT and FPGA/FPAAs have made it affordable to do so again. They're still making DSP synths because DSP still offers many advaantages (not as noisy, fewer limits on polyphony, vastly cheaper at scale), but analog synths are huge again because they simply sound more interesting to most musicians than their digital equivalents. I'm about to sell one of my DSP boxes for this very reason, in fact.

Considering Google Glass utilises cloud storage on presumably some kind of LTE plan I don't see high quality blu-ray or even DVD ready video recording quality anytime soon from these things, it's just not plausible high quality video can be captured and streamed via any network as fast as it is being captured (unless Glass has on-board high storage, but I haven't heard of any).

You are somewhat right in that people have said "x will never be as good as y" and were proven wrong, but that isn't always the case. In this instance I don't see Google Glass replacing any day-to-day camera. Mobile phone camera technology is a good example, mobile phone cameras have become a lot better in the quality of; video, imagery, lenses and sensors they have, but due to constraints such as; battery life, storage capacity and smaller form factor will never be good for more than happy snaps. And while lots of people are content with happy snap quality, to say that Google Glass in the article will ever be of high enough quality to record palatable professional pornography is a misguided and incorrect statement.

Maybe not child pornography in that instance, but I associate any sexually motivated action involving children (secretly filming them for devious purposes) to be somewhat of a sick act nonetheless whatever you want to call it. We don't need to get into specifics here for it to be considered a warranted worry, we all know there are going to be stories of people using devices like Google Glass for nefarious purposes.