Hacker News Reader

Comment by sekasi | Hacker News Reader

I'm not saying you're wrong.. but I feel this argument is getting a little bit old in an era where we're being filmed everywhere by everything from subway cameras to iPhones.

To me, one of Glass's biggest problem has always been its looks. But this isn't an iPhone on your head. We can't compare this to any polished products anywhere. It's a cellphone in a briefcase.

'Would you want a wearable computer on your head' ? - Answer will be no, generally.

'Would you like sunglasses that can do a little bit more than just being sunglasses?' - Answer is now not as obvious.

I've used Glass for a few months now and I don't think it's a consumer product as it stands.

It WILL be, but it's not a consumer product now. Think certain sectors and use them 'for a purpose'.

View on HN

I'm not saying you're wrong.. but I feel this argument is getting a little bit old in an era where we're being filmed everywhere by everything from subway cameras to iPhones.

On the contrary, the argument has never been more relevant than in an era when increasingly pervasive surveillance would otherwise be taken for granted.

Once Pandora's box is open, it will be almost impossible to close it. Pandora's box isn't really full of cameras, though, it's full of all the recording and image processing and data mining that goes with them. You can't do those things without the ubiquitous cameras, but the cameras are usually the only part of the system you can see and do something about, so once the cameras are in you'll never be quite sure who is doing what on the other side of them.

> I'm not saying you're wrong.. but I feel this argument is getting a little bit old in an era where we're being filmed everywhere by everything from subway cameras to iPhones.

That's a fair point but personally I still feel there are some important differences. CCTV footage is usually used (ostensibly) for security or logistical purposes (e.g. traffic management) and comparatively rarely ends up on YouTube or Facebook. Glass footage on the other hand is acquired by a private individual with less visible motives and no oversight. That's not to say that CCTV footage is never abused or personal footage usually is, but on balance I would expect more people to be concerned about being recorded by a random stranger than by a random shop.

Secondly, the 'almost covert' nature of Glass makes it feel to me inherently creepier - you can see if someone is pointing a phone or standalone video camera at you, but if someone looks your way wearing Glass, are they recording you? I expect many people (particularly women, given some of the websites out there) would feel nervous about that. It's easier to consent to being recorded when you know its happening, and therefore also easier to prevent it if you don't consent.

I expect that a person holding a phone in front of them everywhere they went as if filming would experience a similar level of hostility to that reported by some Glass users.

I had it explained to me like this by someone who I previously assumed was backwards when it comes to technology:

Do you remember junior high or high school, and how desperate you were to avoid doing a.n.y.t.h.i.n.g. that could potentially embarrass you? Products like google glass, and smartphones for that matter, bring those feelings back for a lot of people; they know that all it takes is just one quick screw-up, and they're getting picked on, but on a scale that is mind blowing. Essentially, it's not that we're embarrassed by our actions, or that our actions are illegal, it's that we just don't want to be laughed at.

That made perfect sense to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com