Slashdot Mirror
More Details On Google Glass
Earlier today we discussed Google's I/O conference keynote presentation, which gave updates on Android 4.1, Google+, the Nexus 7 tablet, and the Nexus Q streaming device. We also got a rather dramatic demonstration of Google Glass, complete with skydiving, bike flips, and rappelling. They followed up with a press conference solely dedicated to Glass, and Timothy was there to cover it. Read on for details about Glass.
As we mentioned earlier, the developers at I/O have the option to buy the 'Explorer Edition' of Google Glass for $1,500. In addition to the (functional, but unfinished) device itself, they also get access to Google's engineers and to keep up with the devices development. Worry not: when the consumer version of the device is finalized, it will be cheaper, but of course they aren't ready to talk about actual prices yet. As for availability: "Less than a year after we get these Explorer Editions out."
Google wants to encourage creative hacking, even if they don't want the developers to immediately put the results in front of users. Sergey said, "Having used a lot of GoPros, what I really want to do is have 5 GoPros along with me — but also Glass, so you can easily capture the data hands-free, that you can see what you're capturing as you do it."
How do you click a web page? Sergey stumbles a bit -- "maybe you should switch to phone or try another device."
For tying into other Google services, and storing all that data, there is instant upload for pictures. Videos are larger, and they haven't finished how that interaction is going to work. The Google Map improvements with 3D views are perfect for viewing with the glasses.
Sergey also talked briefly about safety. Google has a lot of experience with this, particularly from the self-driving car. Speaking to actual experience: compared to driving, where you have distant view, plus dashboard instruments, etc., "This feels much safer." To objections that (say) even heads-up displays on cars are very limited, Sergey counters by pointing out that they only want to present a limited amount of data.
He went on to speak about the design of the glasses. There were two paths they had to choose from. Their initial instinct was to make these as much like glasses as possible; essentially a device disguised as glasses. Sergey said, "When we went through design options, decided, lets be bold .. a lot of people go through a fair amount of effort not to wear glasses; they wear contacts and things like that." So, they discarded glasses and made it an asymmetrical thing, very non-glasses like. He basically sidestepped a question about whether they've worked or are working with makers like Bausch & Lomb on products.
After fielding a few annoying questions about Larry's health, he went on to say Google Glass fits well with the charter of Google Apps, "to take bold risks and push the edges of technology. ... I think we're definitely pushing the limits." It's not all perfect, though. "There've definitely been situations where I felt that we got the software wrong. When you have something buggy and crashing there," he said, gesturing to the camera above his eye, "that's a real problem."
They're currently demonstrating the glasses. We'll have some video of that for you later.
Google wants to encourage creative hacking, even if they don't want the developers to immediately put the results in front of users. Sergey said, "Having used a lot of GoPros, what I really want to do is have 5 GoPros along with me — but also Glass, so you can easily capture the data hands-free, that you can see what you're capturing as you do it."
How do you click a web page? Sergey stumbles a bit -- "maybe you should switch to phone or try another device."
For tying into other Google services, and storing all that data, there is instant upload for pictures. Videos are larger, and they haven't finished how that interaction is going to work. The Google Map improvements with 3D views are perfect for viewing with the glasses.
Sergey also talked briefly about safety. Google has a lot of experience with this, particularly from the self-driving car. Speaking to actual experience: compared to driving, where you have distant view, plus dashboard instruments, etc., "This feels much safer." To objections that (say) even heads-up displays on cars are very limited, Sergey counters by pointing out that they only want to present a limited amount of data.
He went on to speak about the design of the glasses. There were two paths they had to choose from. Their initial instinct was to make these as much like glasses as possible; essentially a device disguised as glasses. Sergey said, "When we went through design options, decided, lets be bold .. a lot of people go through a fair amount of effort not to wear glasses; they wear contacts and things like that." So, they discarded glasses and made it an asymmetrical thing, very non-glasses like. He basically sidestepped a question about whether they've worked or are working with makers like Bausch & Lomb on products.
After fielding a few annoying questions about Larry's health, he went on to say Google Glass fits well with the charter of Google Apps, "to take bold risks and push the edges of technology. ... I think we're definitely pushing the limits." It's not all perfect, though. "There've definitely been situations where I felt that we got the software wrong. When you have something buggy and crashing there," he said, gesturing to the camera above his eye, "that's a real problem."
They're currently demonstrating the glasses. We'll have some video of that for you later.
Better yet, "Hey son, check this out, it's the exact moment you came into existence!"
Seriously, though, this does look cool. There have been a lot of times when I wish I had a video camera handy but just didn't want to fool with one, even built into a cell phone. Also, if it keeps basically a circular realtime recording of everything going on, it would be really handy to re-watch things that you normally wouldn't be recording at all.
One thing that I suspect will have to be addressed at some point is exactly how much control you have over the data. For example, if you're involved in a wreck, it would be really nice to have the video showing exactly what happened since eyewitness testimony is so unreliable and people tend to lie. But would you be arrested for obstruction of justice if you deleted the video off of your Google Glass because you knew you were speeding?
I have two major concerns about this, neither of which are safety-related.
First, as I mentioned above, it would have to be absolutely clear that I alone control the data on it. If I'm involved in an automobile accident, for example, I don't want to be arrested for obstruction of justice if I decide to delete the video. However, if I need to use it in court, I would get to choose to keep it as evidence.
Second, what about privacy concerns? I mean, right now, if I see a hot girl, I have my memories. Not any more, now I have video of her that I can upload to Facebook! Will people take these things off in restrooms out of respect? I doubt it. Will I never be able to tell off-color jokes to my friends who have these again because it might come up at an inconvenient time when I'm interviewing for a job at some point?
As a lesser but still valid concern, what about copyright? I'm sure that movie theaters would have a cow if you wore them in. What if I'm just lounging around the house and happen to have the television on or a song playing on the Nexus Q, am I going to be sued by Sony or making illegal copies of copyrighted material? Are they going to build in a kill switch for Google Glass controlled by your content-protected television? Etc.
This is a fascinating technology, but not without some challenges. I can't wait to see what happens as these things are worked out.
Probably more of a "destruction of evidence" charge, but yes that would be possible. There would be a burden of proof to show that (1) recognized the video was evidence of a criminal act, and (2) you destroyed or altered it for the purpose of interfering with justice.
(2) can be difficult to prove. "I always clear it every morning and did it out of habit without thinking that accident yesterday might go to court" alone could cast reasonable doubt against (2). Usually requires some other supporting evidence like testimony that you told someone that you deliberately wiped it, or asked someone if it was admissible as evidence before you wiped it etc. The rules of proof for destruction of evidence are a little more lenient however due to the nature of the crime.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Somewhat more morbid, the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case would have been settled already. How will Google Glasses affect crime and punishment?
So basically...you can't see any value in this kind of product at all? Let's get the technology going first. We're geeks after all. I'll bother about the other considerations after I finish being excited over the technological aspect.
Most don't, just like most people don't want to give their money or personal information to the companies selling other products or providing other services that rely on access to personal information. Most people would prefer to keep their money and information.
What people do want is the the benefits they get from using the devices and services. The cost -- in money or information that has to be handed over to get those benefits -- is something that people may be willing to accept as a cost, not something that they "want".
Assuming you are referring to the "Google now" feature, that doesn't seem to do any more tracking than Google already has been for a long time, it just leverages the ability to data mine the data Google has stored for the user's direct benefit more.
Which may make more obvious how much tracking was already going on, and what people can learn by data mining, but it doesn't actually seem to be more tracking.
He went on to speak about the design of the glasses. There were two paths they had to choose from. Their initial instinct was to make these as much like glasses as possible; essentially a device disguised as glasses. Sergey said, "When we went through design options, decided, lets be bold .. a lot of people go through a fair amount of effort not to wear glasses; they wear contacts and things like that." So, they discarded glasses and made it an asymmetrical thing, very non-glasses like.
Yet, many trendy people willing to spend $$$-$$$$ on functionally useless accessories wear frames with non-prescription clear lenses. But I guess such a person is probably not the target market for a pricey, vanity-centric device like Google Glass. . .
Then there is the fact that eyeglasses are the culmination of generations of research on how to mount something over the human eye in a way that is comfortable during everyday activity. But hey, why not reinvent that wheel?
you have the internet. do you really need links to find hot women?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
There are other legit source of content for the kindle besides amazon.
I really like my kindle.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
... Philip Glass' less musically-talented younger brother.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Someone will come out non functioning look a like. Cheap hipster will wear them.
"some idiot filming every little thing on his ugly glasses then yes I think I would have an issue with that. "
So you wouldnt have an issue if he recorded you with beautiful glasses?
My library lets me digitally check out books to read on my kindle. Yours probably does too. Free books + e-reader = ultimate geek win.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.