Slashdot Mirror
Sergey Brin Says Using a Smartphone Is 'Emasculating'
An anonymous reader writes "While speaking at the TED Conference in California earlier today, Sergey Brin seemingly tried to set the stage for a world where using Google Glass is as normal as using a smartphone. What's more, Brin went so far as to say that using smartphones is 'emasculating.' Brin said that smartphone users often seclude themselves in their own private virtual worlds. 'Is this the way you're meant to interact with other people,' Brin asked. Are people in the future destined to communicate via just walking around, looking down, and 'rubbing a featureless piece of glass,' Brin asked rhetorically. 'It's kind of emasculating. Is this what you're meant to do with your body?' Is wearing futuristic glasses any better?"
Another reader sends in an article that also muses on our psychological connection to our devices. Or, as he puts it, the "increasingly weird and perhaps overly intimate relationship we have with our gadgets; the fist we touch when awake, the last at night. Our minds have become bookended by glass."
This is vs staring into some one's face while you ignore them while reading something off your glasses?
Or is it a bit of a slip, fist and tip?
I don't know about Brin, but my e-masculinity is e-normous. Bookends help hold it all in.
Sent from my ENIAC
I love glass :) ...
Is gay.
The size of your screen?
these glasses are going nowhere. They look stupid so they are dead on arrival. Furthermore, they only appeal to the part of the population that already wears glasses.
The hype over these nerd glasses couldn't more clearly illustrate how out of touch dorks are with regular people.
I'm telling you. Between this and the Russian meteorite that caused injuries due to flying glass, this substance needs to be comprehensively banned by all governments around the world!
There are a number of things you can say about a smartphone, but - emasculating? Seriously? Out of what orifice did he pull THAT?
Is Brin worried that Glasses are going to be another Q?
#DeleteChrome
I'll settle for that.
that's pretty emasculating in and of itself.
I don't think you want to know what touches my fist when I awake.
the fist we touch when awake, the last at night
Hmm, so you're into fisting are you?
By the way, most smartphones have a spellchecker. Maybe /. editors could use them to post articles...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
too much glass...
Sent from my ENIAC
IMHO even if Glass is clearly the superior device, it makes you look like a dork/nerd.
There is no way to change that until they look like regular glasses. Until then, all you can do is attack your main competitor, the smarthpone, or it will go the way of the segway.
Oh the irony. Gimme a break.
Sergey, you should leave the marketing to professionals in your organization. You can be the "vision" guy but don't trying to create the narrative for your company. You are not Steve Jobs.
Steve Jobs was the founder of Apple and the CEO until recently but he had some qualities that are unfortunately uncommon among tech industry CEOs. He knew how to "think" like the common man and figure out what the common man wanted before he knew that he wanted it. He also had a sense of taste and an extreme attention to detail to help his company "polish" their products.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Yes, looking at a smartphone while doing something else makes you look like a dweeb. Hanging the screen in front of your face won't help.
Sergey just doesn't get it. My Android phone is a big swinging phallic symbol, especially when it does those 3D maps.... iPhone toting hipster chicks never fail to notice. Got plenty of mileage out of that, opposite sex wise. Sergey just doesn't know how to hold it.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
In a sense, smartphones set you free. You don't have to remember your friends' phone numbers, or the address of that great take-out place. You will instantly know the commonly-accepted answer to just about any question. Brin feels like we're losing something, while I argue just the opposite. Take away the boring minutiae of our everyday lives that we're forced to remember just to get by and you have more room for the things that matter.
If you'll excuse me I have to go write a grant proposal to NIH about the memory effects of smartphones. Which will probably get turned down thanks to budget cuts, but you know, can't blame a guy for trying.
We always knew that the iDevices were crippling golden prisons... ditto for Windows 8 ones... and that Android, while being better in freedom of what you could install, was not at all different in general mindset of cripplingly dumbed-down UIs.
But it's not the phone. It's the *mindset*! Thinking of it as a *fixed-function* device, instead of a *computer*!
But most people nowadays have never actually *used* a computer, and do not even remotely have and idea what a computer actually is.
They have only used fat appliances that happened to be implemented on a computer. But they never ever saw, let alone used, the computer underneath. They never automated anything away.
That's what's emasculating... no, *crippling*.
And as long as people continue believing, that dumbing-down would be an "ideal", instead of being considered harmful, that won't change.
Using a smartphone is emasculating? What? That's not even incorrect; the two concepts have no relation to each other.
This makes the man sound absolutely loony. It's now very difficult to believe a word coming out of any company he is associated with, let alone is the head of.
You keep on using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
Seriously, does he legitimately expect that I'm going to suddenly ditch my phone and throw the contents of my wallet at him for a product that makes Navin's Opti-Grab look stylish simply because he's calling me and one-seventh of the human population -- including women -- castrated girly-men?
...by allowing you to stare blankly at the person right in front of you while you're looking at Google's stream of information about the world around you.
Do you worry about being emasculated by rubbing your featureless piece of glass in your fist? Well, your worries are over, my friend! With your Google Goggles, you'll be able to show everyone your masculinity with two free hands to rub whatever you want in your fist! Act now, supplies are limited.
Knowledge is king, words are power, I feel like the singularity has begun.
Was that Wow for "the fist we touch when awake"?
This "Joy of Tech" cartoon explains what will really happen with Google glasses:
The Reality of Google Glasses
For me, he is well past his sell-by date. Can't he buy some remote island and cocoon there?
Tapping on a screen is not the most natural way to communicate with people. You should assign your best men to this problem to invent a solution. But before you do I have a question for you. What if we used our phones to call people and talk to them?
Seriously what is with this guy? Why is this so complicated?
seriously, if Glass takes off everyone is going to be wearing prescription-free glasses or frames, and they won't want to stick with the google-issued model - it'll become victim to fashion trends as much as regular glasses and sunglasses are, but amped up to the level of womens footwear fashion.
This is going to be huge - it's on your face all the time. Third-party frames compatible with Glass is where I'd invest my cash.
"Our minds have become bookended by glass."
Uh, what's the problem with that? So far you've just stated facts, now you need to state their effects. That's how telling people about something works. Currently, you're just letting the reader draw their own conclusions, and mine is that this is perfectly okay.
Maybe emaciating because of flip motions give the thumb a workout?
Maybe emancipating because you aren't tied to a PC any more?
Maybe e-masturbating because of all the fondling and rubbing?
Not really sure emasculating is the right word. Can maybe blame spell-check auto-correct?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v1uyQZNg2vE
read the well stylized article::
http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates
To me it looks like it could revolutionize.
I could never get into smart phones, but this sounds way more of what I would consider "virtual reality". What I pictured in the 80s and 90s of that anyways. Its not lawnmower man, you are there in the real world. Altered states of reality.
-
It's more helpful if, in the parent article, you replace "interact with other people" with "view advertisements".
Until it cooks my breakfast and reads my thoughts, a computing device that wraps around my head is useless, but Google can't figure that out. Its funny because all of the tech giants are in a state of confusion, grasping for the next big thing. Most users are still trying figure out their cell phones, what makes you think that introducing a new device is going to change us solely based on the fact that it is different and new? You need a third innovative element, and sometimes paying the brightest engineers in the world large sums of money cannot reproduce that. And apparently in the case of google glass they have lost their way.
Tablets and phones are just mobile versions of regular computers. In other words, when you use a mobile computer, you are just as much lost to other people as when you use a desktop PC. How could it be otherise, given the attention that a computer must receive in order to be used properly.
A paradigm shift could only occur with a thought interface to a computer- after all we 'think' and interact with other Humans at the same time. Since we don't even know what a 'thought' interface would be in any sense, such a possibility is a very long way off, if doable at all (most unlikely).
So, the reality is that there is, and will be no tricksy method of allowing people to use a computer and interact with people in real-life at the same time. This simple truth will not change just because you shrink the computer, putting it on your wrist, in your ear, or in front of your eyeball. New, shrunk, computer gimmicks will carry on being niche products for use by certain professional groups in their work environments. Indeed, recall how the early PDAs and tablet computers totally flopped as consumer products, but were then found new homes in warehouses, hospitals, delivery trucks etc.
'Terminator' glasses are the worst idea of all for general use. What's the input? Talking to yourself? A screen that moves with your head is already conceptually 'wrong'. Augmented reality is a non-starter because of the dreadful resolution and tracking ability of these devices (AR needs to be astonishing well done to be acceptable, a bit like CGI in feature films).
Of course, Google, like Intel and Microsoft, cannot think of good new ideas to save their lives. Google would be better off investing its time, energy and financial resources into making Android the de facto OS for all mobile and desktop computers (it is kinda doing this, and it is doing well, but things could still be moving faster, and Android needs to merge with ChromeOS very soon so the desktop side of the project can be advanced in tune with the new generation of very powerful ARM quad-A15 parts). OK, I'm just in a hurry to see MS and Intel meet their very sticky and well deserved end. These two grossly incompetent companies have rode the gravy train for far too long.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Google making a shitload of money from all those "emasculated" people? :-)
And have we already reached the stage where Google tells us what to do with our bodies?
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... time... to... die...
I use "OSMpad" on "iPhone" for mapping for the wiki-style "OpenStreetMap". So it is a precise GPS enabled data input tool. How can I do in with glasses?
If I can, I do not mind. Because every time I have to stop bicycle, take out iPhone, map a building or another structure, put back smartphone into the pocket, and so on.
Touching an inanimate object made of glass and plastic each morning and night is nothing new -- well before the days of smart phones (or even cell phones at all), I used to have a manual alarm clock that I'd have to set each night and turn off each morning. So this "strange intimacy" with our gadgets has been going on for 50 years or more.
Since it was a 12 hour clock, it wasn't possible to reset the alarm when it went off at 7am in the morning or else it would go off again at 7pm, so one had to set it each night.
Now my smartphone is my alarm, and it's better in that I don't have to set it at night, but it's still the first thing I touch in the morning since I have to stop the alarm.
I might buy the Glass, but only if the device connects only to my computers and does only what I want. In effect, it would be a convenient HUD, not a service. Not a bit would go outside of my LAN.
In most cases, though, I don't quite feel the need to have one on. Do I need to wear a monitor in front of me? Do I need to threaten everyone with recording of all their activities, public and semi-public? My life does not revolve around constant communication; there is specific time and place for that. The employer will probably also be not very happy that you can watch movies and read Slashdot all day long without anyone knowing it. The police will be joyful to learn that a Glass owner can see not just the road but also his email and chat - and there is no way to prove it one way or another.
Throw in a mini map showing friendlies deployment, a GPS and a camera to monitor activities by the command and you got yourself some very good gear.
One killer feature (point intended) that could actually make a difference to the soldiers themselves is a targeting line-of-sight camera \ giro that calculates the projectile course and displays a curve with wind correction and such. This will make shooting behind cover and from the waist possible at very long ranges.
Hell, Imagine all your grunts with Terminator 2 like mini-guns since those things can actually fire pretty accurately but the problem was the weak humans who couldn't aim properly while shotting from the waist and couldn't bring them up to the shoulder because they're way too big and bulky.
Screw protective gear. Deploy 5 guys with this combo and some support UAVs with AV and AA and watch them take out 300 men one their own.
Then you can talk to me about emasculating...
I hope that's a typo
But anyhoo, the first thing I touch when I'm awake is my wife, the wife that I love so much
She's also the last thing I touch, before I go to sleep
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
This guy needs to get a partner. It seems a sad and lonely life if you are clutching some gadget all the time. I'm a developer, I have 3 "smart" phones and 4 tablets that are part of my daily activity. The last thing I touch at night is my wife, and also the first thing I touch in the morning. Few things are less annoying than people who don't have anything better to do than compulsively check email, etc. Wake up, be analog, smell the air, see the world, whatever. All that digital crap will wait. That is sort of how its designed.
I see glass as a military device more than anything right now. A simple HUD with the locations of allies overlaid on an aerial map, plus features such as IR camera and text commands. The key feature that makes glass so useful in such an instance is its hands-free nature. This would apply anywhere you are using both hands. The problem is that for most civilians it is not such a hassle to take your phone out.
It could be an equivalent of a car dashboard camera but for cycling. Cyclists wear glasses anyway to prevent mosquitoes getting into the eyes.
Permanent recording could be a safety feature for cyclists. It would make road hooligans less enthusiastic as an HD video of an accident could be played later in a judicial assembly.
There's an app for that, you son of a bitch. Plug it into your damned glasses. You will enjoy it.
Of course Brin wants everyone hard-wired to their Google account 24/7. He wants to make Google an inseparable, integral and vital part of our every day life. Glass is a step in that direction. For me, while I do use Google products all the time and however much I like my Android smartphone, I feel just fine leaving it in my pocket/on my desk most of the time. I've no desire to "see the world" through it.
Consider it a preemptive strike in the age old editor wars before someone accuses Google Glasses of violating privacy.
I have always thought that male smartphone users looked feminine. When they're in public, out of touch with what's around them, and pawing at this little thing, yeah, it doesn't give the impression that this is an alert dude that's ready to deal with the world around him. Especially when you imagine that he's looking at facebook or something.
I know that there's nothing good or bad about being feminine or not, whether or not you have testicles, but being a guy, I am kind of image conscious about how I use my phone. The same way I don't want my man-bag to look like a purse.
That Mr. Brin doesn't seem to understand the difference between the two words is not a good sign that he has carefully considered the point he wishes to make.
Do mobile devices (not just smartphones) have the potential to make face-to-face interaction less likely or desirable? Sure. Where we once needed to actually be in immediate proximity to another individual in order to sustain a meaningful dialogue or communication with them, we now have the convenience of tweeting them or posting something on their (heaven forbid) Facebook wall. We can text them, even if they are halfway around the globe. Does this necessarily decrease the quality of interaction? The most honest answer I can furnish is that it depends.
Throughout history, humans have been devising ways to make communication easier. We invented written languages, books, telegraphy, telephony, television, and the internet. We did all these things because we found it facilitated connection. Does it mean that when the telephone was invented, people started to lament that telephones were "emasculating" (sic) because they made it possible to talk to someone without being physically in the same room? That's an absurdly regressive, not to mention historically and technologically naive, view. It borders on sophistry.
Let's be clear that over-reliance on smartphones and mobile connectivity, to the point of eschewing physical interaction, is a definite phenomenon. I don't want anyone to get the impression that I'm an apologist for all the spoiled teens whose interactions with their peers is primarily through virtual, rather than real, means--and rack up the bills to show for it. Or that I'm excusing full-grown adults who insist on checking their feeds every 5 minutes, who can't be bothered to put their phones down for a real-life conversation in the flesh. But it is painfully obvious that Mr. Brin has an agenda here, which is to sell his company's glasses as the solution to this problem. As such, whatever legitimate criticisms he has lacks credibility because of his bias.
Moreover, there's another problem with Mr. Brin's accusations, and that is the unspoken assumption that these glasses *must* be an improvement. That is a claim that remains to be seen, because it isn't at all obvious. I, for one, would be very uneasy at the prospect of living in a society whose members are constantly recording each others' movements and activities. I suppose Mr. Brin (and Google) takes the attitude that we will simply become accustomed to this omnipresent surveillance, but I think that it is an entirely legitimate question to ask why we as a society SHOULD move in this direction in the first place. Thus far I have not seen any compelling rationale to do so.
In summary, I am distrustful of anyone who advocates for a new technology as a solution to a problem that is largely symptomatic of cultural attitudes and a lack of etiquette. Don't want your mobile devices to turn your social life into a virtual experience? The answer is not to buy the next fancy gadget, be it some silly-looking headwear or something yet to be invented, but to simply make the conscious decision to be a better person by interacting in person. And similarly there is a point at which a society needs to collectively decide for itself that it is better to experience the world first-hand, rather than through a handheld electronic device. To the extent that such a device facilitates that goal, the more power to it. That is the reason for technology--to enrich our lives, not become what we live our lives through.
Apparently these Google Glasses are voice controlled, so people will know exactly what you're doing with your Glasses.
Haha, I'm reading Slashdot and watching cat videos in my Glass during a boring meeting without anyone noticing. Try doing that with your puny handhelds!
Oh shoot, they just did... the cranial sound system works pretty good, but this could still use some form of telepathy...
So basically what he's saying is that using a smartphone will cost me my balls??
I go out with my partner and often see families with children come for nice meal in a nice restaurant. Mum is updating her facebook status while dad's checking ebay, Junior and his sister are toying with nintendo. Parents cant communicate with each other let alone their children. I see scenes like this all the time and I really dont think its a healthy way to live together - if we cant be social as a family unit when we have gone out to be together what hope is there for mankind?
I have no problem with people using their devices for whatever they see fit - but when they have gone out for a special occaision or for a nice meal to be a family together it just seems very broken to me.
N.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
1. Mr. Brin, you are a smart guy but I don't think emasculate means what you think it means.
2. Ironic that this lament of the non-interaction between people comes from the head of Google. Where Google's Mountain View employees work in perfect virtual isolation in their cubes and ventilated tents. Where employees who need to talk to their colleagues in the cubicle next door or right behind them in the same, shared, cubicle use IM instead of lifting their heads and opening their mouths in conversation. Google's virtual isolation culture is truly epic. One wonders who instigated and fostered this culture if not its now self-professed emasculated leaders.
People had the option, and this is how they chose to relate to other people.
I hate Smartphones and after my old phone broke down, I ain't even buying a new one.
Living without a mobile phone is like living without a (annoying) stone chained to your leg.
It's measurably better quality of living.
I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
why does soulskill use his FIST to type with? And why doesn't he ever seem to re-read what he types before posting it?
I understand that English is a living language, but I object to changes arising merely from repeated errors.
"the fist we touch when awake"
Yes, I often am awoken by a fist... I knew I should have remembered my wife's birthday...
That's funny. I never considered using one of those "teaching devices" for the purpose of forcing boring meeting attendees to actually have to listen to the boring meeting. But I bet today's young urban professionals are hard-wired to withdraw and insulate even through something like that.
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
If these Google glasses looked more like a regular pair of glasses / shades, people wouldn't look so conspicuously ridiculous by wearing them.
When I first got into computer for REALZ in the 90s, I let them consume me. I think that is a natural first reaction to the power of technology.
But after a while, I realized I needed a better balance in my life and learned a secret: you can choose NOT to look at the computer. Or email. Or IRC. Or IM. Or Facebook. Or slashdot (sorry).
When I hear experters fret over the dehumanizing affects of technology, I laugh. Some people just don't have enough patience. The rebalance will come to the majority soon enough. In the 50s-80s, the technology monster was TV. Before that, it was radio. Now it is smartphones. Soon it may be smart glasses or smart wrist watches.
However, being an alarmist sells papers.
Hmm.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Many folks would rather have lasers shot in their eyes than wear glasses.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
If you're tied down by your phone, then you're doing it wrong. Get a second number if you have to (i.e. GVoice) and dump everybody in there if you hate getting calls. Turn of alerts if you find them distracting.
I am the master of my phone, not the other way around. The only alerts I get are incoming calls (you know, the prime purpose) and text messages from about 6 people, all of whom I want to hear from immediately if anything important comes up (Parents, wife, daughter, two friends). Everything else is passive. If I need to look something up - it's right there. If I'm running late or have to reschedule - it's right there. If I'm stuck because someone without a phone didn't tell me hey'd be late (that inconsiderate bastard), or I just have 10 minutes to kill, I can either entertain myself or weed out my inbox so when I get back home or to work I don't have to waste more time there. I use it to jot notes down, take pictures of opportunity, and store a myriad of information that - while not critical - is convenient to have - like a running list of things to pick up when out on errands. Saves me time and gas money.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Just telnet into my ebrain cortex so I can understand your communication better, Comrade
Ac FTW!
ITT people who are afraid of change.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
If a smartphone is all it takes to emasculate you, well... let's just say it was hardly worth the effort.
Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
It's becoming obvious that online advertising is far less effective on the small screens. The mass transition from accessing online content from relatively larger laptop screens and desktop monitors to the smaller phone screens reduces ad space and click-through rates. The ongoing growth in the number of internet users in emerging markets can partially offset this, but the transition of the existing user base from large screens to small screens is bad for Google. Google certainly isn't going away, but that portion of their revenue will be hitting a plateau and then shrinking. Companies like FB who are almost entirely dependent on eyeballs have dim prospects going forward.
Hmmm... with the right software maybe Google glass could be WAY better than beer goggles!
Both are attempts to bring the portable computer closer and more seemlessly to your body. In a decade a full computer may be shrunk to that those form factors (decent prototypes now).
I would think the glasses, close to your eyes, ears, and mouth would eventually be the better interface.
The only thing missing is the attached floating chair. I fear it will be even more 'emasculating' (really, it should be impersonal or sterile), since even when you're talking face to face with someone, you'll be involved and/or distracted by all the other things Google Glass is putting in your visual field of view.
His high school quiz bowl team beat mine, so I am going to assume he is right about this, as well.
because, come on, we aren't cave men!
what a close minded view. I agree with others here... at least I'll know when I am being ignored
What I want to know is, why do people feel the need to be connected 24/7?
Nature as we know it is slowly dying and we are all too busy to even stop and smell the roses.
The end is near for sure.
Now there is a fine example of both aesthetics and Yacht-design!
... filled with a bunch of emacs jokes.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
All you kiddies that *want* to be online 24x7 never had to work that way (says the guy who spent two years wearing one, or two, pagers 24x7x365.25).
And all that texting, like the cartoons of two folks at a table texting each other, just shows that you haven't grown up, and are *terrified* of actually talking to another human being. You'd rather imagine that they were all simulations, so that you didn't have to consider getting hurt, or hurting them.
Think you're meat*, you do.
mark "got a life in the RW"
* Check out the cyberpunk usage of the word "meat"
I don't know. A lot of phones do make people look like dorks. And act like dorks too.
The thing the submitter said, first thing touched in morning and last used at night. That's just wrong. I don't do that. I know tons of smart phone owners who don't do that. The phone doesn't control their live and they're not always checking in on it. But some people do that, and I think it's kind of sad actually. "Emasculating" is the wrong word but these people definitely are being controlled by the phone, or co-dependent.
What an extremely insightful post!
I pooped my pants. That is all.
... the last thing many people touch before going to sleep and the first thing they touch after waking.
You follow the anti-smartphone arguments down the rabbit hole and we're all naked and living in caves.
I've been using an iPhone as an alarm clock since June, 2007. Of course it is the last thing I touch (to set the alarm) and the first thing I touch (to turn off the alarm.) How is that any worse than touching any alarm clock? Next you will be telling me to wake up according to my natural rhythms like the Industrial Revolution never happened.
Checking on Facebook or Twitter is not the only use of a smartphone. At least not an iPhone. Drawing, painting, recording music and audio, photography, making movies, reading books — all proud human endeavors. Instead of needing a giant house full of hundreds of different technologies (horse hair paint brush, chemical darkroom, grand piano) I can do those things with what I keep in my pocket. And the documents I made open up on a Mac to be prepared for publishing instead of gather dust in the attic.
Oh, you big boy.. you!
I'm reminded of General Jack Ripper.
I can no longer sit back and allow smart phones to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
Lowering one's eyes to look at the phone is instinctually interpreted by the person you're talking to as submissive or evasive. Using Glass keeps your eyes up on your opponent, in a dominating gaze. Reading Slashdot helps, because you can avoid eye contact without actually appearing to do so. You will now agree with my opinion, or I will continue to stare you down while I surf the Internet.
My Google Glass will rest nicely beneath my prosthetic forehead. They thwart biometric identity!!!