Slashdot Mirror
Seattle Bar Owner Bans Google Glass, In Advance
An anonymous reader writes "A popular Seattle bar and restaurant has posted a notice on its Facebook page warning patrons that wearing Google Glass will not be tolerated. 'Ass kicking will be encouraged for violators,' wrote Dave Meinert, owner of the 5 Point Cafe, perhaps in a mock aggressive tone. GeekWire reports that Meinert raised privacy concerns in an interview with a local radio station: 'People want to go there and be not known and definitely don't want to be secretly filmed or videotaped and immediately put on the Internet.' A subsequent FB post includes more Meinert musings on Google Glass: 'They are really just the new fashion accessory for the fanny pack & never removed Bluetooth headset wearing set,' along with unflattering photos of a pair of early adopters."
And it's my right to take my business elsewhere.
Why don't they put the hardware in a pair of regular horn-rimmed glasses, so you look less of a dork wearing it?
Proactively.
Just another loudmouth trying to generate publicity for his restaurant by being "controversial". Nothing to see here.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
I, for one, will welcome everyone who got "banned" by that backwards moron.
I, for one, will enable users to have *more* intimate, and *less* detached interactions in my bar, with those glasses.
I, for one, will however disallow transferring anything of the video feed outside of the premises. What happens in my bar, stays in my bar, unless *everyone* involved agrees. Analysis, yes. Transfer no. And fuck you if you even dare to say “cloud” instead of a normal word.
And stop propagating the bullshit of braindead morons. I bet he's racist too, based on the same system of 100% pure un-cut prejudices.
1. A facebook page doesn't count for public notice. Unless they post this in the bar itself, it is meaningless.
2. IANAL, but I don't think they consulted one either. Inciting people to violence seems like a bad idea.
3. People have almost surely been secretly filmed in the bar at some point. It's like this guy has never seen an episode of cheaters.
4. You can hardly do ANYTHING secretly with Google Glass on your face.
5. I don't care anyway, because every Google Glass device I've ever seen has been for the right-eyed. Plus it looks stupid.
6. In any case, his one-man crusade against Google Glass seems pretty stupid and I don't think I would want to visit his bar anyway.
The first Slashdotter to use their "glasses" to look inside "Mr Goatse" wins a Troll of the year 2013 award!.
To be fair.. It's not hard to find unflattering photos of people with fanny packs, bluetooth earlobes or geeky google glasses.
Just saying. If they had been flattering photos, it would have to have been some kind of astroturf.
Liberty.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/07/18/227234/mcdonalds-denies-profs-claim-staff-attacked-him-for-wearing-digital-glasses
This seems like the guy is just copying McDonald's policy.
his clientele probably consists of Microsoft employees
Given the desire to record 24/7 with devices like Google Glass etc, I fully understand the decision, and even support it.
It's one thing if someone hauls up a phone and snaps a couple of pictures or a short video clip, but recording video and audio constantly, that's a big Asshole act...
On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?
Its a private business, they can ban whatever they like. Even blue hair.
Might not be good for business.
Is a dive bar located 2 blocks from the Space Needle. The best thing I can say about it is that you can watch the CCTV of the laundry next door. I did like being able to enjoy a beer while keeping an eye on my stuff in the dryer.
Hipster uses Facebook to mock new data-mining technology. Color me shocked.
...when ocular implants that are as inconspicuous as contact lenses grant all the same functionality as these glasses do?
Advocating privacy via Facebook published posting.
Actually, 5 Points is a good spot.
Whenever circumstance dictates that I am forced to mis-spend time in that sodden, dreary town - I am cheered by the 5 Points. Burger time!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
While the bar owner in the article makes his point in an obnoxious and troll-like manner, his point stands under its own merit.
People do not like being filmed and recorded and having it posted on the internet.
Could you imagine the reaction people would have with somebody wearing these glasses at say, a beach, changing rooms, clothing stores, anything that has children ( oh wont *SOMEBODY* think of the children!) in it, movie theatres, art galleries etc etc.
If a stranger wearing Glasses walked up and started talking to me, my very first reaction would be to put my hand up in front of my face to hide from the video camera, knowing full well that everything I say and do will be recorded and possibly posted onto the internet for the world to see. It would make conversation very awkward for both of us.
Its quite a scary thought really. The tech is cool, thats not under debate. But the privacy ramifications of it are, most especially if Glasses become as ubiquitous as smartphones.
What glasses needs is a way to be useful and cool and functional *without* a camera.
I assume he's also banning cell phones and traditional cameras as well, right?
Apologies for being off-topic, but I would like to point fellow slashdotters to wired.com, where you can see a huge congregation of $hills promoting Ubuntu and related $huttleworth contraptions:
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/03/ubuntu-mir/
It appears to me he now also emulates M$ in the way he does propaganda: Lots of pro-$huttleworth half-truths and semi-lies. For example:
A) Thank god there is only the Linux kernel. Yeah, in $huttleworth propaganda there is no BSD and no Solaris.
B) X.org "must go". Yeah, because a $limy bu$$ine$$man has decided so. We need to ditch a rock-solid technology because Mark $ay$.
[nt]
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
So, I just came from the Meca in Seattle; http://mecca-cafe.com/
how is it two restaurants coined the exact same phrase "alcoholics serving alcoholics since 1929" ?
Anyhow, WTF? banning tech glasses? Why don't they ban iPhones, see how well that will do. Obvious publicity stunt, and will probably backfire.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
Google glasses are blatantly illegal. They violate the privacy of people who did not even sign up or know about this technology. If just 1% or of the population started using glasses, that would be enough to record lives of the vast majority of the population. You can bet a secret govt agency is sponsoring Google glasses.
Technology already reached the point where you can be filmed or recorded without being aware of, without needing anything more advanced than a smartphone, with i.e. Koozoo. In fact, won't be surprised if there isnt a wearable webcam addon for smarphone to record an event, meeting or whatever, without going full to google glass.
And add to that that a lot of places have security cameras, a lot of them insecure enough to be in this page some weeks ago.
"Ass kicking will be encouraged for violators"
Well, I accept the challenge gleefully!
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Nothing new here really. Public photographers have been harassed forever; ask any practicing street photographer. Cell phone camera users would be in the same boat except that they are in the majority now. Google Glass users are in the monitory currently, so they can be bullied. Give it time.
Your virginity is showing.
[nt]
Because someone claiming to remember seeing you doing something stupid in that bar one time is the same as being filmed, tagged and published searchable on the net?
My patronage
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
The bar owner's a troll...however, I have to say that a bar is the LAST place I would have Glass on my head. I'm interested in it for business use, and recreational use, but come on...where do most cellphones get swiped/lost? That's right, in a bar.
That being said, if I were offered physical violence for wandering into an establishment with these on, there would be problems. A _polite_ request to remove would be sufficient.
Yes, this guy has a right to ban whatever he wants in his business but that isn't really the issue. You have to speak out loud for the damn things to do anything (assuming the advertising is accurate) i.e. "Start recording" "Take a picture" so it isn't like they're active all the time. People are not going to record your stupid dalliances because (and this may shock you): NO ONE CARES. They're going to record their own lives and experiences and share those with their circles of friends (Google-related pun unintended) and if your own stupidity is captured in the background you can't say crap about it in basically any venue. Also, if the uploads work the same way that the Instant Upload feature on smartphones does then those images (and presumably videos) are private by default anyway they are not "posted for the world to see" without human intervention. Have some trust in your fellow man for Christ's sake.
There will always be creepers, but to assume that absolutely everyone is hell bent on capturing your behavior or ruining your life is paranoid and vain. If you aren't in your own home you have no expectation of privacy. It is just that damn simple. What's more is that you're getting up in arms over the inadvertent capturing of your image. I mean do you sue the evening news if they happen to catch you in frame? You people are being far too paranoid. This isn't some conspiracy to rob you of privacy. If you are inadvertently captured in someone else's video your anonymity is not gone. As technologists, we should embrace these things and do our part to help construct a new etiquette for their use rather than donning tin-foil hats and hiding from the change.
Lets be realistic here he doesnt want people filming or taking pictures of his patrons and then putting them on the internet. Ok thats all well and good but what about cell phones? They take pictures and video and post them to the internet instantly just as well.
This sounds more like he is trying to get attention to his establishment than actually giving a crap about his customers. He just wanted his name out there for his message and nothing else.
you are taking a pretty big risk cuz i might just smash it off your face
So the bar owner is a troll, but you agree with him. That makes you what exactly?
These probably won't be worn by the charismatic people in the bar to socialize. They'll be worn by the greasy fat guy posting cleavage pictures on the internet. He wouldn't even be in the bar except to photograph the beautiful people. If he had the social skills to contribute to the social scene at the bar, he'd know he looked like a dork.
You don't *know* the greasy guy with the dorky glasses is going to post pictures of your bosom on the internet, but the one pointing a cell phone at you? That's easy. He's obviously up to no good.
That hardly matters in reality....since there may not be any upper bound on the number of people who might corroborate the claim. If ten people see somebody do something illegal, for instance, but only one of them remembers the perpetrator's face well enough to identify them, that's still more than enough information to initiate prosecution, and with an additional 9 witnesses to the event, probably sufficient to convict.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
In a restaurant, bar or other publicly accessible private establishment, the rules are made by the owner.
Having that out of the way, I'd like to comment that in Russia dashboard-mounted cameras that film 24/7 are nothing new. They are in fact so common, expat Russians are spreading that habit in near-by countries. That's how some almost all (or all?) those recent awesome meteorite videos came to be.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Tom-Leykis-hurt-in-late-night-Belltown-assault-1152564.php
I love when people use it for things like that, like posting college material and documents.
It's just the right avenue for that stuff.
I assumed (probably incorrectly) that this has more to do with the fact you can't put the thing in your pocket and pay attention to the people you are talking too. Not that different from the new trend to put your phone away during lunch with friends out of politeness. Unless its march madness and I need to check a score... My friends understand.
I think most people here don't realize how irritating and problematic being recorded constantly during private conversations can be. From experience just with someone that had a voice recorder, knowing that the slightest thing you say could be shared out of context or edited to make you look bad and subsequently (perhaps after a couple of bad experiences) *trying* to police every word becomes stressful enough to spark real resentment and anger.
Considering the amount of pressure that a lot of people are under these days between job, financial, and personal issues, and that being recorded on video would be even more stressful than mere audio, this situation is likely to push a lot of them over the edge into violence or worse. I wouldn't be surprised if pressure from voters & police experts results in politicians banning devices of this sort.
Before anyone says it: no, cellphones, cameras and standard surveillance cameras are not the same thing. The cellphones/cameras aren't used to record constantly (doing so would be a major battery drain), so as I said in another thread, the difference between them and GGlasses is similar to that of a friend bringing his dog and a friend bringing his incontinent diarrhea-prone dog. Civilian surveillance cameras are intended to record constantly but usually either lack audio or can't hone in on one specific conversation, plus they're under the control of a neutral third party that has little incentive to abuse the recording.
Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
The bar owner can maybe ban people from wearing this iteration of recording technology in his bar, but what will he do in few years, when invisible camera and augmented reality will be build-in in devices indistinguishable from common glasses, or later build-in directly into our eyes and brains? No one will be able to control what you are recording and archiving then. People should get used to it.
When you can bash a household names hardware and have your eatery splashed over the interwebs?
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but wouldn't it be cool to make a Infra-red led array that shines brightly on your face or away from your head in a way that saturates the photosensors in a camera and makes it impossible to see your face in an image / recording? I am going to try to make one of these I think.
Marvelous Infant-Lactating Female
... hasn't the bar owner been on Ebay in the past two or three years? You can get HD pencams for $30 that are probably better than Google Glass, and NOBODY will ever notice them.
In the US, at least, criminal trespass arrests generally occur after an officer witnesses the owner telling someone to leave and not come back. The police don't have the right to tell me to leave your house - only you have that right. Also, they don't have the right to arrest me unless they either witness me committing a crime or get get a warrant. So it's the property owner (or their representative) telling someone to leave, the cop just witnesses the criminal trespass.
Good on the bar owner for banning these intrusive and hideous things. My patronage is assured (If I lived there)
But everyone here is going on about right to not be recorded and so on. Can you just stop going on about your rights and look at it from a decency and morality perspective? Society is perfectly capable to manage it's own etiquette. No laws or rights required.
Poking a camera in ones face unasked is plain rude. It would piss me off. It is the domain for paparazzi and they are assholes. Google glass is the equivalent of poking a camera on ones face and if I were exposed to such a twat I warn him once and slap the bloody thing off his face the second time.
The other irritating thing that also applies to smartphone users is having them checking their damn phone every few seconds during a conversation. It is rude and persons that feel the need to glue their damn screen to their eye while in a social environment are just the ultimate assholes. I tend to break off conversation when I detect those stealthy glances to their phone.
But, it won't come to that. Google glass has always been a stupid idea and has no hope in hell to ever become cool or socially accepted. Good for the bar owner to make his declaration and get a conversation around the politeness aspect of those things started.
back before it was a bar, wasn't even aware it was a bar now.
Anyways, this is about free publicity, not about him caring about people privacy.
Be seeing you...
The Final Irony: Complaining about privacy ... in your facebook page. WTF.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Our city council enacted an ordinance banning the use of video recording devices in any private property open to the public within city limits. Recording is of course still allowed in public where there is no expectation of privacy, but in any private property, even if open to the public, there is an expectation of privacy and all-party consent is required.
Win for privacy.
You goddamn stupid shit-filled cunt, sorry excuse for a human being.
I want to go on record as saying that only Google Glasses are banned from my establishment. iGlasses are perfectly fine as they follow the hipster guidelines of Seattle and its founding principles of hipsterdum. My previous statement has nothing to do with privacy but to gain media attention to my seedy bar and its select clients. I want to make sure no one is video taping our counter culture activities like poetry reading, tea drinking, writing our novels on MacBooks, and not supporting the troops. This is attempt to get more people in my door then actually giving a shit about privacy, if that was the case I would have pointed out that no one is allowed to bring in phones, paper notebooks, cameras, photographic memories, or any memories what so ever because I am thought genius or whatever I called myself earlier.
Hipster Seattle Seedy Bar Owner
PS Dear Seattle PD please now watch my bar because I JUST pointed out that illegal THINGS were happening here.
tto get into a brewing business, o open a few pubs where wearing the google glass is encouraged.
Google Glasses don't record constantly, for the reasons you stated - the battery would drain in an hour and the thing would be useless. Or do you think the glasses are hooked up to a notebook battery slung under the wearer's shoulder? To start recording you have to give a voice command ("ok, glass, record a video" or "ok, glass, hang out with [contact or group name]"). The glasses also have an indicating light which shines when video is being recorded.
So yes - either be afraid of cameras, cellphones, and Google Glasses, or none of them, as they all possibly share the same capabilities - taking images and video, and uploading them to the internet.
Recording devices are going to be ubiquitous soon - if they're not already with mobile phones.
Sure, Google Glasses are different in that they're on your head and ready to record a little more subtly, but if it's not them, it's going to be something else.
Reactionary policies like this won't really address the problem - technology is fundamentally changing how privacy works.
Citizens need to be made aware of the issue from both sides - when it's OK to record someone, and when they need to be conscious of the fact that they might be being recorded.
They need to be aware of the technical advances (e.g., face recognition combined with social network trawling) and cognisant of the risks. Even today, in a (mostly) Google Glasses free world, people should be aware of the fact that what they're doing might be recorded by someone, somewhere.
Behaviour will need to change to adapt to the new technology - just like it already has to some large degree because of things social networks and ubiquitous digital cameras. Know your rights to privacy, but be aware that a lot of them end when you step outside.
...bans Glass before it's cool.
Not a good "rule" to promote, just because its "your" establishment, doesn't give the you the power to take away a person's rights.
All that will serve is if someone does get their ass kicked in the pub wearing Google glass, the pub will be seen as encouraging the assault and will become liable.
It's like me writing in class rules for a martial art "you will get beaten up". Sure you got to a martial arts class to be beaten up but as soon as that "beat up" is not consented then the martial art becomes labial. That is, students only hit each other during sparing sessions, not outside of set consented times of combat.
Same thing here, the rule writer can be put up for assault and sued now and the courts wont go easy on him because the rule will be seen as premeditated I.E his intent was to cause this upset. Very dumb.
What happens in the Faraday Cage stays in the Faraday Cage. 1/2 price apps on Tuesday!
Ugly George?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Perhaps this will spawn a market for devices that will disrupt video recordings. These can be installed in places where people value their privacy and/or are there with people they don't want others to see them with, etc., etc., etc. I think this would be a great selling point for many people. "Come to our establishment! We won't let others spy on you!"
Just sayin'.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Glass is a representation of a product that las vegas created to emulated the NASA/astronaut/space program. The original program took 20+ years to biologically condition the individual (which was always a psychic). The point of the program was to use the individuals visual cortex to see rather than their eyes. Glass is simply some sort of parody which emulates that.
Very soon, everyone wearing glasses will be targeted as a potential 'spy'. Thanks, Google.
But that's different, right?
Just think more establishments should have a picture of a douche with a slash through it in preparation for the pending Douchocalypse brought to you by Google..
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
The creepy camera man series off the story linkn was hilarious!
My natural face-recognition skills are strongly inferior even to moderately obsolete computer algorithms. Such thing would work as a neural prosthesis for me, a social-interaction equivalent of a peg leg. Would you want to relieve me and others of such aid?
For the record, I'd strongly prefer if such functionality operated offline, without cloud connection...
Problem with Google Glass is employers are now using Social Media to monitor employees and would be employees.
Having this thing around, specially places where you let off steam being able act way you wish. May make you bulleye for said parties.
Heck, legally, depending on how the law judges it could be used in court just like phone records or internet logs can be legally optained or even seized by law. If a privately owned establishment wants to protect its cliental from unwanted snooping (accidently or not) I'm all for it.
What about people unable to recognize faces/expressions on their own? Such toy can be an equivalent of a physical handicap prosthetics. Or do you want to be an asshole and oppress the neurologically disadvantaged?
That will keep working until smart antenna arrays become norm for cellphones. It is fairly logical - no need to send RF energy to all directions when a small fraction of the power can be sent just in the direction of the cell tower, and the same applies to the received signal which then stands out of noise (including jammers) much better.
Ha ha.... I had to "Google" Google Glass :-)
We can be recorded in every business we walk into, and every street we walk.. but the minute we turn the tables and it's no longer in the investment class's benefit for there to be recordings of everything.. it's a bad idea.
http://www.accountkiller.com/en/delete-slashdot-account Stop visiting Slashdot.
If I walk in wearing a Google (fucking) Glass, I DARE them to eject me or actually TRY an "ass kicking".
Good luck trying to ban a person with a bionic eye.
i.e. Resistance is futile.