Slashdot Mirror
Google Glass Is the Future — and the Future Has Awful Battery Life
zacharye writes "The concept of wearable tech is really buzzing right now as pundits tout smart eyewear, watches and other connected devices as the future of tech. It makes sense, of course — smartphone growth is slowing and people need something to hold on to — but the early 'Explorer' version of Google's highly anticipated Google Glass headset has major problem that could be a big barrier for widespread adoption: Awful battery life."
Also, a review of the hardware. The current Glass hardware heads south in less than five hours, which doesn't seem too short relative to similarly powerful devices, but since it is meant to be worn all the time you'd think it would have a large enough battery to make it at least 8 or 10 hours.
This is what they were able to build. Rev 2. (probably when they get to mass producing it) will have better battery life
Great. That's where the camera is. I'll have some wonderful footage to provide the cops when assault charges are filed.
See you in court jackass.
I swear that if anyone approaches me wearing those things I'm going to punch him in the face.
Awww. *pinches cheeks* Remember when you said that about people using cell phones in public? That was just as cute.
ORLY? Who made that rule?
great just proves my point that I was being recorded without my permission?
Give it a few generations to shrink and it will hide in glasses frames.
For now the dorks that will buy it will want you to notice.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Contact Lenses version is coming soon.
What Star Terk Captions didn't know was that Zapp Brannigan means of dealing with Robot Wars would have worked for them too. Kept seen waves of men until the batteries are drained. Also I wonder how long until people deaths are put down not see the real world but only at their screen. Headphones are bad but visual distraction is worst.
Life is like untied shoe laces; it always tripping you up and getting in your way.
i got data flashing in front of me all the time. i know the news before anyone else. i'm so cool.
You have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public.
So why not a version with a Ray Charles type sunglasses frame. Plenty of room for extra battery size in the arms and the oversize dark lenses could completely camouflage the fact that there is a camera and display behind the lenses.
Batteries.
Since it's, effectively, a pair of glasses, make each of the temples or temple tips be a rechargable battery, with a good enough connector to handle connecting/disconnecting and plugging / unplugging hundreds of times.
Design them so that it won't shut down if even one of the two power sources is present, and ship with two+, allowing people to buy additional. Power temple #L1 is low? Disconnect and plug in power temple #L2. Power temple #R1 is recharged, replace power temple #R2 that are on the glasses.
Since google has been better at design (lately) than Apple (who came up with craptacular earphone jacks for the latest iPods), this should be easy.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
You could probably have a 48-hour battery life if you wanted to wrap the sides and back of your head with batteries. Go for it.
...of course battery life on these is going to be low; they're designed to attach to one side of your glasses! Even if they had the space to put more battery in, they wouldn't, because then you'd have a device that was always pulling your glasses down one side of your face, to say nothing of the extra weight on your nose and ear.
Batteries are heavy. If you create a face-mounted computer, you're going to want to make it as light as humanly possible. This should not come as anything remotely close to a surprise or shock to geeks.
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Actually, in many places in Europe, it's illegal to record other people in public places. There's some amount allowed if the person is "public person" (ie. celeb) but not otherwise.
Yes and no.
Depending on the location (nation, state, municipality, etc) there are laws about deliberately filming someone. ~Sometimes~ there are legal differences between casual recording (you walking past in the background) and deliberate recording, but sometimes not.
Sure, you're not going to be (normally) busted for filming your friends at the beach and getting some random people in the background, but it's still possible. (IIRC, there was an Australian case very recently about this.)
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
If GGlass is the future, I fear it. I don't want a world with padded utility poles, increasingly distracted drivers, and a society moving away from face-to-face confrontations for friendly interactions.
For real... if I ever see someone with one of these get punched in the face, I will cheer on the perpetrator. I will also frequent places where they are banned outright. I already go to events which have an unwritten "no phones on the dance floor" rules, which interestingly enough, are frequented by young positive people who actually understand the value of in-person interactions and only use tech where it makes sense.
Would look like stereo headphone cords. Could have an arbitrarily large battery in your pocket or purse. They sell them now for cell phones-- basically double the life.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Apparently the future also has plenty of imbeciles...
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Google glass has to have a powerful ARM processor and a high resolution display to implement it's specs. 2013 technology can only reduce the power consumption for that to a certain extent. And glass is supposed to be a wearable pair of glasses, so the battery mass can only be so high before it causes pain for the wearer.
A wire trailing down from the user's neck to a battery pack elsewhere is a potential solution...but wires like that get tangled up.
Maybe a bleeding edge higher density experimental battery? There are a few like that with more power density (about double) than the best standard lithium ion packs. Of course, such batteries are more likely to fail by catching fire, and this would be in the worst possible place.
Offload more computation to the android smartphone that goes with the glass? Still have to run the radios at a high bitrate to get things like the camera feed. Also this would make the smartphone mandatory.
Ideas? The concept here is awesome, but it de fact REQUIRES a powerful machine that can do image recognition in realtime, monitor gps and heading, read street signs, etc etc etc. This in turn means many millions of active transistors.
The only thing I can think of that just might work is a custom ASIC that provides hardware implementation of the most common mathematical functions performed by the most common glass application. You can get 10 :1 better power efficiency using a custom ASIC to implement the logic instead of a general purpose chip. The catch is, the cost to create such a chip is exorbitant.
Blink Blink Revolution...
***
Blink Right Eye
Now Left,
Right again,
Left twice....
You did it!!!!
I'd wear a prosthetic face wart with a camera.
Sounds like we need a Google Glass version of WorldStarHipHop to capture first-person violence on a low-res camera.
Laws regarding filming children (usually more restrictive, sometimes very much so) add to the stickiness of this situation.
Imagine how piss poor the battery life is going to be on those. Sheesh.
Laws regarding filming children (usually more restrictive, sometimes very much so) add to the stickiness of this situation.
Stickiness? Children? Really?
You're supposed to think of the children -- but not like that.
No way... By then, we'll have Time Crystals!
Great. That's where the camera is. I'll have some wonderful footage... ...or you would have if your battery had not run out about an hour ago.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Imagine how piss poor the battery life is going to be on those. Sheesh.
you will be the battery, coppertop
Would the assault charge be worth it?
Bearing in mind that if you happened to do this to somebody who just happened to be an off-duty cop, you'd be facing a whole world of grief.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Unless this all occurs inside your house, I can't see what the problem is?
... that Google's core competency is in cloud computing services? And not in hardware design.
News release: company with no previous hardware sales success can't resolve real world energy problem. Yawn.
We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
There may not be an "expectation" of privacy in public, but being "in your face" photographed and/or recorded in public by someone wearing this device makes the wearer a "Glasshole".
Given Google is in the US, I'm going by US based laws:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law#Public_property
http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf
It is legal to photograph or videotape anything and anyone on any public property.
Photographing private property from within the public domain is legal, with the exception of an area that is generally regarded as private, such as a bedroom, bathroom, or hotel room. In some states, there is no definition of "private," in which case, there is a general expectation of privacy. Should the subjects not attempt to conceal their private affairs, their actions immediately become public to a photographer using an average lens or video camera.
If you are in a city park for what ever reason, I can pop up a camera and video tape you as much as I want.
ORLY? Who made that rule?
Google did, through design choices.
Look at it. When not wearing, are you going to:
1) Put in pocket with keys
2) Put in pocket with phone.
3) Put in backpack with books.
Look at any image showing the whole thing. It doesn't even fold up like sunglasses so you cannot use a case. It would not fit in a pocket, and you'd be an idiot to do so anyway as it looks really fragile.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Make the lens dark with translucent solar cells.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
A wire trailing down from the user's neck to a battery pack elsewhere is a potential solution...but wires like that get tangled up.
Why not a battery that hangs around your neck? If you make it flat and thin enough and hang it from a lanyard it could be worn under the shirt with comfort and would also be discreet. It could easily hold a battery twice the size of that found in a cellphone. If the battery is built into the lanyard you can have a wire take the charge from the battery up through the lanyard to the back of the neck where the glasses can plug in. Get's the weight of the head and onto a part of the body than can handle the weight for a significant period of time and eliminates the need for a long wire going to a battery pack in your pocket.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Until I ask you to stop, at which point your continued persistence could be construed as harassment.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
That's true, however, there's a legal difference between hidden cameras and ones that are in full view when deciding how reasonable it is. If you've gone to the trouble of going someplace that's technically public, but where there are no cameras, you may very well still have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
With an average lens or video camera, which means that it doesn't apply to super telephoto lenses and it doesn't apply to cameras that are concealed.
So you rather be recorded discretely by a phone in a pocket or held in hands casually? At least with Google Glass you are able to tell you might be recorded as someone is staring at you or wearing one of those.
Last night when I was playing with the Grandson, every time I attempted to use my phone to record, he was too busy looking at his reflection in the phone in my hand than he was at my eyes and face in which he was babbling at just prior to me trying to record him.
So far, that is the only use I have personally witnessed a use for.... besides maybe a handful of tech troubleshooting issues that could not be seen unless the picture was taken at the right height.
My problem with the whole thing is the same reason I have padded around in life without glasses at all....anything sitting on my nose will be endlessly adjusted until the screw for the ear piece falls out and the glasses fall apart.
I wouldn't mind them for watching Netflix/Hulu, but I would have the same problem I have now with my tablet..unless I'm laying flat on my back I won't be able to properly view the screen and still be comfortable. (in the case of the tablet, my arms get sore holding the darn thing up..so then I do this stacking of pillows and blankets on my bed to prop the tablet up so I can watch The Daily Show laying on my side...woops...it fell face down again and paused the show...and look, now it skipped to commercial just because it fell face down....ugh....)
great just proves my point that I was being recorded without my permission?
People don't need your permission to record you in public.
If they turn around and publish it publically that is a different matter, but in general recording in a public place is not against the law.
Sorry mom. Even with bringing me Mac-n-cheese, I'm gonna have to pop you one. Teh internets old me to.
I drank what? -- Socrates
you will be the battery, coppertop
The battery life is definitely going to suck in that case.
I wonder if some product developers have been operating on the assumption that battery life will triple in the next year or two. There have been reports suggesting that such a close-in timeframe for such substantial improvement is not impossible.
I'm in my early 30's with better than 20/20 vision. I know that won't hold out forever, but I've never needed glasses. Why would I want to wear these?
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Until I ask you to stop
Fuck asking, I'm getting t-shirts printed up:
By recording this person, you consent to him kicking the holy living shit out of you.
Hey, it works for EULAs...
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
With an average lens or video camera, which means that it doesn't apply to super telephoto lenses and it doesn't apply to cameras that are concealed.
This thing is hardly conceled. Certainly no more so than a cell phone camera, which is quite common. Heck, I'd argue that a cell phone camera is even more conceled, since it's primarily a phone, and there's lot of other stuff you can do on a phone, and it's not always obvious you're pointing its camera at someone; whereas, with Google Glass, there's this chunky thing attached to a weird partial glasses frame on someones face - it doesn't just blend in, and it doesn't look like ordinary glasses in any way.
Here I was thinking that they should have built it into more normal looking glasses (like the mp3 player glasses that have been around for years, but a better style), but the wierd look might work to their advantage legally.
Great. That's where the camera is. I'll have some wonderful footage to provide the cops when assault charges are filed.
See you in court jackass.
That goes back to the article's point... won't you feel like a doofus when you go to present evidence and find out that the battery died just before the assault?
The comparison with Segway isn't really fair, given it wasn't really "new" (wheeled transportation has been pretty common for awhile). Wearable computing, OTOH, is breaking into some uncharted territory and has a lot of potential for interesting/innovative stuff that we really haven't seen before.
I don't really understand the massive backlash of hate Glass seems to be getting. Maybe it's because it's Google, and they're not really being too secretive about it, so it's in our faces more than standard R&D. I, personally, am pretty excited about the technology in general; it opens up the possibility of cool stuff that's very much been sci-fi, or too rare/clunky to be useful in every day life (HUDs aren't anything new): virtual interfaces a la Minority Report, high quality video without physical screens, incredibly immersive games/media, etc.
What I *am* worried(/interested) about is the direction this stuff is going to take, and if we're going down the Matrix/Borg path. Will we be seeing virtual ads overlayed on buildings everywhere (probably)? How many privacy concerns will there be, beyond just recording/taking pictures (a lot)?
In the end, however, a lot of the concerns we have with the current incarnation of Glass, and where the future will take us, aren't any different than the concerns about all other new technology - they exist, and we need to figure out how to best handle them as a society, instead of freaking out.
LegendMUD
You have a huge electro-chemical generator just millmeters from the glasses.
People have also made mechanical power sources from footsteps or pedometer pendulums. Remember self-winding watches?
Get me an order link and I'll buy like 20 of those. XXL Tall please :P
No, but short of standing in the middle of the street, most places people think of as "public" are in fact private property and the owners are well within rights to demand you turn that shit off and put it away or go play in traffic.
Not true. You have no expectation that something made public can be retroactively made private, not that everything relating to public spaces is automatically non-private.
Public restrooms are public access spaces in which a person can expect a great deal of visual privacy but little auditory privacy.
There is also a consideration for the efforts people take to ensure that something remains private. That's why merely locking a container with locks that are trivially circumvented triggers legal protections regarding the contents of that container.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
People are supposed to put on the glasses (even if they don't wear glasses) and then also remember to bring three or four handfuls of batteries, and not lose them also? And you also have to remember to charge three or four sets of these tiny things every day?
People did that regularly with several models of cell phones.
But there's also that new battery model, which if it scales well, could solve the entire problem. (http://www.extremetech.com/computing/153614-new-lithium-ion-battery-design-thats-2000-times-more-powerful-recharges-1000-times-faster) Seems like this is something Google should invest in.
Since google has been better at design (lately) than Apple (who came up with craptacular earphone jacks for the latest iPods)
The latest iPod earbuds are the only ones ever made I can stand to wear more than an hour. That includes the custom shaped ones.... I spent a few hundred on a nice set of earbuds but after I got the newer Apple earbuds, the Apple buds are the ones I use on planes simply because I can leave them in. The sounds is not as good but the shape is far, far better.
Apple also apparently understands that most people hate recharging batteries, a fact that seems lost on Slashdot.
I said jacks, not earbuds. The buds themselves are fine; I like them. (Far better than the "stuff into your ear" kind; I can't wear those at all.)
But the (female) jack point in the iPod is fragile and has only one set of contacts, so if there is any significant lateral pressure on the connector, the jackpoint cracks slightly, allowing future pressure moments to cause intermittant disconnections of the plug from the contacts, turning off the sound.
This lateral pressure can easily be applied if you have your iPod in a pocket and are just walking around.
Apple's response to me (other than replacing the iPod) was, "Well, just keep the iPod in your hand; don't put it in your pocket."
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
So, what is the recommended procedure to vacate the area when you want to take a few snapshots?
what about generators that run off of cigarette lighters? Here's my attempt at a calculation:
Butane lighter ~ 70kJ (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100426110511AAIvSgM)
hmm... I also see 600J, here (http://cadlab6.mit.edu/2.009.wiki/anchor/index.php?title=Butane_cigarette_lighter)
which is it???
assuming 50% efficiency, that leaves 35 kilojoules = 9.7 Wh
or from the second reference 300J = 0.083 Wh
the iPhone 5 has 5.45 Wh battery...
It's not that unique and the wearable aspect is just a monocle.
What does it let you do that a smart phone doesn't do already? And consider that it places so many burdens upon the user that previous tools do not.
Refine the technology RADICALLY and I might consider it.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Although the parent is rather obviously trolling, Google has a bit to learn about marketing. They are after all the brainiacs that launch social hubs by generating massive publicity and intrest for it, then letting people in only slowly so that by the time most people can actually use it, the hype has completely died off and the early birds have left because the places were deserted.
Google Glass has a simple answer for both power and battery life and price and reception. It is called a wire, the kind of wire that is attached to headphones. Gadget freaks already carry a large battery, a powerful cpu etc. They also are highly likely to carry a pair of headphones. So... why is Google Glass not equipped for decent headphones or a wire?
Simply connect it via USB to a phone. Then you use the touchscreen on the phone in your pocket, use its cpu and its reception without wasting battery life on a short range radio that has to deal with close promiximity of a human body (always plays merry hell with bluetooth).
I think Google was terrified that the device would be to nerdy and not hip enough but lets face it. This will only appeal to the terminally uncool and that is okay because I long since given up on the idea that any woman will go "meh, why not, just how bad can it be" by just seeing me and would be perfectly at home... but I also like my gadgets to be functional and a gadget that is out of power before mid day, isn't functional (or do you think that as you use a device, battery life goes up?).
Nice try google but either invent a battery 10 times more efficient then current tech or break out the wires. And really, WHERE ARE THE EARPLUGS!
because there MIGHT be 1 woman out there crazy enough but if I am seen with these glasses on and STILL talking in my phone... forget it... oh wait, she just texted me... oh. right... oh well... send me a pair over Google, seems I don't need to worry about how it will look any more.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Google US is in the US. Google UK is in the UK and follows local law with no regard for US law. And so on and so forth ad infinitum. You are right, of course, to apply US law in the US. My point with this post is just that you should not assume that the law you state above will be the case everywhere, merely because Google has its HQ in the US.
While your privacy MAY be protected to some extent by local laws, it is trumped by the protection of other people's (and yours) bodies from physical harm.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
So you come on a site that about News for Nerds and you think it's an insult when you call him nerd. But you go ahead and try and assault me because of the glasses I choose to wear. I say try because your attempt would be laughable and in the end the assault charges would be the least of your concerns. Don't worry though I hear broken jaws heal quickly.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Try downloading and watching this episode of Black Mirror, "The Entire History of You" (Season 1, Episode 3) in which most people (in a not too distant future) have a 'grain' implanted behind their ear which records everything they do, see or hear. This allows memories to be played back either in front of the person's eyes or on a screen, a process known as a 're-do'. Google Glass feels like the beginning of this, and [spoiler alert] what do you think happens at the end of the episode? You can read the whole synopsis on the Wikipedia page for it.
If you're in a crowded theater, the best way is shouting "Fire!".
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
With people like you around it's no wonder. You have added nothing to the debate except to insult someone you don't even know.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
You mean I cannot walk without being seen and memorized by someone in the public?
I'm going to start making shirts with IR LEDs sewn into them.
I swear that if anyone approaches me wearing those things I'm going to punch him in the face.
So, you spend a lot of time in Paris McDonald's do you?
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The uniqueness is "wearable" + "computing"; If monocles overlayed dynamic information, then you'd be right. Segways combined wheeled transportation with gyros, which in the end doesn't provide any additional functionality; stationary stability doesn't add much to personal transportation.
It opens the door for virtually placing that information in the real world, something that hasn't been done on a large scale. While smartphones are pretty revolutionary, in that they give us powerful network-connected computers to use almost anywhere, wearable computing is a pretty significant innovation in displaying information.
Think about it like this - in general, computers haven't changed that much in 20 years; the last significant change was broadband networking (and thus, the internet) becoming ubiquitous. Since then, we've still been using physical devices for input and output, we've just been able to increase the quality of each. Smartphones made computing that much more mobile, but we're still typing stuff in and reading stuff back on a screen.
Virtual displays, made possible by wearable computing, *do* allow for radical changes, namely the first real marriage of real and virtual worlds. Helloooooo Holodeck!
LegendMUD
Sure it is. Because people haven't been working on that for a decade.
Pfft, you crazy early adopters. I'm waiting for the retinal implants (support to be added in Android Tiramisu).
LegendMUD
Miniature cameras have been very accessible and affordable (much more affordable than Glass, in fact) for quite some time. Why are you punching the one guy in a ten, who openly displays his camera?
A person wearing GG is like the known teacher's pet. You know to not talk shit about Ms. Crabapple when the pet is around. It's the secret snitch who is the real problem. That's who tattles on you. And there you are, punching the pet.
It's not that there aren't real privacy concerns out there, but the way people are reacting to this product is just plain sad and exemplifies how amazingly stupid people are.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Or you could go for renewable energy source with a propeller hat.
but since it is meant to be worn all the time you'd think it would have a large enough battery to make it at least 8 or 10 hours.
The battery only has to last long enough for it to get stolen, when you to get mugged wearing it, or take it off, when entering a posted "No hipster douche-bags" area - which I'm betting will become more prevalent over time...
Seriously, what is the purpose of this device? Do you really need that level of interactivity with your surroundings? Do you need information pop-ups about what you see - probably in your own town? Like that Ford Sync feature shown in commercials - "Find Chinese restaurant." Perhaps useful for the first week you live there, then not so much...
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I swear that if anyone approaches me wearing those things I'm going to punch him in the face.
No, you've got it all wrong.
First you go up to them and say "Wow, are those the new Google Glasses?" like you're really excited and interested. Then you grab them off his face, throw them on the ground, stomp on them a few times, and THEN you punch him in the face.
What does it let you do that a smart phone doesn't do already?
Well compared to the more traditional blackberry, the iphone... Oh wait, we had this discussion already.
The thing is, this device doesn't need to replicate every function of other PEDs to be useful. My smartphone has replaced a lot of what I used to use my laptop for (checking email, looking up directions, pulling up cooking recipes), but for some situations, I still prefer the laptop.
The problem with the Segway was that it was a VERY expensive solution to a minor problem. IIRC the entry level Segway cost over $5,000. People could buy a literal car for that price (or a good motorized scooter for less than half). It wasn't sufficiently better at anything that what other options could provide for less.
Augmented reality HUDs on the other hand, are features which a lot of people want, and the price is not such that it would drive people away.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
The proper response to somebody wearing Google Glasses is to look at them for a second and then address them as follow: "Hey Google, you want to know everything about me? Great. You can start with my ass". Then, you moon the wearer.
If you do this in the US, there is legal precedent for it as protected speech.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
That's wrong. You can film and take pictures of whatever you want. You're limited in the use of that footage, for example uploading it for other people to see. In that case it depends on where and how many people you filmed/took pictures of.
I tried to warn people that this wasn't like their usual 8-12 hour devices, and that they had to trade off battery weight for comfort.
Seriously, if we could use wearable clothing that would power this, or even a solar cap with battery units woven in, we might be able to make it "wearable tech".
We're not quite there. Energy has to come from somewhere, and video really burns up watt hours.
The other way to go is hipster retro sunglasses, Mad Men bulky style, and use the stems plus the ear hooks to store battery power.
The military versions are way cool, but they make soldiers carry a lot of weight already.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
...and some people were mistrustful of photography because they thought that cameras could 'steal' their souls, or worried that automobiles traveling faster than 50mph would rip our bodies apart. This is really like saying that 1984 is the "logical conclusion" to the internet and government intervention, when in truth we, as a society, are generally pretty good at voicing concerns, and we're able to deal with and temper those concerns.
I'd certainly agree that there are some major negative side effects of this technology, so in the end I think comments like yours are good to bring up. I still, however, remain pretty hopeful that this is a technology that will have tangible, positive effects on our lives. Eventually.
LegendMUD
Why is everyone so critical of this technology?
It's new and interesting. Obviously it is going to take a few iterations to be fully functional, but why should that stop the early adopters from beta-testing the device if they want to pay for it? Other companies make us do it all the time with computers, phones, software and cars.
Also, how much battery life is enough? The hardware is very small... would you rather have a gigantic Lithium ion battery strapped to your head? (That might help with balancing the device center-of-mass.) Or maybe a micro-nuclear reactor? Just like your phone: If you want it to last all day, don't use it all the time.
Have we really become so elitist that we cannot appreciate novel technology unless it is completely and utterly perfect?
Good luck on finding a jury to convict me.
...and don't like contacts.
I suspect a lot people in a position to will get corrective laser eye surgery just to use this device and similar things that will follow. If the concept really catches on in a smartphone or tablet kind of way, that would leave a lot of people out in the cold. Of course, the idea of people having their bodies augmented just to interface with technology, and having that not seem weird, would be very promising.
We will soon see. Strange times are knocking on the door.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
...and some people were mistrustful of photography because they thought that cameras could 'steal' their souls, or worried that automobiles traveling faster than 50mph would rip our bodies apart. This is really like saying that 1984 is the "logical conclusion" to the internet and government intervention, when in truth we, as a society, are generally pretty good at voicing concerns, and we're able to deal with and temper those concerns.
I'd certainly agree that there are some major negative side effects of this technology, so in the end I think comments like yours are good to bring up. I still, however, remain pretty hopeful that this is a technology that will have tangible, positive effects on our lives. Eventually.
Well, still: as an exercise, watch the episode. It's a fast torrent download. And then let's discuss.
Great. That's where the camera is. I'll have some wonderful footage to provide the cops....
Not if he follows you for five hours beforehand.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
I'm going to start making shirts with IR LEDs sewn into them.
Remember not to wear one to the airport. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/09/mit_student_arr.html
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
I read through the wiki synopsis (off topic - I'd like to watch it eventually, but don't currently have good access to a connection where I should be torrenting), and I would agree it *is* scary. To me, though, it falls sorta in the same realm as the Matrix - a seemingly logical extension of technology that somehwat ignores the fact that humans are cranky enough to eventually prevent the darkest aspects of that from widely occurring.
LegendMUD
Dear poster, don't you remember an article a short while ago, explaining how a pretty old chipset is used in the device? With a chipset that's many years fresher, it will be possible to both go down in power consumption and increase performance. I'm sure most other components, including the battery, were thought to improve in energy efficiency.
That's actually incorrect. On public property, in the USA, people have an unabated right to record, regardless of permission. Obviously there are exceptions, such as shoving a camera in your face, stalking, etc, however I can record you in public as much as I like within reasonable limits, even with your expressed desire that I stop. What I can do with that footage is however, more limited.
The corner of a round room
A hat with some discrete solar panels and some hidden batteries would be practical and not be too dorky. Depending on the hat.
Real dorks would wear a beanie with a propeller for recharging. Although I'm not sure there's enough wind in their parents basement to make a difference.
Log in or piss off.
Actually, to be honest, I totally agree with you and your position. I'm not a luddite and I've used your argument similarly many times with friends. It's interesting that in the end the guy cuts the thing out of his head though. Also, by far the most attractive woman in the episode has no "grain", but she also shows the horrible scar it left, demonstrating what an ordeal it is to get the thing out of you.
This is a HUD combined with wearable computing and cloud syncing using Linux/Android as an OS and /. of all places can't think of something more interesting to say "You will look stupid using these". Or "I'd punch anyone wearing Google glass 'cos there is a camera in those things too. If you cannot see past your own vanity or that this might be more than a camera, then honestly you have no right to call yourself a nerd. Seriosu
I'll definitely check it out; I hadn't even heard of the show before your comment, so thanks!!
LegendMUD
The next product in the Google line, for people who wanted a larger battery in their Google Glasses.
Here in Sweden you're allowed to photograph or film anyone in public as long as you aren't specifically harassing them. Publishing photos on the other hand...
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
I'm more concerned about your magical ability to turn anyone approaching you into a man, than your propensity for violence.
It doesn't matter, you can't punch someone just for being annoying. That kind of thing can land you in jail.
A similar situation people are more familiar with is shooting an intruder. Just because he broke into your house doesn't mean you can shoot him. Just because he's filming you doesn't mean you can punch him.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If I made t-shirts with big breadboards, a bunch of wires and a nine volt battery hanging off the chest I don't think I'd sell very many. And if you're in an airport wearing such a thing, somebody asks you about it, and you just walk away without answering, you really shouldn't be surprised by a little extra scrutiny.
I'm someone who gets dragged into the back room every single time I cross the US border. Sometimes there are unholstered guns and handcuffs involved, all because I share a name with someone they're scared of (and a few million other people). I don't have much respect for border guards who can't read a physical description, or airport security who make everybody take their shoes off but can't find real weapons. But I also don't have much sympathy for idiots who do unreasonably suspicious things in such an environment.
Most of those companies that use EULAs have purchased a few members of congress. How many do you own?
Why not get a lot of batteries taped to the inside of a jacket, then wear that through airport security while filming? What could go wrong?
Extra points for being funny and topical at the same time.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
I don't see why these devices are creating so much anger. Seriously? You're so ticked off by someone wearing a device that you're going to physically assault them?
What if the unarmed assault was unprovoked? There's no reason to believe that the stranger you've never met before who is randomly hitting you in the face is suddenly going to stop.
>Now what sort of progress is it that results in modern devices being so irritatingly fragile and having such poor battery life ?
The kind that has you buying a new device every few years, instead of spending twenty or more years using the same one and selfishly holding onto money that you really should be giving to Your Local Electronics Retailer.
I'll have some wonderful footage to provide the cops when assault charges are filed.
Assault is just threatening to punch someone in the face. If you carry through with it, now you have battery.
Perhaps in your jurisdiction. Here, in Germany, you own the right to pictures taken of yourself (Recht am eigenen Bild), unless you are a person of public interest (politican etc.).
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
People did that regularly with several models of cell phones.
Cell phone batteries are larger and less fragile than tiny Glass batteries would be. And people only ever carried ONE spare, if they even carried one at all (I never did for any cell phone I've ever owned)
But there's also that new battery model, which if it scales well, could solve the entire problem.
I totally agree but I was responding to how additional batteries would work. My original point comes down to they don't and that device needs something like a sealed battery that holds a charge for well over a day. For glasses additional batteries are just really impractical and will greatly limit the market for the device.
But the (female) jack point in the iPod is fragile and has only one set of contacts
Aha, that makes way more sense. I didn't realize the iPod jacks were not very good, the iPhone / iPod jack sockets seem OK to me, I don't have an iPod. Sorry for the confusion.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What sort of progress? Oh, I don't know -- perhaps the six-order-of-magnitude increase in memory size, or the four-order-of-magnitude increase in processing speed, or the one-order-of-magnitude-plus reduction in weight, or the two-order-of-magnitude reduction in volume, or...
Look, if what you want is a machine with the power, storage, battery life, and durability of the PC8201a, we can easily hook you up. Of course, you're going to pay for it, because there's no economy of scale in manufacturing it -- nobody wants a machine with those specifications, unless it's in the wristwatch form-factor, and dedicated to a fairly simple task. I'm guessing that a heart-rate monitor is a pretty close match.
How about a hat with solar cells? would it provide enough electricity to run Google glass ?
Actually, the first thing I thought of was a power lead down to a battery that clips on your belt.
BUUUUULSHIT, otherwise CCTV would be illegal. If an establishment can record you, why not another person?
Good-bye
American asshole.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
You can ask, but im under no obligation to comply. Just because you dont like being taped in public does not automatically constitute harassment.
Good-bye
You do realize that Google Glass is just the tip of the iceberg right? Wearable cameras are here to stay, get over it.
Good-bye
What amazes me is that these people have literally been taped for DECADES by businesses.
Good-bye
Armed response is disproportionate to unarmed attack, regardless if it was unprovoked.
You have a legitimate right to defend yourself, certainly... but if your first response to somebody punching you in the face, before they can even get a second punch in the first place (and this is further assuming that they were ever even going to, which you have no reason to assume either), is to respond with armed and possibly lethal force, you may have anger management issues and probably need to just grow up.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
As long as you don't record sound (which could be "wire tapping") as well without posting a notice !
I love my brother, but since he's had kids his whole damned house is sticky, cluttered, noisy, and smells funny. It's like walking into Lindsay Lohan's vagina.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Apple also apparently understands that most people hate recharging batteries, a fact that seems lost on Slashdot.
What does this sentence even mean? Did Apple invent a new battery that never runs out when I wasn't looking?
Did you mean "replacing" batteries? Because that would at least make sense, even though it's still idiotic. I don't "like" tying my shoes, but I don't hate it either. It's not like it's a big fucking deal to have to do it to make my shoes useful, and I'm not going to wear velcro or slippers and make myself look like an idiot in the process of saving myself from such a minor inconvenience.
You also completely ignore the fact that (for example) with my Galaxy S3, I don't change the battery. However, if I need to, I can. You don't get to decide what the criteria are for "needing" to. You don't get to decide why your method is so much better -- and by not doing it your way, I'm doing it wrong. You don't get to speak for anybody but yourself.
I have more options than you. Period. You're a prime example of, "there are none so enslaved as those who believe themselves to be free."
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
The sound exclusion is going to die in court eventually. When almost every camera made includes a mic, its an untenable legal position.
Good-bye
On paper? All of them. Practically? None.
Combined with a form of fusion
Recursive insult!
Love to see how long it would take you to compress a single frame of 720p video with that P8201a's 0.5 MIPS processor... Could it compress 30 frames a second, whilst projecting another 30 frames per second, and maintain a full interactive 12 Mbps network connection?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
A different problem is when I insert my hand underneath your ribs and tear your chest apart.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Combined with a form of fusion
In twenty years. Fusion is twenty years away, and always will be.
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
I thought this was only a problem with the male children...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Am I the only one worrying about having a device that emits signals at 2.45GHz stuck directly on my skull all day long? Sure, the intensity may not be big enough to damage brain tissue immediatly, but I' would wait till I can see some long-term effects.
"You could probably have a 48-hour battery life if you wanted to wrap the sides and back of your head with batteries. Go for it."
I guess this would be a good time to bring up the fact that batteries often fail explosively. I'm thinking the "battery pack helmet" would be similar to the packing around a plutonium core, only there is no packing on the face, so...well, I think you get the idea. Could get messy.
This may sound absurd,but I wonder if you would get enough power by wrapping the rims and frame in high efficency thin film solar panels. Or you could include a solar hat as an accessory. It would likely generate more than enough power to allow for perpetual usage in sunlight. And would likely extend battery life in indoor level conditions.
What does this sentence even mean?
It means people hate recharging batteries. Try reading.
Did Apple invent a new battery that never runs out when I wasn't looking?
Why are you even talking about Apple? Apple devices have to be recharged also. Are you some kind of idiot?
Did you mean "replacing" batteries?
Because most people don't do that ever, the ones that do do so MAYBE once every three years. You need to learn about scale, something that happens daily is WAY more annoying than something you MIGHT have to do every three years.
with my Galaxy S3, I don't change the battery
I get it, you're an Apple Hater. Apple Haters make ANY argument all about Apple even when Apple was never brought into the equation before. Sorry, but the adults here are having a real discussion. Run along kid.
P.S. it's just as easy to carry and use an external battery pack as it is a spare battery. That argument was lost long ago, when even Google started shipping with sealed devices.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Most children are sticky. The job of a parent is an ongoing struggle to teach its children good habits.
FTFY ;-)
Tomorrow is another day...
Really? Which "places" would that be? France and Germany, for example, restrict the distribution of likenesses of non-famous people, but they don't restrict the recording.
In twenty years, fusion will be 149,600,000 km away, and will continue to be for the next 4.5 billion years or so.
Just sayin'
Sure I can, but I don't have the right to do it. As in "Can I go to the bathroom?" vs "May I go to the bathroom?". The first my be asked to your doctor after some weird accident, the second should be asked in a classroom.
Tomorrow is another day...
ALL recording devices should show an "on air" led near the lens.
Tomorrow is another day...
> Just because he broke into your house doesn't mean you can shoot him.
In Florida, for all intents and purposes, it does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_your_ground
If somebody breaks into your home in Florida, you can empty a semi-automatic rifle into his back as he runs to the door, and you're unlikely to face charges once investigators have established that 1) he was a bona-fide intruder and 2) you had even the slightest excuse to believe he was endangering you (like, "I feared he had a weapon left outside and was running out to retrieve it").
The main thing that makes Florida's law unique is that it extends beyond your home to all lawfully-occupied locations. So, if somebody pulls a knife on you and makes you give them your wallet, you could quite legitimately empty your gun into their back while they run away with it & claim they threatened to come back and injure you if they heard you call for help. Things would get messy if your own possession of the gun wasn't entirely lawful, or there was evidence that you yourself were somehow involved with an illegal act involving the dead alleged assailant (like a drug deal), but if the police investigation determines that you were the victim of a straightforward mugging that involved threats of violence or the use/brandishing of a weapon by the mugger & your own possession of the gun was lawful, that's pretty much the end of it. None of this is really *new* -- the main thing Florida's law did was codify the de-facto case-law norm into statute law, and provide automatic administrative procedures to nip prosecution in the bud before it ever got to the point of a real trial.
Yes, but the surveillance camera footage from those businesses doesn't get archived forever and published to the internet in a way that allows strangers to upload a scanned photo of your face and search through yottabytes of video footage for segments where your face was autodetected.
Most people have no real issues with being recorded by businesses, because real-world storage isn't free, and the overwhelming majority of that video footage gets autodeleted within hours, days, weeks, or at worst, months, unless something noteworthy happens and it's explicitly set aside for longer retention.
If Google archived Glasses video footage on the server for 72 hours absent a court order demanding longer retention, the only way to view it was on a device with DRM-enforcing videocard that protected it at least as well as Blu-Ray content (or Glasses that enforced similar end-to-end transport-layer encryption), Google robustly watermarked it & threatened site owners who allowed content with that watermark to exist on their servers (say, photographed off the monitor screen) with eternal banishment from Google search results unless the site owner actively scanned files for the watermark and deleted them), and its long-term searchability was extremely limited, people might not mind it as much. But when when you get into things like "eternal retention" and "casual, anonymous searchability via geotagged face-recognition", it absolutely DOES change the very nature of the video and the consequences of its existence.
Welcome to the wonderful world of planned obsolescence and adults that never really grow up needing expensive toys to be happy. Thank god I moved back to the back country, where men are men, not glorified adolescents.
Tomorrow is another day...
"... now you have battery" Does it last longer than five hours?
Modern geeks being the modern day lady-man, it could just work! Then again, they see themselves as being somewhat manly or is aspiring to be... tough one!
Tomorrow is another day...
We are there NOW. Facial recognition and mass storage are happening NOW, even in businesses like bars. Going on about how the limits of storage tech is what separates this is incredibly naive. I have an 8 camera surveillance system i picked up for under $400. I can compress that video down even further on my regular 3 year old PC overnight easily. I have over 2000 hours of movies on a NAS server the size of a toaster i paid $300 for. It uses 17w and has a real-world throughput of 50 MB/s.
Im working on a cheap license plate scanner system for our condo complex. Log all plates in and out of two entrances for under $1000 on a 200 unit condo complex. My CAR alone has 2 cameras. a dashcam and a 24/7 surveillance cam. If im doing it, almost certainly others are too. We are absolutely living in an age where you should assume you are being recorded at all times while in public.
If you come over for a barbecue and act like a druken ass in front of my home surveillance on my deck outside and i post it to the web, what then?
Good-bye
And that's not even counting the fact that sunglasses with hidden cameras have been common for around a decade as well. And that's just the cheapo bargain basement stuff. I feel like people are going to start being shocked to discover that mp3 players exist too.
Everything will be taken away from you.
I guess this would be a good time to bring up the fact that batteries often fail explosively.
...for unusual definitions of "usually", yes.
I'm a fruit pirate. I bought a watermelon once, and spat the seeds in the back yard. They grew into another watermelon,
It's that lack of self awareness that really amazes me. It's one thing if it's an 18 year old raging about this. But most often it seems to be older people who already went through one "I'm so mad if you have this device!" stage of life before adapting to it and jumping on board. Even if one wasn't personally part of it, you'd sure think that the very recent example there would highlight the nature of changing social trends in the wake of new technologies.
Everything will be taken away from you.
Actually, in many places in Europe, it's illegal to record other people in public places. There's some amount allowed if the person is "public person" (ie. celeb) but not otherwise.
what kind of bullshit is this? many places? the many places including german military bases and the crappier of the pope?
in general you're allowed to film - by law - in any public place. some public place rent-a-cops try to limit this right, but the right is there if it's a public place like a railway station and similar places.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
just a medal to be worn around the neck would do it just fine for bumping the use to 18+ hours.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
"publishing" = uploading to the internet? e.g., with google's live upload crap?
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Closed circuit monitoring is different to video/photo that is automatically uploaded to Google+, potentially geotagged, processed for facial recognition (and thus tagged to a user profile), etc.
For a crowd usually so up in arms over privacy matters due to fucking web browser cookies, you'd think this level of free government surveillance would get a little more concern.
But hey, it's google, they can do no wrong, right?
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
I do this with AAA powered mp3 player all the time, very convenient, it's too bad that none of the manufacturers seem to realize this and newer mp3 all have un-replacable batteries.
The most notable effect of Google Glass has been a resurgence of the internet tough guy.
A battery around the neck is not going to be light. Most of the weight of current-gen devices is now tied up in the batteries.
I think a better solution would be for us to actually put some thought into workflow of hot-swapping rechargeable batteries for a device used for long periods - the iPaq had this with a secondary NiMH cell so you could swap the Li-Ion battery way back in 2000. Surely, with some attention paid to design, the swap action etc. this could actually be made smoothly usable.
Don't forget to mention the "Killer Laser Sharks" :)
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
And I could buy a literal laptop or desktop computer for whatever the glass is going to cost.
It does less then those systems while encumbering me.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
...because every Google Glass user is going to need some. I don't have one, but I'm guessing Google Glass, when recording, will capture everything I look at/towards. So it'll pick up every glance the user makes toward a woman's legs, backside, breasts, face (yup that's often the order). There'll be plenty of idiots initially who'll share lots of instant video captures where halfway through they take a glance down a girl's blouse... they'll learn and they'll need video editting software!
I can buy a literal laptop or desktop computer for the price of my smartphone.
I don't really see how you can honestly say that the Glass is going to encumber you more than a freaking desktop computer...
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Well, it depends on whether you're uploading something which others can see and also whether the persons you've filmed/photographed are clearly the subjects in your video/photo or just random people who happened to be there.
If you stick a camera in someone's face and then upload it for the world to see then yeah, you need permission. If it's a newsworthy event, a celebrity/politician or simply that the person was in the background when your friend did something funny then you don't need permission to upload it.
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
"Holy Living shit" might be hard to interpret in court. I suggest making it longer using specific examples.
I would also suggest you only print it on XXXXL size shirts as it will have to be that big in order to hold it all.
In addition, on the inside of the tag, make sure you use the standard "This agreement is valid upon visual inspection, and may be amended at any time and in any way in my head and I need only notify you verbally after said beating."
My point. They will come from that one place that makes all the overpriced brands you listed.
The only thing that _has_ to protrude is the half silvered mirror. Which is currently about a 45degree prism and pretty obnoxious. They can move the projector back and change the angle. Perhaps hide the whole reflector in the lens using a Fresnel type half mirrored grating. Tint the rest of the lens to match the transmission of the grating.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
You want to strap that thing on your face and look absurd. GO FOR IT.
It will do nothing for you that the smart phone doesn't already do as well. While at the same time being on your face letting everyone know what a sucker you are for new gizmos that are poorly designed and conceived.
No no... Don't disagree. Put it on your face. More people need to know.
I am a strong supporter of live and let die. I offered my opinion... you want to do something dumb... Go for it. Not my problem.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Only if it actually impedes you physically. Following you is considered an impediment but again itnwould be up to a court to decide. Simply asking and their answer is strictly voluntary.
Once again, it comes down to a question of scope and scale. Thousands of balkanized islands of photo and video data that are mostly offline are of little concern. The act of making that aggregate bulk data trivially searchable by anyone, anywhere, fundamentally changes its nature. Bars and stores might archive lots of data, but they keep it to themselves. When it comes to maintaining personal privacy, high barriers to entry, roadblocks to use, and restricted availability of personal data are a GOOD thing. Back when you had to go to the courthouse and fill out request forms to look at court documents, nobody cared about redacting social security numbers and similar private information from exhibits and evidence. The moment it became possible to automatically scrape court websites and do automated bulk OCR on the documents obtained from them, it became a HUGE problem.
As far as your condo complex goes, you might want to talk to your association's lawyer before holding onto the license plate data for TOO long, unless you want to start getting hit by subpoena after subpoena from divorcing couples doing discovery on each other at your association's expense. The cost of complying with those subpoenas can become expensive, and your ability to recoup those compliance costs by charging for the information might be limited or nonexistent. That's why most condo complexes intentionally destroy and discard such information after a while -- after a month or two, that information becomes a potential liability to the association.