Slashdot Mirror
Congress Demands Answers From Google Over Google Glass Privacy Concerns
Today eight members of the U.S. Congress have sent a letter to Google's Larry Page, asking him to address a number of privacy concerns about Google Glass. In the letter (PDF), they brought up the company's notorious Street View data collection incident, and asked how the company was planning to avoid a similar privacy breach with Glass. They also ask how Google is going to build Glass to protect the privacy of non-users who may not want their every public move to be recorded. Further, they ask about the security of recordings once they are made: "Will Google Glass have the capacity to store any data on the device itself? If so, will Google Glass implement some sort of user authentication system to safeguard stored data? If not, why not?" Google has until July 14th to respond.
I would love it if Google responded back stating that it infringes no more than the government already does.
Time to offend someone
Google Glass is visible, right there up on the wearer's face. What about all those cell phones that can do video recording, and can do that video recording right there from your shirt pocket, with no visible indication? Cameras are getting pretty small these days. Someone up to something nefarious, the camera lens is going to be one of his shirt buttons.
Can I ask Congress the same question about the US Governments data collection efforts?
- How is the US Government going to protect the privacy of Citizens who may not want their every public move (phone call, email, etc ) to be recorded?
- What about the security of the recordings that are made - Will the US implement some sort of user authentication system to safeguard stored data? If not, why not?
There's a whole sequence of questions that I'd much rather hear the answer to than similar questions about a dorky headpiece.
And the worms ate into his brain.
Eight members of Congress on Thursday formally demanded that Google address a range of privacy concerns about its new wearable technology device, Google Glass.
Blah blah blah. Yadda yadda yah.
Give us some campaign contributions, and use of your private jets and we'll be gone - in the meantime, we'll use this to fool our constituents that we care.
Cynical? Yep.
Am I right? Yep.
There are valid questions to ask, but every time I see "congress demands answers" I imagine clowns piling out of a tiny car and want to root for the interrogated.
They only care because that means a individual may accidentally record them picking up a hooker or something else scandalous. If congress was somehow exempt from the decrease in privacy, they wouldn't give a rats behind.
Where were these questions when LEO and private businesses rolled out CCTV everywhere?????????
Good-bye
When using Google Glass, is it true that this product would be able to use Facial Recognition Technology to unveil personal information about whomever and even some inanimate objects that the user is viewing? Would a user be able to request such information? Can a non-user or human subject opt out of this collection of personal data? If so, how? If not, why not?
Substitute "google glass" with "United States Law Enforcement" and you begin to see how fucking hypocritical this entire endeavor is
Good people go to bed earlier.
I think being in public means you are free to be recorded at all times. You can't enforce this without also enforcing every company take down their outside facing security cameras.
I'm trying to figure out what the actual legal issues are between google glass and a tape recorder or film camera.
Seems like the technology makes things appear more different than they really are. Taping or photoing people already has laws.
Posting it on the internet could be exactly the same as publishing in a paper if they want. Or not.
But there isn't anything new to discuss. It will be the same old discussion: why can I take a picture of anyone in public or a photo of a house from a drone aircraft but I cannot record the words they use unless they give me permission?
The current laws are totally screwed up. Google glass has nothing to do with that.
My first thought when I read the summary was that hell had frozen over: Congress is thinking about privacy!
My second thought was that *Congress is thinking about privacy*. This can only be a good thing. I think we should encourage them, saying "you're on the right track, keep going that way" rather than being derisive.
Parent is right, government surveillance/data collection is a huge privacy issue. That does not mean it's the only privacy issue. It is easier for our inherently timid Congresscritters to start by pointing the finger outward from Washington, and I'm OK with that because it at least starts the policy discussion we so desperately need.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
So you're telling me to beware when somebody stands at next urinal, stares at my dick and winks?..
Yeah, I thought that was pretty much a given.
TFA is mostly bullshit written from someone that did not even do a cursory search of information about the device. There is a big bright LED blaring at you if the camera is active. Only the blind will not know if the Google Glass is recording them.
But don't let reality and facts get in the way of everyones fearmongering.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Google glass takes pictures and videos. So what? So does my phone. I could walk down the street holding up my phone recording everybody and everything. Streetview was a google system being operated by a google employee (or contractor.) Google glass is just some guy wearing some glasses. My point is, why is everyone all pissy that "google is invading privacy" when it's actually the person wearing the glasses?
You can vote out the government
No, not even theoretically can you do that. All you can do is vote IN leaders, who MIGHT be able to make changes in government organizations... but the organizations are very entrenched, and have many levers to prevent the people voted in from making changes.
This is why it is such a bad idea to form any new government entities, because they exist only to keep existing and to exert more and more control.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"privacy of non-users who may not want their every public move to be recorded"
I wasn't aware people had that sort of privacy. Public is public, and private is private. Pictures are pictures, whether they're taken by a film camera, digital camera, cell phone, or Google Glass.
Google should tell Congress to go fuck off. Congress already exerts more power than they're legally supposed to, and this is just another small step in the erosion of the Constitution if this is allowed to continue.
FC Closer
What a pleasant surprise to see Congress asking intelligent questions about a technical topic. I think we should encourage this type of thinking.
People are assaulted all the time. Hopefully those assailants will be found guilty and a civil suit can be used to recover damages.
That is about all we can expect from anything in life. There are folks who will assault you for wearing the wrong color shirt, or hat.
I find your belief that people will be doing that pretty telling. You seem very focused on the male genitalia photography opportunities. I think psychologists call that projecting.
I personally am not worried about it. I doubt anyone really wants pictures of flaccid wieners, and I think most people can tell if the recording light is on or off.
Maybe you should realize you aren't that important and it really doesn't matter that someone took a picture of you in a PUBLIC restroom?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
How would people feel if the guy or gal coming into the bathroom has a camera mounted to their head which is recording?
That is already illegal. The question is: How do you feel, knowing that you can no longer tell if someone is packing a cam?
To be honest, we already are at surveillance society. It just is in the form of twitter/facebook updates. In the form of a blog update talking about this or that. Apparently people have the sensibility of not disclosing identities, and while it is easier to just post a picture or a recording... I'm sure that (if you have hope in humanity) people will frown upon doing that. Just like we frown upon bringing a camera inside the bathroom (unless you want to take a photo there, and everyone present agrees) outside of an opaque case.
That is not to dismiss your concerns. I wouldn't want to live in a society where I'd have to hide -- regardless of cameras. I'd like to live in a society where even if there is somebody walking around with a Google glass and I'm recorded coming out of X, and even if he did upload it somewhere, nobody would care I did. That not everyone follows the same moral code and that what they think is questionable may not be for others and it's up to the individual to decide their actions and up to others to judge him.
I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
See that tiny speck why out there on the ocean's horizon. That's the ship that's already sailed.
You can get VGA resolution, 30fps Bluetooth camera that looks like a pair of glasses and has 4 GB of memory for something like $30. If the glasses are to obvious, you can get on that looks like an earpiece. And you can already just hide behind a wall and stick the phone out just far enough for the camera to see around the corner. You honestly think a device like Google Glass, that screams "Look! I'm a cyborg!", is going to erode our privacy more that it already has been?