Slashdot Mirror
Google Releases Glass Factory System Image, Rooted Bootloader
Krystalo writes "In a nod towards the modding community and hackers in general, Google has released the first factory system image and rooted bootloader for the latest version, XE5, of Google Glass. Nevertheless, the company is at the same time warning that using these downloads will result in a voided warranty for the experimental device."
Does it make the device less "douchie"?
With as much hype as Google is trying to create for an existing product by another manufacturer, you'd think they'd give a little more leeway for innovation.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
Ty :D
nekkid pics previously posted. For extra credit: action pics.
All your database are belong to U.S.
Australian and New Zealand ./ers will understand this as "Google Releases Glass Factory System Image, Completely Fucking Broken Bootloader"
Every post about Google Glass is flooded with comments about "invasion of privacy", "douchebags", "dorks", "hitting them in the face if they try to film me", "blah blah". WTF is this site, Jocks' Central? What happened to "news for nerds"? You don't like Google Glass, I get it. Now GTFO and back to your Facebook to post about what a great fuck your latest girlfriend was.
It it just me, or does this make no sense. Isn't Open Source suppose to ALLOW you to run the SW in any form, as you like on a piece of HW?
Ok, so this only runs on Google's HW... and they are within their right to set terms of what they're going to support. But this sure sounds really screwed up...
and at least doesn't seem to follow the "spirit" of Open Source, though it does follow the "letter-of-the-law"...
Google continues to slide on my score sheet. Use to seem to be taking a new exciting path, now just turning into yet another huge corp, with a similar mental model as any other. (Granted they all have their own tweaks, but they're not anything special any more). Nothing to see here, move along there...
It won't be long before the Google Glass tech will be put into glasses that don't look obvious and a little ridiculous. For those of you who think you're always going to be able to tell who's recording video of you with wearable Google Glass tech: think again.
Right now they look like "nerds" and "geeks" according to the people who are angry about losing their privacy (or who can't afford them). Pretty soon, they'll look like anyone with eyeglasses. I've seen people here talk about punching anyone they see wearing Google Glass looking at them. What are you going to do when this technology is so ubiquitous that anyone with glasses might be recording you?
Maybe the best we can hope for is that the tech is so widely-available, and moddable, that it's a level playing field (a very exposed playing field). But like it or not, it's coming.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You better not hack* out stuff!! <wink> <wink> <nudge> <nudge>
* Please make our stuff seem cool.
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
I'll give you a clue. People who venture outside and go skiing wear goggles... oh fuckit.
http://developers.reconinstruments.com/
http://www.reconinstruments.com/
The HUD is ~$500 from them. Oakley, Scott, Smith, etc... all had Recon hardware (with a markup) last year.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
You're going to be installing software that they don't know that has low level access to the hardware and could potentially harm it. Voiding the warranty makes sense to me- they can't be responsible for harm done by software they can't control. It doesn't apply to apps, because the apps don't allow direct hardware access except through the APIs Google has written and tested.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Before any content is transmitted from the gGlasses, it is first copywriten? Ownership is cleary definied, and licensing fees would apply, to Google.
They also have a reputation for being pretty forgiving if it's obviously not a firmware problem, although I haven't had the need to try it myself.
akin to "puleease don't trow me in da brai patch"
...
You're just not allowed to make it a device quality issue.
Hack on.
no word on if they're waterproof
Is there any kind of recovery mode if you install a kernel or bootloader that crashes? As I understand there is nothing like a serial port or an alternative storage, which means that a bad update and the device is bricked.
they sure as fuck control it if they are the onrs releasing it, asshole.
Anyone who is panicking about a theoretical future where someone might be recording them with a pair of eyeglasses is out of touch. Cameras that are the size of shirt buttons have been readily available for years. Every person you walk past on the street might be recording you right now and you would never know. What makes Google Glass so special?
It it just me, or does this make no sense.
Either you explained your point poorly, I misunderstood something badly, or it is just you.
Isn't Open Source suppose to ALLOW you to run the SW in any form, as you like on a piece of HW?
Pretty much, yes. Just like it's doing here.
Ok, so this only runs on Google's HW...
Technically no, it would run on anything with a similar CPU and hardware IO.
True, no other such device exists, but that is sort of the idea behind firmware, and not any of Googles doing.
It's like complaining that the device driver for piece-o-hardware-model-xyz doesn't run any other hardware.
There is also the possibility of an emulator for the hardware, which would run the firmware as well.
and they are within their right to set terms of what they're going to support.
Very much so. Pretty much all hardware hackers assume outright that once you start modifying things at that level - If you break it, it was you that broke it, and don't expect anyone to fix it for you for free (if at all)
But this sure sounds really screwed up... and at least doesn't seem to follow the "spirit" of Open Source, though it does follow the "letter-of-the-law"...
How so?
Google continues to slide on my score sheet. Use to seem to be taking a new exciting path, now just turning into yet another huge corp, with a similar mental model as any other. (Granted they all have their own tweaks, but they're not anything special any more). Nothing to see here, move along there...
So what exactly is the issue? Why is this messed up? What aspect of what they are doing against the open source spirit?
I not only don't see what the problem is, but I also don't see you stating what the problem is, although it's clear you feel there is one.
They are selling a self-contained product in the first place, and then release a firmware image and boot loader that is free from any code that would attempt to prevent you from doing just that.
They release some source code too, making it even easier to make changes.
Sounds pretty open source to me.
Is it the fact they won't cover it under warranty if you brick it? Would you?
Have you read any OSS licenses lately? In particular the paragraph they all contain in CAPITAL LETTERS that states there is NO WARRANTY? I bet most other hardware vendors (HP, Dell etc.) stipulate requirements that if you install unsupported software that voids the warranty as well.
It it just me, or does this make no sense. Isn't Open Source suppose to ALLOW you to run the SW in any form, as you like on a piece of HW?
Ok, so this only runs on Google's HW... and they are within their right to set terms of what they're going to support. But this sure sounds really screwed up...
and at least doesn't seem to follow the "spirit" of Open Source, though it does follow the "letter-of-the-law"...
Google continues to slide on my score sheet. Use to seem to be taking a new exciting path, now just turning into yet another huge corp, with a similar mental model as any other. (Granted they all have their own tweaks, but they're not anything special any more). Nothing to see here, move along there...
it has no practical software warranty to begin with.
and in most areas it wouldn't change the mandatory guarantee towards the hardware...
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
yeah that's why if you buy a cpu it has no warranty?
this doesn't affect mandatory hw responsibilities they have by the way.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
So what exactly is the issue? Why is this messed up? What aspect of what they are doing against the open source spirit?
releasing a firmware binary blob instead of .. you know.. the actual source?
Sounds pretty open source to me.
There is no "source". the only source they have released is the linux kernel modifications because they were forced to due to the GPL license. Rest all is just binary blobs.
but hey.. you're a google shill.. logic does not apply to folks like you.
Google Discontinues Glass Factory System Image in 5 ...4...3...2..
No, they don't care if you do hack them, its just that if you break your toy don't come crying.
A perfectly acceptable way to do business.