Slashdot Mirror
Coming Soon: Prescription Lenses For Google Glass
When I first tried on an early Google Glass headset, I had to take off my glasses -- that made the Glass display usable, but made the rest of the room a blurry mess. When I asked the engineers and designers about this, I got mostly shrugs in return. But now, writes reader rjmarvin, "Google Glass users sporting the eyewear will soon be able to do so with a prescription for $99. Eyeglass manufacturer Rochester Optical will offer prescription options in differents colors and styles, even allowing Glass users to trick out their eyewear with transitions or tinted lenses. They're currently conducting a survey to gauge consumer interest and preference." I look forward to the day that online glasses sources like Zenni Optical have have even cheaper options for wearable computing integration, but Rochester's projected starting price is lower than I would have guessed.
As long as Google Glass looks like Locutus-of-Borg cosplay, there will be pushback from people who don't want to be seen with it.
The display needs to be embedded transparently in the lenses itself, and the other components need to be integrated into a thin, ordinary-looking temple piece.
Koans and fables for the software engineer
Well, they wouldn't be so mean as to hit a guy with glasses.
Thinking that someone passing you on the street wearing one of these devices is the same as "recording your movements at all times" is.
Thinking that someone passing you on the street wearing one of these devices is the same as "recording your movements at all times" is.
So, if you see someone walking around with one of those gigantic 1980's VHS camcorders on their shoulder, looking through the eyepiece, you don't think assuming "hey, that guy must be recording something" is a reasonable thought to have?
What self-blinded ignoramus goes through life assuming every camera pointed at him is turned off by default?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
> Not being keen on the idea of someone recording your movements at all times is not what I would consider a Luddite-ish value.
I sure hope you never go outside.
Personally, I find it sad and not just a little fucked up how so many people have this attitude of, 'dur, if you're outside your actual home then it's all fair game!'
That's not how it works, goddammit, so stop saying stupid, mindless shit like that. Yea, in a public place you don't have a whole lot of privacy rights; however, and I want you to read this next part a few times so it sticks: not all out door areas are public fucking places. My backyard, for example, with its 8-foot privacy fence. Do you think I would have spent the money on an 8-foot privacy fence, if I didn't want a little privacy in my backyard? Of course not. So don't be a douche about it.
Yes, you might be able to *legally* park a bucket truck on the street, extend it all the way, and look into my backyard, but that doesn't change the fact that you're a nosy asshole who should be universally shunned for doing it.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Are you a time-traveler from the past? Have you not been around for, oh, 10-15 years? Because I have news for you buddy, there's an internet-connected camera in every Tom, Dick, and Harry's pocket, and if they want to film you, they're going to film you. There's nothing that Glass does that people haven't been able to do for years now. Sorry for the rude awakening.
So every person with a cameraphone has it recording at all times? What person goes through life assuming that every camera in existence is recording their every move?
Hint: It's called paranoid schizophrenia, and it's no fun.
Will not fix a myopic product.
--
Socrates was asked where he was from. He replied not "Athens," but "The world."
This argument is incredibly tiresome, its a complete logic fail. There is no barrier to uploading CCTV video to the net.
Good-bye
So if I walk up to you and point my cell phone camera in your face - No problem? I think you'd get annoyed rather quickly.
Also, let's be honest, the security camera argument is a false argument, since we all know how crappy the footage from security cameras are and that there are more controls over the purpose and use of that footage.
With Glass you may become part of some weirdo's "art project" or have your image stored with Google in perpetuity for them to eventually add to their facial recognition database and who knows what else.
So every person with a cameraphone has it recording at all times?
When they're holding it in that certain way that screams, "I AM RECORDING SOMETHING RIGHT NOW," yes.
When it's in their pocket, or they're obviously on a call? Don't be obtuse.
What person goes through life assuming that every camera that's pointing at themis recording their every move
Celebrities and other values of person who put value on their privacy.
Hint: It's called paranoid schizophrenia, and it's no fun.
Don't use that term. You obviously don't know what it means, and just insulted every person who either suffers from the affliction or at least knows what that term means.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Not to mention...I'm sure the NSA is already figuring a way to suck up all the data from Glass type video recorders, store it and run some nifty face recognition to really help track down the populace....err....terrorists.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
You could make the same argument about sunglasses with prescription lenses, but people still use those.
Contacts can only be made so strong, and there isn't as much precision in the prescriptions as with glasses. Laser surgery should only be done if/when your prescription has been stable for 2-5 years, which for some people never happens and for others can take decades (my father's eyes didn't stabilize until age 40). It's also expensive.
Everything is better with chainsaws.
You bet, you will get a free "Google Privacy protector" at any local shopping store for free. simply place on your head and cut holes for your eyes. The stores call them "grocery bags" but that is because they don't understand the Google nomenclature.
Yeah, that sounds great, except the trend is now to make it illegal to wear something that covers your face in public...
http://www.wtvq.com/content/localnews/story/Lexington-Adult-Masks-Illegal-To-Wear-In-Public/kduA8xtDwE6DV1LdXH5D5w.cspx
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/06/01/outrageous-critics-angered-by-new-law-making-it-illegal-to-wear-a-mask-at-unlawful-protests/
http://gothamist.com/2011/09/19/nypd_uses_law_from_1845_to_arrest_m.php#photo-1
Don't be glib. There is a difference and you know it.
Class-based? Seriously? Everybody just pining for Glass and we hate anyone who has it because we don't? I will have you know that I can afford a rainbow of Glass colored frames and I still do not care for this technology and prefer to not be around people wearing it. Not everybody records you without your knowledge, but sooner or later there is going to be one douche who just can't help themselves. They would never stick a phone or a camcorder in your face but will happily record away with their glasses.
Going to the bank is the same as walking out your frond door? Sure, there are places we expect to see CCTV and accept those locations as a trade off for giving banks the ability to catch robbers. This is not the same as being tracked by your mobile phone, NSA having access to turn on your web-cams, and people volunteering _your_ location and information because they think a gadget is "cool".
The scope of the majority of surveillance has been hidden from view, so claiming "everyone's okay with something" that they have no knowledge of is asinine. The backlash after the whistle blowers from the public should make that abundantly clear, which is why you rarely hear stories on propaganda^wNews about what Snowden revealed, you only hear about the horrible opinion the Government has for a whistle blower.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Better idea: don't intentionally violate people's privacy.
If someone in a plane flying overhead *happens* to glance out the window and see me sunbathing nude in my private yard, well, that's life - shit happens.
Conversely, if someone is using technology to intentionally circumvent the obvious and reasonable privacy measures I've put up, then they are violating my civil rights and I will do everything in my power to make sure they pay the legal price.
Add a roof to your fence
OK, I've heard some terribly ridiculous suggestions in my day, but this one ranks up near the top.
Ever hear the term, "reasonably prudent?" Yea, it's a jurisprudence thing, and one I'd be sure to know by heart before making silly statements like that one.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Interesting, there seems to be plenty of CCTV footage on youtube. Did everyone in this compilation get fired? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGSFQxxJaZk
Would you be okay if I followed you around a store with my camcorder on? Don't mind me, just filming you. (licks lips).
In that case the creepy part is "followed you", not "camcorder". It would be equally objectionable to follow around one specific, unwilling person even if you didn't take any recordings or photos.
I got Google Glass for Christmas and what I've read doesn't really align with reality.
While I suppose you could roll the video recorder nonstop, the glasses get warm and wear the battery out pretty fast. Glassholes as walking surveillance cameras is not reality. There are lots of clandestine cameras out there already and that's not what Glass is about. You can take a picture by winking, but that's pretty obvious, and also potentially unnerving.
I need reading glasses so prescription lenses will be a big help.
Glass without the lenses makes you look like a cyborg sticking a camera in everybody's face all the time. Glass with the lenses clipped on makes them look like a lot more like normal glasses that most people don't immediately care about. Adding a neck strap and putting the glasses on (which by the way powers the device up) pretty much eliminates you being a big glasshole.
I wore it for a full day and was surprised at what I actually found useful. Its nice to glance up and see the time - they are more comfortable for me than a wristwatch. While I was exercising, having a timer right above my field of vision was really nice; this helped when cooking a meal too. I'm looking forward to having it show my heart rate with a Bluetooth Polar monitor strap. I found myself googling information I wouldn't have bothered to look up otherwise. I was pleasantly surprised that I liked the hands-freedom of it acting as a Bluetooth phone headset.
Google Glass is both a glimpse of the future and not ready for the mass market. Google calls early adopters willing to experiment and write applications for Glass explorers. Criticizing Glass at this point would be like telling the the Wright brothers that their plane was lacking in so many ways in the early days of flight.
I'm not sure Glass will have an immediate consumer killer app, but the business use cases are very much there. Taking inventory in a store or a warehouse where having both hands free, but looking at a barcode and speaking the quantity is interesting. A cashier or a warehouse worker having a scanner and speech input device with both hands free could be compelling. Anybody who is not sitting in front of a computer but needs to monitor process status or receive alerts is another obvious use case for many business applications; yes you can do that now with a phone, but you have to operate the device with your hands as opposed to glancing up.
Greed is the root of all evil.
Yes I could actually, but your mind is already made up so what is the point.