Slashdot Mirror


I Became a Robot With Google Glass

Nerval's Lobster writes "Videographer and journalist Boonsri Dickinson took the second generation of Google Glass out for a spin, and came back with some thoughts (and a video) on the hardware (basically unchanged from the first generation) and the new XE12 software upgrade (which includes many new features, such as the 'eye wink' option for snapping photos). New apps in the tiny-but-growing Glass app store include Compass, which allows you to find interesting landmarks; Field Trip, which allows you to walk around and look up local history; Video Voyager, a tool for sharing videos based on your location; and Strava Run, which visualizes your fitness habits. 'Glass has potential to take off as a new platform because it's not a phone,' she writes. 'The hands-free approach could expand its use to venues as diverse as the operating room and kitchen, unlocking new ways of using the data overlays to augment the real world.' Interesting features aside, though, her experience with the device raises the usual privacy questions: 'For the most part, Glass is a good prototype for this new kind of computer: but do we really need it, and are we ready for it?'"

25 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. Wearable Tech by elzurawka · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is huge hype in the media that THIS year will be the year of wearable tech. Until there are better input methods then voice, i dont think it will take off. I hate interacting with my phone through voice, and i feel like Glass would be even worse.

    Wearable tech is still a lot of hype by the industry, and I don't know if the consumer is really looking to spend money on it just yet. I feel like we need a breakout tech to really get people on board, and Glass hasn't done that.

    --
    -EL
    1. Re:Wearable Tech by boristdog · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've found that voice interactions with devices are generally annoying.

      But I have found that I like using with voice interaction when I am drunk or stoned. Then it's fucking hilarious.

    2. Re:Wearable Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've found that voice interactions with people are generally annoying too.

    3. Re:Wearable Tech by Kelbear · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Like most first-gen hardware, it's going to be a rough experience. Doing the limited release they way they have was a good idea.

      In the meantime, I think the most compelling part of Google Glass is the first-person recording. There are other wearable cameras of course, but they typically record from over-the-head views. It seems like Google Glass is a unique video recorder for parents.

        Like that saying: "The best camera is the one you have with you" nearly all of the pictures and video of my son are from my phone. Our family's actual camera stopped being used after we got smartphones last year. One of the most annoying problems with the phone is that I have to position the phone, and aim the phone to record moments with my son that I want to remember later. That means I have to choose 1) between recording the moment so that my wife and I can remember it for years, or 2) watching the moment directly instead of watching it through a fucking phone. With Google Glass, I get to see the moment directly, while also getting a first-person recording for later. Plus I wouldn't have to hold it while I'm waiting for the right time to start the video or take a picture, it's ready to go.

      If a consumer version of google glass comes out that isn't insanely expensive, even if was garbage for everything else, I might still buy one to just to record special events.

    4. Re:Wearable Tech by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      In private, using voice to search on my Android device is much much faster than typing it out. I also find myself dictating notes to my device and watching it type out my words instead of jotting my thoughts down manually.

      In public, nobody should use voice commands.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    5. Re:Wearable Tech by Kelbear · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, let's think about it. What if some parent showed up at the swim meet with a camcorder to film their kid's performance? Soccer game? Marching band? Maybe a birthday party? Those people aren't getting punched in the face today, what if they try filming those events on their phone? When they film it on a head-mounted camera, is it punchy-time yet? No, it's fairly well understood by those present why that person brought a recording device and it's accepted that recording devices are likely to show up at these kinds of events.

      Now, if someone sat down on the subway in the seat across from you and pointed a camcorder at you (whether or not you can tell it's off), that's clearly unsettling and I could very well imagine that person getting punched in the face. It seems there are already fairly clear social norms around when you can record in public. An etiquette for its use has already been established, and in reports from those using the explorer models, I'm already starting to see examples where the writer felt uncomfortable putting on Glass in places like the aforementioned subway. Word about how to recognize the appropriate etiquette will spread in time, and the usage will eventually follow (and of course we'll have people with bad behavior too, much like smartphone creep shots today). Overall, I'm not exactly in a panic about this technology. I'm also not terribly concerned about using Glass to record my kid doing things because the only time I'd take out the Glasses is in typical recording situations.

  2. Poor use of phrase "robot" ? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If he became a robot, wouldn't that mean he was kind of a slave to whatever the Glass told him to do? Like someone was texting his eyeballs messages saying "Order a quarter-pounder-with-cheese and a Dr Pepper"

    If he wanted to say cyborg I'd buy it, or if he "felt" like an android I guess I could accept it.

    But "robot" tends to imply a mechanical device more devoid of free-will or thought than some of the other phrases. Heck, the blurb in which it's used is describing how it's expressing personality.

    1. Re:Poor use of phrase "robot" ? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Funny

      speaking of robots, suppose I wear a tee shirt with 'robots.txt' printed on it and some wildcards below it.

      I wonder: will that render me invisible to google glass wearers?

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Poor use of phrase "robot" ? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 2

      Maybe RTFA? (Boonsri is a Woman)

      I read TFA, and shockingly didn't know Boonsri was a woman's name. How does that take away from my overall question.

      The closest thing to robot-like is that she didn't have to remember street directions. Cyborg or whatever - sure, but not robot-like.

      Read my post, the question was the correct term of Robot vs any other term. I'm not seeing anywhere she describes the Glass as removing free will or where she feels less-than.

    3. Re:Poor use of phrase "robot" ? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      speaking of robots, suppose I wear a tee shirt with 'robots.txt' printed on it and some wildcards below it.

      I wonder: will that render me invisible to google glass wearers?

      Doubtful.

      Similarly, I wonder how effectively some high-powered infrared LEDs sewn into the lapels of my shirts would hide my face from the built-in camera...

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:Poor use of phrase "robot" ? by egcagrac0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The term that clicks for me is gargoyle.

      I'm sure a few others around here have read that book, too.

    5. Re:Poor use of phrase "robot" ? by minstrelmike · · Score: 2

      I wonder: will that render me invisible to google glass wearers?

      Here's an option: Google glass is prevented from photo-tagging or otherwise identifying any other google glass wearer.
      The only people that are identifiable in google glass vids are non-wearers.
      So if you want to stay invisible to the NSA, you'll need to join the google gang.
      bwa-hah-ha . pay up for privacy.

  3. Needs an external redesign by TheBilgeRat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It would help if they could design that into a form factor that isn't blatantly a pair of google glasses. I would want my wearable tech to be as inconspicuous and non-intrusive as possible, both to my experience and the public around me.

    1. Re:Needs an external redesign by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      It would help if they could design that into a form factor that isn't blatantly a pair of google glasses. I would want my wearable tech to be as inconspicuous and non-intrusive as possible, both to my experience and the public around me.

      Yea, don't want to let the parents at that playground know you're secretly videotaping their kids, eh? That could end badly.

      BTW, I'm only half-joking (specifically, the half where I suggest you're a pervert - I don't know you well enough to make that determination)

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Needs an external redesign by TheBilgeRat · · Score: 2

      It would help if they could design that into a form factor that isn't blatantly a pair of google glasses. I would want my wearable tech to be as inconspicuous and non-intrusive as possible, both to my experience and the public around me.

      Yea, don't want to let the parents at that playground know you're secretly videotaping their kids, eh? That could end badly.

      BTW, I'm only half-joking (specifically, the half where I suggest you're a pervert - I don't know you well enough to make that determination)

      So, are you suggesting that playground perverts are being stymied today by a lack of suitable surreptitious videography gear? Or that even in its current form factor that it is acceptable to walk up to people whom you deem "pervy" and demand they leave a public place because of their google glass?

      I could have said something like "I would like to not advertise an expensive wearable computer on my face to the unwashed masses on the subway train, since it would only lead to me being robbed". The fact that her face wear drew knowledgeable attention should be indicator enough. Other reasons to have it surreptitious? How about witness to a crime, intentional or otherwise?

      If you are really a parent concerned with your child's privacy at the playground, I would suggest things that are actually under your control, like not letting them play where the hoodlum teenagers broke the vodka bottle by the jungle gym, or keeping them from putting foreign objects in their mouths. That is time well spent.

  4. Robot? Summary is missing context for headline by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

    I Became a Robot With Google Glass

    Come on, editors (and submitters) - the least you could do is make sure that the headline makes sense within the context of the summary alone, rather than just copy and pasting it without thought for cogency.

    The relevant part of the article is this:

    The device also takes over as a fashion statement. One friend wrote to me: “I get a strong vibe that you are a robot inside. I’m not sure if that’s a nice thing to say, but in seriousness I think it’s an interesting way of expressing personality.”

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  5. Re:I already have multiple pairs or normal glasses by Kelbear · · Score: 2

    Here you go:

    http://gigaom.com/2014/01/05/google-glass-prescription-lens-option/

    It ain't cheap, but it's there.

  6. Didn't we see it coming? by jigawatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We've spent all our time worrying about the singularity as if the machines would eventually gain insight and perspective beyond the best humanity has to offer. Much more likely will be that human cognition falls below the level of a mere machine.

    In short, the big problem is not that machines are thinking like humans, but that humans are thinking like machines.

  7. 1) yes, 2) no by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes we need it. That shouldn't even be a question. Did we need transistors? Did we need the keyboard, the mouse, the gui, the network, the Internet, modern web browsers, tablets, cell phones?

    Are we ready? No. I do not believe so.

    We are not ready for google glass on at least two fronts: privacy and self control.

    Are you mad about google+ integration? Ok, then do you really think google glass will continue the trend of the ever watching google or will it reverse the trend?
    Would you be ok with Google mining your "anonymized" glass data to build a better profile on you? Would you be ok with Google mining someone elses "anonymized" glass data to build a profile on you?
    What about when glass data becomes part of what law enforcement / the government can subpoena?
    Are you upset when you try to install a flashlight app and it tells you it needs full access to all your contacts, current calls, and the network? Wanna bet that all google glass apps are going to want full access to your current location, your vision, your hearing, what you say, and who you are with?

    We aren't ready to deal with that yet, because as a society we still haven't found a current level of privacy and usefulness that strikes a balance. I think that there is a balance, but as users of the devices/services we just don't have enough power or information.

    On top of privacy, we just don't have the self control and awareness to not do stupid things online. It will only get worse if we start using always-on, internet connected wearable devices. And I'm not referring to anyone who uses social media and the internet responsibly, I'm referring to the people who aren't informed and aware of the implications of uploading something to social media or posting it online.

    How often do we hear about some highschooler suspended/expelled because he/she said or posted something stupid on facebook. Something completely harmless but since it is out of context for all the world to see, there are consequences. Furthermore, revenge porn is now getting into the courts, and its not just an angry ex leaking a sextape that two adults made, there are tons of people that don't realize that chatting naked with a stranger on the internet is a really good way to have that video posted to every shady corner of the web. For ever. Videos and pics of drunk college parties are preventing people from getting jobs upon graduation because they never realized that posting that time you pissed off the balcony at your frat house would show up on some HR person's search of you.

    We just haven't caught up yet as a society. That doesn't mean there are completely responsible informed people who would use google glass in positive ways, it means there are a lot of idiots who are going to do something stupid then cry when their life is fucked up because of something stupid they didn't mean to have broadcast to the world.

    I don't think that means we shouldn't move forward with google glass, I just don't think we ready as a society to use wearable computing devices responsibly.

    1. Re:1) yes, 2) no by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes we need it. That shouldn't even be a question. Did we need transistors? Did we need the keyboard, the mouse, the gui, the network, the Internet, modern web browsers, tablets, cell phones?

      Guess that depends on how one defines "need," doesn't it?

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  8. Google Glass altered reality by DickBreath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Imagine. Those glasses could recognize advertising. Then mask it with other advertising that Google thinks you are interested in.

    For example, that offensive billboard with a barely clothed female could be replaced by a strapping muscle bound shirtless hunk . . . holding puppies or kittens.

    As per Vernor Vinge's story Fast Times at Fairmont High, everyone could tell Google what color and style they want their house to appear to other people wearing Glass. When you see artwork, Glass could replace it with different artwork that you prefer.

    Two people wearing glass want to watch a movie together? All they have to do is agree which wall surface will become the "tv".

    An underground meeting place could have a plain door, but members of the underground group, or invitees to the party would see a sign on the door, and could recognize one another.

    Let your imagination roam.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:Google Glass altered reality by egcagrac0 · · Score: 2

      Imagine. Those glasses could recognize advertising. Then mask it with other advertising that Google thinks you are interested in.

      Like my very own private Minority Report.

  9. Journalists that dont do research.... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "For the most part, Glass is a good prototype for this new kind of computer: but do we really need it, and are we ready for it?'

    Wearable computers have been around for decades. I really wish that "journalists" would do some research before they write an article. Prof Steve Mann and Prof Thad Starner (who is the project lead on google glass) have had wearable computers since 1990's and the Aviation and military has used them since the mid 2000's. the only thing that is new is miniaturization and looking stylish.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Journalists that dont do research.... by LostMonk · · Score: 2

      Not the same thing at all. Having a HUD at the pilot sit -- used by a tiny minority in a highly specific and specialized location -- and giving to the general public to be used however they want, are worlds apart in their impact on everyday life.

  10. Re:Here is where google glasses really are: by Salgat · · Score: 2

    I think you fail to realize that this is just a prototype limited by technology. The true future Google Glass, 5-20 years from now, will be indistinguishable from a pair of glasses.