Slashdot Mirror


Woman Attacked In San Francisco Bar For Wearing Google Glass

First time accepted submitter Martin Blank writes "Sarah Slocum, an early adopter of Google Glass, was bar hopping with friends in San Francisco when a few people in the bar took issue with the eyewear when she was demonstrating it to another patron even though she wasn't recording. When she felt threatened, she informed them that she would start recording. Two of them approached her, yelling and throwing a bar rag at her, and ultimately ripping the Glass from her face and running from the bar with it. She gave chase and eventually got the Glass back, but her purse was gone when she returned to the bar. This physical level of hostility is unusual, but discomfort with Glass is common, especially among those who don't understand how it works. Given that much more hidden spy cameras are available for far less than the $1500 cost of Glass, what will it take for general acceptance to finally take hold?"

26 of 921 comments (clear)

  1. No, not those who don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    discomfort with Glass is common, especially among those who don't understand how it works

    No... especially among those who do understand how it works.

    1. Re:No, not those who don't understand... by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That only happens with the devices made of straw.

    2. Re:No, not those who don't understand... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you are missing the difference so I'll try to explain.

      Looking at a cell phone is not offensive.
      Obviously showing the screen to a friend is not offensive.

      Holding the camera up pointing at the room with the screen towards you would be offensive whether or not you were filming.

      Glass is the equivalent of walking around holding your cell phone up in filming position... all the time. You may not be recording but nothing stops you from quickly flipping into recording mode or taking pictures.

      These people are trying to relax. Some of them may be having affairs while they "work late at the office".

      Some of them may be criminal types, meeting in the bar for business.

      And you are walking around holding a camera up, ready to start taking pictures of them at any instant.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    3. Re:No, not those who don't understand... by asmkm22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that I do understand how it works, and definitely do not like the idea of having that kind of product around. But yeah, I must be buying into fear and hype because there's no other reason for people to not like the idea of having a fairly concealed recording device that may or may not be recording.

  2. Take pictures, press charges. by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If someone starts threatening you you start recording. Because if they steal from you, or strike you, they've committed assault and you'll have iron clad evidence of it.

    1. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by OptimalCynic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Assuming your device survives the experience.

    2. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A $3.99 balaclava from the Dollar Store can easily take care of any identifying info. Of course, if push comes to shove (literally), a good attacker will just shove the victim's face in the wall, so the glasses get a good view of the bricks, then the concrete...

      This isn't something completely new... it is just blowback from being recorded 24/7, and now people want to wear headcams to add more insult to injury. I wouldn't be surprised to see more incidents of this happening, be it reactionary protests, or just to snarf something worth $1500... and $1500 buys a lot of meth in most of the US.

    3. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it's going up, you've got some serious issues.

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    4. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      >A $3.99 balaclava from the Dollar Store

      ???

    5. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by Minwee · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you wear four of them, it protects you four times as much.

    6. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Out in the open in a public place, such as a sidewalk, bar, or a grocery store - there isn't an expectation of privacy.

      Apparently there is, even if the law doesn't currently recognise it. Maybe that law is out of date and should be changed.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    7. Re:Take pictures, press charges. by pepty · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There is an expectation of obscurity in public, which while not a legal expectation has served as a substitute for the legal expectation of privacy. That's ending now as cameras (and the data they upload) become ubiquitous.

  3. what will it take for general acceptance by wiredog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    to finally take hold?

    Oh, I dunno, maybe not wearing it in a bar and threatening to record other people with it when they don't want to be recorded.

    Or, maybe, we'll just have to get used to living in a post-privacy future.

    1. Re:what will it take for general acceptance by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wearing a short skirt isn't an invasion of other people's privacy. Pointing a camera at them is. If people make it clear they don't want a recording device pointing at them, and you persist, then you do indeed bear some responsibility if it results in a bad outcome for you.

    2. Re:what will it take for general acceptance by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes! Now imagine if she had been wearing a short skirt as well, then those guys wouldn't just be justified in assaulting her, they could also rape her! </sarcasm>

      There is a difference:
       
      Wearing a short skirt is something that you do to yourself
       
      Filming is what you do to other people

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  4. LED by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 5, Interesting

    what will it take for general acceptance to finally take hold?

    A red LED that glows when the 'glasses' are actually recording and is dark when they aren't.

    1. Re:LED by radja · · Score: 5, Informative

      just stop pointing your camera at me. I don't care if it's showing a red light or not. She was being obnoxious, and wouldn't stop when asked.

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    2. Re:LED by Gunboat_Diplomat · · Score: 5, Informative

      what will it take for general acceptance to finally take hold?

      A red LED that glows when the 'glasses' are actually recording and is dark when they aren't.

      Which is easily disabled. Even laptop camera lights that claimed to be "hardware inline" has been showed to have exploits that malware can use to disable the light while recording (they won't really be as "inline" as you think because of noise issues with that, and the fact that many cameras these days double as light sensors, so they are always on). If you are the owner it is even easier, you can cover up the light, or disconnect a wire.

  5. Begun, the Class Wars Have... by Mad+Bad+Rabbit · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTA: "You [i.e. rich hipster techies] are killing this city!"

    It may have ostensibly been about privacy, but clearly it was also about resentment towards tech-industry aristos displacing everyone else,
    with their private busses and their artisanal vodkas and fancy gadgets and most of all their ability to pay obscene rents and stay in The City
    rather than commuting in from Gilroy.

    --
    >;k
  6. Or is it just theft? by wooppp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "...but her purse was gone when she returned to the bar.". Is it just the plain old distraction tactics?

  7. There won't BE any "general acceptance" by kheldan · · Score: 5, Informative

    People don't like being recorded, or even the possibility of being recorded, without their express permission. That's not going to change, therefore there isn't going to be any "general acceptance" of technology like this.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  8. Re:Rejects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Pathetic self-promoting blogger

    When I first read about this 2 days ago witnesses said it was her friend who threw the first punch after she was insulted.

  9. It's not about Glass by Natales · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real issue here is what's actually going on in SF. If you don't live here you probably don't know, but there has been a lot of soft aggression against tech workers regardless of the company all over the city, simply because more and more are moving in, driving up the prices of housing and attracting more higher-end businesses, effectively changing the nature of traditionally "working class" neighborhoods. Classic gentrification.

    This bar in particular is more of a punk-type place, located exactly in one of those areas under rapid changing, so the presence of someone with GG was probably an in-your-face reminder (no pun intended) of the situation many of the locals are experiencing.

    I can personally understand both sides, but I tend to side with history: everything changes over time and different forces will produce different changes. You can fight it only to a certain degree, but change is inexorable, and you can't forever cling to "the way things were before".

  10. I don't want people wearing Google Glass in bars by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wouldn't be aggressive, but I also think it's unacceptable that people film me constantly when I'm trying to relax. Especially in bars and similar places where I have high expectations of being away from the scrutiny of everyone but the people I've chosen to socialise with.

    Pointing cameras at people (and optionally saying "I swear it's not recording"), in the form of phones or Glass or whatever, is simply a really anti-social thing to do.

    So is aggression and theft, but one wrong doesn't mean we should turn the other person into a white knight as this article tries to do.

  11. I don't want to live in a world... by MatthiasF · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where I need to worry that any moment of my life can appear on online without my permission.

    Where I need to worry someone has turned on and off their recording at opportune times of that moment that appeared on online to make me look bad without giving full context of the situation.

    Where I need to pay money to remove said videos from the Internet.

    Where I cannot walk down the street, eat at a restaurant, workout at a gym, or celebrate at a bar without worrying someone is recording to be uploaded and judged harshly by tens of thousands if not millions of people.

    I doubt anyone else wants to live in that world either, but every time someone resigns themselves to allowing it that world arrives that much sooner.

  12. Re:I am going to disagree. by belatucadros3918 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    or just stop cheating on your wife. options, options