Slashdot Mirror
Theater Chain Bans Google Glass
mpicpp sends this report from Ars: A cinema chain announced Tuesday that it is now barring patrons from wearing Google Glass at its movie houses across the U.S. in a bid to clamp down on piracy. Alamo Drafthouse, which runs theaters in Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, Texas, Virginia, and soon in California, is among the first U.S. chains to ban Google's computerized eyewear. 'Google Glass is officially banned from @drafthouse auditoriums once lights dim for trailers,' the chain's chief executive, Tim League, tweeted. The decision comes as Google has made the eyewear readily available to the general public, and it follows a slew of incidents in which wearers of Google Glass have had brushes with the law.
Good. Fuck Glassholes.
Does it even matter? The battery wouldn't last the whole movie anyways.
People with common sense make decisions.
Shut that garbage down! No more crap, Dice. We want it gone!
Boycott Dice!
Boycott ThinkGeek!
Boycott Beta!!!!!
Alamo Drafthouse's policy seems to make perfect sense. They also have a very strict policy with regards to cell phones (and even better commercials ;-) ), so it would only make sense for them to extend the ban to other devices that distract from the viewing.
At Alamo draft house they will kick you out for talking to other people or using your cell phone after the lights dim. Their policy is the teenagers with laser pointers that walk to talk to their BFFs can go elsewhere. I like it.
Interesting, but even if we assume that the standard problems with google glasses are ignored/remediated like the GG's battery life when recording*, head movements and such, I could simply wear a button-up shirt with a camera in the pocket. A lot easier to sit still that way and get a good recording. Or better yet set the camera up away from me under an arm rest or something.
Besides, wasn't it found that most camcorder recordings of movies was coming from projector operators?
*Couldn't you run a cable to a supplemental battery pack?
I don't read AC A human right
It's why I don't like this franchise. They have a ninche market in Austin, and I heard they are trying to expand to NYC (where they're petty nonsense won't fly).
Thing is, no one minds someone discrtely checking there phone for a few seconds with the light dimmed to the lowest setting, or having Google Glass on their person if the use is not distracting or obtrusive.
This chain likes to ban anything with even the slightest possibility of distracting your movie, and appeals to only the pettiest moviegoers.
Moral of the story? Grow up, stop complaining about things that don't matter, and enjoy the movie.
*Obviously talking loud, having a bright screen for an extended period etc, are all different and legitimate things to complain about.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
But don't pretend it'll help prevent piracy. Does anyone really expect someone to hold their head perfectly still and never look away from the screen to pirate a film? Of course not. Google Glass is invasive for a lot of reasons, but pirating movies in theaters is hardly a concern for them. It's easier to drop your cell phone in a cup holder pointed at the screen, and less obvious to boot. Not that I think many people are doing that, I suspect most decent cams come from theater employees.
The biggest single issue with 'banning' glass is that if/when it ever becomes remotely mainstream there will be a proportion of users (likely significant) who wear prescription glasses and who have no intention of carrying a spare 'non-glass' pair everywhere. As someone who wears glasses I know that if glass was near universally banned then I wouldn't buy it, but I would happily chose a different movie theatre or bar if some bars ban it and others don't. There's no risk of people recording films on it (it neither has the battery or camera quality) and anyone using it and distracting others can be dealt with the same as cellphone users. I know I, and expect the vast majority of users, would want it turned off to avoid having it interrupt our enjoyment of the film anyway.
I'm amazed that a head-mounted video camera has been banned from a venue that previously had a ban on video cameras. Same story with casinos.
These glassholes, for lack of a better term, walk around and act like they are shocked when others don't want a camera on them all of the time.
It is just like if someone walked around holding their phone/camcorder/camera in front of him all of the time and was pointing it everywhere he looked. No one wants that. These glassholes act as they have some sort of inalienable right and if someone complains then their civil liberties have been violated by a glassist.
fun to Be again. states thatk there
Wearing an electronic device that emits radiation and frequency waves around one's brain for prolonged periods of time can cause cancer and DNA damage, worse than a cell phone. Don't use this technology for the sake of your own health.
Same dicks.
This has got to be google trying to drum up interest. Only misfits wear google glass and only misfits worry about people that wear google glass. LOSERS.
"discreetly"
Oh my god, you actually THINK that? Are you that self-absorbed and delusional? What's your standard for "nobody minds"--nobody has punched you in the face yet? Trust me, people do notice, and they do mind. Once the previews end, yes, that screen is absolutely noticeable.
Caught between my hatred for MPAA and my hatred for Google Glass... arghhh... don't..know..what..to..do..... SPLAT
Recording movies. They might as well carry a handycam into the theatre. What do you expect theatres to do, say, yes, sure, absolutely bring that recording device into the theatre? While they are at it, did you want the optimal seat reserved for you so you can pirate the best quality movie?
Yes, can't have people pirating 20 year old movies. (If you've been to a draft house you know what I mean).
No we are shocked at the amazing lack of education people have when they act that way.
I personally have never had anything but a positive reaction and curiosity from people, I have NEVER had someone go all crazy and start screaming "STOP FILMING ME!" because it is insanely obvious when it is recording.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Its like society at large has no fucking clue that google glass only has 45 minutes of battery life...
Because when I download movies, I want a screener filmed by a tiny camera with a tiny battery, mounted to someone's head!
And be gone, Luddites! Less FUD, More HUD!
Like...? Glass technophobes always remind me of the reaction to Kodak cameras in the 1880's. A few choice quotes:
I really don't get the vitriol. In 120 years people will laugh at the primitives from the early 2000's who reacted with shock and horror to Google glass. My biggest objection is that it's rude to glance at a notification when you're speaking to someone. But that's true of a phone, too.
As someone who wears glasses I know that if glass was near universally banned then I wouldn't buy it, but I would happily chose a different movie theatre or bar if some bars ban it and others don't.
Sure. Maybe AMC, Cinemark or Regal might not want to displease you as a discriminating minority, but people go to Alamo for an experience, and a trivial thing like changing out your Glass for other eyewear isn't likely to change your mind about Alamo.
Props to Alamo. Nothing sensational, just put away (and silence) the smartphone and take off the Glass when the lights go down.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
How's the sand tasting down there?
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
I have NEVER had someone go all crazy and start screaming "STOP FILMING ME!" because it is insanely obvious when it is recording.
We are more polite then that, but that doesn't mean we don't deeply resent being filmed.
These glassholes, for lack of a better term, walk around and act like they are shocked when others don't want a camera on them all of the time.
It is just like if someone walked around holding their phone/camcorder/camera in front of him all of the time and was pointing it everywhere he looked. No one wants that. These glassholes act as they have some sort of inalienable right and if someone complains then their civil liberties have been violated by a glassist.
A battery big enough to record continuously on a Glass or a cellphone all day long and upload data to the cloud would weigh 5-10 pounds and require a cable to the device. That's not even mentioning the hit on the user's data plan.
So people being outraged at something that literally cannot happen, thereby demonstrating their profound technical ignorance and inability to do basic math ('mathholes', perhaps?) to the world.
(Disclaimer: I do not own a Glass, nor do I intend to. I merely am tired people bloviating on /. about it.)
BSD'S acclaimed every chanc3 I got some of you have things in
No we are shocked at the amazing lack of education people have when they act that way.
I personally have never had anything but a positive reaction and curiosity from people, I have NEVER had someone go all crazy and start screaming "STOP FILMING ME!" because it is insanely obvious when it is recording.
It's funny how people cite a lack of education when someone calls them out for doing something they don't like.
yeah, a shaky loud recording from inside a theater hurts tickets...not.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Let's face it, the manager that makes this decision is not just stupid, they are clearly deliberately trying to run the company into the ground in the long term. The company is on a path that, with improving technology, will quickly become "we discriminate against the partially sighted" and then develop to "we show movies, but no-one is allowed to watch them". I'm pretty sure they'll go out of business before becoming something you'd read about in the Hitchhiker's Guide.
How sensitive is Glass to IR light? I'm beginning to think there's a market for jewelry or clothing that is studded with high intensity IR LEDs that are invisible to the human eye. Certainly, movie theaters should be putting them all over the place.
until they have steadycam technology incorporated into GG, bootlegging a motion picture with them is a dream.
ah i bet your mom and dad told you how special you were all the time didn't they?
if someone wants to record me, i'd be quite flattered. the reality is that no one wants to record me (or you) because we are nobodies. thinking otherwise is narcissism at it's best.
It is just like if someone walked around holding their phone/camcorder/camera in front of him all of the time and was pointing it everywhere he looked. No one wants that.
I honestly don't care. And I don't feel like this is the same thing as someone pointing a camera at me.
There are security camera's everywhere. I don't freak out whenever a camera happens to be pointed at me (which is nearly all the time in public). If someone continuously focuses their camera on me (i.e. targeting me specifically) then I'd have a problem with it, because I don't know what their intent is.
I don't care if people glance at me as part of just the normal looking around and being aware of their surroundings. For the same reason I don't care if they are just filming their own experience (of which I might be in the background) without targeting me specifically, nor do I care if I am in the background of a security camera.
I don't care about being recorded. I care about being targeted.
Fuck the corporate sheep who buy and wear this shit.
Who in their right minds uses anything from Google, a company that produces nothing but spyware?
Soon, and thankfully, after a few glassholes get their intrusive piece of shit shoved into their skull, people will get the message and stop using this invasive and retarded device.
It's almost like nature is injecting new idiocies into people because natural selection is failing the human race. The next major natural selection culling will be glassholes.
You do know that glass will not record more than 10 seconds at a time without hacks and has a bright glowing LED on it when the camera is recording...
Wow you must be the dumbest motherfucker on Slashdot, probably dumber than a salad bar.
Who in the smeg watches these 'handy-cammed' movies? The quality must be crap. If you have the time to watch this stuff, go get a Golden Retriever and spend the time walking him / her instead. The Golden'll be up for the walk, I guarantee it.
Theaters, and movie makers do *not* lose money as a result of manual recordings made in the theater.
When you record a movie that way, the quality sucks. The only people who buy those recordings are people who wouldn't have gone to the theater anyway. The set of theater movie-goers has no intersection with the set of second-hand-recording-buyers.
All this enforcement just makes things harder on everyone, without profiting anyone. It is stupid.
I've been wearing glasses almost all of my life, and since I am wearing them already, it would be great to have additional functionality. Its seems like all the privacy issues related to these already exist, except worse, because people pretend the issues dont exist, and it seems much harder to hide google glass. I really dont think you have to worry about somebody wearing 'smart' glasses following you around recording you, and if you do have to worry about that, then you are already in danger and already have an awful lot of your plate. Besides privacy the only other problem seems to be that people just dont like the users. Maybe Im under thinking this, but if the human behind the device is the worst part of it, then why demonize the technology
How good would the recording be, say, compared to a typical commercial VHS? An analog recording from a cable box source? Sound looped from the projector/sound system or live miked (stereo or mono)?
I would imagine if you could shoot it with a telephoto lens on a hidef camera from the projection booth and grab line-level audio it would be reasonably watchable.
I'd worry about the generic cam videos, but maybe they're VHS/VCR cable recording OK.
First, the the Alamo, then there will be others.
After all, we can't have people wearing active recording devices into an area where they charge money to play copyright protected media to a limited audience, can we?
Besides, if you were sitting here in a typical theater with a smart phone in a little tripod-thingy recording the movie, you could reasonably expect to get in trouble, if spotted by any staff members, right?
So, how long before we see anal-retentive stars at ComiCon who charge an arm and a leg for a pic, setting their body-guards on Google Glass-wearing attendees for "stealing" pics/video of them at the Con? Next we'll see Google Glass Banned from such conventions...
Where does it end?
This dumbass gives decent movie going Texans a bad name... I think it is great that Alamo DH ridiculed her on Youtube. They also recently banned Madonna from the theaters until she issues a public apology for being on her damn phone the whole time during a special screening. No BS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L3eeC2lJZs&feature=kp
Also reminds me of this from The Oatmeal: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/movie_theater_layout
"We don't want none of your kind here" isn't an emotion I sympathize with from any establishment for any reason."
It isn't the geek that is being banned ---- it's his gadgets.
The geek is as attached to his gadgets as a redneck to his guns, he feels naked and impotent without them --- and like a sex deprived adolescent will take his gadget-play into the theater or the church, where it is neither welcomed or appropriate.
OK, so wearing the camera makes you look like a voyeuristic dork.
But the biggest problem with Google Glass is that it is proof positive that you can't cut the cord that binds you to the machine --- and that is what really creeps people out.
So, you have a webcam in your bathroom? Everyone can watch, right?
If the answer is no, turn to page 10. Congratulations, you're a hypocrite.
If the answer is yes, turn to page 18. Congratulations, you're an autistic neckbeard who will never understand normal people.
Just because you couldn't get Glass doesn't mean nobody should be able to use it. Never mind trying to get rid of the inevitable and wide-spread use of facial recognition also being a Luddite move as well.
That aside, the unmentionable place banning Glass is like Ryanair stating that they'll charge for restroom use on their airplanes. In both cases, they're going for sensationalism.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
N/T
The Alamo Drafthouse does not fuck around when it comes to theatre etiquette and rules.
Instead of banning the devices, they could have provided extra services through them. Closed captioning, for example.
*eyeroll*
Google Glass (and similiar tech) is here. It's in the world, and it's not going away. Lots of people complain about it, and mostly they feel like it's an invasion of privacy.
I find that odd. Our privacy is invaded all the time. The US government records every text message and call you make and no one can seem to be outraged. Meanwhile, some guy has a camera on his face (and he's not even necessarily recording) and everyone is bent out of shape. No one bats an eye when someone takes out a phone to take a pic though.
There is ONE drawback to this tech. You might get recorded.
There are several HUGE benefits. For one, it turns the surveilance around. It's been shown that cop/citizen violence goes WAY down(I seem to remember a 50% reduction reported) when everyone is recorded. That's a good thing. For two, putting these things everywhere will turn everyone a lot more polite. I know it's a popular meme that an armed society is a polite society. Well, a recorded society might ACTUALLY be more polite. For three, carrying around an alibi might put an end to the practice of rounding up "the usual suspects". No more "He's black, it was probably him." We can all SHOW we weren't there. For four, I'd love to see it mandated that all public servants wear them. It's significantly harder to make backroom shady deals when everything you're doing is being recorded, but that's really just my pipe dream.
Anyway, people are bitching about glassholes. This is just... eh. Shrug. It's loosed upon the world. It's coming, and nothing you can do is going to stop it. I happen to think the benefits are well worth it. The only real drawback is that someone might record you being an asshole. :D
Sounds like another good reason to continue patronize the Alamo Drafthouse near me.
Google Glass is just like any other tech widget in a theater: Turn it off and put it away.
If you chose to put your perscription lenses into Glass, that is an unfortunate decision on your part. Go get the spare glasses out of your car (or whereever you keep them.)
A battery big enough to record continuously on a Glass or a cellphone all day long and upload data to the cloud would weigh 5-10 pounds
Which is funny, when you think about it, since a reasonably modern laptop can happily run its camera and upload files for 7-8 hours while weighing far less, including all of the other laptop bits like a screen and keyboard.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
And who in their right mind would go for a pirate movie "recorded live at some cinema"? Extremely low quality, and head movements too. Yuck.
It doesn't matter if the glass has a good camera - try recording from a screen and cry when you see the result . . .
Believe it or not the light from that bright little screen is perfectly visible from all around you in a dim room. The image may be totally out of focus, but most of the light doesn't make it into your pupil, and it becomes a bright annoying spot in the room that moves and demands attention from everyone else with every shift of your head.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
So what?
I don't really mean to sound so unsympathetic, but I do mean to suggest that your position is not going to have much meaningful impact in the long term.
A lot of people DIDN"T WANT people to have portable microphones, cameras, or transmitters to permeate society.
Now, people all over the place have camera phones on them.
When telephones interrupted families at dinner tables, some people objected to the intrusion of their lifestyle. Today, those who oppose the technology are not likely today to getting millions of families to be discontinuing all phone service in their household.
Similarly, your argument does not seem sustainable over time. Your arguments may be able to win over some supporters now, so early that the product hasn't caught on very much yet. However, such support is likely to reduce over time. The clearest evidence of that is to look at some other, more recent technologies.
When cell phones first came out, there was serious discussion about banning cell phones from movie theaters, and even grocery stores. After all, hearing somebody else's phone ring, and then needing to listen to them yell "I've got bad reception. I'm losing youuu..." in a crowded place isn't very pleasant, and may be rude of them to do.
Fast forward, and what do you actually find happened? Movie theaters have banned cell phones, but they are allowed most everywhere else except for driving a car. Only some states have outlawed cell phone usage while driving, and most Gen Xers will admit to breaking that particular law on a somewhat regular, or very frequent basis. Many and perhaps most Gen Y'ers will admit to being guilty of sending a text message while driving.
In a random sampling of society, I would generally expect the majority of adults and teenagers have a readily usable cell phone on them. This is why I'm suggesting that it doesn't matter if some people DON'T WANT the cell phones. Other people DO want the cell phones, and they have their way.
The fact that you are insightful enough to realize certain potential unpleasantness so early on, before Google Glass mass-market adoption, is not going to be sufficient to overcome what most people want. Today there are many people who would like to try out Google Glass, and there are others who do not want that technology to be used, and many people who probably have no enthusiasm for or against the product. As more people start to enjoy the product, resistance will shrink and many apathetic people, or even opponents, are likely to be swayed over time.
Once more, a movie theater chain takes an action that makes people think they are cracking down on piracy. That's also the real reason they ban texting during the movie; the audience distraction thing is a smokescreen.
But very little video piracy is done by going into theaters and recording the movie with a camera, and those bad recordings probably have little effect on the box office or on sale of legitimate videos in any case.. Most of it is inside jobs where somebody gets access to the movie server and rips the film from there.
When Glass is mated with prescription frames (with Rx lens) wouldn't that be like asking someone to remove any other prosthetic aid? What about bioptic telescope low vision aids (picture a micro telescope mounted on a pair of glasses)? A few of the better ones can record short rounds of video too. It's pushing the edge of the law and sanity but the ADA has been pushed a lot.
Serious ... how much battery life does Google Glass have?
If you're telling me that Google Glass can record an entire 2 hour movie on a single charge, then I'm sooo getting one!
A device that size that can do so much - I gotta have one!