I would be glad to review that augmented reality application if and when it is ready. Until then, by default, you already know my opinion:-) It's just too typical when a bunch of geeks touts R-Pi (or any given newfangled gadget) as a solution of all the world's problems. In reality, it's just a small PCB with a few inexpensive ICs that is sold to you for 100x its value.
Your entire argument hinges on this, but how do you know that?
Somewhere in this thread someone asks "why so many people hate GG here and so few love it?" Of course, it's only a slice through Slashdot audience; but it's likely (IMO) that GG, in its surveillance mode, will not be extremely popular with serious people. They don't care to film others. It's something that only immature children would do.
If history is anything to go by, convenience always wins in the court of public opinion.
There is no convenience in carrying the camera on your head all the time, just in case you want to take a photo once per week. Perhaps there is convenience to have your Twitbook posts listed in front of you all the time - but as I said this is not something that busy people have time or patience for. For them there would be no convenience at all. For me, it doesn't bother me at all that I need to look at my phone if someone calls. In car I only need to say "Answer." Why would I need GG?
This is not something I can change. These 2% are a business agreement between the merchant and the payment network. The merchant is allowed by the contract (or was allowed, at least) to offer cash discounts. But rare a vendor does that. Some gas stations are the only example I can think of.
So, here we are. The 2% are built into the fabric of the entire economy. It does not matter if I pay with plastic or cash. What do you propose, outside of marching with torches and pitchforks toward the VISA HQ?
So if you had any cash in your wallet, that would be gone and you could NOT replace it, much like bitcoins.
This is one of many reasons why nearly everyone pays with plastic. Cash is used only if you have no bank account. I keep very little cash, never carry it, and only use it for transactions at a flea market, for example.
Not only using plastic is free and safe; it is also profitable (to you) because the bank shares with you a small part of the 2% that the c/c networks charge for transactions. The vendors simply overcharge the cash customers for those 2% and keep the money.
What a waste of electrons... whoever wrote that article managed to not say a word about what the software does, and how it works. Can't discuss without details.
But outside of that... if the GG performance is sufficient for the task, then it can be used as a medical tool - especially as a prototype. A real medical device probably has to be a bit more reliable - in terms of battery time, and in terms of dependency on external networks, and such.
Will you be admitted everywhere, even if you have a letter with you? I doubt that. The TSA is notoriously uninterested in letters that anyone can print and sign. Your GG will have to go onto the belt, along with your phone and the notebook and your shoes. Will you be admitted to a locker room while wearing the thing? I do not know. Will you want your lawyer to wear a GG while discussing your predicament, even if he has a prescription?
And if I convert a semi-auto AK to full-auto, who will find out and how?
If you shoot it at the range; if you transport it and your car is searched; if your house is searched; if someone knows and wants you arrested. Or you may do the mod safely, and nobody would ever know. The risk of discovery is not that great, really, but the punishment is severe.
Anyway, if disabling such functionality is illegal, I think that vast majority of people will respect that, if only out of the fear of being caught
The vast majority of people will not want to wear GG. Those people are more law-abiding. It's like wondering why "Saturday night specials" are mostly found among criminals, and not among wealthy, legal owners of high quality firearms. It's a case of self-selection. If you buy GG, you already want to record (with some good probability.) If you want to record, you will want to mod your gear so that you can record wherever and whenever (with some good probability.) There cannot be a serious fine because, currently, all you risk is being asked to leave. There are no effective laws that would protect your privacy outside of a handful of specially named places (bathrooms.) Is GG legal in locker rooms, changing rooms, bath houses, gyms, doctor's offices, hospitals? I do not know. It may be illegal to come close to someone's window at night and to peer inside; but is it illegal to stand in the street and wear a GG with a telescopic lens? To sit in a parked car?
You are correct, of course, that covert cameras are already available. However GG would popularize "the game." If you ask a typical teenager if he knows where to buy a spy camera, he won't be able to tell you right away. These cameras are rare. If you have one, you must be spy (or so the thinking goes.) However a GG has other functions, and it carries no stigma. High volume of manufacturing, good software support, and low cost will result in many "interesting" applications of GG that we don't want to think of today. On top of that, GG is obvious when worn, so it will be a prime target of robberies. Supplies of "grey" GG will be plentiful. The society just does not need hundreds of millions of additional cameras.
I don't see how you can claim that "camera is not required for this". How, exactly, will the device know where to place markers if it doesn't have an image to analyze?
If you don't have the camera *and* the computer that can do video analysis in real time then you use GPS and compass to determine what you are looking at. It's not as good as the real image... but processing of the real image is too taxing; and besides, you need to have something to compare it with. An array of colored pixels tells nothing to a non-AI computer. If you have a photo, taken from this place in that direction and under similar lighting, then the crude CPU can match them and tell you that you are there. But you can already see where that goes. Augmented reality is a hard nut to crack even if you have a rack full of CPU blades. Doing it in a micropower processor doesn't make the task any easier.
The most obvious application of augmented reality is navigation in a city. I would like to see software that can take all the available inputs (GPS, camera, but not compass) and create an overlay that draws the street that you are on, and a few nearby streets. This is not that simple. Google's Street View was created by storing exact GPS coordinates, and the compass readings, of each frame. If you only have the image to latch onto... good luck; this is hard even for many humans. If you have the compass then you do not need the camera at all - you already know where you are and what you are looking at. You only need the map and the HUD to overlay the map on. This is how you do it without the camera; it will be more reliable, and it will take less power, and it will work regardless of what you see (such as in fog, or at night.)
This is something that you can't really fix. If someone wants to record you covertly, they already have the hardware and software for it.
One problem here is that there won't be much of a punishment for tampering with all those indicators and activators. Try to convert a semi-auto AK47 into a full-auto - that's a serious violation. But hack your own GG - who will even find out, and how? The simplicity of the hack, the lack of enforcement, and the obvious attractiveness of the hack to "entitled persons who have rights" will lead to the sad truth: you still can't say if a given GG is recording or not. It's like a gun that is pointed at you. Is it loaded? No way to tell.
The huge attraction of Glass and similar products is that it provides you with "augmented reality" - the ability to overlay metadata directly over your visual input, that is relevant to that input.
The camera is NOT REQUIRED for this. Furthermore, the camera cannot be used for this. The GG is not even capable of overlaying the computer-generated image onto your entire field of vision. This is problem #0. GG only projects the image into a separate "screen" in the corner. This is useless for augmented reality.
You may want to say: "but why don't we feed the camera through the GG into that small screen?" Yes, it's possible... and is not practical. That screen is small; but it would duplicate the area that you see directly, with your eyes. This will be a very confusing visual input. Do you want to take your driving directions by not looking ahead with your eyes? Who is brave enough to drive a car looking through a camera that is not certified not just for automotive use, and not just for operation of machinery when human life is at stake... it's not certified for anything; it's a pure entertainment device.
Furthermore: there is no CPU in GG that would be fast enough to process the camera image to make any use out of it. This is a serious computational task that is done in self-driving cars. GG, by definition, is not capable of any such thing. It can only feed the camera input, unchanged, into the output, and then overlay hints (in Terminator style) onto that screen. But then why do we need a camera? Simply use a heads-up display that is designed for the task, that can overlay hints onto your entire field of vision, and you are golden. This is how helmets of pilots of warplanes are made. A GG, however you put it, is a toy that cannot do augmented reality. There was an article on Slashdot a week or two ago about the real device; it uses two LCD screens and some optics to generate whatever you want in front of your eyes. Combined with a camera, compass, and a very fast computer, it could be usable as a navigational aid. You could drive in darkness, for example; see in UV; see overlays that do not exist in reality. This is valuable; however GG is not capable of such things. It would cost far, far more to be able to do this. As things are, GG is a head-worn camera that can record short video segments, which then are sent to Google for offline analysis. It is also a heads-up display for the smartphone. GG cannot do much else; as result, it has very little purpose outside of being a fashion item.
I have to accept an opinion of a competent person (Vint Cerf) because he at least saw the device. I haven't, and I cannot say if "an illuminated screen" is a sufficient indicator of anything. Logically, the screen can be illuminated for many other reasons, even when not recording. How well is it visible to others?
With regard to the command: (a) the command to record can be spoken ahead of time - you don't need to mutter it all the time; (b) the victim may not hear the command; (c) there may be alternative ways to capture audio and video, such as by installing software that activates recording by a gesture, or by a smartphone activity, or by timer...
But, most importantly, (d) - the average person is not likely to know these details, and is not likely to care to know. We do not like when people carry live grenades around, even if they are "secure" with the pull ring still being in. The only way to be secure is to not come close to the dangerous item. The GG can be activated instantly, so it is not inert enough. One GG that would be OK with me is a GG without a camera. Most people are not voyeurs, and they don't need an inbuilt camera. Besides, a GG without a camera would be lighter, and the battery would last longer. What's not to like? Who is it, exactly, that insists on having a camera in the product?
It's much worse when the three guys that you have nothing to do with offered you a compromising, fake (edited) footage and suggested that you pay them, or else the video goes to your boss.
So, they are like cops, but unarmed. But we are trying ti increase the number of cops.
FCC does not permit intentional interference with licensed communications. Jamming is illegal because it interferes with other people's right to use the spectrum that is licensed to them, explicitly and indirectly, through the provider who paid for that license.
I have seen some Chinese-made jammers for cell phones and other wireless devices. They are illegal, but it's possible to get some and use. If anyone complaints, an FCC DF van will be at your place within an hour. They geolocate interferers and fine those who are responsible. A typical fine for a "pirate" broadcast could be $15K. It's all public information.
GG is a social problem. Nobody would object to GG as a gadget... as long as it is not streaming to Google, and as long as it is not worn day in and day out as a fashion accessory. A GG would be an excellent portable monitor at work, for example; or as part of policeman's equipment; or as a wearable teleprompter for Obama. The camera is not needed in the vast majority of cases. It looks like GG got the camera not because the customer needs it, but because Google needs it. Streaming video via a phone is extremely expensive!
Assuming you'd actually have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a restaurant.
You'd have a rock solid expectation of not being videotaped in a restaurant that has a policy that prohibits videotaping. Especially when the staff enforces that policy.
You can't take any dog with you into a restaurant; only guide dogs are allowed. GG could be a similar assistive technology, allowed only to those who are officially disabled, carry the permit, and so on.
However it is not very likely that GG would be a good fit as a medical device. It does not have much of video processing power to be useful to people with, say, vision problems. (They may benefit from brightness/contrast/color adjustments, among other techniques.) Most importantly, the medical device has to work all the time; and it will not send the data to Google due to HIPAA. Those devices would be entirely harmless; they wouldn't even be able to record. (What for?)
This guys attitude is Not that of a hospitable restauranteur.
You cannot be hospitable to good people and bad people at the same time. You have to make your choice. The owner chose to protect many people who already depend on his policy because they are eating their food. This was done at expense of one person who was not even allowed to order yet. This was the right decision even regardless of the nature of the dispute (shirts, shoes, hygiene, inebriation, etc.) I fully support the owner of the restaurant, and if I find myself in the area I will be interested in visiting there.
Funny, because I can think of several good uses for tech like Glass.
There are many good uses for a gas mask, or a dildo, or a nuclear bomb. It doesn't mean that they all should be worn in public by the consumer of the lowest common denominator.
I could for instance hold my phone exactly where a normal person holds their phone while talking, at my ear, except with the camera pointed at you.
This is not a common way to use a cell phone. Sure, you can put it in your front pocket and set to record... but this is very uncommon, and there is no peer pressure to do so. Maybe some boys and girls will want to do that one day, but the video will not go anywhere. Most likely it will be deleted right after filming because watching a lengthy segment of nothing in particular is work, not fun. A GG video will be processed by a robot, and it will see everything that is worth seeing.
GG promotes and rewards filming. GG wearers are already pushing the limits, as this whole discussion shows. Do you want a worldwide Internet competition for the funniest (not to you!) video taken by GG? Your image, and your privacy, will be converted into jokes for other people. Do you want everyone you know to see yourself slipping and falling in the street one day? Making a mistake that normally would be remembered by humans who happened to witness it? Doing something that would *seem* wrong?
Yes, it is already possible to do something like that with cell phones. And we have YouTube to dump all that garbage into. However GG is a significant enhancement of such recording. The people around GG wearer do not know when the GG is recording; and the GG is already in position to start recording.
There are millions of reasons to be wary of GG. For details, please review the video "Don't talk to the police." There the professor gives several examples of how your innocent behavior can get you convicted. GG will be used by the police; and since all the records are at Google, you do not have an option of unseeing something - even if you really, really want to. Today you are protected from being a witness against yourself. What if tomorrow you wear a GG and get into a situation? Your GG video will be subpoenaed, and you will have no say in it. Maybe it will save you; maybe it will doom you. I would rather prefer doubt - it is interpreted in favor of the accused. GG will remove the doubt, even if the recording does not show the whole picture.
Ultimately having something very visible that shows the Google Glass is recording either in audio or video will probably be necessary - that's certainly what the feedback suggests. -- Vint Cerf, Sep. 09, 2013
I would think that Vint Cerf, the Chief Internet Evangelist at Google, knows what he is speaking of.
you are upset that the last three guys you tried to hook up with in the men's room were wearing Google Glass and emailed the clip to your wife?
It's much worse when the three guys that you have nothing to do with offered you a compromising, fake (edited) footage and suggested that you pay them, or else the video goes to your boss.
The simple fact is that you have nothing to gain from glassholes, and something small to lose. Therefore you always lose if a glasshole is present.
From what I know, miners only get a fee from the blocks that THEY mined. Not from other miners' blocks. If true, this gives even more advantage to "early adopters" - not only they sit on mountains of nearly free BTC, they also collect rent on it. Those would be the only "miners" left (they won't be doing actual mining, probably.)
We're reaching the top of the curve for bitcoin mining, long before all the possible coins are "found".
This means that at some point the remaining coins wouldn't be searched for. For that to be economical, each coin would have to cost a $1M or something. If that's not the case, there is no reason to bother. It's exactly as I don't walk the streets looking for lost coins, wallets, or jewelry. I guess I could get some revenue this way, but it makes no sense - there are better ways to make money.
ASIC mining isn't really subject to the article's malicious use scenario, but even then in another couple of years you won't be able to make money.
Miners, as I understand, are an essential part of BTC network. If nobody mines anymore, how will the network operate? There is nothing on the horizon, and the difficulty would make it prohibitive anyway.
(a) You know who can read your messages. (b) You cannot know where they end up.
You select (a) to be sufficiently secure with (b). This does not always work (ask Snowden,) but it is better than nothing when you cannot work alone. It is certainly not equivalent to sharing with the entire world; otherwise you would know all the secrets on this planet. Do you? If not, Q.E.D.
Solution 1. When Alice posts to the group, she encrypts to keys of Bob, Charlie and David. If David wants to boot Charlie, he generates a new key and sends individual copies, encrypted, to Alice and Bob. Each copy is encrypted to one key and can be only read by key holder.
Charlie can still post; however his post won't be readable by David because he changed the key, and David doesn't have it. David won't encrypt his posts to Charlie's key. Alice and Bob can either post using Charlie's key, or they can also boot him from the group. A group member who does not have keys of other members can only talk to himself.
This solution only requires a method to push new keys to members. It also implements "soft voting out" of unwanted group members, without using a moderator.
When you buy a Tesla for enough money to purchase a small house you expect a luxury car that is infinitely reliable, perfectly supported, and flawlessly serviced. When you buy a Ford you only expect to get a Ford. Even if both vehicles are comparable in reliability, one expects much more from Tesla.
Slashdot Mirror
I would be glad to review that augmented reality application if and when it is ready. Until then, by default, you already know my opinion :-) It's just too typical when a bunch of geeks touts R-Pi (or any given newfangled gadget) as a solution of all the world's problems. In reality, it's just a small PCB with a few inexpensive ICs that is sold to you for 100x its value.
Your entire argument hinges on this, but how do you know that?
Somewhere in this thread someone asks "why so many people hate GG here and so few love it?" Of course, it's only a slice through Slashdot audience; but it's likely (IMO) that GG, in its surveillance mode, will not be extremely popular with serious people. They don't care to film others. It's something that only immature children would do.
If history is anything to go by, convenience always wins in the court of public opinion.
There is no convenience in carrying the camera on your head all the time, just in case you want to take a photo once per week. Perhaps there is convenience to have your Twitbook posts listed in front of you all the time - but as I said this is not something that busy people have time or patience for. For them there would be no convenience at all. For me, it doesn't bother me at all that I need to look at my phone if someone calls. In car I only need to say "Answer." Why would I need GG?
This is not something I can change. These 2% are a business agreement between the merchant and the payment network. The merchant is allowed by the contract (or was allowed, at least) to offer cash discounts. But rare a vendor does that. Some gas stations are the only example I can think of.
So, here we are. The 2% are built into the fabric of the entire economy. It does not matter if I pay with plastic or cash. What do you propose, outside of marching with torches and pitchforks toward the VISA HQ?
So if you had any cash in your wallet, that would be gone and you could NOT replace it, much like bitcoins.
This is one of many reasons why nearly everyone pays with plastic. Cash is used only if you have no bank account. I keep very little cash, never carry it, and only use it for transactions at a flea market, for example.
Not only using plastic is free and safe; it is also profitable (to you) because the bank shares with you a small part of the 2% that the c/c networks charge for transactions. The vendors simply overcharge the cash customers for those 2% and keep the money.
see http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/08/catalin-voss/ .
What a waste of electrons... whoever wrote that article managed to not say a word about what the software does, and how it works. Can't discuss without details.
But outside of that... if the GG performance is sufficient for the task, then it can be used as a medical tool - especially as a prototype. A real medical device probably has to be a bit more reliable - in terms of battery time, and in terms of dependency on external networks, and such.
Will you be admitted everywhere, even if you have a letter with you? I doubt that. The TSA is notoriously uninterested in letters that anyone can print and sign. Your GG will have to go onto the belt, along with your phone and the notebook and your shoes. Will you be admitted to a locker room while wearing the thing? I do not know. Will you want your lawyer to wear a GG while discussing your predicament, even if he has a prescription?
And if I convert a semi-auto AK to full-auto, who will find out and how?
If you shoot it at the range; if you transport it and your car is searched; if your house is searched; if someone knows and wants you arrested. Or you may do the mod safely, and nobody would ever know. The risk of discovery is not that great, really, but the punishment is severe.
Anyway, if disabling such functionality is illegal, I think that vast majority of people will respect that, if only out of the fear of being caught
The vast majority of people will not want to wear GG. Those people are more law-abiding. It's like wondering why "Saturday night specials" are mostly found among criminals, and not among wealthy, legal owners of high quality firearms. It's a case of self-selection. If you buy GG, you already want to record (with some good probability.) If you want to record, you will want to mod your gear so that you can record wherever and whenever (with some good probability.) There cannot be a serious fine because, currently, all you risk is being asked to leave. There are no effective laws that would protect your privacy outside of a handful of specially named places (bathrooms.) Is GG legal in locker rooms, changing rooms, bath houses, gyms, doctor's offices, hospitals? I do not know. It may be illegal to come close to someone's window at night and to peer inside; but is it illegal to stand in the street and wear a GG with a telescopic lens? To sit in a parked car?
You are correct, of course, that covert cameras are already available. However GG would popularize "the game." If you ask a typical teenager if he knows where to buy a spy camera, he won't be able to tell you right away. These cameras are rare. If you have one, you must be spy (or so the thinking goes.) However a GG has other functions, and it carries no stigma. High volume of manufacturing, good software support, and low cost will result in many "interesting" applications of GG that we don't want to think of today. On top of that, GG is obvious when worn, so it will be a prime target of robberies. Supplies of "grey" GG will be plentiful. The society just does not need hundreds of millions of additional cameras.
I don't see how you can claim that "camera is not required for this". How, exactly, will the device know where to place markers if it doesn't have an image to analyze?
If you don't have the camera *and* the computer that can do video analysis in real time then you use GPS and compass to determine what you are looking at. It's not as good as the real image... but processing of the real image is too taxing; and besides, you need to have something to compare it with. An array of colored pixels tells nothing to a non-AI computer. If you have a photo, taken from this place in that direction and under similar lighting, then the crude CPU can match them and tell you that you are there. But you can already see where that goes. Augmented reality is a hard nut to crack even if you have a rack full of CPU blades. Doing it in a micropower processor doesn't make the task any easier.
The most obvious application of augmented reality is navigation in a city. I would like to see software that can take all the available inputs (GPS, camera, but not compass) and create an overlay that draws the street that you are on, and a few nearby streets. This is not that simple. Google's Street View was created by storing exact GPS coordinates, and the compass readings, of each frame. If you only have the image to latch onto... good luck; this is hard even for many humans. If you have the compass then you do not need the camera at all - you already know where you are and what you are looking at. You only need the map and the HUD to overlay the map on. This is how you do it without the camera; it will be more reliable, and it will take less power, and it will work regardless of what you see (such as in fog, or at night.)
This is something that you can't really fix. If someone wants to record you covertly, they already have the hardware and software for it.
One problem here is that there won't be much of a punishment for tampering with all those indicators and activators. Try to convert a semi-auto AK47 into a full-auto - that's a serious violation. But hack your own GG - who will even find out, and how? The simplicity of the hack, the lack of enforcement, and the obvious attractiveness of the hack to "entitled persons who have rights" will lead to the sad truth: you still can't say if a given GG is recording or not. It's like a gun that is pointed at you. Is it loaded? No way to tell.
The huge attraction of Glass and similar products is that it provides you with "augmented reality" - the ability to overlay metadata directly over your visual input, that is relevant to that input.
The camera is NOT REQUIRED for this. Furthermore, the camera cannot be used for this. The GG is not even capable of overlaying the computer-generated image onto your entire field of vision. This is problem #0. GG only projects the image into a separate "screen" in the corner. This is useless for augmented reality.
You may want to say: "but why don't we feed the camera through the GG into that small screen?" Yes, it's possible... and is not practical. That screen is small; but it would duplicate the area that you see directly, with your eyes. This will be a very confusing visual input. Do you want to take your driving directions by not looking ahead with your eyes? Who is brave enough to drive a car looking through a camera that is not certified not just for automotive use, and not just for operation of machinery when human life is at stake... it's not certified for anything; it's a pure entertainment device.
Furthermore: there is no CPU in GG that would be fast enough to process the camera image to make any use out of it. This is a serious computational task that is done in self-driving cars. GG, by definition, is not capable of any such thing. It can only feed the camera input, unchanged, into the output, and then overlay hints (in Terminator style) onto that screen. But then why do we need a camera? Simply use a heads-up display that is designed for the task, that can overlay hints onto your entire field of vision, and you are golden. This is how helmets of pilots of warplanes are made. A GG, however you put it, is a toy that cannot do augmented reality. There was an article on Slashdot a week or two ago about the real device; it uses two LCD screens and some optics to generate whatever you want in front of your eyes. Combined with a camera, compass, and a very fast computer, it could be usable as a navigational aid. You could drive in darkness, for example; see in UV; see overlays that do not exist in reality. This is valuable; however GG is not capable of such things. It would cost far, far more to be able to do this. As things are, GG is a head-worn camera that can record short video segments, which then are sent to Google for offline analysis. It is also a heads-up display for the smartphone. GG cannot do much else; as result, it has very little purpose outside of being a fashion item.
I have to accept an opinion of a competent person (Vint Cerf) because he at least saw the device. I haven't, and I cannot say if "an illuminated screen" is a sufficient indicator of anything. Logically, the screen can be illuminated for many other reasons, even when not recording. How well is it visible to others?
With regard to the command: (a) the command to record can be spoken ahead of time - you don't need to mutter it all the time; (b) the victim may not hear the command; (c) there may be alternative ways to capture audio and video, such as by installing software that activates recording by a gesture, or by a smartphone activity, or by timer...
But, most importantly, (d) - the average person is not likely to know these details, and is not likely to care to know. We do not like when people carry live grenades around, even if they are "secure" with the pull ring still being in. The only way to be secure is to not come close to the dangerous item. The GG can be activated instantly, so it is not inert enough. One GG that would be OK with me is a GG without a camera. Most people are not voyeurs, and they don't need an inbuilt camera. Besides, a GG without a camera would be lighter, and the battery would last longer. What's not to like? Who is it, exactly, that insists on having a camera in the product?
So, they are like cops, but unarmed. But we are trying ti increase the number of cops.
No comment. I just cannot come up with one :-)
FCC does not permit intentional interference with licensed communications. Jamming is illegal because it interferes with other people's right to use the spectrum that is licensed to them, explicitly and indirectly, through the provider who paid for that license.
I have seen some Chinese-made jammers for cell phones and other wireless devices. They are illegal, but it's possible to get some and use. If anyone complaints, an FCC DF van will be at your place within an hour. They geolocate interferers and fine those who are responsible. A typical fine for a "pirate" broadcast could be $15K. It's all public information.
GG is a social problem. Nobody would object to GG as a gadget... as long as it is not streaming to Google, and as long as it is not worn day in and day out as a fashion accessory. A GG would be an excellent portable monitor at work, for example; or as part of policeman's equipment; or as a wearable teleprompter for Obama. The camera is not needed in the vast majority of cases. It looks like GG got the camera not because the customer needs it, but because Google needs it. Streaming video via a phone is extremely expensive!
Assuming you'd actually have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a restaurant.
You'd have a rock solid expectation of not being videotaped in a restaurant that has a policy that prohibits videotaping. Especially when the staff enforces that policy.
You can't take any dog with you into a restaurant; only guide dogs are allowed. GG could be a similar assistive technology, allowed only to those who are officially disabled, carry the permit, and so on.
However it is not very likely that GG would be a good fit as a medical device. It does not have much of video processing power to be useful to people with, say, vision problems. (They may benefit from brightness/contrast/color adjustments, among other techniques.) Most importantly, the medical device has to work all the time; and it will not send the data to Google due to HIPAA. Those devices would be entirely harmless; they wouldn't even be able to record. (What for?)
This guys attitude is Not that of a hospitable restauranteur.
You cannot be hospitable to good people and bad people at the same time. You have to make your choice. The owner chose to protect many people who already depend on his policy because they are eating their food. This was done at expense of one person who was not even allowed to order yet. This was the right decision even regardless of the nature of the dispute (shirts, shoes, hygiene, inebriation, etc.) I fully support the owner of the restaurant, and if I find myself in the area I will be interested in visiting there.
Funny, because I can think of several good uses for tech like Glass.
There are many good uses for a gas mask, or a dildo, or a nuclear bomb. It doesn't mean that they all should be worn in public by the consumer of the lowest common denominator.
I could for instance hold my phone exactly where a normal person holds their phone while talking, at my ear, except with the camera pointed at you.
This is not a common way to use a cell phone. Sure, you can put it in your front pocket and set to record... but this is very uncommon, and there is no peer pressure to do so. Maybe some boys and girls will want to do that one day, but the video will not go anywhere. Most likely it will be deleted right after filming because watching a lengthy segment of nothing in particular is work, not fun. A GG video will be processed by a robot, and it will see everything that is worth seeing.
GG promotes and rewards filming. GG wearers are already pushing the limits, as this whole discussion shows. Do you want a worldwide Internet competition for the funniest (not to you!) video taken by GG? Your image, and your privacy, will be converted into jokes for other people. Do you want everyone you know to see yourself slipping and falling in the street one day? Making a mistake that normally would be remembered by humans who happened to witness it? Doing something that would *seem* wrong?
Yes, it is already possible to do something like that with cell phones. And we have YouTube to dump all that garbage into. However GG is a significant enhancement of such recording. The people around GG wearer do not know when the GG is recording; and the GG is already in position to start recording.
There are millions of reasons to be wary of GG. For details, please review the video "Don't talk to the police." There the professor gives several examples of how your innocent behavior can get you convicted. GG will be used by the police; and since all the records are at Google, you do not have an option of unseeing something - even if you really, really want to. Today you are protected from being a witness against yourself. What if tomorrow you wear a GG and get into a situation? Your GG video will be subpoenaed, and you will have no say in it. Maybe it will save you; maybe it will doom you. I would rather prefer doubt - it is interpreted in favor of the accused. GG will remove the doubt, even if the recording does not show the whole picture.
I would think that Vint Cerf, the Chief Internet Evangelist at Google, knows what he is speaking of.
http://glassalmanac.com/vint-cerf-google-glass-will-probably-need-visible-recording-indicator/
you are upset that the last three guys you tried to hook up with in the men's room were wearing Google Glass and emailed the clip to your wife?
It's much worse when the three guys that you have nothing to do with offered you a compromising, fake (edited) footage and suggested that you pay them, or else the video goes to your boss.
The simple fact is that you have nothing to gain from glassholes, and something small to lose. Therefore you always lose if a glasshole is present.
From what I know, miners only get a fee from the blocks that THEY mined. Not from other miners' blocks. If true, this gives even more advantage to "early adopters" - not only they sit on mountains of nearly free BTC, they also collect rent on it. Those would be the only "miners" left (they won't be doing actual mining, probably.)
We're reaching the top of the curve for bitcoin mining, long before all the possible coins are "found".
This means that at some point the remaining coins wouldn't be searched for. For that to be economical, each coin would have to cost a $1M or something. If that's not the case, there is no reason to bother. It's exactly as I don't walk the streets looking for lost coins, wallets, or jewelry. I guess I could get some revenue this way, but it makes no sense - there are better ways to make money.
ASIC mining isn't really subject to the article's malicious use scenario, but even then in another couple of years you won't be able to make money.
Miners, as I understand, are an essential part of BTC network. If nobody mines anymore, how will the network operate? There is nothing on the horizon, and the difficulty would make it prohibitive anyway.
(a) You know who can read your messages.
(b) You cannot know where they end up.
You select (a) to be sufficiently secure with (b). This does not always work (ask Snowden,) but it is better than nothing when you cannot work alone. It is certainly not equivalent to sharing with the entire world; otherwise you would know all the secrets on this planet. Do you? If not, Q.E.D.
Solution 1. When Alice posts to the group, she encrypts to keys of Bob, Charlie and David. If David wants to boot Charlie, he generates a new key and sends individual copies, encrypted, to Alice and Bob. Each copy is encrypted to one key and can be only read by key holder.
Charlie can still post; however his post won't be readable by David because he changed the key, and David doesn't have it. David won't encrypt his posts to Charlie's key. Alice and Bob can either post using Charlie's key, or they can also boot him from the group. A group member who does not have keys of other members can only talk to himself.
This solution only requires a method to push new keys to members. It also implements "soft voting out" of unwanted group members, without using a moderator.
you have no right to violate my privacy as i tell the world about everything in my entire life!
The discussion here is about sharing within a controlled group.
While I would not buy a current Tesla, it may be possible in the next few years to buy a hybrid that meets my needs and costs less than 25k.
You could do it back in 2005, and you certainly can do it today. That's what I did. No need to wait.
When you buy a Tesla for enough money to purchase a small house you expect a luxury car that is infinitely reliable, perfectly supported, and flawlessly serviced. When you buy a Ford you only expect to get a Ford. Even if both vehicles are comparable in reliability, one expects much more from Tesla.