Remote phone management software already exists and is already being used at places where employees can use their own devices; that software (among other things) allows for remote data wiping in the event the phone is lost or an employee is let go.
I didn't RTFA, but generally I'd assume that positions that require on-call access to an employee would provide a phone to those without their own phones, or who just refuse to use theirs for work. Our IT staff already has an on-call phone that's either given to the on-call person, or is forwarded to their personal cell phone if they don't want to lug two around.
Yeah, there's software out there to do exactly that, that a lot of employers (I'm in the network security field) already require to be installed if you want to connect to work resources.
I read through the wiki synopsis (off topic - I'd like to watch it eventually, but don't currently have good access to a connection where I should be torrenting), and I would agree it *is* scary. To me, though, it falls sorta in the same realm as the Matrix - a seemingly logical extension of technology that somehwat ignores the fact that humans are cranky enough to eventually prevent the darkest aspects of that from widely occurring.
...and some people were mistrustful of photography because they thought that cameras could 'steal' their souls, or worried that automobiles traveling faster than 50mph would rip our bodies apart. This is really like saying that 1984 is the "logical conclusion" to the internet and government intervention, when in truth we, as a society, are generally pretty good at voicing concerns, and we're able to deal with and temper those concerns.
I'd certainly agree that there are some major negative side effects of this technology, so in the end I think comments like yours are good to bring up. I still, however, remain pretty hopeful that this is a technology that will have tangible, positive effects on our lives. Eventually.
It's not that unique and the wearable aspect is just a monocle.
The uniqueness is "wearable" + "computing"; If monocles overlayed dynamic information, then you'd be right. Segways combined wheeled transportation with gyros, which in the end doesn't provide any additional functionality; stationary stability doesn't add much to personal transportation.
What does it let you do that a smart phone doesn't do already?
It opens the door for virtually placing that information in the real world, something that hasn't been done on a large scale. While smartphones are pretty revolutionary, in that they give us powerful network-connected computers to use almost anywhere, wearable computing is a pretty significant innovation in displaying information.
Think about it like this - in general, computers haven't changed that much in 20 years; the last significant change was broadband networking (and thus, the internet) becoming ubiquitous. Since then, we've still been using physical devices for input and output, we've just been able to increase the quality of each. Smartphones made computing that much more mobile, but we're still typing stuff in and reading stuff back on a screen.
Virtual displays, made possible by wearable computing, *do* allow for radical changes, namely the first real marriage of real and virtual worlds. Helloooooo Holodeck!
The comparison with Segway isn't really fair, given it wasn't really "new" (wheeled transportation has been pretty common for awhile). Wearable computing, OTOH, is breaking into some uncharted territory and has a lot of potential for interesting/innovative stuff that we really haven't seen before.
I don't really understand the massive backlash of hate Glass seems to be getting. Maybe it's because it's Google, and they're not really being too secretive about it, so it's in our faces more than standard R&D. I, personally, am pretty excited about the technology in general; it opens up the possibility of cool stuff that's very much been sci-fi, or too rare/clunky to be useful in every day life (HUDs aren't anything new): virtual interfaces a la Minority Report, high quality video without physical screens, incredibly immersive games/media, etc.
What I *am* worried(/interested) about is the direction this stuff is going to take, and if we're going down the Matrix/Borg path. Will we be seeing virtual ads overlayed on buildings everywhere (probably)? How many privacy concerns will there be, beyond just recording/taking pictures (a lot)?
In the end, however, a lot of the concerns we have with the current incarnation of Glass, and where the future will take us, aren't any different than the concerns about all other new technology - they exist, and we need to figure out how to best handle them as a society, instead of freaking out.
I don't really agree with this guy, based on how texting is currently done. Most of us like reading their texts (or proofreading speech-to-texts), and few of us use text-to-speech, so the "eyes free" situation really isn't that common. I *really* don't think that using "Siri is just as risky as texting" is misleading at all, in our current accepted usage.
To some degree, I'd agree with your point on phablets, but in my (very anecdotal) experience, those I know with the Note 2 still like having a larger (7"+) device when they're at home, in situations that laptops would've otherwise reigned. While people don't want two devices, they also don't necessarily love a single device that does two things poorly.
Eh, I'm the complete opposite. My Nexus 7 has almost completely replaced my laptop and phone (Galaxy Nexus) in my home for "general" usage (web browsing, emailing, e-reading, and watching videos). Hell, I only use a laptop at home for gaming and programming now.
clunky tablets look to have the shelf-life of DVD players
DVDs have had solid usage in my household for over a decade, and smartphones have been wildly ubiquitous for like 6 years (and don't seem to be going anywhere soon).
Wearable computing definitely seems like the direction we're ultimately going in, but even over the next few years it'll probably be more an extension of a smartphone than a replacement for it. Also, video/ebooks/web browsing (all of which are far better on tablets than smartphones) probably won't move over to wearable computing until stuff like this becomes mainstream.
Five years is a very long time in computing
In terms of computing power, yes. In terms of general platforms, not really, no.
Most tablets sold are used for cutting fruits in games and just because "everyone has one".
Dunno, I'd disagree. My tablet has replaced my laptop in the living room for basic web browsing, my e-reader completely, is small enough (I have the Nexus 7) to use on my work commute, but is larger than my phone in a way that makes it far more pleasant for reading books, watching videos, and browsing the web. Web browsing is actually kind of a big one, since tablets really don't have to deal with mobile browsing like the vast majority of cell phones do.
phones can do most of the stuff a tablet can plus all the phone functionality
I look at this the other way - tablets can do everything smartphone can (including texting!), minus place calls, plus a few more things because of the screen real estate.
It's less the automatic LinkedIn spam as it is the users who abuse it, while LinkedIn turns a blind eye. Their TOS specifically mentions that users cannot contact other users unsolicited, and yet I'm constantly barraged by recruiters who (using the built-in requests) indicate we've "worked together" (despite never having met, or having had any mutual contacts), attempting to just add me to their huge list of LinkedIn contacts.
Unfortunately, those are the sort of users that LinkedIn wants, and that behavior is neither curbed nor stopped.
Yeah. And the devs of this game have repeated referred to Game Dev Story as the main inspiration. Ripping it off, maybe, but at least they're lovingly ripping it off.
Yeah, exactly. Personally, I've been pretty happy with T-Mobile, and have brought my own device (heh, the online stuff doesn't even recognize my Galaxy Nexus), even before they did these new plans. Now I can decide whether or not to go to the HTC One, although I'd like to wait until the Cyanogen dudes get it all working there.
Slashdot Mirror
Yup, I'd agree, and if/when my employer implements such software I will likely disable work email on my phone.
Depending on the software they force employees to install: yes, not sure/maybe, yes, and yes.
Remote phone management software already exists and is already being used at places where employees can use their own devices; that software (among other things) allows for remote data wiping in the event the phone is lost or an employee is let go.
I didn't RTFA, but generally I'd assume that positions that require on-call access to an employee would provide a phone to those without their own phones, or who just refuse to use theirs for work. Our IT staff already has an on-call phone that's either given to the on-call person, or is forwarded to their personal cell phone if they don't want to lug two around.
Yeah, there's software out there to do exactly that, that a lot of employers (I'm in the network security field) already require to be installed if you want to connect to work resources.
Thank god for implants; Google Glass is too clunky.
I usually read 'meant' as just referring to the original intent, which is less forceful than a requirement.
I'll definitely check it out; I hadn't even heard of the show before your comment, so thanks!!
I read through the wiki synopsis (off topic - I'd like to watch it eventually, but don't currently have good access to a connection where I should be torrenting), and I would agree it *is* scary. To me, though, it falls sorta in the same realm as the Matrix - a seemingly logical extension of technology that somehwat ignores the fact that humans are cranky enough to eventually prevent the darkest aspects of that from widely occurring.
...and some people were mistrustful of photography because they thought that cameras could 'steal' their souls, or worried that automobiles traveling faster than 50mph would rip our bodies apart. This is really like saying that 1984 is the "logical conclusion" to the internet and government intervention, when in truth we, as a society, are generally pretty good at voicing concerns, and we're able to deal with and temper those concerns.
I'd certainly agree that there are some major negative side effects of this technology, so in the end I think comments like yours are good to bring up. I still, however, remain pretty hopeful that this is a technology that will have tangible, positive effects on our lives. Eventually.
Who said it was a rule?
Pfft, you crazy early adopters. I'm waiting for the retinal implants (support to be added in Android Tiramisu).
The uniqueness is "wearable" + "computing"; If monocles overlayed dynamic information, then you'd be right. Segways combined wheeled transportation with gyros, which in the end doesn't provide any additional functionality; stationary stability doesn't add much to personal transportation.
It opens the door for virtually placing that information in the real world, something that hasn't been done on a large scale. While smartphones are pretty revolutionary, in that they give us powerful network-connected computers to use almost anywhere, wearable computing is a pretty significant innovation in displaying information.
Think about it like this - in general, computers haven't changed that much in 20 years; the last significant change was broadband networking (and thus, the internet) becoming ubiquitous. Since then, we've still been using physical devices for input and output, we've just been able to increase the quality of each. Smartphones made computing that much more mobile, but we're still typing stuff in and reading stuff back on a screen.
Virtual displays, made possible by wearable computing, *do* allow for radical changes, namely the first real marriage of real and virtual worlds. Helloooooo Holodeck!
The comparison with Segway isn't really fair, given it wasn't really "new" (wheeled transportation has been pretty common for awhile). Wearable computing, OTOH, is breaking into some uncharted territory and has a lot of potential for interesting/innovative stuff that we really haven't seen before.
I don't really understand the massive backlash of hate Glass seems to be getting. Maybe it's because it's Google, and they're not really being too secretive about it, so it's in our faces more than standard R&D. I, personally, am pretty excited about the technology in general; it opens up the possibility of cool stuff that's very much been sci-fi, or too rare/clunky to be useful in every day life (HUDs aren't anything new): virtual interfaces a la Minority Report, high quality video without physical screens, incredibly immersive games/media, etc.
What I *am* worried(/interested) about is the direction this stuff is going to take, and if we're going down the Matrix/Borg path. Will we be seeing virtual ads overlayed on buildings everywhere (probably)? How many privacy concerns will there be, beyond just recording/taking pictures (a lot)?
In the end, however, a lot of the concerns we have with the current incarnation of Glass, and where the future will take us, aren't any different than the concerns about all other new technology - they exist, and we need to figure out how to best handle them as a society, instead of freaking out.
Heh, reminds me of this.
I don't really agree with this guy, based on how texting is currently done. Most of us like reading their texts (or proofreading speech-to-texts), and few of us use text-to-speech, so the "eyes free" situation really isn't that common. I *really* don't think that using "Siri is just as risky as texting" is misleading at all, in our current accepted usage.
To some degree, I'd agree with your point on phablets, but in my (very anecdotal) experience, those I know with the Note 2 still like having a larger (7"+) device when they're at home, in situations that laptops would've otherwise reigned. While people don't want two devices, they also don't necessarily love a single device that does two things poorly.
This. Really liked that you referenced flexible screens. Sure, tablets will evolve, but I highly doubt they're going away.
Eh, I'm the complete opposite. My Nexus 7 has almost completely replaced my laptop and phone (Galaxy Nexus) in my home for "general" usage (web browsing, emailing, e-reading, and watching videos). Hell, I only use a laptop at home for gaming and programming now.
DVDs have had solid usage in my household for over a decade, and smartphones have been wildly ubiquitous for like 6 years (and don't seem to be going anywhere soon).
Wearable computing definitely seems like the direction we're ultimately going in, but even over the next few years it'll probably be more an extension of a smartphone than a replacement for it. Also, video/ebooks/web browsing (all of which are far better on tablets than smartphones) probably won't move over to wearable computing until stuff like this becomes mainstream.
In terms of computing power, yes. In terms of general platforms, not really, no.
Dunno, I'd disagree. My tablet has replaced my laptop in the living room for basic web browsing, my e-reader completely, is small enough (I have the Nexus 7) to use on my work commute, but is larger than my phone in a way that makes it far more pleasant for reading books, watching videos, and browsing the web. Web browsing is actually kind of a big one, since tablets really don't have to deal with mobile browsing like the vast majority of cell phones do.
I look at this the other way - tablets can do everything smartphone can (including texting!), minus place calls, plus a few more things because of the screen real estate.
It's less the automatic LinkedIn spam as it is the users who abuse it, while LinkedIn turns a blind eye. Their TOS specifically mentions that users cannot contact other users unsolicited, and yet I'm constantly barraged by recruiters who (using the built-in requests) indicate we've "worked together" (despite never having met, or having had any mutual contacts), attempting to just add me to their huge list of LinkedIn contacts.
Unfortunately, those are the sort of users that LinkedIn wants, and that behavior is neither curbed nor stopped.
Yeah. And the devs of this game have repeated referred to Game Dev Story as the main inspiration. Ripping it off, maybe, but at least they're lovingly ripping it off.
Probably (slightly expensive) pot.
Yeah, exactly. Personally, I've been pretty happy with T-Mobile, and have brought my own device (heh, the online stuff doesn't even recognize my Galaxy Nexus), even before they did these new plans. Now I can decide whether or not to go to the HTC One, although I'd like to wait until the Cyanogen dudes get it all working there.