5 ms·

Much as it's maligned, the original did attempt to solve some genuine problems and narrowing the audience / focus seems sensible. Given a lot of the negative p

Much as it's maligned, the original did attempt to solve some genuine problems and narrowing the audience / focus seems sensible. Given a lot of the negative points were around the reaction of others to having a camera pointed at them, I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use. Perhaps a little less of a concern in a professional use environment, but it still helps if you have an easy way not to wind people up, eg if you nip away from the place you actively use it in but don't want to take them off completely; would be a Glass equivalent of not going to talk to a shop assistant with your headphones blaring away or whilst on the phone neither of which are particularly polite!

ddebernardy 7y ago
> I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use Perhaps this might help? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-dismisses-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid...
jackbrookes 7y ago
Well, eventually it seems Glass will become a full augmented reality system which basically relies on cameras to map the world
Sir_Substance 7y ago
>Given a lot of the negative points were around the reaction of others to having a camera pointed at them, I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use. That actually doesn't really solve the problem. People sometimes use cameras in the most inappropriate of places. If a friend of mine has a motorbike accident and breaks an arm and someone from the side of the street goes "coooool" and pulls out his phone and starts streaming, I can storm over there and slap the phone out of his hand. You may or may not like the idea that I might do that, but I think it's appropriate and if that person disagrees then fuck 'em, they can argue it in front of a judge in small claims court. The problem with glass, even with a flip down camera, is that /I have to hit you in the face/ to do the same thing. There's no way to make a glasshole stop filming except to stick my mittens near their eyes, and I'd totally agree with any judge that said my going for someones face to make them stop filming is a far more aggressive action than slapping a phone out of their hand. But therein lies the problem. If you don't have the social awareness to know that you shouldn't be filming someone, if you're using glass I can't force you to stop filming without severely escalating the situation. It's a socially inappropriate design.
- DenisM 7y ago
  > I can storm over there and slap the phone out of his hand [...] they can argue it in front of a judge in small claims court More likely you will be arguing in the criminal court on charge of assault. Videotaped, too.
- blincoln 7y ago
  What are you going to do when it becomes easy to record everything without there even being an obvious camera lens? It's possible today, just not with an unmodified consumer phone.
  - Sir_Substance 7y ago
    We're already seeing filming-in-public laws tightening up thanks to things like creep-shots. Laws take a long time to be revised. By and large, our public photography laws are still based in a time when most photos would become a negative which sat in a box for 30 years and then got thrown out. I hope that we will see better progress in the area of rights of insignificance and the quiet enjoyment of ones life before we reach that point. If we don't, it'll be a bumpy ride until the law catches up.
    - Nicksil 7y ago
      >We're already seeing filming-in-public laws tightening Is this true? Where and how so?
- judge2020 7y ago
  Aren't sidewalks and streets public spaces? Unless you're on private property (that you own), you can't legally slap someone, nor can you slap their phone out of their hand.
  - Sir_Substance 7y ago
    Would you still feel the same way if someone was filming your child?
aeroevan 7y ago
> Given a lot of the negative points were around the reaction of others to having a camera pointed at them, I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use. As one of the glass explorers (who still has and uses my explorer edition from time to time), this is something that I never understood. The entire prism would light up if the camera was in use (it's easy to see when the display is on). And you either have to use voice commands or would have to touch the device to take a picture, both of which are fairly obvious. It's much easier to take a discrete photo or video with a cell phone. But I suppose this is another case omitting one or two facts to completely change the narrative.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  People don't innately understand exactly how the different pieces of hardware are tied together. You're pointing a camera at them, and even when you're right that a secret photo is currently impossible, it's one firmware update away from having a timelapse mode that doesn't show any sign of activity. The facts aren't missing to change the narrative, it's because the average person doesn't know and it could change, so those facts don't fix the problem.
- Zeebrommer 7y ago
  How are people supposed to know all this about a new device that they have only read stories about? Even then, a surprising amount of people in my well educated affluent high tech bubble tape their laptop webcams closed because they don't trust the indicator light right next to it.
  - etatoby 7y ago
    What, you don't? That indicator light is one firmware hack away from being turned off. Granted, if someone gets into my laptop I have bigger worries than having stealth selfies stolen, but still.
    - marquis-chacha 7y ago
      The way I see it, if the adversary is able to remotely access my computer to the extent they're hacking the firmware, my webcam being turned on is the least of my concerns. In my eye, taping the webcam is akin to ROT13'ing my private keys.
bonestamp2 7y ago
> I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera Yes, and maybe even make a camera free version (some basic cell phones are available without cameras for private work environments). This would make the product much more friendly for customer facing applications too. Of course, it would take away one input method, but there are use cases where this is acceptable. I too was one of the original explorers and we had 5 units in our lab (working on automotive manufacturing and service applications). We did not need a camera for our use cases, and it might even bring the price down slightly (although I don't believe price is a considerable factor for this type of technology in an enterprise). I worked on warehouse/picking software at one time and Glass would be perfect for the picker to be reminded of the quantity of the item they're currently picking. Sure, you could fit more info, but Pick quantity is one of the most common picking mistakes since nearly 100% of picks only require a single unit to be picked, so the human brain tends to ignore the value that rarely ever changes since it seems like noise (and is most of the time).
- nprateem 7y ago
  > Yes, and maybe even make a camera free version Aren't they just called "glasses"?
  - IggleSniggle 7y ago
    Most glasses don't have a HUD built-in
    - logicprog 7y ago
      Cut him some slack, he's probably from the future-- I'll bet glasses with HUDs are pretty commonplace there.

ddebernardy 7y ago

> I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use Perhaps this might help? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-dismisses-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid...

jackbrookes 7y ago

Well, eventually it seems Glass will become a full augmented reality system which basically relies on cameras to map the world

Sir_Substance 7y ago

>Given a lot of the negative points were around the reaction of others to having a camera pointed at them, I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use. That actually doesn't really solve the problem. People sometimes use cameras in the most inappropriate of places. If a friend of mine has a motorbike accident and breaks an arm and someone from the side of the street goes "coooool" and pulls out his phone and starts streaming, I can storm over there and slap the phone out of his hand. You may or may not like the idea that I might do that, but I think it's appropriate and if that person disagrees then fuck 'em, they can argue it in front of a judge in small claims court. The problem with glass, even with a flip down camera, is that /I have to hit you in the face/ to do the same thing. There's no way to make a glasshole stop filming except to stick my mittens near their eyes, and I'd totally agree with any judge that said my going for someones face to make them stop filming is a far more aggressive action than slapping a phone out of their hand. But therein lies the problem. If you don't have the social awareness to know that you shouldn't be filming someone, if you're using glass I can't force you to stop filming without severely escalating the situation. It's a socially inappropriate design.

DenisM 7y ago
> I can storm over there and slap the phone out of his hand [...] they can argue it in front of a judge in small claims court More likely you will be arguing in the criminal court on charge of assault. Videotaped, too.
blincoln 7y ago
What are you going to do when it becomes easy to record everything without there even being an obvious camera lens? It's possible today, just not with an unmodified consumer phone.
- Sir_Substance 7y ago
  We're already seeing filming-in-public laws tightening up thanks to things like creep-shots. Laws take a long time to be revised. By and large, our public photography laws are still based in a time when most photos would become a negative which sat in a box for 30 years and then got thrown out. I hope that we will see better progress in the area of rights of insignificance and the quiet enjoyment of ones life before we reach that point. If we don't, it'll be a bumpy ride until the law catches up.
  - Nicksil 7y ago
    >We're already seeing filming-in-public laws tightening Is this true? Where and how so?
judge2020 7y ago
Aren't sidewalks and streets public spaces? Unless you're on private property (that you own), you can't legally slap someone, nor can you slap their phone out of their hand.
- Sir_Substance 7y ago
  Would you still feel the same way if someone was filming your child?

aeroevan 7y ago

> Given a lot of the negative points were around the reaction of others to having a camera pointed at them, I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera part as a way to physically indicate it wasn't in use. As one of the glass explorers (who still has and uses my explorer edition from time to time), this is something that I never understood. The entire prism would light up if the camera was in use (it's easy to see when the display is on). And you either have to use voice commands or would have to touch the device to take a picture, both of which are fairly obvious. It's much easier to take a discrete photo or video with a cell phone. But I suppose this is another case omitting one or two facts to completely change the narrative.

Dylan16807 7y ago
People don't innately understand exactly how the different pieces of hardware are tied together. You're pointing a camera at them, and even when you're right that a secret photo is currently impossible, it's one firmware update away from having a timelapse mode that doesn't show any sign of activity. The facts aren't missing to change the narrative, it's because the average person doesn't know and it could change, so those facts don't fix the problem.
Zeebrommer 7y ago
How are people supposed to know all this about a new device that they have only read stories about? Even then, a surprising amount of people in my well educated affluent high tech bubble tape their laptop webcams closed because they don't trust the indicator light right next to it.
- etatoby 7y ago
  What, you don't? That indicator light is one firmware hack away from being turned off. Granted, if someone gets into my laptop I have bigger worries than having stealth selfies stolen, but still.
  - marquis-chacha 7y ago
    The way I see it, if the adversary is able to remotely access my computer to the extent they're hacking the firmware, my webcam being turned on is the least of my concerns. In my eye, taping the webcam is akin to ROT13'ing my private keys.

bonestamp2 7y ago

> I never got why they didn't make it easy to flip up the camera Yes, and maybe even make a camera free version (some basic cell phones are available without cameras for private work environments). This would make the product much more friendly for customer facing applications too. Of course, it would take away one input method, but there are use cases where this is acceptable. I too was one of the original explorers and we had 5 units in our lab (working on automotive manufacturing and service applications). We did not need a camera for our use cases, and it might even bring the price down slightly (although I don't believe price is a considerable factor for this type of technology in an enterprise). I worked on warehouse/picking software at one time and Glass would be perfect for the picker to be reminded of the quantity of the item they're currently picking. Sure, you could fit more info, but Pick quantity is one of the most common picking mistakes since nearly 100% of picks only require a single unit to be picked, so the human brain tends to ignore the value that rarely ever changes since it seems like noise (and is most of the time).

nprateem 7y ago
> Yes, and maybe even make a camera free version Aren't they just called "glasses"?
- IggleSniggle 7y ago
  Most glasses don't have a HUD built-in
  - logicprog 7y ago
    Cut him some slack, he's probably from the future-- I'll bet glasses with HUDs are pretty commonplace there.