5 ms·

I really hope Apple can show enough restraint to not make these glasses cameras or video recorders like Google glass.

by caseyf7 7y ago

kgwxd 7y ago
How would they augment reality without a camera?
- selectodude 7y ago
  Make the screens transparent.
  - wongarsu 7y ago
    Everybody has transparent screens on their AR googles, but how do you overlay information over real objects if the device has no clue what real objects exist and where they are? Without cameras you are restricted to being essentially another screen for your smartphone.
    - swebs 7y ago
      >the device has no clue what real objects exist and where they are The technology in the article solves that
      - umeshunni 7y ago
        Eh, no. UWB solves the problem of locating yourself in relation to other UWB devices. It doesn't help you identify non-UWB devices (like a wall) that AR glasses might want to know about.
- caseyf7 7y ago
  There’s a big difference between a camera used in real-time for AR vs a camera recording everything to disk and sending it to the cloud for analysis and data mining.
- judge2020 7y ago
  My only guess is the glasses screen not relying on a camera and something like soli would be used instead of a camera for detecting air interactions. https://atap.google.com/soli/ https://atap.google.com/soli/
wongarsu 7y ago
It pretty much has to have cameras for working AR. The MS Hololens has 6 cameras. Any solutions have to be software-side, like an external indicator light when images are saved in some form. I think Google Glass attempted that too.
rowanG077 7y ago
This is a technical impossibility right now. Any inside out tracking will need at least one camera, multiple if you want it to be good.
goodcjw2 7y ago
I think the interesting question to follow up is: "why not camera"? Is it intuitively bad? How bad? When weighing against the benefits, is camera still worth it? I'm not 100% sure, just a couple random points: 1/ The first concern pops into my head is having a recording device nearly always on. In reality, there is no way you can prevent people to take photos and/or videos using smartphone when something interesting is happening in the public. It takes less than 5 seconds for people to take the phone out of their pockets and start recording. Then what's the real difference between camera on the face or camera in the pocket? 2/ The Glass-Hole issue. People always blame the camera as the ultimate evil. I'm not that sure. Remember, the original Google Glass was basically a piece of not-that-useful-to-put-it-nicely gadget that costs $1500. Honestly, back then, I thought whoever is buying those stuff that just overpaid nerdy douchebags (I'm thinking that way mainly because I cannot afford it). I'm not sure having a camera is the biggest issue; but having a camera is probably the biggest issue that you can publicly talk about. 3/ Trust issue, i.e. whether Google/Apple/FB are secretively collecting those video feed. Or even worse: what if the business model of future AR products depending on collecting those video feed.
- mewse 7y ago
  When someone is holding up their phone or actual camera to take a photo, that’s very visible and obvious to everyone in the area what they’re doing, and social feedback can be delivered if the usage is inappropriate. That’s very different from an accessory like glasses, which are typically on somebody’s face all the time, whether or not they’re being used for photo functionality, with a hidden camera constantly pointed at whoever they’re talking to or whatever they’re looking at. You may never know that a photo or video or other recordings of you, of your property, of your company secrets, of national security, etc are imminent or already taking place. “What’s the real difference” is kind of absurdly obvious, yes?
  - goodcjw2 7y ago
    Apologize if I didn't make my idea clear enough. Seems there are two topics here: 1. being able to use a camera & 2. being able to conceal a camera. My originally argument is focusing on point 1: people can already _use_ smartphones to take pictures and to record videos as easily/convenient as using a wearable camera. On the point 2. I totally agree with you, wearables will make it easier to conceal the camera and that is a bad thing. I guess the takeaway here is that the camera isn't the problem, the problem is being able to conceal the camera.
john_minsk 7y ago
I really hope they can figure out how to get camera record full day without recharge...

I really hope Apple can show enough restraint to not make these glasses cameras or video recorders like Google glass.

kgwxd 7y ago

How would they augment reality without a camera?

selectodude 7y ago
Make the screens transparent.
- wongarsu 7y ago
  Everybody has transparent screens on their AR googles, but how do you overlay information over real objects if the device has no clue what real objects exist and where they are? Without cameras you are restricted to being essentially another screen for your smartphone.
  - swebs 7y ago
    >the device has no clue what real objects exist and where they are The technology in the article solves that
    - umeshunni 7y ago
      Eh, no. UWB solves the problem of locating yourself in relation to other UWB devices. It doesn't help you identify non-UWB devices (like a wall) that AR glasses might want to know about.
caseyf7 7y ago
There’s a big difference between a camera used in real-time for AR vs a camera recording everything to disk and sending it to the cloud for analysis and data mining.
judge2020 7y ago
My only guess is the glasses screen not relying on a camera and something like soli would be used instead of a camera for detecting air interactions. https://atap.google.com/soli/ https://atap.google.com/soli/

wongarsu 7y ago

It pretty much has to have cameras for working AR. The MS Hololens has 6 cameras. Any solutions have to be software-side, like an external indicator light when images are saved in some form. I think Google Glass attempted that too.

rowanG077 7y ago

This is a technical impossibility right now. Any inside out tracking will need at least one camera, multiple if you want it to be good.

goodcjw2 7y ago

I think the interesting question to follow up is: "why not camera"? Is it intuitively bad? How bad? When weighing against the benefits, is camera still worth it? I'm not 100% sure, just a couple random points: 1/ The first concern pops into my head is having a recording device nearly always on. In reality, there is no way you can prevent people to take photos and/or videos using smartphone when something interesting is happening in the public. It takes less than 5 seconds for people to take the phone out of their pockets and start recording. Then what's the real difference between camera on the face or camera in the pocket? 2/ The Glass-Hole issue. People always blame the camera as the ultimate evil. I'm not that sure. Remember, the original Google Glass was basically a piece of not-that-useful-to-put-it-nicely gadget that costs $1500. Honestly, back then, I thought whoever is buying those stuff that just overpaid nerdy douchebags (I'm thinking that way mainly because I cannot afford it). I'm not sure having a camera is the biggest issue; but having a camera is probably the biggest issue that you can publicly talk about. 3/ Trust issue, i.e. whether Google/Apple/FB are secretively collecting those video feed. Or even worse: what if the business model of future AR products depending on collecting those video feed.

mewse 7y ago
When someone is holding up their phone or actual camera to take a photo, that’s very visible and obvious to everyone in the area what they’re doing, and social feedback can be delivered if the usage is inappropriate. That’s very different from an accessory like glasses, which are typically on somebody’s face all the time, whether or not they’re being used for photo functionality, with a hidden camera constantly pointed at whoever they’re talking to or whatever they’re looking at. You may never know that a photo or video or other recordings of you, of your property, of your company secrets, of national security, etc are imminent or already taking place. “What’s the real difference” is kind of absurdly obvious, yes?
- goodcjw2 7y ago
  Apologize if I didn't make my idea clear enough. Seems there are two topics here: 1. being able to use a camera & 2. being able to conceal a camera. My originally argument is focusing on point 1: people can already _use_ smartphones to take pictures and to record videos as easily/convenient as using a wearable camera. On the point 2. I totally agree with you, wearables will make it easier to conceal the camera and that is a bad thing. I guess the takeaway here is that the camera isn't the problem, the problem is being able to conceal the camera.

john_minsk 7y ago

I really hope they can figure out how to get camera record full day without recharge...