5 ms·

For people that read past the headline (probably not many judging by the comments): "We don't let people film other people or take photos unwanted of other peo

For people that read past the headline (probably not many judging by the comments): "We don't let people film other people or take photos unwanted of other people in the bar because it's kind of a private place people go." So filming / taking pictures is already not allowed. It feels like publicity stunt, but nothing particularly weird, imho.

derefr 14y ago
There are things HMDs are useful for besides recording/storing sense data. In fact, I would say, so many of them (and growing further with each new development), that a policy like this will eventually just become impossible to enforce--it would be like asking people to leave their phones at the door, or perhaps even their prescription glasses. But, of course, this is still a problem that needs to be solved; never before have the barriers to recording everyone around you, unbeknownst to them, been so low. (Whereas before, only professionals--spies, reporters, hostage-negotiators, etc.--really bothered to go through all the schlep required.) So, perhaps, in the future, a law will be passed requiring HMDs (and phones, actually--there's no reason they don't also count) to get a "privacy-zone" feature. Within range of any wi-fi AP emitting a "privacy-zone beacon", the HMD would be legally required to disable its recording features. This brings the barrier-of-entry back up to "have to jailbreak your HMD and override the restriction", which is similar to "buy a gizmo from a spy-store" in terms of difficulty, so I would say it's equitable. Of course, then you could get police walking around emitting privacy-zone beacons, and other totalitarian effects. The real underlying problem, causing things like that, is that completely technological systems are prone to social exploitation, because our own social mores aren't carried over into the technological domain. So, instead, we would want to rely partially on the technology, and partially on social enforcement. A good balance might be: entering a privacy zone prompts you to disable your recording--a single "click" will do so, but you can ignore/cancel the request. Once you've complied, you can't re-enable recording until you leave the privacy zone. Also, the privacy-zone beacon will be aware of whether you've complied with the request. Thus, as the owner of a private establishment (e.g. a bar), you can simply activate your privacy-zone beacon and attenuate its range out to some distance beyond the perimeter of your building--and then have a bouncer who won't let people in until they see, among whatever other conditions--that they have assented to disabling recording.
- dexen 14y ago
  http://www.zdnet.com/apple-patent-could-remotely-disable-protesters-phone-cameras-7000003640/ http://www.zdnet.com/apple-patent-could-remotely-disable-pro... using infrared emiters.
- coldtea 14y ago
  >There are things HMDs are useful for besides recording/storing sense data. In fact, I would say, so many of them (and growing further with each new development), that a policy like this will eventually just become impossible to enforce--it would be like asking people to leave their phones at the door, or perhaps even their prescription glasses. Really? I would like to read a list of those "uses". Except if you talk about some kind of accessibility accessories, there's nothing that makes those glasses even remotely a necessity. Even something like your glucose levels you can watch them from a device that's not a glass with a camera attached. Like your smartphone or a watch.
  - derefr 14y ago
    Three that immediately jump to mind: * Putting a "minimap" in your field of vision as you walk down the street. * Letting you read a book--or consume an ordinary chatroom/news feed/other auto-updating thing--while standing in a packed subway car, or while laying in bed (no more weird-sideways-phone-holding-time), and never having to "put it down" when something needs your attention; you just look away, and then look back. * Giving you to-do lists that you'll finally always check, because they can actually get "in your face." For that matter, spaced-repetition flash cards that come up exactly when you need them to optimally memorize things. Also, a few more that involve sensory data input, but only to process it into something else (these could be high-level APIs that can safely be accessed whether or not "real recording" is enabled): * Identify your contacts with visual recognition [can be just stored on your device--not some Panopticon database], and automatically pull up their contact cards/Facebook profiles. Everyone you've met gets a nametag hovering over them like in an MMO. * Finally make QR codes useful: look at one and immediately see the thing it links to overlaid--and then bookmark it with a glance. This extends to other kinds of barcodes--for example, being able to see the lowest price for an item in a store by just looking at the UPC. * Identify images, songs, movies, TV shows, etc., through passive submission to something like Tineye, Shazam, etc., or just by a "backing track" laced into the audio/video, that the HMD can detect. Never "lose" something you liked just because you didn't get to find out its name. * Pair the HMD to a TV, then pause the stream whenever you look away from it. Pair the HMD to a computer, then lock it whenever you aren't interacting with it.
danieldk 14y ago
> So filming / taking pictures is already not allowed. It feels like publicity stunt, but nothing particularly weird, imho. Google Glass is a new level of privacy violation. At least with a camera or phone one can see if someone is just playing a game or trying to record you. With Glass there is no visible difference.
raphman 14y ago
The difference is that taking photos or filming with a mobile phone or digital camera is an explicit action that is usually obvious to the people being filmed. With always-on gadgets like Google Glass, you can never be sure whether the wearer is recording you or not. I guess that some people wearing Google Glass might not even be aware that they are violating someone else's right to privacy. Therefore, it is certainly helpful to explicitly declare one's place a 'no recording' zone - if only to avoid events such as [1]. [1] http://eyetap.blogspot.de/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdonalds-for.html http://eyetap.blogspot.de/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdona...
- jschuur 14y ago
  Don't you have to say 'OK glass, take a picture'? Seems a lot more obvious than using your phone, unless you can also tap the side of the case to take a pic. I could be casually checking my phone, and people on the other end wouldn't know I'm using the camera in a noisy place. How good is noise cancellation on Glass anyway? Would it still work in a busy bar?

derefr 14y ago

There are things HMDs are useful for besides recording/storing sense data. In fact, I would say, so many of them (and growing further with each new development), that a policy like this will eventually just become impossible to enforce--it would be like asking people to leave their phones at the door, or perhaps even their prescription glasses. But, of course, this is still a problem that needs to be solved; never before have the barriers to recording everyone around you, unbeknownst to them, been so low. (Whereas before, only professionals--spies, reporters, hostage-negotiators, etc.--really bothered to go through all the schlep required.) So, perhaps, in the future, a law will be passed requiring HMDs (and phones, actually--there's no reason they don't also count) to get a "privacy-zone" feature. Within range of any wi-fi AP emitting a "privacy-zone beacon", the HMD would be legally required to disable its recording features. This brings the barrier-of-entry back up to "have to jailbreak your HMD and override the restriction", which is similar to "buy a gizmo from a spy-store" in terms of difficulty, so I would say it's equitable. Of course, then you could get police walking around emitting privacy-zone beacons, and other totalitarian effects. The real underlying problem, causing things like that, is that completely technological systems are prone to social exploitation, because our own social mores aren't carried over into the technological domain. So, instead, we would want to rely partially on the technology, and partially on social enforcement. A good balance might be: entering a privacy zone prompts you to disable your recording--a single "click" will do so, but you can ignore/cancel the request. Once you've complied, you can't re-enable recording until you leave the privacy zone. Also, the privacy-zone beacon will be aware of whether you've complied with the request. Thus, as the owner of a private establishment (e.g. a bar), you can simply activate your privacy-zone beacon and attenuate its range out to some distance beyond the perimeter of your building--and then have a bouncer who won't let people in until they see, among whatever other conditions--that they have assented to disabling recording.

dexen 14y ago
http://www.zdnet.com/apple-patent-could-remotely-disable-protesters-phone-cameras-7000003640/ http://www.zdnet.com/apple-patent-could-remotely-disable-pro... using infrared emiters.
coldtea 14y ago
>There are things HMDs are useful for besides recording/storing sense data. In fact, I would say, so many of them (and growing further with each new development), that a policy like this will eventually just become impossible to enforce--it would be like asking people to leave their phones at the door, or perhaps even their prescription glasses. Really? I would like to read a list of those "uses". Except if you talk about some kind of accessibility accessories, there's nothing that makes those glasses even remotely a necessity. Even something like your glucose levels you can watch them from a device that's not a glass with a camera attached. Like your smartphone or a watch.
- derefr 14y ago
  Three that immediately jump to mind: * Putting a "minimap" in your field of vision as you walk down the street. * Letting you read a book--or consume an ordinary chatroom/news feed/other auto-updating thing--while standing in a packed subway car, or while laying in bed (no more weird-sideways-phone-holding-time), and never having to "put it down" when something needs your attention; you just look away, and then look back. * Giving you to-do lists that you'll finally always check, because they can actually get "in your face." For that matter, spaced-repetition flash cards that come up exactly when you need them to optimally memorize things. Also, a few more that involve sensory data input, but only to process it into something else (these could be high-level APIs that can safely be accessed whether or not "real recording" is enabled): * Identify your contacts with visual recognition [can be just stored on your device--not some Panopticon database], and automatically pull up their contact cards/Facebook profiles. Everyone you've met gets a nametag hovering over them like in an MMO. * Finally make QR codes useful: look at one and immediately see the thing it links to overlaid--and then bookmark it with a glance. This extends to other kinds of barcodes--for example, being able to see the lowest price for an item in a store by just looking at the UPC. * Identify images, songs, movies, TV shows, etc., through passive submission to something like Tineye, Shazam, etc., or just by a "backing track" laced into the audio/video, that the HMD can detect. Never "lose" something you liked just because you didn't get to find out its name. * Pair the HMD to a TV, then pause the stream whenever you look away from it. Pair the HMD to a computer, then lock it whenever you aren't interacting with it.

danieldk 14y ago

> So filming / taking pictures is already not allowed. It feels like publicity stunt, but nothing particularly weird, imho. Google Glass is a new level of privacy violation. At least with a camera or phone one can see if someone is just playing a game or trying to record you. With Glass there is no visible difference.

raphman 14y ago

The difference is that taking photos or filming with a mobile phone or digital camera is an explicit action that is usually obvious to the people being filmed. With always-on gadgets like Google Glass, you can never be sure whether the wearer is recording you or not. I guess that some people wearing Google Glass might not even be aware that they are violating someone else's right to privacy. Therefore, it is certainly helpful to explicitly declare one's place a 'no recording' zone - if only to avoid events such as [1]. [1] http://eyetap.blogspot.de/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdonalds-for.html http://eyetap.blogspot.de/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdona...

jschuur 14y ago
Don't you have to say 'OK glass, take a picture'? Seems a lot more obvious than using your phone, unless you can also tap the side of the case to take a pic. I could be casually checking my phone, and people on the other end wouldn't know I'm using the camera in a noisy place. How good is noise cancellation on Glass anyway? Would it still work in a busy bar?