4 ms·

I don't get to decide how people view my actual glasses either, but that doesn't mean I'm going to walk around blind. The usefulness of a thing as a tool is inc

by yew 13y ago

I don't get to decide how people view my actual glasses either, but that doesn't mean I'm going to walk around blind. The usefulness of a thing as a tool is incidental to its value as a fashion statement. If Glass is actually revolutionary in the usefulness department I suspect we'll see the same sort of behavior we see with smartphones - many people owning and using them and a small number of people complaining about them alienating everyone from society. If it turns out to be just a gimmick, I agree it probably won't catch on. Though there are some pretty odd ideas about mainstream fashion in this thread, too. See the above post by someone who thinks that watches and expensive cars are unfashionable. I trust HN for a lot of things, but views on fashion (and on what's likely to become fashionable) isn't one of them.

gfodor 13y ago
Fortunately you can buy glasses that look good and that people like. If you couldn't, we'd all be wearing contacts. There is also a huge difference between something that lets you see and something that affords you the convenience of not having to reach into your pocket to read Twitter. The last device that made you look smug, started off extremely expensive with the goal of getting cheaper with volume when the public inevitably scooped them up, and provided a convenience viewed as overt laziness because a cheaper more widely acceptable alternative existed was called the Segway. Glass already checks off two out of three (it's expensive, and is for people "too lazy" to take out their phone.) It remains to be seen if it hits the trifecta of also just plain looking doofy. I've only seen it on nerds and celebrities so it's hard to guess just how far on the doofus totem pole your average Glass wearer is going to be knocked.
- rdouble 13y ago
  Maybe Google Glass will ultimately join the Segway as another mandatory piece of kit for mall security guards?
  - gfodor 13y ago
    A photo of a fat mall cop on a Segway wearing Glass could be the kiss of death.
- yew 13y ago
  If you couldn't, we'd all be wearing contacts. I seriously doubt the accuracy of that judgment. Likewise with the rest of the post. 'smug' and 'lazy' are nice, quick labels but none of it actually serves to differentiate the Segway from any other product. (I mean, 'started off extremely expensive with the goal of getting cheaper with volume'? Really?) The Segway just didn't fit a niche. There was no reason to buy one, so they stayed rare and weird. Which is also why they remain fairly popular as a tourist attraction in quite a few places. The idea that Segways exude a 'douchebag' field (along with an irrational hatred of mall cops) seems to be either highly regional or simply confined to the Internet. Just based on my own anecdotal experience, of course ;)
  - gfodor 13y ago
    The exact same argument may or may not be leveled against Glass. "I already have a phone, why would I spend $1500 on something that just does what my phone does? Is the guy wearing Glass so lazy he spent $1500 so he doesn't have to take out his phone to check Facebook?" I was one of the people out there defending the Segway's absurd price point as a temporary condition since it seemed "obvious" that everyone would be riding around NYC on Segways in a few years. Segways would be incredibly useful in cities even today for getting around local neighborhoods, expanding the distance you can feasibly travel on a outing on foot. But you look dumb on them, they cause awkward interactions, you sit yourself on a tier above "normal people just walking around", and you are viewed as lazy relative to bikers. All of these aspects have clear analogs to Glass wearing. It makes no sense because people in cars do not look lazy relative to pedestrians. People are funny when it comes to self-image, regardless of utility.
    - yew 13y ago
      I did mention that two posts above. If Glass is just "cellphones, but on your face" I agree that it probably won't catch on. Of course, smartphones are already useful for a lot of things besides checking Facebook. There's a reason they were so popular among businessmen even before the iPhone pushed them into the mainstream. The real question is whether or not 'the masses' (and especially teenagers) will pick up on the things, though. Smartphones followed in the cell phone's wake. So 'Facebook' might actually be a selling point, unless Facebook hatred picks up first (an extreme dislike for Facebook being yet another thing that essentially no one outside the techie-sphere shares).

by yew 13y ago

gfodor 13y ago

Fortunately you can buy glasses that look good and that people like. If you couldn't, we'd all be wearing contacts. There is also a huge difference between something that lets you see and something that affords you the convenience of not having to reach into your pocket to read Twitter. The last device that made you look smug, started off extremely expensive with the goal of getting cheaper with volume when the public inevitably scooped them up, and provided a convenience viewed as overt laziness because a cheaper more widely acceptable alternative existed was called the Segway. Glass already checks off two out of three (it's expensive, and is for people "too lazy" to take out their phone.) It remains to be seen if it hits the trifecta of also just plain looking doofy. I've only seen it on nerds and celebrities so it's hard to guess just how far on the doofus totem pole your average Glass wearer is going to be knocked.

rdouble 13y ago
Maybe Google Glass will ultimately join the Segway as another mandatory piece of kit for mall security guards?
- gfodor 13y ago
  A photo of a fat mall cop on a Segway wearing Glass could be the kiss of death.
yew 13y ago
If you couldn't, we'd all be wearing contacts. I seriously doubt the accuracy of that judgment. Likewise with the rest of the post. 'smug' and 'lazy' are nice, quick labels but none of it actually serves to differentiate the Segway from any other product. (I mean, 'started off extremely expensive with the goal of getting cheaper with volume'? Really?) The Segway just didn't fit a niche. There was no reason to buy one, so they stayed rare and weird. Which is also why they remain fairly popular as a tourist attraction in quite a few places. The idea that Segways exude a 'douchebag' field (along with an irrational hatred of mall cops) seems to be either highly regional or simply confined to the Internet. Just based on my own anecdotal experience, of course ;)
- gfodor 13y ago
  The exact same argument may or may not be leveled against Glass. "I already have a phone, why would I spend $1500 on something that just does what my phone does? Is the guy wearing Glass so lazy he spent $1500 so he doesn't have to take out his phone to check Facebook?" I was one of the people out there defending the Segway's absurd price point as a temporary condition since it seemed "obvious" that everyone would be riding around NYC on Segways in a few years. Segways would be incredibly useful in cities even today for getting around local neighborhoods, expanding the distance you can feasibly travel on a outing on foot. But you look dumb on them, they cause awkward interactions, you sit yourself on a tier above "normal people just walking around", and you are viewed as lazy relative to bikers. All of these aspects have clear analogs to Glass wearing. It makes no sense because people in cars do not look lazy relative to pedestrians. People are funny when it comes to self-image, regardless of utility.
  - yew 13y ago
    I did mention that two posts above. If Glass is just "cellphones, but on your face" I agree that it probably won't catch on. Of course, smartphones are already useful for a lot of things besides checking Facebook. There's a reason they were so popular among businessmen even before the iPhone pushed them into the mainstream. The real question is whether or not 'the masses' (and especially teenagers) will pick up on the things, though. Smartphones followed in the cell phone's wake. So 'Facebook' might actually be a selling point, unless Facebook hatred picks up first (an extreme dislike for Facebook being yet another thing that essentially no one outside the techie-sphere shares).