5 ms·

I still don't really get what google glass is for. The only things he mentions using it for is directions and taking pictures, my phone works perfectly for bot

I still don't really get what google glass is for. The only things he mentions using it for is directions and taking pictures, my phone works perfectly for both those things (I can't remember any time where I've missed a good picture because I couldn't get my phone in time) Maybe its something you need to try to really understand, but I'm not excited by it.

tellarin 14y ago
Well, I can remember many times where I didn't have my phone handy and missed some great pictures. But that's not enough to convince me of the usefulness of smart glasses. Nonetheless, I'd love to try one out for a couple weeks and I can see me buying one for USD$ 200 if it gets to that price.
dm2 14y ago
The current version of Google Glass is a stepping stone. It's just to see what features people might unexpectedly use or find out they really want or do not want. The future versions have unlimited possibilities such as automatically recording live events then replaying them, playing games, taking inventory, or even overlaying TV shows on top of screens at a bar so that you can effectively watch whatever you want. Infrared, night-vision, and auto-tracking of objects are also possibilities. The military has had such a system for many years, it's called Land Warrior. It can map waypoints in a 3d environment, give directions, display messages, and display any information that the user needs. I imagine that in the near future the system will be able to identify hostiles or friendlies, detect mortars instantly and tell the user where to move, and will be integrated with the boomerang shooter detection system. The possibilities are endless, we have to start somewhere though.
- dorian-graph 14y ago
  A lot of those examples you gave so easy to do from home, in a bedroom or toilet. The military use example seems fine and some useful HUD type information would be neat.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  Just like Google Wave. "Unlimited possibilities (no *current applications)." I buy a device for what it can actually do, not for the potential of what it could do in 3-100 years time. The ironic part about you bringing up Land Warrior program is that Land Warrior was cancelled in 2007. It still lives on but has never been expanded and or been adopted by other units or branches of the US military.
  - lorenzfx 14y ago
    The German army has received the first units of a similar system ("Gladius") and will be testing it in Afghanistan soon [0]. [0] http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsrheinmetall-starts-gladius-soldier-system-deliveries-german-army http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsrheinmetall-starts-g...
  - dm2 14y ago
    Land Warrior was restarted in 2008 and is most certainly being used and extensively developed. The current version of Glass is for early adopters, if you are not purchasing a device to explore it's potential then you are not an early adopter. Wave is still somewhat alive (donated to Apache). Google made it clear that Google Documents (and it's collaborative editing features) would be the replacement for Wave and would be more useful.
  - ofacup 14y ago
    the ironical part is that being from a 3rd world country, this isn't really an option for you, is it? the other ironical part? now iOS is priced according to your disposable income... isn't it ironic, don't you think?
- OGinparadise 14y ago
  You do understand that to do all those supposedly great things, you have to wear the dorky glasses on (yes, they're dorky!) AND a have smartphone with you. So there is a cost, both financial and social. Not sure how you thought of the bar scenario, but people usually go to bars to socialize, they watch a game or show but usually in a group setting and that starts a conversation, debate etc etc about it. Not sure if enough people go to bars with dorky glasses on so they could watch whatever they like, alone. No doubt some would, but most would not. >> taking inventory Niche and "There's an [or 500] app/s for that." >> automatically recording live events then replaying them IMO that takes away from enjoying it, unless you're being paid to record it. My point is that niche applications exist but most people will not see the benefit of having glasses on. Google loves them, imagine the "unlimited possibilities" of showing ads right in your eyeball, but what's in for the wearer? Not much, IMO. P.S. I tune out people like Scoble, they're famous for being famous and they cement this by being social media whores "early adopters" or whatever. His opinion means jack, in fact it's worse since he's sponsored by RackSpace. Each time he gets mentioned, it's better for them and for him, thus the bombastic claims.
  - dm2 14y ago
    If you are attending a sporting event (or anything really) and missed something, then you could rewind and view it or save it. The recording would not distract the user at all, it would be taking place in the background and would never be uploaded to the internet (by default). It's like having a photographic memory upgrade, except you can also share it. Maybe have a feature that records up to X minutes of video and overwrites it unless the user decides to manually save part of that video. Even during sexy time, overlay a face of gwyneth paltrow onto your partner. How about threat detection? Any snakes or dangerous creatures could automatically highlight in red and a warning message could pop up "Don't step here!". The "dorky" argument is just a societal norm. They have many plans for less dorky looking versions. The eventual use of this would be built into your eyeball or a contact lens. Yes, it's a halfway scary future but our children will not see it that way. I'm not saying it's the right way to go but it's worth discussion.
    - taylodl 14y ago
brunomlopes 14y ago
I'd like to propose another use case: HUDs. I've recently took up cycling to work and back, and would love to have speed/gears/time up on the glasses, instead of having to look and focus down. Riding my scooter would also be better with it, since the speedometer and turning light indicators are a bit out of my normal field of vision. Also, be able to see who's calling on the cell phone would be a plus (I've found that having the phone 'say' who's calling results in a jumble that I can't make heads or tails of, as most of the names are not English names)
- dm2 14y ago
  Yes! Integrating it with your car to see gas (or battery) levels. No integration needed to see speed, directions, stop lights, traffic, construction ahead. You could take it one step further and crowd-source to find stolen cars or license-plates.
  - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
    >You could take it one step further and crowd-source to find stolen cars or license-plates. // So it seems Orwell didn't anticipate that we would carry the cameras that spy on us with us ... take it a couple more steps further and the secret service have a system where they can look through anyone's [with smart-glasses] eyes at what they're seeing. Imagine Boston if after the bombing the authorities could requisition the view of everyone over the previous hour (cached for your convenience) and run that through a mapping program that can literally recreate the 3D scene with peoples movements and interactions for that whole period. Awesome power.
    - dm2 14y ago
      One critical feature would be local storage of recorded video. It would be a huge invasion of privacy to pull images from innocent people, even if it is for the greater good, maybe. I don't know which side of the privacy debate I'm on. If there is unlimited transparency for citizens then there should be 100% transparency for the government, that's the only way. The 3D mapping thing has already been done. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.5982v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.5982v1.pdf
gnaffle 14y ago
Lots of people say "don't get it" when faced with a new technology. That's the problem with generic platforms. "Why would I need a smartphone" is a similar question. The potential answers are obvious today, but they weren't 10 years ago. I don't think it's about understanding, but rather imagining what could be done better with this technology. A lot of workers are carrying barcode scanners and tablets around in the field today because they need to input or access information. That's a potentially very lucurative niche. I don't really think (and certainly don't hope) Google Glass will ever be socially acceptable, though.
- ohwp 14y ago
  Well I still don't own a smartphone because I ask myself the question "Why would I need a smartphone". And when I look around a lot of people don't need it. So in a way "I don't get" why a lot of people "need" a smartphone.
  - UberMouse 14y ago
    I don't need a smartphone, but it's convenient and useful.
  - dm2 14y ago
    The people who do not need a smartphone, a tablet, or a HUD shouldn't purchase one. If they feel pressure from society to buy one or just want to see what all the fuss is about, then that's their choice. People who purchase one for the games are doing nothing but providing funding to help improve the technology for the people who actually do have uses for smart-phones. There are TONS of practical uses for smart-phones, but there are also billions of people living on this planet who don't have a use for them.
  - gnaffle 14y ago
    And that's OK. Not everyone needs a smartphone, but that wasn't my point. My point was that many people (even tech people) immediately ask this question in a dismissive way before they have even started to think about what this technology can be used for. I know people who thought smartphones weren't for them, but suddenly they discovered they were easier to use than their old Nokia phone and had QWERTY keyboards so they could write text messages without learning T9. I never imagined that a tablet would be so useful for flying and didn't see a need for one before that.
Kiro 14y ago
You weren't excited by the smartphone either.

tellarin 14y ago

Well, I can remember many times where I didn't have my phone handy and missed some great pictures. But that's not enough to convince me of the usefulness of smart glasses. Nonetheless, I'd love to try one out for a couple weeks and I can see me buying one for USD$ 200 if it gets to that price.

dm2 14y ago

The current version of Google Glass is a stepping stone. It's just to see what features people might unexpectedly use or find out they really want or do not want. The future versions have unlimited possibilities such as automatically recording live events then replaying them, playing games, taking inventory, or even overlaying TV shows on top of screens at a bar so that you can effectively watch whatever you want. Infrared, night-vision, and auto-tracking of objects are also possibilities. The military has had such a system for many years, it's called Land Warrior. It can map waypoints in a 3d environment, give directions, display messages, and display any information that the user needs. I imagine that in the near future the system will be able to identify hostiles or friendlies, detect mortars instantly and tell the user where to move, and will be integrated with the boomerang shooter detection system. The possibilities are endless, we have to start somewhere though.

dorian-graph 14y ago
A lot of those examples you gave so easy to do from home, in a bedroom or toilet. The military use example seems fine and some useful HUD type information would be neat.
UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
Just like Google Wave. "Unlimited possibilities (no *current applications)." I buy a device for what it can actually do, not for the potential of what it could do in 3-100 years time. The ironic part about you bringing up Land Warrior program is that Land Warrior was cancelled in 2007. It still lives on but has never been expanded and or been adopted by other units or branches of the US military.
- lorenzfx 14y ago
  The German army has received the first units of a similar system ("Gladius") and will be testing it in Afghanistan soon [0]. [0] http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsrheinmetall-starts-gladius-soldier-system-deliveries-german-army http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsrheinmetall-starts-g...
- dm2 14y ago
  Land Warrior was restarted in 2008 and is most certainly being used and extensively developed. The current version of Glass is for early adopters, if you are not purchasing a device to explore it's potential then you are not an early adopter. Wave is still somewhat alive (donated to Apache). Google made it clear that Google Documents (and it's collaborative editing features) would be the replacement for Wave and would be more useful.
- ofacup 14y ago
  the ironical part is that being from a 3rd world country, this isn't really an option for you, is it? the other ironical part? now iOS is priced according to your disposable income... isn't it ironic, don't you think?
OGinparadise 14y ago
You do understand that to do all those supposedly great things, you have to wear the dorky glasses on (yes, they're dorky!) AND a have smartphone with you. So there is a cost, both financial and social. Not sure how you thought of the bar scenario, but people usually go to bars to socialize, they watch a game or show but usually in a group setting and that starts a conversation, debate etc etc about it. Not sure if enough people go to bars with dorky glasses on so they could watch whatever they like, alone. No doubt some would, but most would not. >> taking inventory Niche and "There's an [or 500] app/s for that." >> automatically recording live events then replaying them IMO that takes away from enjoying it, unless you're being paid to record it. My point is that niche applications exist but most people will not see the benefit of having glasses on. Google loves them, imagine the "unlimited possibilities" of showing ads right in your eyeball, but what's in for the wearer? Not much, IMO. P.S. I tune out people like Scoble, they're famous for being famous and they cement this by being social media whores "early adopters" or whatever. His opinion means jack, in fact it's worse since he's sponsored by RackSpace. Each time he gets mentioned, it's better for them and for him, thus the bombastic claims.
- dm2 14y ago
  If you are attending a sporting event (or anything really) and missed something, then you could rewind and view it or save it. The recording would not distract the user at all, it would be taking place in the background and would never be uploaded to the internet (by default). It's like having a photographic memory upgrade, except you can also share it. Maybe have a feature that records up to X minutes of video and overwrites it unless the user decides to manually save part of that video. Even during sexy time, overlay a face of gwyneth paltrow onto your partner. How about threat detection? Any snakes or dangerous creatures could automatically highlight in red and a warning message could pop up "Don't step here!". The "dorky" argument is just a societal norm. They have many plans for less dorky looking versions. The eventual use of this would be built into your eyeball or a contact lens. Yes, it's a halfway scary future but our children will not see it that way. I'm not saying it's the right way to go but it's worth discussion.
  - taylodl 14y ago

brunomlopes 14y ago

I'd like to propose another use case: HUDs. I've recently took up cycling to work and back, and would love to have speed/gears/time up on the glasses, instead of having to look and focus down. Riding my scooter would also be better with it, since the speedometer and turning light indicators are a bit out of my normal field of vision. Also, be able to see who's calling on the cell phone would be a plus (I've found that having the phone 'say' who's calling results in a jumble that I can't make heads or tails of, as most of the names are not English names)

dm2 14y ago
Yes! Integrating it with your car to see gas (or battery) levels. No integration needed to see speed, directions, stop lights, traffic, construction ahead. You could take it one step further and crowd-source to find stolen cars or license-plates.
- pbhjpbhj 14y ago
  >You could take it one step further and crowd-source to find stolen cars or license-plates. // So it seems Orwell didn't anticipate that we would carry the cameras that spy on us with us ... take it a couple more steps further and the secret service have a system where they can look through anyone's [with smart-glasses] eyes at what they're seeing. Imagine Boston if after the bombing the authorities could requisition the view of everyone over the previous hour (cached for your convenience) and run that through a mapping program that can literally recreate the 3D scene with peoples movements and interactions for that whole period. Awesome power.
  - dm2 14y ago
    One critical feature would be local storage of recorded video. It would be a huge invasion of privacy to pull images from innocent people, even if it is for the greater good, maybe. I don't know which side of the privacy debate I'm on. If there is unlimited transparency for citizens then there should be 100% transparency for the government, that's the only way. The 3D mapping thing has already been done. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.5982v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.5982v1.pdf

gnaffle 14y ago

Lots of people say "don't get it" when faced with a new technology. That's the problem with generic platforms. "Why would I need a smartphone" is a similar question. The potential answers are obvious today, but they weren't 10 years ago. I don't think it's about understanding, but rather imagining what could be done better with this technology. A lot of workers are carrying barcode scanners and tablets around in the field today because they need to input or access information. That's a potentially very lucurative niche. I don't really think (and certainly don't hope) Google Glass will ever be socially acceptable, though.

ohwp 14y ago
Well I still don't own a smartphone because I ask myself the question "Why would I need a smartphone". And when I look around a lot of people don't need it. So in a way "I don't get" why a lot of people "need" a smartphone.
- UberMouse 14y ago
  I don't need a smartphone, but it's convenient and useful.
- dm2 14y ago
  The people who do not need a smartphone, a tablet, or a HUD shouldn't purchase one. If they feel pressure from society to buy one or just want to see what all the fuss is about, then that's their choice. People who purchase one for the games are doing nothing but providing funding to help improve the technology for the people who actually do have uses for smart-phones. There are TONS of practical uses for smart-phones, but there are also billions of people living on this planet who don't have a use for them.
- gnaffle 14y ago
  And that's OK. Not everyone needs a smartphone, but that wasn't my point. My point was that many people (even tech people) immediately ask this question in a dismissive way before they have even started to think about what this technology can be used for. I know people who thought smartphones weren't for them, but suddenly they discovered they were easier to use than their old Nokia phone and had QWERTY keyboards so they could write text messages without learning T9. I never imagined that a tablet would be so useful for flying and didn't see a need for one before that.

Kiro 14y ago

You weren't excited by the smartphone either.