6 ms·

Yea... Does it have a camera on it? Don't wear it into a theater or other area where filming is prohibited.

shurcooL 13y ago
Does your phone have a camera on it? What if you decide to take out your phone and check an email, would you want what happened to the guy happen to you? "Don't take out your phone out of your pocket in a theater or other area where filming is prohibited."
- streetnigga 13y ago
  Please don't light a bright back-lit screen in a theater for something like email. The focus break ruins the experience people pay the ticket price for. Emergencies only.
  - shurcooL 13y ago
    I agree and I don't. It was just a counter-example.
- res0nat0r 13y ago
  Checking your email on your phone is OK (even though it is a dick move since you annoy others in the theater), but holding your phone up to the screen to record all 180 minutes of The Wolf of Wall Street is in fact not ok. IE: Wearing a device on your face that is pointed to the movie screen that can possibly record the entire flick is not the same as your phone being out of your pocket for 20 seconds to read your latest text message.
  - Malician 13y ago
    It seems pretty evident that some people are going to be wearing computers on their faces, and all of these computers come with cameras. Bootlegs are always available (in terrible quality), anyway.
    - corin_ 13y ago
      Most illegal things are always available / possible (drugs, weapons, theft..), the fact that they happen isn't a reason not to prevent them happening when possible. You can argue things shouldn't be illegal, but not that illegal things shouldn't be pursued based on the fact that they happen anyway.
- vellum 13y ago
  You should turn the brightness down all the way before the film starts. It's less annoying for the people around you.
jasonlotito 13y ago
Filming is prohibited. Not cameras. Now, if they want to make camera's prohibited, they could try that. Leave your smart phones at the door.
- MatthewWilkes 13y ago
  Going after the people pointing a camera at the screen is, generally, a pretty accurate way of stopping filming.
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    Evidently not.
- streetnigga 13y ago
  Filming is against the law, it is often company policy to not allow people to mount cameras onto their shoulders as to reduce the number of people breaking the law by filming. Acceptable: Having phone in pocket. Unacceptable: Holding phone out with the camera facing the projector screen a vast majority of the time. Dude, no: Rigging up a telecine machine with your phone in the projector booth to make a more direct copy during off-hours.
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    > it is often company policy I search AMC's website for policies related to carrying a camera. There wasn't any. Considering that the Glass wearer had been there at least 2 times earlier that week without issue, your argument is invalid.
    - streetnigga 13y ago
      "This guy got away with it previously and I didn't see anything about shoulder mounted cameras on AMC's web site so your argument is invalid." OK buddy, you got me. Go wear cameras into prohibited areas on private property, specially those where federal law comes into play.
mkaito 13y ago
Well, it's a rim. If you wear eye glasses, you have your regular "I need these to see things" lenses mounted into your fancy-ass $1500 rim. You'd need them to see the damn movie, even if you weren't recording.
- streetnigga 13y ago
  I never said anything about the glasses themselves. You don't have a right to wear a camera into a private establishment just because you mounted them on your prescription glasses. How 'fancy' the rims are is immaterial to the camera you mount on them.
- waterlesscloud 13y ago
  Then it's a poorly designed product for real-world use.
- ohazi 13y ago
  So if you're going to go through the trouble and expense of getting prescription lenses mounted onto this thing, then maybe it's also worth your while to get a second pair? You know, to avoid situations like this? We've seen people get into trouble with stuff like this before [0]. This is a new, socially unproven device meant for developers. As an early adopter, you should expect to run into occasional resistance until the general public and law enforcement become more familiar with devices like this. Expecting everybody to automatically be on the same page as you regarding what is and isn't reasonable with this device is pretty naive. You are the public image of this technology. Behave appropriately. [0] http://eyetap.blogspot.com/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdonalds-for.html http://eyetap.blogspot.com/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdon...
  - discardorama 13y ago
    > You know, to avoid situations like this? So if an innocent guy gets strip-searched, your advice would be to tell him not to wear clothes? You know, to avoid situations like this?
    - 13y ago
__david__ 13y ago
No, that's not quite the right conclusion. Did you ever go to a music show around 1999–2000? I remember security would confiscate all cameras and cell phones. But not a lot of people had them back then. Nowadays if they tried to do that there would be a riot. So the real takeaway is, be careful when you have tech that the whole world hasn't embraced yet. If 99% of people are wearing google-glass style things in 15 years, I guarantee there won't be incidents like this. There is safety in numbers.

Does your phone have a camera on it? What if you decide to take out your phone and check an email, would you want what happened to the guy happen to you? "Don't take out your phone out of your pocket in a theater or other area where filming is prohibited."

streetnigga 13y ago
Please don't light a bright back-lit screen in a theater for something like email. The focus break ruins the experience people pay the ticket price for. Emergencies only.
- shurcooL 13y ago
  I agree and I don't. It was just a counter-example.
res0nat0r 13y ago
Checking your email on your phone is OK (even though it is a dick move since you annoy others in the theater), but holding your phone up to the screen to record all 180 minutes of The Wolf of Wall Street is in fact not ok. IE: Wearing a device on your face that is pointed to the movie screen that can possibly record the entire flick is not the same as your phone being out of your pocket for 20 seconds to read your latest text message.
- Malician 13y ago
  It seems pretty evident that some people are going to be wearing computers on their faces, and all of these computers come with cameras. Bootlegs are always available (in terrible quality), anyway.
  - corin_ 13y ago
    Most illegal things are always available / possible (drugs, weapons, theft..), the fact that they happen isn't a reason not to prevent them happening when possible. You can argue things shouldn't be illegal, but not that illegal things shouldn't be pursued based on the fact that they happen anyway.
vellum 13y ago
You should turn the brightness down all the way before the film starts. It's less annoying for the people around you.

jasonlotito 13y ago

Filming is prohibited. Not cameras. Now, if they want to make camera's prohibited, they could try that. Leave your smart phones at the door.

MatthewWilkes 13y ago
Going after the people pointing a camera at the screen is, generally, a pretty accurate way of stopping filming.
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  Evidently not.
streetnigga 13y ago
Filming is against the law, it is often company policy to not allow people to mount cameras onto their shoulders as to reduce the number of people breaking the law by filming. Acceptable: Having phone in pocket. Unacceptable: Holding phone out with the camera facing the projector screen a vast majority of the time. Dude, no: Rigging up a telecine machine with your phone in the projector booth to make a more direct copy during off-hours.
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  > it is often company policy I search AMC's website for policies related to carrying a camera. There wasn't any. Considering that the Glass wearer had been there at least 2 times earlier that week without issue, your argument is invalid.
  - streetnigga 13y ago
    "This guy got away with it previously and I didn't see anything about shoulder mounted cameras on AMC's web site so your argument is invalid." OK buddy, you got me. Go wear cameras into prohibited areas on private property, specially those where federal law comes into play.

mkaito 13y ago

Well, it's a rim. If you wear eye glasses, you have your regular "I need these to see things" lenses mounted into your fancy-ass $1500 rim. You'd need them to see the damn movie, even if you weren't recording.

streetnigga 13y ago
I never said anything about the glasses themselves. You don't have a right to wear a camera into a private establishment just because you mounted them on your prescription glasses. How 'fancy' the rims are is immaterial to the camera you mount on them.
waterlesscloud 13y ago
Then it's a poorly designed product for real-world use.
ohazi 13y ago
So if you're going to go through the trouble and expense of getting prescription lenses mounted onto this thing, then maybe it's also worth your while to get a second pair? You know, to avoid situations like this? We've seen people get into trouble with stuff like this before [0]. This is a new, socially unproven device meant for developers. As an early adopter, you should expect to run into occasional resistance until the general public and law enforcement become more familiar with devices like this. Expecting everybody to automatically be on the same page as you regarding what is and isn't reasonable with this device is pretty naive. You are the public image of this technology. Behave appropriately. [0] http://eyetap.blogspot.com/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdonalds-for.html http://eyetap.blogspot.com/2012/07/physical-assault-by-mcdon...
- discardorama 13y ago
  > You know, to avoid situations like this? So if an innocent guy gets strip-searched, your advice would be to tell him not to wear clothes? You know, to avoid situations like this?
  - 13y ago

__david__ 13y ago

No, that's not quite the right conclusion. Did you ever go to a music show around 1999–2000? I remember security would confiscate all cameras and cell phones. But not a lot of people had them back then. Nowadays if they tried to do that there would be a riot. So the real takeaway is, be careful when you have tech that the whole world hasn't embraced yet. If 99% of people are wearing google-glass style things in 15 years, I guarantee there won't be incidents like this. There is safety in numbers.