The arguments against Google Glass
For those who don't know, the world of technology is getting very excited about Google's 'Glass' wearable tech: a pair of glasses that display information in front of one eye from the internet etc., and, crucially, allow the wearer to easily record what's going on in front of them on video. Or:
Here's an interesting article that lays out 35 objections to the Glass. Many of them are predictably focused on privacy rights, both for the unknowing subject of a film and the user who will be uploading even more of their lives and information to Google's servers; but points are also raised about the ease with which glasses can be stolen, the potential for breaches in doctor-patient confidentiality, the discouraging of paying attention and taking risks, and potential increases in violence towards photographers.
Is this technology a good thing, or should it be regulated or even banned altogether? Does it pose a threat to our privacy, or has that been eroded too much anyway for it to matter?
EDIT: And for those who've noticed that there's already been threads about the Glass, the main focus of this one is the points raised against this technology in the article.
Google Glass is a snazzy set of specs that will part the Red Sea if you tap it from the right angle. It aims to fuse smartphones and computers into a hands-free user experience more pleasurable than sex, religion, and world domination combined
Here's an interesting article that lays out 35 objections to the Glass. Many of them are predictably focused on privacy rights, both for the unknowing subject of a film and the user who will be uploading even more of their lives and information to Google's servers; but points are also raised about the ease with which glasses can be stolen, the potential for breaches in doctor-patient confidentiality, the discouraging of paying attention and taking risks, and potential increases in violence towards photographers.
Is this technology a good thing, or should it be regulated or even banned altogether? Does it pose a threat to our privacy, or has that been eroded too much anyway for it to matter?
EDIT: And for those who've noticed that there's already been threads about the Glass, the main focus of this one is the points raised against this technology in the article.
(edited 11 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Original post by ash92:)
Your quote...= 
It's from the article
I think almost all the arguments against Google Glass are ridiculous. Either they can be applied to smartphones as they are, or they place the blame on Google Glass when really it should be placed elsewhere (e.g. reason 3 in that link), or they are non-issues which can easily be remedied.
Original post by coconut2456
I think almost all the arguments against Google Glass are ridiculous. Either they can be applied to smartphones as they are, or they place the blame on Google Glass when really it should be placed elsewhere (e.g. reason 3 in that link), or they are non-issues which can easily be remedied.
Arguments such as point three are based on the fact that such activities will be a lot easier to do with this technology. Given that it will probably take off in a major way with the younger generation, even more of our lives will be filmed in the future etc., and so cases like these will get more common.
Original post by tjf8
Arguments such as point three are based on the fact that such activities will be a lot easier to do with this technology. Given that it will probably take off in a major way with the younger generation, even more of our lives will be filmed in the future etc., and so cases like these will get more common.
Activities such as firing someone for baseless reasons? That is what the real issue is here, not the fact that an innocent enough picture (which the teacher knew was being taken) was posted on FB. Things which people want to record will be recorded anyway with smartphones. If someone is doing a crazy dance and someone wants to record it, they'll use their phone. Google Glass will shave off, what, 2 seconds? If they're just having a mundane conversation with a friend then they're not going to record it. I don't see why this will lead to a massive increase in us being filmed. This is also despite the fact that you'll have to actually tell it to record and there is a blinking LED when it is recording, both of which makes secretly recording someone more difficult unless if it's hacked at some point.
(edited 11 years ago)
If you live in a City you are filmed hundreds of times a day without even realising it, shops, buses, stations, streets, airport all have people filming.
How long can these glasses even record for? I'm guessing not long. If its of any quality it would be crazy to cloud store it, so it would be on board storage.
How long can these glasses even record for? I'm guessing not long. If its of any quality it would be crazy to cloud store it, so it would be on board storage.
Original post by doggyfizzel
If you live in a City you are filmed hundreds of times a day without even realising it, shops, buses, stations, streets, airport all have people filming.
How long can these glasses even record for? I'm guessing not long. If its of any quality it would be crazy to cloud store it, so it would be on board storage.
How long can these glasses even record for? I'm guessing not long. If its of any quality it would be crazy to cloud store it, so it would be on board storage.
Exactly, also unless if it has some amazing futuristic battery, people won't be recording a lot with it. Cloud storage would be crazy, if recording doesn't burn through your battery, uploading the videos through 3G/4G will.
It could destroy whatever shreds of privacy we have left.
People can legally film you pretty much all they like while you are in public, if you are worried about people filming you in a private place then simply ask them to take off the glass before they are allowed to enter.
It will turn the United States into a surveillance state.
The UK already has a lot of surveillance, the average person is filmed 70 times a day via CCTV. The glass is not designed as a security system and would not really be an effective way of keeping surveillance on someone.
It will hold more people needlessly accountable for easily pardonable activities.
The law is the law, if you break it you get punished and companies are sensible to check up on a potential employees past. Here's an idea, if you are worried about the stupid crap you do being recorded don't do stupid crap.
It is remarkably easy to steal a pair of glasses.
It's also remarkably easy to steal a mobile phone which i guarantee contains more personal information than your glass ever will.
It gives Google far more personal information than it needs to know.
That's a perfectly reasonable opinion however not everyone holds it and some have no problem with the information Google is collecting.
It will open new possibilities for online sexual extortion.
How? The Hunter Moore revenge porn thing was mainly ex partners with a grudge posting photos and videos they made in privacy with their former lovers, unless people who like to have sex in public are also incredibly modest and don't want their acts filmed glass will not have any use in regards to sexual extortion.
It may increase violence.
So does alcohol, we gonna ban that as well?
It will discourage personal risk.
This point makes no sense, the author seems upset that the presence of cameras discourages people from cheating?
We have no idea what health problems Glass will create.
Yeh this point is complete crap, as long as its under 1.6w/kg you aren't going to have any problems.
It may increase violations of doctor-patient confidentiality and attorney-client privilege.
Except current laws already in place would prevent doctors and lawyers filming without permission so this is pretty much a null point.
It could be hacked.
So can a lot of technology.
It will discourage anonymity.
This point seems to just be an attack on Google and has nothing to do with the glass technology.
It isn’t distinct enough from the body.
Buy some paint
It could give the police far more details about you than you can possibly know.
No more than they can already get from your smartphone.
It will discourage kindness and respect.
Artists will be held more accountable for material that “offends.”
If an artist publishes work it is already in the public domain, i fail to see how it being recorded with a glass is any different than it being recorded with any other type of recording device.
It may kill off what remains of the moviegoing experience.
People still go to the cinema? Anyway Google glass will be banned as is other recording equipment while in the movie.
It will create problems with consent.
Google is evil blah blah blah
Cool places will be outed by boors.
It will discourage people from paying attention.
Sorry i was texting what did you say?
It will turn more strangers into stalkers.
Stalkers will exist no matter what technology is available to them, preventing the development and advancement of technology out of fear what a tiny minority of our population will do with it is not a good policy.
It will create more cyberbullying and stress.
This is the same "derp ban guns so people don't shoot kids derp" type arguments, bullying is not a result of recording technology nor is it a result of social networking. If you want to stop people getting bullied then address the actual issue of kids bullying other kids, simply trying to stop bullying by stopping the methods used to bully isn't going to work, kids are as resourceful as they are cruel and bullying has been around and kids have been topping themselves over it well before the creation of the internet.
It could make you more willing to believe lies.
I don't understand how glass would work differently than you being on the phone with someone in this scenario?
It will create more needless distraction.
what is needless is subjective as is the rest of this point
It will expand the Streisand effect to an unprecedented level.
same point as the cyber bullying one.
It could prevent people from discovering themselves.
What if you discover yourself and he's a massive whiny hipster douchnozzle as well?
It will discourage people from seeking unfamiliar viewpoints.
What is...i don't even..
It could create another place where advertisement takes over our lives.
Pretty much destroyed by the first line of his own argument. Google presently has no plans to add advertising to Glass, the technology is not being developed for advertisement and Google agree having advertisements on the Glass would be impractical and moronic.
It will create needless competition over who has the most worthwhile life experience.
Well not everyone likes sitting around all day smoking weed and debating philosophy with their equally stoned friends.
It will discourage people from striking up conversations with strangers.
Good, if i'm walking down the road i don't want some random person talking to me, seriously what part of my eyes straight ahead quick pace makes you think i want to engage in a conversation with you?
It could discourage companies from hiring people.
Its a companies decision how they want to do their recruitment process.
It will create unfair advantages for online retailers.
Err no, competition between businesses saves the average person money and ensures companies are always pressured to do better. If a business can't compete they should not be in business.
It could usher in a new form of vertical integration and that does not compensate talent.
Youtube has to date been the biggest money making opportunity for amateur video, music and animation producers ever. A Youtube clip that has been seen by 50 million people has no where near the same amount of revenue as a movie that has been seen by 50 million people.
It will make driving dangerous.
If that is the case then glass will be banned as calling people on mobiles is.
It could attempt to erase people in need from existence, as well as serious problems that we cannot ignore.
Could this guy have a bigger hard on for steve jobs? Seriously?
"The difference here is palpable: Jobs believed that the iPhone was for everyone. For Brin, Glass is for a privileged elite. But if you want to start a revolution, then you need to know how to speak and appeal to the people. And you should really work out the kinks before you speak out."
I'm sorry how stupid do you have to be in order to think that iPhones are available for everyone? The vast majority of people in the world have no chance in hell of ever affording an iPhone. Both Glass and iPhone are for a privileged elite.
Urgh why does everyone not care about all the issues i pretend to care about? god my life suuuuucks.
People can legally film you pretty much all they like while you are in public, if you are worried about people filming you in a private place then simply ask them to take off the glass before they are allowed to enter.
It will turn the United States into a surveillance state.
The UK already has a lot of surveillance, the average person is filmed 70 times a day via CCTV. The glass is not designed as a security system and would not really be an effective way of keeping surveillance on someone.
It will hold more people needlessly accountable for easily pardonable activities.
The law is the law, if you break it you get punished and companies are sensible to check up on a potential employees past. Here's an idea, if you are worried about the stupid crap you do being recorded don't do stupid crap.
It is remarkably easy to steal a pair of glasses.
It's also remarkably easy to steal a mobile phone which i guarantee contains more personal information than your glass ever will.
It gives Google far more personal information than it needs to know.
That's a perfectly reasonable opinion however not everyone holds it and some have no problem with the information Google is collecting.
It will open new possibilities for online sexual extortion.
How? The Hunter Moore revenge porn thing was mainly ex partners with a grudge posting photos and videos they made in privacy with their former lovers, unless people who like to have sex in public are also incredibly modest and don't want their acts filmed glass will not have any use in regards to sexual extortion.
It may increase violence.
So does alcohol, we gonna ban that as well?
It will discourage personal risk.
This point makes no sense, the author seems upset that the presence of cameras discourages people from cheating?
We have no idea what health problems Glass will create.
Yeh this point is complete crap, as long as its under 1.6w/kg you aren't going to have any problems.
It may increase violations of doctor-patient confidentiality and attorney-client privilege.
Except current laws already in place would prevent doctors and lawyers filming without permission so this is pretty much a null point.
It could be hacked.
So can a lot of technology.
It will discourage anonymity.
This point seems to just be an attack on Google and has nothing to do with the glass technology.
It isn’t distinct enough from the body.
Buy some paint
It could give the police far more details about you than you can possibly know.
No more than they can already get from your smartphone.
It will discourage kindness and respect.
Artists will be held more accountable for material that “offends.”
If an artist publishes work it is already in the public domain, i fail to see how it being recorded with a glass is any different than it being recorded with any other type of recording device.
It may kill off what remains of the moviegoing experience.
People still go to the cinema? Anyway Google glass will be banned as is other recording equipment while in the movie.
It will create problems with consent.
Google is evil blah blah blah
Cool places will be outed by boors.
It will discourage people from paying attention.
Sorry i was texting what did you say?
It will turn more strangers into stalkers.
Stalkers will exist no matter what technology is available to them, preventing the development and advancement of technology out of fear what a tiny minority of our population will do with it is not a good policy.
It will create more cyberbullying and stress.
This is the same "derp ban guns so people don't shoot kids derp" type arguments, bullying is not a result of recording technology nor is it a result of social networking. If you want to stop people getting bullied then address the actual issue of kids bullying other kids, simply trying to stop bullying by stopping the methods used to bully isn't going to work, kids are as resourceful as they are cruel and bullying has been around and kids have been topping themselves over it well before the creation of the internet.
It could make you more willing to believe lies.
I don't understand how glass would work differently than you being on the phone with someone in this scenario?
It will create more needless distraction.
what is needless is subjective as is the rest of this point
It will expand the Streisand effect to an unprecedented level.
same point as the cyber bullying one.
It could prevent people from discovering themselves.
What if you discover yourself and he's a massive whiny hipster douchnozzle as well?
It will discourage people from seeking unfamiliar viewpoints.
What is...i don't even..
It could create another place where advertisement takes over our lives.
Pretty much destroyed by the first line of his own argument. Google presently has no plans to add advertising to Glass, the technology is not being developed for advertisement and Google agree having advertisements on the Glass would be impractical and moronic.
It will create needless competition over who has the most worthwhile life experience.
Well not everyone likes sitting around all day smoking weed and debating philosophy with their equally stoned friends.
It will discourage people from striking up conversations with strangers.
Good, if i'm walking down the road i don't want some random person talking to me, seriously what part of my eyes straight ahead quick pace makes you think i want to engage in a conversation with you?
It could discourage companies from hiring people.
Its a companies decision how they want to do their recruitment process.
It will create unfair advantages for online retailers.
Err no, competition between businesses saves the average person money and ensures companies are always pressured to do better. If a business can't compete they should not be in business.
It could usher in a new form of vertical integration and that does not compensate talent.
Youtube has to date been the biggest money making opportunity for amateur video, music and animation producers ever. A Youtube clip that has been seen by 50 million people has no where near the same amount of revenue as a movie that has been seen by 50 million people.
It will make driving dangerous.
If that is the case then glass will be banned as calling people on mobiles is.
It could attempt to erase people in need from existence, as well as serious problems that we cannot ignore.
Could this guy have a bigger hard on for steve jobs? Seriously?
"The difference here is palpable: Jobs believed that the iPhone was for everyone. For Brin, Glass is for a privileged elite. But if you want to start a revolution, then you need to know how to speak and appeal to the people. And you should really work out the kinks before you speak out."
I'm sorry how stupid do you have to be in order to think that iPhones are available for everyone? The vast majority of people in the world have no chance in hell of ever affording an iPhone. Both Glass and iPhone are for a privileged elite.
Urgh why does everyone not care about all the issues i pretend to care about? god my life suuuuucks.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by tjf8
It's from the article
I know, the "
" was not at you, rather it was at the content of the quoteOriginal post by ash92:)
I know, the "" was not at you, rather it was at the content of the quote
" was not at you, rather it was at the content of the quoteJust thought I'd make sure! I'm not that creative
I will be too busy thinking "what a prat" to wonder if they are filming me.
I reserve the right to think you are a prat if you wear these.
I reserve the right to think you are a prat if you wear these.
What a bunch of over-hyped nonsense.
In most cases, the list could be a lot shorter, and was artificially lengthened.
But also, as previously stated, the arguments can apply to existing technology,
Considering how much the author slates this technology, im surprised how much he %&#^# Steve Job's @#$^&#^.
In most cases, the list could be a lot shorter, and was artificially lengthened.
But also, as previously stated, the arguments can apply to existing technology,
Considering how much the author slates this technology, im surprised how much he %&#^# Steve Job's @#$^&#^.
Original post by Squidgyness
I will be too busy thinking "what a prat" to wonder if they are filming me.
I reserve the right to think you are a prat if you wear these.
I reserve the right to think you are a prat if you wear these.
I bet most were thinking "what a prat" when people first started calling others on brickphones. It will look stupid initially and could be a major fail but if Google play their cards right I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes the next big thing and the people who think they look prattish become the minority.
Original post by Darth Stewie
People can legally film you pretty much all they like while you are in public, if you are worried about people filming you in a private place then simply ask them to take off the glass before they are allowed to enter.
I would be offended to know that I was being recorded whilst talking with someone.
The UK already has a lot of surveillance, the average person is filmed 70 times a day via CCTV. The glass is not designed as a security system and would not really be an effective way of keeping surveillance on someone.
It could easily be exploited, and simply because there is already lots of surveillance doesn't mean that we should have to put up with more.
The law is the law, if you break it you get punished and companies are sensible to check up on a potential employees past. Here's an idea, if you are worried about the stupid crap you do being recorded don't do stupid crap.
It's the law in Saudi Arabia to punish people by stoning to death. Does that mean the law should be blindly followed? Simply because it's 'the law' doesn't make it a good thing. And you're essentially telling people 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear', same ethos used in just about every dictatorship. You're advocating that someone should live their life in fear.
Original post by Kiss
I would be offended to know that I was being recorded whilst talking with someone.
It could easily be exploited, and simply because there is already lots of surveillance doesn't mean that we should have to put up with more.
It's the law in Saudi Arabia to punish people by stoning to death. Does that mean the law should be blindly followed? Simply because it's 'the law' doesn't make it a good thing. And you're essentially telling people 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear', same ethos used in just about every dictatorship. You're advocating that someone should live their life in fear.
It could easily be exploited, and simply because there is already lots of surveillance doesn't mean that we should have to put up with more.
It's the law in Saudi Arabia to punish people by stoning to death. Does that mean the law should be blindly followed? Simply because it's 'the law' doesn't make it a good thing. And you're essentially telling people 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear', same ethos used in just about every dictatorship. You're advocating that someone should live their life in fear.
We live in the UK, mate. If you're doing something minor like littering, ignoring a "don't step on the grass" sign or letting your dog do their business wherever they like, you don't have to live in fear. The police probably won't care if someone keeps sending them footage of you doing as such, and probably freak out at that guy instead. It's nothing that a mobile phone or concealed camera can't do.(How do you think they do all that stuff on consumer watchdog shows?) If you're doing something actually fear worthy like murder, assault or rape, then it's a good idea for you to be arrested.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Kiss
I would be offended to know that I was being recorded whilst talking with someone.
It could easily be exploited, and simply because there is already lots of surveillance doesn't mean that we should have to put up with more.
It's the law in Saudi Arabia to punish people by stoning to death. Does that mean the law should be blindly followed? Simply because it's 'the law' doesn't make it a good thing. And you're essentially telling people 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear', same ethos used in just about every dictatorship. You're advocating that someone should live their life in fear.
It could easily be exploited, and simply because there is already lots of surveillance doesn't mean that we should have to put up with more.
It's the law in Saudi Arabia to punish people by stoning to death. Does that mean the law should be blindly followed? Simply because it's 'the law' doesn't make it a good thing. And you're essentially telling people 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear', same ethos used in just about every dictatorship. You're advocating that someone should live their life in fear.
Why would they be recording you? Unless if you see yourself as someone important enough to have their conversations recorded, it's both pointless and completely impractical for someone to record every conversation they have. The type of person who would record your conversation without you knowing can already do so if they wanted, Google glass won't make a difference.
In what way would it be "easy" to exploit? By the police hacking into every glass user and seeing every person's feed in real time whilst recording the data in a computer with an unholy amount of storage?
Ok, what aspect of the law do you disagree with now which would be more strongly enforced with the introduction of google glass? You're making this a completely overblown issue, no one will live their life in fear because of google glass.
As I understand it, the glasses do not hold anything locally. All the data gathered is held by Google and subsequently accessed each time by the user. This has raised the question as to how much control Google has over that data, although I agree that some of the concerns that have been raised are trivial there are some genuine issues that will need to be addressed.
Original post by Kiss
I would be offended to know that I was being recorded whilst talking with someone.
That sucks but you being offended doesn't obligate someone else to stop doing something they are within their rights to do.
It could easily be exploited, and simply because there is already lots of surveillance doesn't mean that we should have to put up with more.
To what end? Surveillance technology is miles better for monitoring people than Glass will ever be, if Glass having the ability to record makes it bad and a threat to privacy then surely smartphones and digital cameras are equally as evil? Since their ability to record will be almost identical?
It's the law in Saudi Arabia to punish people by stoning to death. Does that mean the law should be blindly followed? Simply because it's 'the law' doesn't make it a good thing. And you're essentially telling people 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear', same ethos used in just about every dictatorship. You're advocating that someone should live their life in fear.
Saudi Arabia is not run by a democratically elected government, our laws are determined by Parliament who in turn are elected by the people if you have an issue with our laws there are a number of channels you can go down to voice your concerns. Breaking laws in a society like ours because you don't think they should be enforced is disrespectful to the entire principle of democracy and no one has the right to simply declare a law that was introduced by our representative government shouldn't be followed because they don't like it.
(edited 11 years ago)
This thread is funny seeing as Google Glass is clearly a techno-widget gimmick and going to flop fairly hard.
I'm sure Glass will find it's niche but it will be small and the product's hype overblown, and it's adoption low and uneventful.
If I even see a pair of them being worn by someone going about their business where I live I'll pay up £100.
I'm sure Glass will find it's niche but it will be small and the product's hype overblown, and it's adoption low and uneventful.
If I even see a pair of them being worn by someone going about their business where I live I'll pay up £100.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- ASAP!! Will internal exclusion affect six form and job applications?
- Durham Law
- A level History NEA Coursework
- Any tips for wearing glasses?
- Thoughts on Abortion?
- i.r.a.c method
- Glasses
- What is your favourite book ?
- Eduqas Religious Studies A-Level
- Politics 25 mark extract question structure
- Kamala Harris is the Democrat VP pick
- How does one even go about answering this question!?
- Relationship help!!!
- Is A level philosophy (aqa) hard if you study?
- A level politics edexcel
- English language gcse questions
- A new short story I wrote this evening
- Can someone mark my LNAT essay?
- Writing Essays
- Next Interview
Latest
Last reply 3 minutes ago
MSc Computer Science (conversion course) 2024-2025Last reply 5 minutes ago
I work as a Clinical Psychologist, ask me anything (within reason)Last reply 6 minutes ago
TSR Decisions Drop In 2024 - LIVE NOW support with university decisionsLast reply 7 minutes ago
COMPETITION - Post a photo you’ve taken of nature [urban edition]Last reply 10 minutes ago
What'll happen if a uni told me that my application is given to other schools?Posted 12 minutes ago
Is mbbs best if I take admission Through New Era EducationLast reply 20 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Posted 43 minutes ago
Which school has a better political science education, UCL or KCL?Last reply 48 minutes ago
CSM Fashion communications: histories and theories 2024Last reply 49 minutes ago
Do you need to know Acylation mechanism for A level OCR chemistry ?Last reply 59 minutes ago
Official: Queen's University Belfast A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 1 hour ago
Official University of Edinburgh Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryTrending
Last reply 6 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Last reply 1 month ago
TSR opinion poll, Feb 2024: how would you vote in the general election?Last reply 1 month ago
2024 Budget: Chancellor Jeremy Hunt under pressure to cut taxesTrending
Last reply 6 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Last reply 1 month ago
TSR opinion poll, Feb 2024: how would you vote in the general election?Last reply 1 month ago
2024 Budget: Chancellor Jeremy Hunt under pressure to cut taxes
