Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 12:18 UTC
Google Lucky bas... Joshua Topolsky got to use and test Google Glass. "Is it ready for everyone right now? Not really. Does the Glass team still have huge distance to cover in making the experience work just the way it should every time you use it? Definitely. But I walked away convinced that this wasn't just one of Google's weird flights of fancy. The more I used Glass the more it made sense to me; the more I wanted it. If the team had told me I could sign up to have my current glasses augmented with Glass technology, I would have put pen to paper (and money in their hands) right then and there. And it's that kind of stuff that will make the difference between this being a niche device for geeks and a product that everyone wants to experience. After a few hours with Glass, I've decided that the question is no longer 'if', but 'when?'" No wonder Google is going into retail. They need physical stores to sell this.
Order by: Score:
What is next ?
by Lennie on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 12:46 UTC
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

So basically this provides a Heads-Up-Display (HUD) for the real world.

If they can add more camera's to it, then they can add something similair to the Kinect to watch what your hands are doing, right ?

In that case you can have a HUD-like interface on your glasses you can manipulate with your hands.

Because speech really isn't such a great interface or is it ?

Edited 2013-02-23 12:49 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: What is next ?
by JAlexoid on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 14:04 UTC in reply to "What is next ?"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Weight and size constraints have to be addressed. Depth sensing cameras aren't small enough.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: What is next ?
by WereCatf on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 14:10 UTC in reply to "RE: What is next ?"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Also, Google Glass does not cover your whole view, it only covers a small portion of it, so it's not really augmented reality or a "HUD" even if you were to add several more cameras to it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: What is next ?
by Lennie on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 14:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What is next ?"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Not yet :-)

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: What is next ?
by MOS6510 on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 17:24 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What is next ?"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

It is a HUD, Heads up Display. It only needs to display info to the user without him/her looking down.

HUDs in fighter jets are pretty small too.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: What is next ?
by Lennie on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 14:31 UTC in reply to "RE: What is next ?"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I never mentioned it wouldn't take an other 5 years before it could be implemented. ;-)

So the question is, is there a physical limitation on how depth sensing cameras are made which would prevent them to be shrunk to such a size

Reply Score: 2

Comment by gan17
by gan17 on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 12:57 UTC
gan17
Member since:
2008-06-03

I can see a booming market for parkour tutorials and "my final moments" vids.

Reply Score: 9

RE: Comment by gan17
by Wafflez on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 14:07 UTC in reply to "Comment by gan17"
Wafflez Member since:
2011-06-26

Well youtube got pretty interesting when russians started using cameras in their vehicles. Imagine when russians will get their Googles Glass... ;)

Edited 2013-02-23 14:08 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by gan17
by tidux on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by gan17"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

"Dmitry runs away from bears, part 68."

Reply Score: 9

RE[3]: Comment by gan17
by gan17 on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 15:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by gan17"
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

"Dmitry runs away from bears, part 68."

When Wafflez mentioned "Russian" my first thought was more along the lines of "Dmitry tackles beaver in the backseat, position 69", though I'm not sure if Youtube allows that sort of stuff, and I'm not sure I'd even want a Google-Glass view of that anyway. ._.

Edited 2013-02-23 15:54 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by gan17
by Doc Pain on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 16:04 UTC in reply to "Comment by gan17"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

With the many security flaws and possible exploits of surveillance technology, combined with sousveillance technology run by "normal people", maybe Glass could be connected to those monitoring you? Like, "this is how you look from above, walking into that building; look to your left, there's a hidden camera peeking in your pockets from above". Or "you're going to enter your PIN into this ATM or payment terminal which is currently connected to a l33t hax0r who now has all your banking data plus your PIN, which is 1234; have a nice day". And the look up the contact information of the boss of the ATM company on Facebook to help you schedule a nice talk with him about security, because you love to hear fairy tales.

While this sounds very useful for people who are paranoid anyway (because, you never know...), it could encourage the upcoming "typical Glass customers" on how their privacy fades when they are at home, go into public, work... oh wait... that doesn't sound like a selling argument, does it? :-)

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by gan17
by WereCatf on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 16:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by gan17"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

With the many security flaws and possible exploits of surveillance technology, combined with sousveillance technology run by "normal people", maybe Glass could be connected to those monitoring you?


Why would they need to do that? You are ALREADY being monitored at all times when you go anywhere even remotely public, there is simply no need to bother with using Google Glass for that. Heck, even just your cell phone has access to much, much more lucrative stuff than can usually be learned from the camera or microphone.

Actually, Google Glass would be a rather poor solution for trying to monitor people: it ain't got enough processing power for anything smart, it only has a limited selection of inputs that are already in use, there's no offline-storage for you to keep anything of value there, and it has terribly limited view on things as it's attached to you, not your surroundings.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by gan17
by Doc Pain on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by gan17"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"With the many security flaws and possible exploits of surveillance technology, combined with sousveillance technology run by "normal people", maybe Glass could be connected to those monitoring you?


Why would they need to do that? You are ALREADY being monitored at all times when you go anywhere even remotely public, there is simply no need to bother with using Google Glass for that.
"

That's right. I just wanted to point out that visual clues provided by a "Glass app" (not sure if that term even applies) could educate those who are interested in this information, regarding aspects of who is monitoring them, from where and how. With the increasing interconnection of services, the Glass could be a tool to "turn around" surveillance, i. e. you can now exactly determine who is responsible for invading your privacy, prbably even why this is. You can also connect this information to individuals (operatives in charge, owners of surveillance companies and so on) just as you as an individual are subject to surveillance.

Heck, even just your cell phone has access to much, much more lucrative stuff than can usually be learned from the camera or microphone.


Again you are fully correct. The only addition I'd like to make is that the Glass sees what you see, whereas the camera in the smartphone is covered when you're carrying it in a pocket. So the Glass would deliver a permanent video and audio stream, but probably nothing more.

But that was not the primary intention of my comment.

Allow me to be more specific:

For my daily work, I'd like to have a "Glass app" that tells me things about security which I'm concerned of, either because I'm "in charge" or I'm just interested in it from a personal point of view. View! Visual identification of objects will lead to their security specs, and in an interconnected world, remote processes could be launched for diagnostics. Example: I look at a customer's computer. Per location and other visual clues, its IP is determined, and a port scanner is run, as well as other tests. In the Glass, I can see the (poorly chosen) password and enter it "without knowing" it. Same goes for printers (as a nice carrier of spyware), banking terminals and other devices you'd like to know more about when you're concerned enough. The Glass could point you to locations of cameras so you can happily smile into that direction, giving your friendly government that you are all happy people enjoying all the care you pay for with your taxes.

Another application could be a "Glass app" that identifies faces of people I see and (in the interconnected world) obtain information from their Facebook and Twitter accounts and governmental records. In negotiations (e. g. for contracts and salaries) those informations could be very useful. I won't use the word "blackmail" here, but you get the idea. The Glass could be used to find something for my counterpart he should better have hidden, but because "everything is public" there's no reason to complain.

The advantage of having this information delivered per Glass (instead of per smartphone or per laptop) is that it is much less obvious for others. (Of course in a higher level security area I would not be allowed to wear it, but there are other options.)

From this imagination, you can easily conclude that the upcoming technology already made me totally insane. Must be the radiation. :-)

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by gan17
by WorknMan on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 17:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by gan17"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Actually, Google Glass would be a rather poor solution for trying to monitor people


Maybe not, but I bet it'll do wonders for the gonzo porn industry ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by gan17
by BallmerKnowsBest on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 17:24 UTC in reply to "Comment by gan17"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

I can see a booming market for parkour tutorials and "my final moments" vids.


Google Glass + "YOLO"-spouting brain donors == greatest Darwin Awards ever.

Reply Score: 4

...
by Hiev on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 17:30 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

Hey, Google, I'm gonna give you this idea for free, put a camera behind.

Reply Score: 3

Bright Future
by bowkota on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 18:23 UTC
bowkota
Member since:
2011-10-12

I've been excited about this since day 1. I think it would make a great companion to your mobile phone; makes much more sense than a smart watch. I also believe it makes more sense for video than it does for taking pictures.

My only concerns are implications to privacy and let's hope they don't price it like the Chromebook.

Reply Score: 2

No thanks
by Phloptical on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 21:08 UTC
Phloptical
Member since:
2006-10-10

Interesting idea, but they can keep it. I'm no technophobe, but the last thing I want while walking down the street (or driving) is ads popping up in my field of vision letting me know of useless junk that is on sale.

Communicators in star trek were a cool idea too, until they came into production (ie. cell phones). Now every schmuck and their brother has one and is yacking on it incessantly.

Reply Score: 3

v RE: No thanks
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 21:58 UTC in reply to "No thanks"
RE[2]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 12:18 UTC in reply to "RE: No thanks"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

It's more like google being on a high horse looking down on everything you do and then profiting millions off you without your consent. Does this not bother you?

I for one will never buy or use a single product from google. I understand I'm in the minority these days. But as you get older perhaps you'll understand the wisdom of keeping your personal life private and only allow companies with ethics and morals to prosper.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: No thanks
by WereCatf on Sun 24th Feb 2013 12:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: No thanks"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

and only allow companies with ethics and morals to prosper.


So, you mean you're never ever going to be buying any sort of electronics ever again, rent a movie, buy music or anything like that?

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: No thanks
by Lennie on Sun 24th Feb 2013 13:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: No thanks"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

No, he builds all the electronics he uses at a hackerspace himself. ;-)

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 15:22 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: No thanks"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

I don't know what hackerspace is?. But you're correct, I build all my own gear. Is there something wrong with that?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: No thanks
by Lennie on Sun 24th Feb 2013 15:34 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: No thanks"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

No, there is nothing wrong with that.

I assume you build your own desktop PC and not your mobile phone, tv or tablet for example ?

A hackerspace is a place where people come together to build stuff. As Wikipedia describes it: "A hackerspace (also referred to as a hacklab, makerspace, or hackspace) is a community-operated physical space where people with common interests, often in computers, technology, science, digital art or electronic art, can meet, socialise and/or collaborate."

That can be very useful, because not everyone has access to certain equipment or tools at home or even work, but at a hackerspace you can share.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 16:21 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: No thanks"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10


I assume you build your own desktop PC and not your mobile phone, tv or tablet for example ?


Yes I build all my own PC's. My TV is a standard 50" plasma from Panasonic made in Japan. It has no other features other than to display tv channels and allow standard hdmi input.

I have my own built and programed media center pc. I wrote my own software to run it using linux as the operating system and a mixture of C and python to display and record TV, play our music and videos, display our pictures and play many free games and much more. My family have used it every single day for the past 5 years and have a lot of fun doing so. I'm not a trained programmer or have any degrees in computer tech, I'm just a simple chippy that doesn't waist his life in front of an idiot box watching ads and propaganda.

I don't own a tablet yet because there aren't any that will allow me to do what I want with them. I'm thinking of building my own from parts that are readily available theses days at a cost much less than what is on offer. I would never own an android or apple tablet as long as my arse points to the ground!

My phone is an old Nokia N95 which I have repaired several times and suits my need completely. When it dies completely I will get something simple if something similar is not available, we'll see ;)

None of the companies I have bought my products from to date have been ethically and morally corrupt as other companies, so they have enjoyed my patronage.


That can be very useful, because not everyone has access to certain equipment or tools at home or even work, but at a hackerspace you can share.


I don't know if we have these things in Australia. I must look into it. They sound like great places to meet similar minded people and share thoughts and ideas.

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: No thanks
by WereCatf on Sun 24th Feb 2013 16:15 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: No thanks"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I don't know what hackerspace is?. But you're correct, I build all my own gear. Is there something wrong with that?


I'd love to know the details of how you've built your own processor, displays, memory chips and all. That would make for a wonderful story here on OSNews.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 16:26 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: No thanks"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

I'd love to know the details of how you've built your own processor, displays, memory chips and all. That would make for a wonderful story here on OSNews.


Why would I need to do all of that? What is so ethically or morally wrong with companies that build that kind of hardware?

How does Intel, ARM or AMD screw you? Or a memory or display manufacturer?

Please enlighten me I'm truly interested in your thoughts.

Edited 2013-02-24 16:28 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 15:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: No thanks"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

What makes you think you need to support vile companies to have such luxuries? Not all of them are as morally and ethically corrupt as google. I would rather go without than support companies that are leading you into a life of serfdom, it's your choice, I've made mine!

Reply Score: 2

RE: No thanks
by Wafflez on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 22:25 UTC in reply to "No thanks"
Wafflez Member since:
2011-06-26

Really? Ads? Despite google saying "no ads", talking out loud "ok glass take a picture" or "ok glass <..>" every minute or privacy concerns, you're worried about ads?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: No thanks
by Doc Pain on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 23:22 UTC in reply to "RE: No thanks"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

[...] talking out loud "ok glass take a picture" or "ok glass " every minute [...]


Please compare: http://abstrusegoose.com/501

;-)

Reply Score: 5

Comment by kovacm
by kovacm on Mon 25th Feb 2013 06:52 UTC
kovacm
Member since:
2010-12-16

Hope that Google will be ready for analysing so much new data when everobody start to wear google glass.

Reply Score: 2