“So the titanic showdown between Facebook and Google might not be the News Feed vs. Google+ after all. It might be Facebook Camera vs. Project Glass. It might, in fact, be pictures vs. vision.” Sounds esoteric, but bear with author Robin Sloan, because I think he’s clearly on to something. By extension, this.
… is lawsuits due to vision damage.
Nah, just stick a warning on the box.
cybergoths will be sued out of existence!
Better to stick with Diaspora*.
By “sharing a vision”, does the author mean more crappy video with an unstable point of view that makes you feel ill in seconds ?
Making good videos, that are a pleasure to watch, requires work. It is, in my opinion, not something that can be done spontaneously like that, you always have to remember that you’re filming and keep concentrated on what the camera is doing.
Solved.
http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/youtube-offers-free-…
More seriously, there is already a sample video taken from a project glass device, and guess what? It is very watchable. The head, as long as it is not weighted down too much by equipment, is a more stable support for a video device than one’s arm and hand.
https://plus.google.com/photos/111626127367496192147/albums/57458498…
I expect first-person videos to become a new “standard” way to film sport, events, life. I think the tiny difference of POV – moving from a handheld camera to a head-attached one – is far more important and far-reaching in our psyche than many think it will be, and may be as important as the ubiquity of cameras nowadays. It is no accident that many scifi writers envisioned that one day, we could see what other people see – literaly, from their point of view, through artificial camera-eyes or through uploading your memories.
Such (limited) software stabilisation tricks still leave the “crappy” part.
Overall, it reminds me about the small fad of home videos, at my place happening 1-1.5 decade ago. Even though the equipment is now much better and less expensive… it mostly passed.
People, to my slight amazement, figured out how utterly tormenting such videos tend to be, and they mostly went “back” to photos (I guess also because there are usually not that many, people can quickly sift through them for the few good ones; not really universally first-person BTW).
Plus http://www.osnews.com/permalink?521083
And yeah, scifi… it also envisioned colonies on the moon or “super AI” in XX century; or flying cars / airplanes from “our” times: http://goo.gl/9TLhg (Wiki Unicode URL, tends to work weird …and we can even build them – take a Harrier, remove wings and canopy – still a horrible idea vs. “boring” reality: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ryanair_Boeing_737-800_appro… ); or that videocalls will be the mode of distant communication.
(or http://www.osnews.com/permalink?520970 )
OTOH they didn’t really envision the ubiquity of computers, mobile phones, or – yes – digital capture and storage of images or audio.
Or Rosey vs. Roomba difference.
is an old trick in myths or fairy tales. A closer term for scifi would tech fantasy …after all, there’s usually not much place for science in it (as in depicting a scientific process, or having a minimum of respect to the conclusions it gives about our world)
Edited 2012-06-06 23:45 UTC
Also, making good videos typically involves discarding, essentially, most of the material shot – that’s not only probably the single most important thing overlooked by creators of crappy videos, the concept of such “life experience” videos also goes right against it.
(sure, there might be a small craze for some time, like with more usual home videos http://www.osnews.com/permalink?521084 , but…)
Edited 2012-06-06 23:39 UTC
I really liked this article and many like it as it points in your a different direction of thinking. When put on the blog/black and white it makes perfect sense.
Obviously Facebook will continue to try and push the facebook platform but the idea of photos being at it’s core of course perfectly obvious it’s just never dawned on me before where i would like that communication would have been the primary use of facebook, thats not sarcasm its how i viewed the platform but photos are the core make a lot more sense with the communication around the photos.
I also appreciate the view of google and in particular their long view of the future, i can see how they are positioning themselves for augmented information delivery and world information/interaction.
Like i said it was a good article and one that got the grey cells moving.