Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Feb 2013 11:40 UTC
Google This is amazing. Not only has Google just opened up the pre-order program for Google Glass to 'creative individuals', it has also unveiled what the user interface looks like and how it works. It's... Nothing short of amazing. I'm throwing money, credit cards, my car keys, my house keys, my Surface RT, my cats, everything at my screen. I want this so bad.
Thread beginning with comment 553218
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Of course it's no different. You can do the same with any phone - including the iPhone - and it has been that way for almost a decade. Nothing new.

But it's from Google so better make some snide remark about advertising even while their own site uses advertising and tracking as well.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

I think I would be more relaxed about this if it wasn't an advertising company making it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I think I would be more relaxed about this if it wasn't an advertising company making it.


Well, why? Atleast with Google they're not selling your details to others, but if it was some non-advertising company you could bet your ass that they'd sell all the details they could to some 3rd party they do not really have control over, and would that really be preferable to you?

Reply Parent Score: 4

Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

But it's from Google so better make some snide remark about advertising even while their own site uses advertising and tracking as well.


We all find advertising useful sometimes both as receivers of ads and as purveyors of ads. But I do think some things are probably best not run by advertising companies, and this sort of wearable device might be such an example.

I think the police are necessary and useful but I wouldn't be happy if they ran the kindergartens, I think religious institutions have their place but I wouldn't want them to control the ministry of culture, I think political parties are essential to democracy but they shouldn't decide the verdict in court cases. etc etc.

If a company, such as Google, makes all it's money from advertising then that has an effect on what it does and how it does it. A non-advertising company would probably do a lot of things differently than Google does them. I think it would be silly to argue otherwise.

Maybe the fact that Google Glass is a product of an advertising company will have no impact on the end user experience. On the other hand it might, and that impact may have negative consequences for end users.

I would of thought it should be possible to raise such matters, even occasionally in a caustic and satirical fashion, without such concerns being condemned out of hand.

Just saying.

Reply Parent Score: 0

galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

We all find advertising useful sometimes both as receivers of ads and as purveyors of ads. But I do think some things are probably best not run by advertising companies, and this sort of wearable device might be such an example.


I assume you are implying that you would be more likely to trust Apple to make this since they are not an advertising company... I mean really, who else could you POSSIBLY be talking about...

So what is an "advertising company"? Isn't it a company that sells access to it's users eyeballs, making revenue by charging a fee for such access?

http://advertising.apple.com/

Well?

Yes, I realize there is a rather large difference in scale between Apple's small scale endeavor and what Google does... But I would argue it doesn't matter - your argument is about principle, so it is the principle that counts.

If Apple took an official stance and publicly stated "we are a technology company - we aren't interested in making money through advertising" then I might actually agree with your point. But they don't. They are just as much an "advertising company" as Google is - they are simply not as good at it yet. So they make vastly more money selling hardware, but that in no way gives them any moral high ground - i.e. it is no reason to "trust them" to make something like this product any more or less than Google.

If they are willing to pursue revenue through selling access to their users, well they are advertising company - the scale doesn't matter.

If a company, such as Google, makes all it's money from advertising then that has an effect on what it does and how it does it. A non-advertising company would probably do a lot of things differently than Google does them. I think it would be silly to argue otherwise.


Name such a non-advertising company?

Samsung maybe ;)

I would of thought it should be possible to raise such matters, even occasionally in a caustic and satirical fashion, without such concerns being condemned out of hand.


I think the problem is the concerns you are raising are based on a completely false premise. Maybe if you reply here that you meant Samsung or HTC or some other "pure" hardware maker would make you feel better... But we all know those were not the alternatives you were thinking of when you wrote this.

I personally think you are maybe just a tad bitter because Apple didn't think of this one first ;)

Reply Parent Score: 4

mistersoft Member since:
2011-01-05

I think I agree with more than half of what you're saying for a change(knowing you've a somewhat Apple bias..and each to their own)

But I'm just imagining a scenario where say 4, 6 even companies have similar offering in broad over area of AR/VR/HUD glasses. be they similar notifications a la bluetooth companion watches for smartphone simple info/pic consumption (but strapped near your eye)....or up to google glass (or http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/sep/10/augmented-reality-... ) or a switchable mix of AR/VR even with variable transparency.
And the contenders beyond Google are obviously Apple and Microsoft, but maybe also Canonical, Amazon, News Corp..? or other wonders.

And it's always going to be the back-end/cloud voice and data processing (and hoarding, and selling) that is going to be the worry. If these companies were brave enough (and decent enough) they'd allow, and cooperate to an extent to facilitate customers using AR hardware from each other to use different back-ends ..e.g. Google Glass hardware with Apple's Siri backend as the only example that one could use so far..

And vice versa, whenever more come on stream. I think this kind of facilitating of customer choice would be the ONLY way that we as customers/consumers could have even the vaguest amount of hope or trust that someone somewhere can't literally tapped into your video/audio/location feed as literally a walking spy drone.. (let alone more innocuous advertising worries). Paranoid enough..?? ..Never!! ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

_Nine_ Member since:
2010-10-13

Of course it's no different. You can do the same with any phone - including the iPhone - and it has been that way for almost a decade. Nothing new.

But it's from Google so better make some snide remark about advertising even while their own site uses advertising and tracking as well.


It's totally different. It's the difference between capable and easily capable, not mention discrete. Sure, you can do the same thing now and even years ago, but you can't capture video just by looking at someone--you have to get your phone out, access it's camera, aim it at your subject, etc. It's not discreet, and if you started recording videos of strangers for an extended period of time, someone's probably going to ask you what the eff you're doing.

Will that stop this from progressing? Maybe not. But, social consequences are a consideration and certainly have--and will continue--to influence the adoption of a technology.

Reply Parent Score: 2

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Of course it's no different. You can do the same with any phone - including the iPhone - and it has been that way for almost a decade. Nothing new.

I don't know Thom ...the degree of automation really can make a difference.

But then OTOH, I don't really see what the big deal is about Glass - seems like a bit fancied out webcam; its videos seemingly impressive mostly because of pro editing, including music, short clips.

Edited 2013-02-25 11:07 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2