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.
Thread beginning with comment 553551
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: No thanks"
RawMustard
Member since:
2005-10-10

Price fixing is against the law and those responsible have been brought to justice. You've always had the choice of not buying the product if you thought the price was not fair. I never felt the price was not fair and paying for something I wanted and needed was fine by me.

Price fixing is not the same as stealing your private information and tracking your every movement and activity.

It's illegal to open someone elses mail in my country and carries a hefty penalty. I believe it's the same in many countries. Why should it be ok on the internet and why should I support low life that do that very thing?

I guess you don't mind people reading your letters in your letter box or following you when you go out to visit friends, do some shopping, or take a holiday and log your every movement? It's called stalking here and again carries a hefty penalty. Why should it be ok on the internet?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: No thanks
by WereCatf on Sun 24th Feb 2013 17:01 in reply to "RE[9]: No thanks"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Price fixing is not the same as stealing your private information and tracking your every movement and activity.


See, that's exactly what I was waiting from you: hypocrisy. First you derail against companies being greedy and morally and ethically corrupt, and then the next thing you know you're saying it's actually okay as long as it doesn't involve online activities.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[11]: No thanks
by RawMustard on Sun 24th Feb 2013 17:14 in reply to "RE[10]: No thanks"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

Not so. I have no problem with companies price fixing in what's supposed to be a free market. If the price they fix at is too high for me then I'll simply refuse to buy their products opening the way for someone else to come out at a better price. I don't find this to be morally or ethically wrong. I do however have a problem with bureaucrats legislating stupid laws without knowing the consequences of their actions because of their ideological beliefs!

And your argument about taking issue with something because it's online is just simply ridiculous.

If there are laws to prevent people sticking their noses into other people business offline, then those laws should apply online also, no?

I hate busy bodies, and I hate busy bodies that profit from breaking laws governments should be upholding more!

Reply Parent Score: 1