Criminalizing Google Glass - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2014, 09:48:10 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--See below link for an article about the Feds hard timing a fellow for wearing a Google Glass.http://betabeat.com/2014/01/feds-interrogate-man-wearing-google-glass-in-movie-theater/--Also please see below.http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-google-glass-20140117,0,5347315.story--As a general matter, I tend to support the police, but this sort of thing is beginning to get under my skin. I plan to purchase the Google Glass or something like, just as soon as I can afford it. I use computers a good portion of the day, and the freedom to move my head where I want when working on equipment would be very handy."Television has raised writing to a new low."Szmuel Gelbfisz - Samuel Goldfish - Samuel Goldwin1879 - 1974Best RegardsClear Ether

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2014, 09:52:47 pm
content: Do they even make movies worth seeing at the theaters anymore, much less to bother recording/stealing?

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2014, 11:57:54 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on January 21, 2014, 09:48:10 pmThe same hard time they would give anyone holding a video recorder in a cinema.He seems to be a fine example of why they are call glassholes...

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 12:19:18 am
content: The real problem there is that they haul in the feds for someone recording a movie. How is that not excessive? Just eject the guy from the premises! I don't get alphabet soup up my ass for using a camera in a bookstore, even though I could photograph pages...

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 12:26:14 am
content: Dear Rufus:--I take your point but, in this case it is clearly over reach. Just watch the guy for a few minutes, if his head holds rock still like a statue, then he might be filming the movie. If he turns to his companion, scratches his nose, eats popcorn, or laughs, probably not, I think.“The main difference for the history of the world if I had been shot rather than Kennedy, is that Onassis probably wouldn't have married Mrs Khrushchev.”Nikita Sergeyevich Krushchev 1894 - 1971Best RegardsClear Ether

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 12:29:14 am
content: A good sign really. Means all of the murders, rapists, child molesters and gang bangers have been caught, they must be moving on to lesser crimes.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 12:47:24 am
content: I'm hopeful this pointless "innovation" will lose interest, and become banished to the annuls of failed products, along with the Apple Newton, Sony MiniDISC/UMD/Memory Stick + many more.Google are the one company who, if I allowed them to, would TRULY ANGER ME. I find them in utter contempt of their entire user base, and they reap what they sow... and what they sow is mistrust... so...Please - make this creepy TRASH illegal.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 12:53:01 am
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 12:47:24 amLast thing we need is another stupid law.My niece is deaf, something like Google Glass could easily listen and put spoken words on the screen for her to read, what a technological achievement for a child in need.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 12:59:09 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on January 22, 2014, 12:53:01 amIf a product ONLY did that, then yes - that would be great for deaf people. It is clearly a product not designed for that alone.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:05:34 am
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 12:59:09 amWhy? A deaf person can't hear a cell phone, and IM, an Email blonk? You can't ignore the advantages of such a device, the stupid ass movie theaters will just have to get over it.I could easily embed a camera in a hat or other device, pirates will continue unphased by a Google Glass ban.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:09:23 am
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 12:47:24 amWhat's creepy and why should it be illegal? What makes technology trash?

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:12:25 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on January 22, 2014, 01:05:34 amI feel this is getting nowhere. You don't have to convince me; I'm against it, and that won't change. Take care

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:12:37 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on January 22, 2014, 12:53:01 amAnd if they didn't have a camera built in she would be able to use them in a cinema.

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:26:42 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on January 22, 2014, 01:09:23 amTechnology which lets Google use thousands (millions they hope) of glasshole drones to invade my privacy.Quote from: http://mashable.com/2013/05/16/google-glass-glasshole/Personally I think deformation of the nose from punching will prevent the long term wearing of Glass in public.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:29:07 am
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 01:26:42 amRight, because that camera is always transmitting the whole world to Google, who are analyzing every frame for information they can use.QuoteSeems to me the problem isn't with the users of Glass.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:34:17 am
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 01:26:42 amAlthough I'm a believer in an individual's privacy, you already have none, this doesn't change anything. Walking around in public is well, public, and anything you do online, via cell phone, land line, tracked via vehicle GPS/onstar, etc is captured and has been for years. Fixing this requires a fundamental shift in government operation.Banning technology to fix this is like banning a vehicle for drunk driving accidents.

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 02:46:00 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on January 22, 2014, 01:29:07 amIs there any way for someone to tell it isn't doing that?Facial recognition of everyone you look at isjustthe kind of shit google likes. How cool would be be to look at someone and see little labels hovering above their head telling you what they last searched for on google or last bought from Amazon? Maybe they could tell you who else in your G+ circles has also seen that face recently. Maybe if the face isn't recognised as having a G+ account it could just label them "In need of assimilation".In Korea it is a legal requirement that camera phones make shutter noises, in Japan it is a voluntary manufactures agreement. In the USA a bill (Camera Phone Predator Alert Act) requiring the same was proposed in 2009. Glass has vastly more potential for covert invasion of privacy than phones without shutter noises. Personally I would be very happy to see glassholes out in public get punched in the face.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 03:02:51 am
content: I know it may seem obvious to many people, and it also is to the others who deny it because they're too scared/biased/sold-out/invested, to face facts, but there's something simple we should all remember:Most companies like to lie, on the whole; they like to lie *A LOT* - it's known as "marketing". Also, companies hype the "features" they want to exaggerate and get us to focus on, so our focus is drawnawayfrom the things they DON'T mention - the things they'd really rather you DON'T know about. Even if you can prove something is bad, the likes of Google play dodgeball with the facts, even if they KNOW you know, they think a lie is more logical than "losing face" or market share.Denying something happens or that it has the potential to happen, doesn't mean it won't EVER happen; it means you are in denial. Isn't that obvious? I bet many of you will even be sold out enough to deny THAT.Google ain't safe baby - the consumer world is under DEEP delusion... verrrrry deep. Apple say noone can access your iPhone 5S fingerprint sensor data... says who? Says THEM... and so what? Barclays and many other banks, say that their "systems" and ATMs are infallible... rigggght.

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 03:19:57 am
content: Interesting stuff in this thread.Fact is, in the majority of the countries on this world, including US, when you are in a public place you can be filmed and photographed and there is no expectation of privacy or any law through which someone has to ask permission.A guy with a Google Glass device on his head has the same rights to walk around recording just as any other guy outside can photograph you, or film you. It's only illegal in some cases, if you harass someone or try to do something indecent, like shooting under women's dresses.You may not like it but that's the reality.As for the issue with the cinema, the fault is again with the cinema, the MPAA and the ICE agents that basically assaulted him. It's a combination of aggressiveness from MPAA's part and stupidity from the part of the ICE agents who acted as a private police for MPAA agents.The Google Glass is just a smartphone with camera, glued to glasses, and it should be treated like any other smartphone with cameras. If you have a smartphone on your shirt pocket, that doesn't mean it's always recording or that you have any intention of recording.

author: Sigmoid
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 06:20:52 am
content: Guys, a cinema is private premises. If you don't like their fascist attitude toward cameras, don't go to one. The movie will be out on iTunes and Amazon Instant Video in a month or two anyway.And a google glass on your head (ie. not in your bag) is not like a cell phone in your pocket. It's like a cell phone in your hand raised up, with you looking at the screen. I guess if you did that in the cinema, the result would be the same.Also, there was the incident with a guy getting a ticket for driving with a google glass on. In California, it's illegal to drive with a computer screen in front of you. So while it may be excessive, I guess the cops' reasoning is that the guy may be watching pro wrestling on that thing while driving, and if he gets distracted at the wrong moment, it could cost lives.Perfectly understandable, I don't think we need to envision some kind of anti-technology government conspiracy or whatever.

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 08:17:10 am
content: I linked over to the second article. The LA times article on lady ticketed driving wearing Google Glass. In my view, this is not and issue about Google Glass but about driving.This distraction is unsafe. It is well established that in the USA driving is a privilege and not a right. Driving is also unlike other "freedom" as this one can injure or even kill your fellow humanoids near you.If this distracted lady runs over someone and killed the person, a second-degree homicide is easily justified. A first-degree homicide is certainly within the ream of consideration. (For international readers: As every state in the USA is different, loosely speaking: 2nd degree is accidental and unintended; 1st degree is where you know it can lead to the death of others but you acted with total disregard. I am no lawyer, so please correct me if I am wrong.)This lady is not only selfish, she is childish, self centered, irresponsible. and lacks good judgement. She is a danger to me and to other who is sharing the road with her.Shame on her. Not only should she receive a ticket, her driving privilege should be revoked.

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 08:50:22 am
content: Is the radio safe? Is the GPS safe? Is the speedometer safe? For all these three things, you're supposed to take your eyes off the road, which doesn't happen with Google Glass.How is it any different to see a small gps picture in the corner of your eye compared to looking at the gps in your car?How is it any different than this :It's simply let's panic about new technology just because it's new and we don't understand it..Oh.. and I just read on some news site that the Google glasses can only record for up to 10 seconds and only with voice command and it also has a led that lights up when recording. The guys at cinema and so on obviously didn't know this, or they were motivated by MPAA's ransom money (they pay cinema employees for each arrest or prosecution or something like that)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 10:25:33 am
content: Here in Australia at least, in public you have no right to privacy, i.e. to not being filmedOn private property though an owner is within their rights to ask you to stop filming if you are on their property, but if you are on public land then they are fair game.

author: lemmegraphdat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 10:43:28 am
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 01:26:42 amTactic of the school yard...punch a nerd.

author: lemmegraphdat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 10:54:30 am
content: It'll be cool when this tech is a option at the optometrist's office.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:03:59 pm
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 02:46:00 amOther than the technical reality that there is insufficient bandwidth, processing power, and battery capacity available for this?QuoteAnd I'd be very happy to see you, and all those like you, get locked up for it.

author: Dago
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:17:28 pm
content: So much hate for Google glass recently, I don't really get whats the point! You can photograph everybody freely on a public space so I don't see how wearing the camera on your head makes it any different.

author: vtkkorhanjoh
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:39:28 pm
content: I didn't know that there were feds sitting all movie theaters, checking for people who may record something in the movie theaters.We never have that here in Norway!

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:49:25 pm
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 03:02:51 amWhat are you arguing? Anybody that believes they have public privacy need to pull their head out of their ass.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 01:52:22 pm
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 02:46:00 amAnd above is why we are failing as a society,.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 02:18:21 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on January 22, 2014, 01:49:25 pmYes - why be concerned about your privacy hey? May as well just throw all caution to the wind and wire up Google cameras in every room in your house and give them free reign...Yeeah... doesn't matter, Mr passive.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 02:26:33 pm
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 02:18:21 pmConspiracy theorist detected.You walk around in a mask all day?

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 02:35:28 pm
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 02:18:21 pmLet's stop being passive, we could make their cell phone spying more fun. Let's write a cell phone app that sends a text message to each of our contacts once per minute "Suck a hogs ass you spying bastards".A few million people, to a hundred or so contacts once per min, ha ha ha, I've drank way too much coffee this morning.

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 05:25:15 pm
content: Quote from: mariush on January 22, 2014, 08:50:22 amNo it is not simple panic. My last two accidents were distracted drivers hitting me and the latest I was actually stopped at a stop sign waiting for traffic to clear! Prior to that, I had no human related accidents for 30 years (deer ran into my car once and I ran into deer once).At least once a week, I drive by a part of a road with a memorial of a 14 year old girl died crossing the road. (Kind of a custom in some states, a small memorial is left on the side of the road where someone died.)Some distractions (speedometer, gear-shift) are necessary and part of the deal. Some are not (radio). I skip GPS since it is arguable either way.So, I view it as no different than "open container" laws. Some states disallow have open container of alcohol in the car. If you carry a bottle ofunopenedbeer next to you, no problem. The moment that bottle is opened it became disallowed to be inside the passenger compartment of the car. When danger is unnecessary doing what is considered a privilege and not a right,there is no need to invite danger.As a technologist for half a century, I am not afraid of technology. I was mobile on-line with Palm7 before most know general-public knows what the net is. Some technology is just stupid and this is one of them. I am also a small-government guy. I am no control freak like imposing laws that you can't get a coke > 16oz. (mayor of NYC). While I don't support most laws, but when it come to protecting one citizen against harming by the misdeed of another, I will give it due thought. This is one of them.

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 05:40:11 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on January 22, 2014, 01:49:25 pmWhile anyone who argues that privacy is an all or nothing option also has their head up their ass.Didn't your mother tell you it was rude to stare? Don't you think recording video so you can stare as much as you like later or upload it to the internet for millions to stare at is vastly more rude?If people desire social acceptance they might have to understand and show some social grace. Personally I would consider someone punching a glasshole in the face to have more social grace than the glasshole.Quote from: mariush on January 22, 2014, 08:50:22 amI believe in most states (all?) it is simply illegal to have equipment capable of displaying television installed in a position where the driver can view it. That makes all android type devices and glass illegal. The law has been overtaken by technology and needs revision.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 05:47:29 pm
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 05:40:11 pmHa ha, you can't stare, but it ok to punch people in the face. Just wrong.

author: Rufus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 05:54:15 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on January 22, 2014, 05:47:29 pmI guess this forum being what it is the membership here has rather below average social grace, way below in some cases.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 05:54:39 pm
content: Quote from: Rufus on January 22, 2014, 05:54:15 pmNo, I think you're just a fruitcake.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 06:40:24 pm
content: "Everyone is spying on everyone, therefore everyone should now be allowed to spy on everyone, because everyone is doing it, therefore it is acceptable because everyone is spying on everyone, therefore..."

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 06:41:08 pm
content: Please stop putting words in our mouths.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 06:43:28 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on January 22, 2014, 06:41:08 pmOkay. I'll put text onto your screen, instead"Hey dude, not my problem; 'everyone's' doing it, so it can't be that bad":

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 07:00:15 pm
content: Please step to the sidelines and remain quiet while the rest of the world moves on and leaves you in the dust.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 07:02:05 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on January 22, 2014, 07:00:15 pmFeel perfectly free to enjoy your technology-induced trance of "progress". You have free will, let's hope you all snap out of this delusion sometime

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 07:06:45 pm
content: Quote from: rolandpenplotter on January 22, 2014, 07:02:05 pmAbout the same time you snap out of yours.

author: rolandpenplotter
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2014, 07:07:45 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on January 22, 2014, 07:06:45 pmHave a nice evening

author: lemmegraphdat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 02:11:02 am
content: I hate screwing around with a camera while on vacation. I just want to be on vacation, I don't care about pictures. I sure as hell don't care about pictures of my day to day life. Google glassed are just useless really. What I want is the Terminator overlay on something I'm working on, now that might be useful.

author: MatCat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 02:28:29 am
content: It seems to me that some people take Alex Jones a bit too seriously...

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 02:54:54 am
content: I managed to get my hands on a pair, and I will walk into AMC theatres and watch a movie with it on. Then I will sue for searches without probable cause or warrant.

author: os40la
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 03:02:21 am
content: I wonder how many anti-glass people start heading to the check out counter when someone posts the x-ray vision hack on here..... But mr. FBI I was only trying to get the behind the scenes footages......

author: Robert.Adams
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 03:23:50 am
content: I have Google Glass and that guy was just being obnoxious. I've been out and seen two movies while I've had my Google Glass but I've always had the sense to turn them off and put them in the bag.I am a little curious because he said he had his prescription lenses on them and needed it to see. AFAIK there are only 3d printed adapters to get prescription lenses attached currently. I heard the price (starting at $99) announced but didn't think the lenses were out yet.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 10:03:26 am
content: I wonder how much of the pushback is just due to it being produced and promoted by Google and not, say, Apple, Microsoft, or even some random Chinese company? Along that line of thought, I can't wait for competitors to appear...As for the privacy argument, I believe that if you are in a public space then you shouldn't expect any - you're already being watched by the security cameras. On the contrary, if you're in a private space and you're the owner, then you do have the right to not allow use of recording devices. Personally I wouldn't buy a Glass since I don't want to be "connected" to Google with it, but if some other company comes out with one, maybe... especially if it has a built-in thermal camera

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 11:11:24 am
content: Quote from: amyk on January 23, 2014, 10:03:26 amOnly if you are filming on private property. If you are standing on public property then you can film people on private property. At least here in oz.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 11:34:25 am
content: It's seriously not practical for Glass to record continuously and upload to servers. Anyone who has tried to use a smartphone to record video knows this - battery life is on the order of 4 hours - now take the tiny battery in the Glass and you'd be lucky to do 1-2 hours of recording...

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 01:31:26 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on January 23, 2014, 11:34:25 amIn fact if I were to want to record continuously and secretly, I'd probably get something like this:http://www.eyespypro.com/products/Clear-Glasses-Wired-Hidden-Camera.html

author: Po6ept
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2014, 05:58:26 pm
content: Quote from: os40la on January 23, 2014, 03:02:21 amThat's not new technology. I could buy X-RAY Specs from the ad in the back of Boy's Life back in the 1960s!