Google Glass could get you thrown out of a restaurant. I saw it with my own eyes today!

[Overmind One]

You do realize you are your own doorman to your place, right? I don't believe I need to elaborate on that.

Yeah, but I have at least one buddy who already told me he was getting them and we argued about it. I told him he would not be allowed to wear them at my pad, and he thinks Im kidding and that I myself will buy a pair! Not gonna happen. Wait...didnt I just finish blowing my computers away and installing Linux as my primary OS at home? Im getting serious about my privacy. Its my new "cause". I take note of the extreme security where I work, and where new technology is being developed. Arent we all entitled to the same levels of privacy?

 

[Overmind One]

The companies that make radar detectors also make the actual radars and anti-radar detector tech for law enforcement. They are the epitome of playing both sides.

Signal jammers are already illegal on the Federal level, as are any devices which "interfere with lawful communications". It is even illegal to manufacture or possess them. Radar detectors toe a line because radar signals are not really "communication" per se. The Feds use of your cellphone to spy on you secretly, or by tapping into your computers and/or webcams and microphones is considered "lawful communication" on the Federal level, made possible by the Patriot Act.

http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/jammer-enforcement

 

[Overmind One]

I apologize if I am a little negative on this. I mean, I love technology and all, but technology is suppose to help the world becoming a better place. I feel repackaging stuff with a new paint job or a putting a prettier box, is just scamming the public.

It angers me when tech is used for the wrong reasons.

This is significant. Imagine, if you will, working for the Wizard of Oz. Say you were one of the people who changes the lights and fuses on the control panel the "wizard" used to create the fake Great Wizard of Oz and fool everyone. You were picked because you are trusted to keep the secret, and yet you are needed because you have the knowledge and skills to maintain the equipment. After all, the Wizard of Oz is at best an actor and executive. He is not an inventor or technician or visionary.

Tech used for the "right" reasons tends to facilitate something you want to do.

Tech used for the "wrong" reasons tends to control something, beyond your ability to choose.

 

[heisenberg]

No, but I do have geek friends, early adopters who would buy this thing just because it's new, and exclusive, and they have the money to waste on them. The guy wearing them at TGIF appeared to have matched the blue frame of his Google Glass to his outfit (a light blue color). I saw a young woman wearing one with white frames, and yet another wearing them without actual glasses which looks more unnatural than those worn with actual eyeglasses.

The sign in my home is a statement and will likely become a conversation piece. Ill take a picture of it when I put it up.

I was looking this issue up last night, and found these:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/27/lost-lake-cafe-google-glass_n_4350039.html

Excerpt:



10 places where Google Glass is banned:

http://www.searchenginejournal.com/top-10-places-that-have-banned-google-glass/66585/

On the list:

Banks/ATMs
Sports Arenas/Concert Venues
Locker Rooms/Dressing Rooms
Movie Theaters
Cars
Hospitals
Classrooms
Strip Clubs (had not thought of that one!)
Casinos (or this one)
Bars

Every hotel I called in Las Vegas (about 5 random ones on the Strip) said that they cannot be worn in the Casinos anywhere in Vegas OR Atlantic City NJ. Both the Spa and Morongo have banned them in their casinos too.

Entire states are seeking to ban them whilst driving...not good news for automakers who want to create sync capability in their cars for Google Glass.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...s-driving-bans-as-states-move-to-bar-use.html

The entire UK as banned them in ALL cinemas:

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/jul/01/google-glass-banned-in-uk-cinemas

Not surprising. I think this sort of tech crosses a line.

LMAO, so it's pretty much banned anywhere you can get any attention? Good

 

[Overmind One]

LMAO, so it's pretty much banned anywhere you can get any attention? Good

Unlike other social causes, I do not think that courts will back anyone's "right" to wear Google Glass anywhere. They are cameras/recorders/phones/data devices/geolocators, and they do not fall under any sort of civil rights category or 1st Amendment protections.

 

[heisenberg]

Unlike other social causes, I do not think that courts will back anyone's "right" to wear Google Glass anywhere. They are cameras/recorders/phones/data devices/geolocators, and they do not fall under any sort of civil rights category or 1st Amendment protections.

Why can't the courts bully the nsa to stop doing it then, if they can do to individuals?

 

[Overmind One]

Why can't the courts bully the nsa to stop doing it then, if they can do to individuals?

Its a Bureau, like the CIA and IRS and the others. Congress gives them means to conceal information. Congress could defund the portion of that agency that does the spying, however. I dont know the details of how all that works, but it is bigger than the Supreme Court.

 

[Atlantis]

Google Glasses looks F**ing ugly and silly. I don't know who came up with the design but they don't suit anyone. I wouldn't wear them and if I saw someone wear I would tell them to take it off. Google glasses haven't taken off here (fortunately)

 

[Overmind One]

Google Glasses looks F**ing ugly and silly. I don't know who came up with the design but they don't suit anyone. I wouldn't wear them and if I saw someone wear I would tell them to take it off. Google glasses haven't taken off here (fortunately)

They have not taken off here either, but there is a "I was first!" crowd which exists in the US, and they are buying them. I think I have seen maybe...5 people wearing them so far (including this guy at TGIF). 1 female and the rest guys. At $1500.00, you will not see kids wearing them. And even though they are expensive, I do not see thieves trying to steal these things in the future.

 

[Overmind One]

I feel the whole privacy/freedom battle is one we are going to lose.

I had to come back to this....

You are right about losing the privacy battle....to a point. Your HOME is your home, and you are king of that home/apartment/space. You can do things in that space and be completely private (for now). Unless you have an Xbox One 1st Gen or all-in-one computers with a built in camera or a Smart TV with a built in camera, or ANY landline (including MagicJack now), nobody can secretly snoop on your activities, not even the NSA. They can monitor your internet behaviors if you have not taken precautions or if you run Windows or OS X, but otherwise, no.

 

[Atlantis]

They have not taken off here either, but there is a "I was first!" crowd which exists in the US, and they are buying them. I think I have seen maybe...5 people wearing them so far (including this guy at TGIF). 1 female and the rest guys. At $1500.00, you will not see kids wearing them. And even though they are expensive, I do not see thieves trying to steal these things in the future.

I wonder, with the debt you guys have where do these people get the money from to buy such impulse purchases?

 

[Gatefan1976]

The marvels of economics CA.

 

[Overmind One]

I wonder, with the debt you guys have where do these people get the money from to buy such impulse purchases?

Debt? California is running on a budget surplus at the moment. But here,the disparity is in income and housing. If you have a good job and live in a decent area, you better be making decent money. Many sectors of business in California pay well enough to buy toys like these.

 

[Overmind One]

The marvels of economics CA.

California is a rich state. Its employed people make more money than the national averages in whatever jobs they have. A 21-year-old in IT living in the Bay Area makes about 80K to 150K, but an apartment in the Bay Area costs double what it does in say...San Diego. But the taxes are also higher, housing costs more and inflation tries to profit from all that wealth flowing around here. This article will help to understand it:

http://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2014/08/04/surplus-california-resembles-banana-republic/

 

[Annoyed]

I dont. I think a whole new layer of tech will create fortunes for people who create anti-snooping devices and strategies. Much like Norton and McAfee made fortunes on Microsoft's buggy, vulnerable software by creating antivirus. Or like companies that make radar detectors and bug detectors. I can think of at least three killer devices I would like to invent. (shhhhh....)

Gotta disagree with you here, Overmind.
It was in Norton/Mcafee's best financial interests to develop & market fixes for Windows vulnerabilities.
But this is a different ballgame.
No company is going to want to restrict the data available to their marketing departments. And I suspect you're aware that marketing / sales drive the actions of nearly every company out there. Not many companies are going to tell their marketing/data collection people that they are going to produce a product that hamstrings those departments.

Even if some company or other does develop & try to market some tool which allows a user to block advertising data collection, the advertising/marketing/sales industry in this country is HUGE. If some upstart starts to interfere with their activities, they will simply buy the offender & shut them down.

And then there is the government.

We as a society have proven over and over that we will happily trade security for convenience. I don't see this changing. The sheeple just don't care.

 

[Tripler]

Just a thought here but what if the tech gets good enough to make google contacts . Then no one is gonna know if your wearing them or not . Would you think that kind of tech is very far off ? Probably blink once for a a still pic . 2 blinks for video footage and 3 blinks for night vision . Blink both eyes to answer an incoming call . Keep eyes shut for 3 to 4 seconds for playback . All functions could be manually controlled with a smart phone if your not the blinking type or if your eyes dry out .... Far fetched yes ! Or maybe not .

 

[Gatefan1976]

Just a thought here but what if the tech gets good enough to make google contacts . Then no one is gonna know if your wearing them or not . Would you think that kind of tech is very far off ? Probably blink once for a a still pic . 2 blinks for video footage and 3 blinks for night vision . Blink both eyes to answer an incoming call . Keep eyes shut for 3 to 4 seconds for playback . All functions could be manually controlled with a smart phone if your not the blinking type or if your eyes dry out .... Far fetched yes ! Or maybe not .

You may just get cybernetic eyes before then.

 

[shavedape]

Just a thought here but what if the tech gets good enough to make google contacts . Then no one is gonna know if your wearing them or not . Would you think that kind of tech is very far off ? Probably blink once for a a still pic . 2 blinks for video footage and 3 blinks for night vision . Blink both eyes to answer an incoming call . Keep eyes shut for 3 to 4 seconds for playback . All functions could be manually controlled with a smart phone if your not the blinking type or if your eyes dry out .... Far fetched yes ! Or maybe not .

You may just get cybernetic eyes before then.

I can envision (pardon the pun) a visual bio-implant becoming a reality in the future. Maybe something like they use in Continuum. Or a brain implant, one not even in the eyeball itself, something that "records" stuff we see and hear via neural pathways.

I can also envision flying cars, time travel and sentient chickens that pluck and roast themselves. I admit I'm most looking forward to the self-roasting chickens, but then again, who isn't?

 

[Gatefan1976]

Don't be stupid Ape.
No one will ever work out the self pluck chicken, it's a biological impossibility. They don't have the opposable thumb for it.

 

[Tripler]

Don't be stupid Ape.
No one will ever work out the self pluck chicken, it's a biological impossibility. They don't have the opposable thumb for it.

No reason why someone could not sew a pair on !