Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Helgoland]

It isn't, because hidden(!) cameras.

Also, you can always ask the other guy to take off his glass if it bothers you.

[LordBucket]

you can always ask the other guy to take off his glass if it bothers you.

What if they're prescription lenses?

The guy holding a video camera to his face recording you has social stigma working against him. The guy recording you with glass has social stigma working in his favor.

[Helgoland]

Not if we make it a new social norm! And that's totally within reach - there's already 'glass-free zones', if I remember correctly.

[BurnedToast]

There ISN'T a difference, it's just that with google glass, it's harder to tell. Much harder.

False.

I can buy, for less then $100, a camera hidden in a pen, or a fake bluetooth headset, or any number of other things and follow you around recording you and you won't ever have any idea at all.

Those things also bother some people. How does it make sense to claim that this thing that does X that bothers people, is ok because there are also other things that also do X that also bother people?

Your logic is like complaining about cars, because some people turn up the stereo too loud. People making too much noise bothers me, cars have stereos, therefore because cars can be used to make too much noise cars are bad.

Technically, you might have a point. But it's a silly argument against cars.

[LordBucket]

OK, should it not be stigmatised to ask to remove GGs (heh, google glasses acronym is the same as 'good game'), I'll probably be happier.

I wish I could get used to a world in which most stuff we do is monitored, but I dislike it. I like my privacy and anonymity. I don't like it when I cannot have either because profit or because terrorism or because noseyness.

Do you already accept fingerprinting for your driver's license? Do you already accept google earth showing everyone your house? Do you already accept surveillance cameras every time you go shopping?

The frog is being boiled.

[Pnx]

So here's the thing that always bothers me about these sorts of arguments.

People are scared of surveillance... Which makes some degree of sense, universal or near-universal surveillance and a lack of privacy is one of the hallmarks of Orwellian style dystopia fiction, that's so common out there. And it certainly has some potential for abuse. I can think of ways in which it could lead to cyber bullying or other forms of harassment.

But people seem to be scared or upset by surveillance itself. Which is something that bothers me, because someone knowing something about you, cannot in of itself hurt you.

Maybe I just have a different perspective on this because I grew up in an environment where I had very little privacy, but this general attitude seems really weird to me. People always seem to talk in the most ambiguous and vague terms about surveillance's potential to hurt them.

[Flying Dice]

The really insidious part about recording with glass (or with cell phones, for that matter), is that it isn't always easy to tell that someone is recording. Remember how video recorders typically had a little red light that came on while recording? I'd like to see something like that, a red LED in the frames or something. Ultimately you aren't going to be able to prevent people from filming in public spaces if they're willing to blow people off when asked to stop &c., but something like that could serve as a warning to the people around them. It's not ideal, but it's more likely than preventing google from shipping them with the ability to record video or take pictures.

There ISN'T a difference, it's just that with google glass, it's harder to tell. Much harder.

False.

I can buy, for less then $100, a camera hidden in a pen, or a fake bluetooth headset, or any number of other things and follow you around recording you and you won't ever have any idea at all.

The fact that there are easier and less expensive ways for people to do something undesirable doesn't mean we should ignore every other option they have.

[LordBucket]

But people seem to be scared or upset by surveillance itself. Which is something that bothers me, because someone knowing something about you, cannot in of itself hurt you.

but this general attitude seems really weird to me. People always seem to talk in the most ambiguous and vague terms about surveillance's potential to hurt them.

It's a generational values difference. It is somewhat arbitrary, but the same could be said of nudity. When a girl covers her breasts in public it's not because she's concerned about real and tangible harm coming from it. She's simply culturally accustomed to the idea that it's not appropriate.

In previous generations, there was cultural conditioning that being watched, covert surveillance, "Big Brother" was a dangerous and scary thing.

I wonder what it's like for the current generation to read 1984.

[BurnedToast]

The fact that there are easier and less expensive ways for people to do something undesirable doesn't mean we should ignore every other option they have.

But it also means it's pointless to demonize glass for something that it's not even particularly suited for. If people wanted to make a thread complaining about recording devices in general, and then include glass in there... fine.

But, Someone mentioned "glass free zones" above. How absurd is that? You can't wear glass because it might be used to record. But do they check for other hidden recording devices? probably not. Do they ban cellphones? probably not.

It's frustrating because rather then addressing the problem (recording people is possible) they just knee-jerk ban the latest thing and stick their heads in the sand and pretend everything is solved because it's too scary or too hard to actually do anything about it.

[BurnedToast]

For the most part, it's perfectly legal to record people in public places.

Generally speaking, the government has ruled that you have no right to privacy while in a PUBLIC place.

[Flying Dice]

And of course you only have the right to privacy in private places from other citizens, not the government.

[Helgoland]

I wonder what it's like for the current generation to read 1984.

People who believe 1984 was about surveillance (or even a very powerful state) are kinda missing the point of the book - it really was about the government having command over every aspect of your personality, thus obliterating the notion of individuality. The kind of surveillance that's being talked about right now is completely different in its aims.
Not saying these concerns aren't valid - just that I dislike a great book being abused this frequently.

[MorleyDev]

Honestly, I kinda take Gott Est Tot attitude towards the "classical" idea of completely privacy. Namely, times have already changed and that idea is not dying: It's dead. Gone. Lost. A decaying corpse from a bygone era. Changed completely by the modern era.

I can walk up to your face holding my phone and recording you, it'd be obvious I'm doing so and you can ask me to stop and I can say "no" and then you punch me in the face. With Glass, it's as obvious it's happening and the same things play out. Or it could be hacked to stop...and the hacker may as well have got one of those tiny super-effective cameras you can pick up for the same or cheaper a price than glass. That become a thing a long time ago.

And then there's the natural counterpoint. We saw it not that long ago in Turkey. Footage of the being instantly uploaded to a public internet from phones, this kind of technology does take away a government's ability to hide things from the world stage and serve to showcase what actually happens, exposing the good and bad and filling in pieces of the picture that would otherwise be missing.

As for the rudeness, people multitask all the time. Users have found it lets them pay more attention to things by making that multitasking easier. You'll naturally drop all things, including a phone/game/coursework/essay/book/other-thoughts for a serious conversation that matters, if people don't it's probably because the conversation is mundane enough to not need such a focus of attention. For a mundane conversation, which make up 99% of life's conversations, integrating other aspects of the multitask into vision whilst still allowing for eye contact lets them split attention more effectively and makes it less obvious. If anything, is it not less rude to allow them to deal with these things quickly and discretely as they come up, letting them dismiss what arrives and is less important than the conversation or immediately switch focus to something more important?

Here the madman fell silent and again regarded his listeners; and they too were silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern to the ground, and it broke and went out. "I have come too early," he said then; "my time has not come yet. The tremendous event is still on its way, still travelling - it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and thunder require time, the light of the stars requires time, deeds require time even after they are done, before they can be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than the distant stars - and yet they have done it themselves."

[alway]

It's easier to use a basic cell-phone than glass to surreptitiously record people.

So some fun facts:
1. You can tell when glass is recording: It has a light which tells you it is recording, as well as an obvious HUD that lets you know it is turned on.
2. If someone is looking at their phone, with it pointed in someone else's general direction, no one would be suspicious; they simply assume you are browsing the internet so long as you look like you're engaged in what is going on with the phone's screen and don't actively take peeks over the device at them.
3. If you wanted to record someone with glass, you need to actively be staring in their general direction to do so. This is rather obvious, especially compared to phones.

And yeah, even still, recording people in public is perfectly legal. From what I recall, the only bounds involve specific laws against things like upskirt shots or extreme cases of monetary exploitation.

[Parsely]

At this point, in all things in general, I'm just hoping the world doesn't turn completely to shit during my lifetime.

Jesus Leo..

The recording point is the only one I can dig. I doubt that's a feature that would stick around for long considering creepy people (NOT JUST THE GOVERNMENT) would have infinite capacity for recording people stealthily. Tell me you can't see that being brought up in a court. Even if media attention about potential for stalking didn't crop up it still would not last.

Everything else is just..

Not sure how else to say this, but I'm not sure how much you go outside. Normal people aren't rude with their phones like that man. You act like people have never had electronics that could potentially be rude in a social situation. Pagers for example. Or cellphones. They're not new. People know when they need to be polite because its extremely embarrassing. And if I'm with friends hell everyone is on their phones or playing xbox or making a video or dicking around on the PC but does it affect conversation? Hell no!

EDIT: Its super obvious when someone's recording you or even quickly taking a photo of you anyways, so why does it matter? And doesn't google glass have a big fat recording light?!!