Google fights glass backlash even before launch

“Google Glass isn’t even for sale yet, but it’s already facing backlash,” Steve Henn reports for NPR.

“There have been articles in the Atlantic and Wired mocking techies who have a pair, and even Saturday Night Live got in on the jabbing at the technology,” Henn reports. “The New York Times ran a front-page story about Google Glass and privacy, and the gadget has been banned from a bar in Seattle and casinos in Las Vegas.”

Henn reports, “But for the earnest Googlers who helped create Glass, and the enthusiastic techies who already have their hands on a pair, all this hate can be a little bewildering… Right now, Goggle Glass might be the world’s worst spy camera; if you go out in public with one on, you are guaranteed to attract attention. Still, the idea of techies mounting a tiny screen and a little camera to their faces makes millions of people uncomfortable. According to Sarah Rotman Epps, a tech analyst at Forrester Research, that is why Google is rolling out Glass to the world slowly in stages. ‘Google has been incredibly transparent… with their Glass rollout,’ Epps says. ‘They realize that Google Glass will require shifting social norms to be accepted.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Google Glass. Inspired by Eric T. Mole’s data collection needs during Apple Board meetings.

Related articles:
Google Glass meets serious resistance – May 7, 2013
Eric Schmidt: Regulate civilian drones but not Google Glass – April 15, 2013
Google Glass: Orwellian surveillance with fluffier branding? – March 20, 2013
If Apple had unveiled Google Glasses… – February 25, 2013
Why Apple is working on ‘iWatch,’ not ‘iGlasses’ – February 11, 2013
Glenn Beck: Be wary of Google, they way they think is creepy (with video) – February 17, 2011
Google CEO Schmidt: If you don’t like being in Google Street View then ‘just move’ – October 28, 2010
Consumer Watchdog ads mock Google CEO Eric Schmidt (with video) – September 2, 2010
Google CEO Schmidt: Change your name to escape ‘cyber past’ – August 18, 2010
Wired: Google, CIA Invest in ‘future’ of Web monitoring – July 29, 2010
37 states join probe into Google’s questionable Wi-Fi data collection – July 22, 2010
Google Street View Wi-Fi data included passwords and email – June 18, 2010

48 Comments

    1. Exactly, “shifting social norms” to create a whole new class of geeky public invasive asshole. You wear those you might as well say out loud “I hate humanity, I am contemptuous of other humans.”

      1. Well, there certainly is the air of ‘TECHNOCRAT’ on the person wearing them, which rhymes with ‘ELITIST’ 😉 which all feeds into growing the separation between people, the removal of actual person to person contact. IOW: Rudeness becomes a cultural norm, which I don’t find enticing at all. Therefore, Google can keep their glass.

        But the prospect of everyone becoming part of someone else’s REALITY INTERNET SHOW is profoundly disturbing. All the world become’s one’s circus. No one gets paid. No one gives permission. That’s not acceptable. It gives everyone the incentive to bring a small, low velocity PAINT GUN with them when they roam the streets of some glass-hole’s circus. Ready, aim, fire. Show over.

        But I’d rather we all just be nice, walk up to the glass-holes and politely request that the remove their Google Glass. Bring your friends! The larger the MOB of disapprovers, the merrier.

  1. People are apparently unwilling to tolerate the loss of their privacy. Soon, I hope, people will feel as intolerate to the loss of their freedoms.

      1. because they were misinformed (or ignorantly chose to by pass the fine print) on what privacy they were losing – 85% falsify about who they are anyways – we now teach our kids to hide in this manner when exposed to the internet – privacy is open for the public – chose your reality; this world is practically virtual now – stock markets all FUD – world will end by next year – whatever

        1. FUD is an extremely old method of propaganda. It’s just that FUD has become a very public and pervasive tool of manipulating our current era of sheeple.

          Equally, the ‘world will end by next year’ is ancient. Every year a new ‘messiah’. Every year a new ‘end of the world is coming’. Neither prove to be true. Someone has been attempting (and often succeeding) in manipulating us yet-again. I personally don’t comprehend the point. Then again, I’m not a psychopath.

      2. Fb is only as invasive of personal privacy as users allow it to be. Post up every little detail of your day-to-day life, make available all of your personal history in your profile, of course it’s invasive.
        Keep your Profile details to the minimum, like I do, and only post up status info that friends will find interesting, without letting on where you live, and your house is going to be empty for the next fortnight, for example, and there’s no privacy invasion.
        Simple things that all too many people seem incapable of grasping, then snivel about privacy invasion…

        1. I do everything you do (minimal profile, no broadcasting when house will be empty, etc), but you missed two things:

          1) people who DON’T have FB accounts, but friends and others can still post pictures with them in it, and sometimes tagging them without the person knowing (you can tag someone without actually linking to a FB profile).

          You can ask people you know to not do that, but at the end of the day you have no idea if your request is honoured, and no control over it, if you don’t also have a token FB account to monitor it.

          2) if you have a FB account, then unless you use a completely different browser for FB than your regular browsing, a network of cookies means that FB can track your browsing habits even if you’re not logged in. Private Browsing mode in Safari isn’t any protection from this–it only prevents others on your computer finding out where you’ve been, by dumping the history and cookies after you exit Private Browswing. But while you’re in the Private session, cookies are still being stored and read–they have to be, in order for websites to know if you’re currently logged in or not.

    1. This one deserves the negative attention. If Google wants to shift the norm, remove the camera and make it one of consumption only. Then again, they wanted the camera and need that data. So, returning to privacy issues made by Google.

  2. G.Glass is a privacy is the opposite from existing privacy:
    • if I, stupidly, put too much data on G+ or FaceBook then it is MY privacy that is invaded.
    • with G.Glass it is the OTHER person’s privacy that is invaded.

  3. Funny how a privacy snooping company who copies other companies products for a living creates a product that blatantly enables the individuals to record others business.

    1. THE MOLE: HA ha – perfect my plan is working Andy.

      ANDY: Oh how cute you look Sir when your laughter is filled with evilness that is going oh so your way Sir.

      THE MOLE: With glass, i will control all information, these dense tech nerds take hold of any device so willingly. Quick, prepare the anal-apple-probes, part five of my masterful plan.

      ANDY: Ah you mean the anti-matter pods that i have connected to my little fella down below?

      THE MOLE: No no no you idiot, keep that damn thing in your pant pockets, no one needs to know about your kinky desires Rubbin.
      The analysts you fool, the apple anal-ists, I want them all waring our google goggles and interview Tom Crook. The anti-matter-probes will influence positive reviews and start a social renaissance pointing in my favour.

      ANDY: Very good Sir, oh yes, happy to do that my master, oh boy Tom is gonna get cooked now… hee hee! Love it love it Sir. You are the best.

      THE MOLE: Do it in stages my pet… we don’t need suspicious minds tracing back to me now. And see if Suckermen of that social network FartNook is interested in starting his line of phones while you are at it.

      ANDY: In deed Sir, Clark Suckerman, was very interested Sir. In fact, I have him scheduled to come by the office this week. He said he was interested in grabbing Weasel for a Million for some map service. Its all a plot to put pressure on Apple he said.

      THE MOLE: I see. Hmmm, this Suckerman could be dangerous. I have an idea, I have changed my mind, I insist you attach your anti-matter-pods to Suckermans genitalia and mind meld with him. Get all the information lickity-split. Do you hear me? Booooooo haa haa. I’m the greatest master jammer on the West coast… I even impress myself sometimes.

      ANDY: In celebration of your genius, could I treat ya to a donut and coffee Sir, from Tom Hurting? Or shall I say Apple is gonna get an eye sore. Lol Sir I made a funny.

      THE MOLE: Shut up you buffoon, I am the Joker here and the BadMan, Tee hee… now get to work.

  4. Why is this reporter calling this device ‘a pair’ ? When you talk about glasses, there are definitely a pair of lenses. Here there’s only one lens (although it’s not really even a lens but a transparent screen). Better to call it a unit or some other singular idea.

    Aside from that point, keep the thing away from me, though.

  5. Hmm, I have to wonder how wearing one of those awkward things on my face would affect other’s behavior towards me. Certainly lots of folks would be guarded, considering their sense of “just between the two of us” interaction is being monitored by the cyber device astride my head.
    I know I would not want to interact in any but the most formal way with someone wearing a google glass type device.
    Additionally, I have to wonder just what sort of data Google is capable and planning to mine with these things?

Leave a Reply to MacRaven Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.