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. Simply ask anyone wearing the stupid thing to take it off while you are speaking to them. If they do not want to comply with your wishes (and honestly anyone with a wearable computer is NOT going to want to take it off. And can you blame them?) just walk away.

    If no one will interact with a person wearing Google Glass, eventually they wont leave their Mom’s basement anymore.
    Win Win!

  2. To end Google’s Glass, just mandate for a 5 years that Google must provide all its employees with an active Glass unit at all times during working hour and voluntary after hours. Then allow this data to be accessed by anyone or entity without modification. If no privacy arise then society would modify natural to the tech and the mandate removed.

    See how Googles view of privacy would define itself then.

    1. Or how about a Captain Picard BORG laser embedded into your head (that part is optional) that you can point at someone’s Google Glass camera and BLOW OUT ITS CIRCUITRY. It won’t be too good for the Glass wearer’s right eye either. Kind of blinding I’d think.

      This option is probably far more affordable and practical than that boring old expensive option of a portable EMP (electromagnetic pulse) device. Then again, EMPs are far more anonymous, which seems appropriate in this case. 😉

  3. The issue I take with Glass is that someone else’s being nonchalant with their privacy shouldn’t cause my privacy to be invaded. At least holding a phone up to take a pic makes those around you aware of what’s happening.

    1. Agreed; and that’s my problem with people using Gmail: the subscriber agreed that his or her email could be searched and indexed and used for marketing purposes, etc., but I didn’t. So I don’t send real communications to Gmail addresses anymore; rather, I ask the person to send me a different email address to continue the conversation with.

    1. This is what’s entertaining me about everyone freaking out about G.Glass. I would notice someone wearing that goofy “I’m a dork” G.Glass. I wouldn’t know someone was wearing a button camera.

      It’s also just as easy to turn on your iPhone 5’s video camera, or start a Facetime call, stick your iPhone in your shirt pocket so the lens is pointing out, and record everything that’s going on as you walk around. And that would be far less noticeable than G.Glass.

    2. At $230 a camera, the button camera is a bit expensive. But I get your point.

      For me, this is an argument against ALL public surveillance for the purpose of personal collection without public benefit. I don’t care if it’s Google Glass or a robot monkey on your shoulder. It’s all abusive of another person’s inane right to privacy and makes all users of this tech into peeping Toms, aka pervert creeps.

      At least Google Glass is clearly visible to anyone. So it’s one notch above pervert creepiness, but just one.

      IOW: Privacy has always, and will always be an innate right. Abusers are users are losers. Not acceptable.

      Then there are those public, government run public cameras. Can they be abused as well? Damn right! The UK London police have proved that by turning them OFF when they’re inconvenient to any publicly embarrassing pursuit they are following. In one case it was the illegal abuse of a Muslim they were following through the underground (aka subways).

      On the other hand, these cameras were brilliant at identifying and tracking down the recent Boston Marathon bomber scum (whom I personally believe were for real, as opposed to being just another FUD crime of our corrupt US government). Therefore, it’s another balance of benefit versus detriment.

          1. Damn! I’ll pay if you can get me one!

            It’s good to see that decent ale survives in the UK. I get shivers when I hear about and see Brits drinking Budweiser. Good lord, what has the mother country come to?! Real ale for me, thank you!

  4. Input is a huge problem for Glass. Voice doesn’t work in public. Therefore, it’s really bad at texting and writing Emails. It’s really bad at surfing the web too because you have to call out keywords. It’s bad at video (video glasses have been around forever and failed in the market). I could go on. Perhaps the nail in the coffin is that Glass is something needed IN ADDITION to your smartphone on your persons. So now you need another gadget to carry to do things worse than before?

    This might work for vertical markets but I am having trouble understanding how this will get any consumer adoption.

  5. I can see some serious trouble erupting here if people walk around with one of these. Try walking around and pointing a camera at people and see what reaction you get so to have someone being able to take a pic at any time without you knowing is going to create all sorts of hostility especially when a few drinks have been downed. Dirty old men will be at the front of the queue for these, so not sure how long the ‘cool’ image will last and the idea of turning everyone into voyeurs is my idea of the first step to science fiction hell.

  6. Invasion of privacy is a big deal. Safety is also a big deal. Having someone driving a car with these on will be a disaster waiting to happen.
    Video taping every where without anyone’s knowledge can also be a big deal.

Reader Feedback

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