Pssst… see that group of people at the bus stop “checking Facebook” on their handhelds? How do you know any or all of them aren’t recording video or at least audio? At least the Glass device gives you some fair warning (although I personally find it dorky and useless, at least it’s honest about what it may be doing).
I find these freakouts so odd. If you are out in public, people are seeing you. Security cameras are already recording you, like they have been for decades.
And the general public having recording capabilities is a good thing. Now the police have to think twice before abusing their power, at least wait until they take you somewhere isolated before they beat the shit out of you for looking at them funny or being the wrong race.
This is not true, it was last night.
I don’t understand why people think people use the camera function continuously on the glasses. As far as I know it’s a internet terminal and can be used for a number of things such as Google maps.
If the people using the google glasses start to get assaulted, I would expect the video to be constantly uploading streaming then so they have something to turn into the police, can post pictures of that person to youtube or use the evidence to get that person some mental health help voluntary or not.
This kind of over-reaction puts at risk people who wear protective goggles for other reasons. Some nice old geezer with very light-sensitive eyes, because of his medications, is going to be targeted by our new neo-bullies.
Or some kid at the Comic-Con in a “Cyclops” (X-Men) costume.
A few years back, some mobsters were caught based on a bugged conversation. The bug was a hacked cell phone that was turned off at the time (or so it seemed to them, I guess). You make the connection – which might be that I seem to be deeply paranoid.
I’d better be careful when I have my GoPro on my ski or biking helmet then, I guess.
Google Glass is uniquely dorky-looking…will there really be a rash of assaults against people wearing any oversized glasses or goggles?
Right, that ship has mostly sailed. Some people seem to think that the Google Glass is constantly recording video, from what I understand it isn’t. It has a limited battery, it can record video for something like an hour or two. So if someone chooses to take a video of you with their Google Glass, someone else could just as easily choose to do so with their Iphone. People might constantly have their Google Glasses on their face, but that doesn’t mean that they are on or doing anything, just like someone might have their Bluetooth device on their ear but it’s not doing anything, or their phone in their pocket or purse but that doesn’t mean it’s recording or doing anything.
I am somewhat worried about widespread use of Google Glass or its descendants in the future, but not because of recording. What worries more is the distraction. I’m worried that people will drive will checking Facebook and crash their cars. Or even if I’m talking to someone, I don’t want them to also be checking Twitter while talking to me. Of course people can do that with their phones now, but it’s much more obvious.
You said the frame rate was jerky, how jerky was the actual video? Was it better or worse than a hand held camera? I don’t know how able people are to stand still and look straight at an event, and how watchable that footage would be. Hand held cameras can be shaky, but I would think video from glasses could be equally nausea inducing.
It was an obviously low frame rate combined with constant head motion. It didn’t impress me at all…I’ve gotten much better video from just a little point-and-shoot camera.
That makes sense. I was guessing the head motion would hurt most videos. Even if you were trying to shoot something stationary, like using your Google Glasses to pirate a movie at a movie theater, you’d probably fidget and move around some and mess up the video. For anything else the head motion would be much worse.
Here’s a video from a glass wearer.
There probably won’t be any rash of assaults at all. Most people aren’t that stupid. Also, computerized glasses and goggles will change design styles, quickly and often. Look how quickly laptop computers came onto the scene, or smart phones, or tablets. Look how very small cameras can be made anyway.
If I wanted to get surreptitious video of a scene, I could use a lapel camera, and most people would never be able to spot it. As Sam Lowry says, the ship has already sailed. Singling out goggle wearers is as dumb as singling out Android smart-phone users while ignoring I-Phones.
Definitely agree. It ups the ante from the existing threats and social poor etiquette we now experience with smart phones. It’s more distracting to drivers, and more likely to come between people in the course of ordinary conversation.
My local Post Office has a posted rule: you can’t be on your phone while you’re doing business with a counter clerk. Hang up, or go back to the end of the line. With a hand-held phone, it’s easy to see who’s flouting the rule. With goggles, not so easy.
But assault and battery as a form of reproach? Gosh, how tepid! Let’s espouse a Second Amendment solution!
Oh, from Sarah Slocum. Now there’s a wanna-be.
Of course, google is now exploring putting their glass tech into contact lenses. The downside to that being …
Shut up and take my money!
Didn’t Torchwood have something exactly like that? The difference being that it was science fiction, of course.
He’s not using Google Glass, but this guyhas certainly learned to embrace it.
I find it surprisingly easy to acknowledge that he has a legal right to do that, while at the same time hoping that one of the people he films beats him comatose for doing it.
What a Dick. This does not appear to be a healthy endeavor. If someone does beat him comatose, I wonder if they’ll have the good sense to … take the camera 
The only jerky thing about that video was the nitwit wearing the Glass.