Project Glass (formerly known as google goggles)

[vektor]

A: nice random fact generating
B: permanent worldwide connectivity is clearly the same as a radio or a tv that sits in your home.
C: consumers gonna consume

[Azure]

I'm not sure what your problem is.

People that constantly talk on their phone while they are in company are rude. They would probably be rude if they didn't have a phone.

Smartphones are a great tool. I use mine more and more every single day for work to be more productive and to do a better overall job. I try not to text or phone when I'm around other people, and I hit 'end' more often than not if someone is talking to me. The requirements for having proper manners don't include owning a feature phone.

[QuadCityImages]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

How have they done anything innovative with voice-recognition?

Really? I guess I thought some of this stuff was more common knowledge.

Check these outt, as they summarize things pretty well. Also notice both articles are pre-Siri announcement.

http://mashable.com/2011/07/07/voice-technology-google/

http://www.slate.com/articles/techno...e_talking.html

Google used all the voice data they got from Goog411 (kind of a Google-by-phone, automated directory assistance that ran from 2007-2010) and their mountain of CPU power to make huge leaps in speech recognition. They put that into Android back in the Froyo days I believe. Much of the stuff Siri made a big deal about Android has had for years, but there's no conversation mode, so its less of a "virtual assistant."

Google has never had the PR-masters that Apple has, so I'm pretty sure that in a similar vein, when Apple comes out with a free turn-by-turn GPS navigation service at some point, a lot of people will forget that Android got that in 2009.

[Milt Schmidt]

Originally Posted by vektor

A: nice random fact generating
B: permanent worldwide connectivity is clearly the same as a radio or a tv that sits in your home.
C: consumers gonna consume

It's not exactly a secret that when new technologies emerge lots of people view them with suspicion and fear, it's a pretty common theme in histories of frontiers. Here's little link talking about how the telegraph was viewed as, to use your words, "permanent worldwide connectivity," you can find similar articles for tv, radio

http://www.idehist.uu.se/distans/ilm...f-neuman02.htm

The point is that the arguments that you're making are quite similar to arguments that against earlier technologies. You may be right, it may turn out that Google Glasses or a similar product will be extremely destructive to the way we interact socially. But I doubt it. I think Azure has hit the nail on the head in his post. You are, however, in good company with Thoreau who also doubted communications technology.

I probably don't have to point out the irony that we're discussing this on an internet forum...

Milt

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by QuadCityImages

Really? I guess I thought some of this stuff was more common knowledge.

Check these outt, as they summarize things pretty well. Also notice both articles are pre-Siri announcement.

http://mashable.com/2011/07/07/voice-technology-google/

http://www.slate.com/articles/techno...e_talking.html

Google used all the voice data they got from Goog411 (kind of a Google-by-phone, automated directory assistance that ran from 2007-2010) and their mountain of CPU power to make huge leaps in speech recognition. They put that into Android back in the Froyo days I believe. Much of the stuff Siri made a big deal about Android has had for years, but there's no conversation mode, so its less of a "virtual assistant."

Google has never had the PR-masters that Apple has, so I'm pretty sure that in a similar vein, when Apple comes out with a free turn-by-turn GPS navigation service at some point, a lot of people will forget that Android got that in 2009.

OK, I'll give you the client server aspect as being innovative. I often ask questions like that to understand where people are coming from - because I didn't want to hear about how Android had Siri before Siri, because I don't consider either of those aspects of the technology very important, neither are doing anything particularly innovative, when its the client server and mass statistical analysis of voice that are the important part.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Barnes

That video was a cool concept. I started the thread here on it even though I am such a Fanboi.

It was definitely a cool video.

[vektor]

Originally Posted by Milt Schmidt

It's not exactly a secret that when new technologies emerge lots of people view them with suspicion and fear, it's a pretty common theme in histories of frontiers. Here's little link talking about how the telegraph was viewed as, to use your words, "permanent worldwide connectivity," you can find similar articles for tv, radio

http://www.idehist.uu.se/distans/ilm...f-neuman02.htm

The point is that the arguments that you're making are quite similar to arguments that against earlier technologies. You may be right, it may turn out that Google Glasses or a similar product will be extremely destructive to the way we interact socially. But I doubt it. I think Azure has hit the nail on the head in his post. You are, however, in good company with Thoreau who also doubted communications technology.

I probably don't have to point out the irony that we're discussing this on an internet forum...

Milt

the ironic part is that this wasn't condescending and it was logical. That is rare. I disagree, but understand where you're coming from. I think embracing technology without scrutiny is a possible mistake when you consider the exponential growth of technology along with the health risks. I'm not willing to sacrifice social interaction, privacy and my health for convenience. After doing quite a bit of research I've come to believe (not 100% sure) that constantly being connected to the internet and being around/touching and interacting with technology has a detrimental effect on brain function. The hydrocarbon compounds found in keyboards/plastics, the constant overstimulation and the electromagnetic fields all pose possible health risks. During my psyche degrees we studied FMRI's that showed how cell phone use effects the brain, having a set of glasses that is constantly receiving and sending information while being around hundreds of other people could cause serious health risks.

I'm not saying one way is innately bad and the other is perfect. I'm just saying the risk is there, there is substantial science that points towards there being negative health effects. Why not be cautious instead of standing in line the first day to get the newest and best cell phone technology? People said thalidomide was safe, having an EMR emitter directly beside ones brain while providing continuous stimulation may be a bad thing.

[PsnaP]

Windows isnt too far behind.

http://www.break.com/index/windows-project-glass.html

[Phanuthier]

Small bump... one of my friends was doing a small show and tell of one of these things. Kind of slick but I don't think I'd buy it... really makes your life busy.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Small bump... one of my friends was doing a small show and tell of one of these things. Kind of slick but I don't think I'd buy it... really makes your life busy.

Honest question... at the end of the day would it make a life any busier (potentially) then cell phones currently do?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Honest question... at the end of the day would it make a life any busier (potentially) then cell phones currently do?

I think it would, cause its pretty much in your face every waking hour. At least with a cell phone, you're checking it ever 10 minutes to make sure you didn't miss a text while you weren't looking.

[FanIn80]

The company's terms of service on the limited-edition wearable computer specifically states, "you may not resell, loan, transfer, or give your device to any other person. If you resell, loan, transfer, or give your device to any other person without Google's authorization, Google reserves the right to deactivate the device, and neither you nor the unauthorized person using the device will be entitled to any refund, product support, or product warranty."

Welcome to the New World, one in which companies are retaining control of their products even after consumers purchase them.

It was bound to happen. Strange as it may sound, you don't actually own much of the software you buy today. You essentially rent it under strict end-user agreements that have withstood judicial scrutiny. Google appears to be among the first to apply such draconian rules to consumer electronics.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/18/tech/i...html?hpt=hp_t5

Not good.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Not good.

Sounds understandable considering it's a limited edition first release. Seeing people trying to pawn off winning into the Discoverer program would cheapen the image of Google Glass a bit.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Yeah, it's a limited edition first release they are talking about. It prevents people from getting it only to sell it at a ridiculous price a day later.

Good on Google for trying to get it in people's hands that care about using the product, not just looking to make a quick buck.

[Rathji]

Yeah, considering the contest aspect of the initial distribution of units, this is not surprising.

[FlamesPuck12]

I got to try on the Glass couple months ago. It's really cool how the piece of glass is so close to your eye but when you look into it, it's like staring at a TV couple feet away. I can't wait until I can start streaming NHL games on the Glass. That would be the ultimate use case for me.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

I got to try on the Glass couple months ago. It's really cool how the piece of glass is so close to your eye but when you look into it, it's like staring at a TV couple feet away. I can't wait until I can start streaming NHL games on the Glass. That would be the ultimate use case for me.

And they get built into regular glasses.

Imagine, your spouse is yelling at you for something you totally screwed up on, like forgetting to pick her mother up from the bus station in -40 degree weather while you were having a few beers at the pub. All the while you are watching the game, surfing CP and hanging your head in shame about how much of a screw up you are.

[drPepper1]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

I think it would, cause its pretty much in your face every waking hour. At least with a cell phone, you're checking it ever 10 minutes to make sure you didn't miss a text while you weren't looking.

When I lost my cell phone, I thought I would try to go a full month without replacing the phone. I felt more sane, and relaxed during that time, but the bottom line was I needed a cell phone eventually. But now I find myself back in the same habits of checking it every 10min.

[calumniate]

I hear apple's coming out with something similar that incorporates apple map technology..