I see at least one eager early-adopter market for Google Glass: amateur pornographers who want to share their, um, personal experiences. Don't laugh -- throughout history, pornographers have been early-stage adopters of new media technologies -- e.g., see http://www.law.indiana.edu/fclj/pubs/v49/no1/johnson.html
The TV show "Peep Show", which isn't about surreptitious leering despite the title, uses first person PoV in their series. Some people hate it, others grew used to the PoV.
That show is amazing. I feel like the name turned off a lot of potential viewers. The POV-style filming isn't even that central to the show. After an episode or two, you become used to it.
Even David Mitchell hates the name and says the late night time slot didn't help with peoples assumptions (see his SoapBox series), but says he's come to accept the name over time.
I have a feeling thought that "See it from their eyes" was their schtick, but that they dropped that when it became apparent that it was a good TV show (e.g. Season 2+'s title sequence doesn't explain the PoV thing)
I can picture giving premium users the right to "tag along for the ride", as it were, and watch as it's getting filmed. Could be quite cool.
I suspect as the hardware is further refined and becomes less intrusive, we'll start to see more interesting things done with the technology. My only real concern is, who pays for it? Taking advantage of seamless sharing would require a 4g connection. Do I pay another $60 a month for my glasses, on top of my cell phone?
> I can picture giving premium users the right to "tag along for the ride", as it were, and watch as it's getting filmed. Could be quite cool.
Ah yes, all the glamour of watching people make a porn film, with the constant starting and stopping, set changes, wardrobe snafus, and arguments when it turns out some tech crew can't make the shoot or an actor's medical paperwork is out of date.
TBH, this has more of a use for recording things on the fly that you normally wouldn't be able to catch due to fiddling with a camera rather than a replacement for higher quality film cameras for commercial productions. Of course, amateur productions (of any kind) are a different story.
Yes, it's from Snow Crash. I don't remember the whole description, because the Gargoyle included various additional modules/gadgets and one of the points was that it was odd-looking from outside.
guelo: please accept my apologies for my prior response at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4169385 -- looking at it with fresh eyes, it came across as rather condescending, which is not what I intended at all. Sorry about that.
guelo: Google Glass isn't about making movies per se but about sharing personal experiences -- live and otherwise. Think about it for a moment and you'll get it.
Not really that much different to recording Video with a Smartphone.
I get that there is a difference in that you are always wearing it and are theoretically always on, and photos/vids of Smartphones are huge, but … seriously … how many experiences of your personal day today would you like to share? Nah.
On the other side there are certainly people who are burning to attention whoring the shit out of Google Glasses. Perhaps it would be like a more extreme version of Twitter were 99% of people are following a very vocal 1% minority. And if Sergey Brin would publicly stream his Glass video I would watch it and place the video in a corner of my desktop screen. It would be like having a pet or the first Justin.tv all over again.
What was that website a few years back where these guys wandered the streets of Manhattan with a live camera strapped to them, and you could send them suggestions for improv-like interactions with the passerby? It was a lot of fun, really.
EDIT- "Mod My Life". Maybe that's an idea whose time has come.
That 'Porn drives the industry' is bullshit imho. Porn cares about money, and yes they do need technology to distribute their 'product'. But they are not the earliest of the adopters, they do not try out untested technologies unless they already have already proved potential and i can't recall a porn company who actually funded technology.
I 'm not up for any sort of censorship of course, but porn has also adverse effects (e.g. it's addictive (see http://yourbrainonporn.com), yet i do not see much talk about these.
Err... I hate to break it to you, but most pornography is done for cash. The people don't actually do it for fun, and, hope not to burst you bubble, but they are faking a lot of the time…
A little blue pill and some 'acting' is all you need,
