

Google Begins Testing Its Augmented Reality Glasses - nickbilton
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/04/google-begins-testing-its-augmented-reality-glasses/
On Wednesday, Google gave people 20/20 vision about a secret augmented-reality project called Project Glass. The glasses are the company’s first foray into wearable computing.
======
hswolff
>“We’re sharing this information now because we want to start a conversation
and learn from your valuable input,” the three employees wrote. “Please follow
along as we share some of our ideas and stories. We’d love to hear yours, too.
What would you like to see from Project Glass?”

Why would you ask that? This type of product is so different from what's
available on the market that I doubt the Project Glass team would receive any
type of suggestions they'd find useful.

That would be like Apple asking people "What do you want the iPhone to do?"
before it was first released in 2007.

If you're creating the product, create it. Find the features you want it to
have and research the features it needs to have. Asking the public "what do
you want it to have" will not do anyone any favors. Decision by committee can
be truly atrocious.

~~~
indiefan
Typical Google. Treating what should be platforms like products and treating
what should be products like platforms.

~~~
jordhy
This is a great point. In the Project Glass video all of the products are
Google's. Imagine if, instead of a product, the Google glasses were an open
platform for AR like Android is for smartphones. If this were so, Google could
create a new app store for AR applications, a new distribution platform for
web searches, AR open web apps, and (maybe) a first-person version of YouTube
(reality TV 3.0). This platform would mobilize the development community and
deter some companies from building apps for the iPhone (if delivery on the
Google Glass platform would be more convenient).

As a developer who is working on a product that's very well suited to take
advantage of this product I'm very ashamed of Google's lack of third-party
developer involvement and business vision. Sure the product looks great, but
is not solely about products; it's about people, about delivering value for
customers the world over. And the full value of this product would only be
realized if Google takes a platform approach, opens up the ecosystem and lets
everybody in (including, and, especially Facebook).

Summary of the good things I saw in the demo:

\- Very clean user interface

\- Nice hardware design

\- Interesting functionalities

\- Nice integration with Google products

\- Slick animations

\- Seems to be pretty fast

Initial concerns:

\- Video calls in version one? What about battery life? Sometimes is better to
keep some things out on first iterations

\- No hints to integrations with other platforms

\- Too much use of voice (we all know the state of the art in voice
recognition and how long voice processing currently takes)

\- I didn't see a single Web search in the video... how come?

All and all this is a VERY promising product and a very important one for the
whole industry. I hope Google opens up this platform so that it can reach all
the momentum and followers it deserves.

~~~
fudged
Does webpage searching really have much relevance to AR? A lot of useful
services for this application are on different platforms like twitter,
facebook, chat, video, maps. I don't think this AR will/should be text-heavy.

~~~
jordhy
The bulk of information that resides in social networks is "conversational".
Publicly accessible human knowledge about places (such as historic facts,
meetups, etc) still resides, for the most part, in the open Web.

Connect to the open Web (with a powerful summarization technology) would be a
killer on this platform. Otherwise we would we reinventing the wheel.

------
heyrhett
Why would the largest advertising company in the world want to place a screen
between my eyeballs and reality?

~~~
jgrahamc
Also, in the concept video he goes into a physical book store and selects a
physical book and buys it. Surely, his Googgles would just scan the book tell
him how much cheaper it was in the Google Store... Rather amused that when
meeting a friend he spent time checking in to the location rather than talking
to the dude.

But these could be useful in situations where you don't have your hands free
to hold a smartphone. For example, I would very much like GPS as a heads up
display for cycling around London. And skiers/snowborders would enjoy them for
other information (How many Gs am I pulling in this turn? How fast am I
descending? Where am I?)

~~~
cake
_Rather amused that when meeting a friend he spent time checking in to the
location rather than talking to the dude._

I'm rather creeped out by this project. In almost all the situations presented
he could have asked a freaking human instead of his glasses :

    
    
      - bookstore : ask the bookseller that's what he's here for,
     he may even give you better recommendations
      - maps in the street : ask somone
      - where is your friend ? call him
    

Etc etc...

~~~
dpark
Every single one of those things is faster and easier if handled
automatically.

Ask the bookseller where to find a book? I don't do that now unless I've
looked for the book myself and failed to find it, because it makes me feel
lazy, and because it's not always easy to find someone without going to the
cashier.

Ask someone for directions? People suck at giving directions, and they're slow
at giving those bad directions. There's a reason people buy GPS units, and
it's not because they're anti-social. It's because they work so much better.

Call your friend just to ask where he is when you expect him to arrive any
minute? That comes off as impatient. And it's an inconvenience for your friend
who has to answer his phone just to tell you he's almost there.

~~~
Foy
Here, here!

I think that as the way information is handled transforms and evolves the
world will have to adapt.

I suspect getting floor plans of each and every store where these glasses
operate wouldn't be feasible so having staff around to point people to
specific books may still be useful. But I strongly believe that we shouldn't
shun a new technology on the basis that it renders a current job useless. Just
think of how many jobs that computers destroyed, and made.

I'm always excited when I think of what the future will look like because so
much has changed with the Internet, and so much will continue to change as
products like smartphones, tablets and AR systems come into play.

Imagine if someone from the 1800's could visit 2050. He might assume we are
all extremely high-functioning schizophrenics.

~~~
marshray
> Imagine if someone from the 1800's could visit 2050. He might assume we are
> all extremely high-functioning schizophrenics.

Remember that movie 'Time After Time'? HG Wells and Jack the Ripper both visit
the 1980's. Guess who fit in better? :-)

------
JshWright
Here's an example of how I would love to be able to use (even a very basic
version of) this product:

I'm an EMT (and Paramedic student). There are plenty of scenarios in emergency
medicine where you're following a time based algorithm. In the example of a
cardiac arrest patient, everything revolves around two minutes cycles of CPR,
medications, and (if applicable) defibrillation. Even something as simple as a
clock that was alway superimposed in the corner of my field of vision would be
great. If it kept track of upcoming medications and other actions, that would
be even better.

I think this technology has applications in technical fields (medicine,
mechanics, etc), long before it will be a common thing to wear out in 'normal
life'.

~~~
rudyfink
I am in complete agreement that augmented reality ("AR") has the potential to
be a game changer for physical tasks. It is the kind of thing that has the
potential to raise the effective IQ of the user quite substantially.

The military has spent a fair amount of time working on something similar to
what you describe for vehicular repair. I think you might find the videos off
of this page ( <http://graphics.cs.columbia.edu/projects/armar/index.htm> )
and this page ( [http://singularityhub.com/2010/01/11/augmented-reality-to-
he...](http://singularityhub.com/2010/01/11/augmented-reality-to-help-
military-mechanics-fix-vehicles-video/) ) very suggestive of the kind of thing
you are looking for in medicine.

I haven't seen the same level of thing yet for medical systems, though it may
exist. I have seen some work on using AR for visualization of imaging (e.g.
map the CT scan onto the body I am looking at). I think the sort of direct
procedural guidance you describe is probably harder for people than it is for
vehicular repair. At the core that is probably just a computational problem
though.

------
jasonlotito
What this will provide for disabled and autistic people is amazing. It's too
easy to get caught up in the "social sharing" part of this and forget that
something like this can really help change people's lives.

Edit: To expand a bit, take an autistic adult that wants to do something, like
go to the movies. It's simple for us, we wash up, get dressed, go outside, go
down the straight, hope on the 132 Bus for 3 stops, get off, walk 2 blocks,
pay for tickets, and go into theater number 5. For someone with autism, they
can struggle with things like this. These glasses provide them with visual
cues base upon their location, so when they finally do get to the theater, the
glasses can show them what to do next, and give them that visual cue.

Currently working on an app for tablets for this sort of things, but having it
work in glasses would be simply amazing. God, what I wouldn't give to be apart
of this.

~~~
trothamel
I suspect that this will be a huge benefit to deaf people as well, once speech
recognition works well enough.

~~~
sp332
You wouldn't even necessarily need the speech "recognition" to resolve words
completely, e.g. deciding which homonym is appropriate in a given context.
Just representing incoming phonemes in IPA could be a great improvement. The
human brain can translate this input on the fly just like it does with spoken
words.

------
siavosh
I loved the video, but it didn't show the glasses on his face. Besides the
technical/usability challenges, I think the cultural connotation of the device
will be an equally deal/no-deal situation.

Like the Segway, significant portions of the society might associate negative
connotations with the device ("dorky", antisocial, pretentious etc).

I remember when a friend bought a pair of Oakley sunglasses with built in
headphones. I think amongst my friends, the almost unanimous consensus was
that it was not a good social statement to say the least.

This will be a challenge, but I'm sure there's a solution.

~~~
JanezStupar
This is nothing like Segway. Segway users are bound to be seen as too lazy to
walk.

But imagine having these glasses on while performing a complicated technical
procedure providing you with checklist of activities, enabling you to take
pictures as you go.

Or giving a lecture/presentation without having to turn away from the public
to peek at your presentation/notes.

Plus in comparison to Segway and bluetooth headphones these would make you
look cool.

It just lacks a Brain Computer Interface.

I want one, of both.

~~~
siavosh
I think that's a valid point especially for certain tasks, but it finally hit
me what's slightly jarring about the glasses in the scenario the video
portrayed.

It creates a very clear seperation between you and the person you're facing, a
complete loss of intimacy and focus which right now is the last refuge for non
distracted human contact. It's analgous (roughly) to having someone talking to
you while looking at their iPhone the whole time. In the personal (ubiquitous)
scenario, I can see how glasses like these can be a violent intrusion in our
relationships.

~~~
JanezStupar
My god. I am really curious what is your opinion of sunglasses?

~~~
moheeb
Take them off when speaking to someone. No eye contact no respect.

*Exceptions apply. At the beach is fine.

~~~
yew
I wear photochromic prescription lenses and have horrible vision without them.
I'm certainly not going to take them off, and you have no way of knowing that
they are not sunglasses just by looking at them.

That might explain my lack of aversion to the idea, though. Have to look into
that...

------
DasIch
Augmented reality glasses, self-driving cars... Google is becoming a really
exciting and interesting company. It will be interesting to see how Apple will
react to this given that they are the ones claiming to revolutionize consumer
technology every couple of years.

~~~
joejohnson
Real artists ship. I'm very excited about all of Google's cool new projects,
but they have a history of shooting themselves in the foot. If these
technologies are so far along, why not build a consumer version and get people
to pay to be testers?! Then iterate on the concept and keep improving it
through successive versions. But that's Apple's game.

~~~
jonknee
Because you don't ship when it still kills people. Google launches stuff in
betas all the time (arguably too much and for too long), but I'm glad they're
not out there letting anyone test self driving cars or augmented reality
contacts.

Apple's difference isn't that they iterate, it's that they don't talk about
their new stuff until it ships.

~~~
switz
The automated car has driven over 200,000 miles and has never once been in an
accident. I don't know many humans that can live up to that.

~~~
teej
200k miles is nothing. Over 8 billion vehicle miles are spent per DAY in the
US. One person is killed for every 75 million miles driven. 200k miles isn't
enough to test every terrain, under every weather condition, in every
lighting, etc. There's too many variables in the equation.

The Google car won't be truly safe until it has logged 1000x miles.

~~~
Symmetry
Its not that Google's automated cars haven't been in an fatal crash, its that
they haven't been in a crash at all. The US _crash rate_ is a bit over 5 per
million miles traveled, you you would expect about one crash in the 200k miles
already covered if it was a human driver. The circumstances probably aren't
identical, but what evidence we have suggests that these automated vehicles
are at least comparably safe to a human driver.

~~~
dwiel
If we expect 1 crash per 200k mi, and the car has driven 200k mi, the evidence
we have has sample size 1 ...

~~~
Symmetry
We only have a sample size of one for the 1 crash per 200k miles case. So the
evidence that these cars are actually _better_ than humans is non-existent.
However, the evidence against the 1 crash per 100k miles case where the car is
no longer comparable to human error rates is at least suggestive. And the
evidence against the 1 crash per 20k miles case is actually pretty decent. I
chose my words carefully.

------
kiloaper
I wonder how many Google Glasses wearers will become Life Loggers? I meet them
at conferences occasionally. Some people actively avoid them. There's
something about standing face to face with someone taking a photo of you every
X seconds that people find really unnerving. I certainly do. Real time video
is worse and it's very different to CCTV.

How long before Google collects and mines all this video like they did with
Google StreetView but in realtime? Combined with the huge advances in facial
recognition the privacy implementations are frightening. It reminds me of the
scifi film "The Entire History of You". [1]

In the future will people who want to opt out of face recognition and tracking
have to wear identifiers*, e.g. QR codes, on their person when talking to
Google Glasses users, much like Google's wifi policy? [2]

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror_%28TV_series%29#3...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror_%28TV_series%29#3._.22The_Entire_History_of_You.22)

[2] [http://searchengineland.com/google-announces-nomap-wifi-
opto...](http://searchengineland.com/google-announces-nomap-wifi-
optout-101134)

~~~
jrockway
All the technology you're worried about exists and is widely used. Walk around
the streets of New York City. Chances are, you're being photographed by people
sharing photos online. My commute involves riding across the Brooklyn Bridge.
I'm sure I ended up in 20 separate photographs today, many of which are now on
Facebook. Likely with a comment about how I'm an asshole for riding my bicycle
in the bicycle lane :) The underlying technology is not going to change once
people start wearing cameras. If anything, the sheer volume of photographs
being shared will make it less likely that the picture is of you.

As for facial recognition, anyone who can write a few lines of Perl could
easily scrape social network profile photos and start matching pictures of
people on the Internet to names. It's trivial. And doing this sort of thing
manually is popular: search for "human flesh search engine".

Privacy in public just doesn't exist.

~~~
pavel_lishin
I wonder if (when?) it will become socially acceptable to wear masks in
public. Or perhaps something like this: <http://cvdazzle.com/>

Or perhaps a combination - a semi-transparent mask that constantly displays
shifting patterns, like Rorschach's mask.

------
zmmmmm
I'm pretty skeptical about people's ability to multitask like this. We all
like to think we can do several things at once but many studies have shown
we're basically interrupt driven single-tasking organisms. You simply cannot
walk and watch where you're going while also watching something in your
glasses. People think that having the screen overlaid onto reality solves the
problem, but the problem isn't really visual in the first place, it's mental.
Try even reading a (real) sign while walking along and you'll find you're
bumping into people, dangerously strolling across roads without looking, etc.

I really want these to work, and I can see in limited situations (manually
turn them on to look something up, etc.) they could. But I really deeply doubt
they can work they way people are imagining.

------
SCdF
It looks like my idea of augmented reality is different from google's.

The features and functions shown in that video were basically removing the
pain of pulling your phone out of your pocket. It was, essentially, a more
elegant system than strapping your phone to your face.

It's a good start for the idea of putting processing power in front of your
vision, but I wouldn't buy it until it actually augments my reality. If I look
at my friend it should show upcoming appointments between us. If I look at a
concert poster it should bring up links for articles about the band, reviews,
links to buy tickets. _That_ would be augmentation.

------
mladenkovacevic
Youtube promo of how it might work (is this for real or just a concept? looks
too good to be true) <http://youtu.be/9c6W4CCU9M4>

~~~
pfraze
I'm buying first gen. Then second gen. All the gens.

~~~
Xurinos
What scares me is there is next to no choice on buying these, particularly if
they are fast. There is an extreme advantage to people having easy access to
information as it is presented in the video. Moreso than smartphones, it is a
game changer.

~~~
artursapek
Next to no choice? You're saying people will just all want this by default?

I think most people will want to try this, myself included. But personally I
draw the line here and I think many others will. I would never want to own a
pair. This will be a niche product for those people who already use Bluetooth
headsets, who are a minority.

~~~
huskyr
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." ;)

[http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-
ip...](http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ipod)

~~~
artursapek
Cute winky face, but you completely miss my point. I'm not saying this is
"lame," I'm saying most people won't want to wear pixels on their face. Even
the most successful products get criticism, especially in the beginning.

~~~
fidotron
Yeah, but I think you're also missing the point, which is it's possible that
this accessory presents such an enormous advantage to the user that to remain
competitive in society you won't have a choice but to adopt it.

I'm not sure which way it'll go, but I can imagine that happening.

~~~
artursapek
Fair argument, but I can't. At least from the way this video presents it this
seems like it would be as much a handicap as an augment.

------
saturdaysaint
I don't know whether to be encouraged or disturbed by the notion of having
wearable _cameras_ become socially acceptable. On one hand, I would think this
could be a major crime deterrent - the idea of a "witness" could become quaint
as any crime could easily be captured with a time/location stamp.

But it could also be a major altering of norms. Are women comfortable with the
idea that any guy looking at them on the street can capture their image?

~~~
dpark
How is this actually any different than today? There's nothing stopping me
from popping up my phone to take a picture or video in a public space. There's
also nothing stopping me from wearing a pinhole camera all the time. If these
became common, then obviously there would be more cameras on at all times, but
the fundamentals wouldn't be any different.

It seems like the biggest difference is that if a ton of people were wearing
these all the time, police couldn't tell everyone to turn them off. If they
looked like normal glasses, they wouldn't even know.

~~~
saturdaysaint
I agree that in a way, this would only intensify effects of camera-equipped
cellphones. I have a pet theory that ever-present camera-phones are
responsible for at least some of the drop in crime in the last decade. And
while the controversy has gone away, there were a lot of overblown concerns
about "camera-phones in locker rooms" in the early 00's.

The difference is speed. You'd always have a camera aimed at whatever you were
looking at. If you saw a mugger grab a purse, you might not have the presence
of mind to fumble with your phone, but you might be able to press a button or
say "take picture" (or whatever). I'd imagine that a decrease in response time
could be a real deterrent.

I know there've been spy cams forever, but I'd argue that merely owning one
(let alone openly displaying it) would mark you for suspicion among a lot of
people and I don't think they're widely used. I'm not saying it's the end of
the world, but there are some new privacy norms that will be established if
these are to take off.

~~~
yew
You've not heard of lifelogging? It was mentioned up/down thread. It's hardly
common at the moment but the privacy concerns are older than Google as a
company.

------
ChuckMcM
I wonder if they use a laser to do range finding.

While asking for public input into what they should be able to do, it is clear
the real value is that all Google employees can wear them, where they can
stream snippets of other teams that are working on other parts of your project
to you so that you can co-ordinate with your team. This should really
streamline the release process, allowing groups of Googler's to get way more
done than they would working alone and relying on email or other social media
tools to co-ordinate. Creating dynamic hang outs, streaming the feeds of those
around you, allowing for collective action against problems and to respond
immediately and on target with just the right resources. A real break through
in organizational efficiency.

The only hangup is that the legendary mobility of people in Google, being able
to switch jobs almost at will, means that trying to hard code names into the
stream is really time consuming. The current work around is to just use
numbers for the groups, so if you're the group working on adding Picasa
support which is group number 15 on the p pages, you might be referred to as 3
of 15 ...

------
jeremysalwen
Looking at the potential for this technology, and seeing that it being used
for what amounts to nothing more than shoving your iphone in your face 24/7 is
bothersome. It's just an incremental step towards being on Facebook _a little
bit more_. Why isn't this technology being developed for surgeons? Mechanics?
Engineers? Police? Disabled people?

Well, the answer's obvious: it's not where the money is. It's sad that actual
advancement to our society is only getting the funding through piggy-backing
on our increasing intrusive means of entertainment.

------
philo23
That's a pretty neat concept video, but of course it's more than likely just a
well produced concept video. Hopefully the real thing can live up to it.

One thing I did think about after seeing the concept photos they have on the
Google+ page (<https://plus.google.com/111626127367496192147/posts>) and in
this NYT article, what about us poor people not gifted with 20/20 vision? But
again they are probably just concept images and shouldn't really be taken as
much more than that.

~~~
gyardley
From the article:

 _There are reportedly dozens of other shapes and variations of the glasses in
the works, some of which can sit over a person’s normal eyeglasses._

------
jacquesm
I can see a great use of this for technical work on hardware that requires
huge amounts of documentation (say aircraft maintenance).

The glasses the way they're designed are smart, not in between but rather in a
fixed spot and only a part of the field of view. I definitely wouldn't want a
computer screen between my eyes and 'the real world' in normal day to day
life. Believing what my eyes see is important to me and with another layer in
between you'll never know whether you are reacting to an overlay or the real
thing. Especially if the images are created with input from a remote source
which opens all kinds of interesting possibilities. Superimpose a picture of a
traffic accident on the glasses of someone that is driving and you could very
well end up with the real thing.

Seeing is believing they say and the response to visual input can be very
reflexive. Audio alone can be distracting enough.

So google seems to have that part done right, it'd be great to play around
with these.

~~~
daralthus
On the opposite side they could have made not another display, but a whole new
tool. A new interface for manipulating dynamic content. Preferably with your
hands. Eliminating objects, laptops, touch displays...

However there are some clear points why did they choose this path:

\- they only needed to make the display tech. Everything other could come
later.

\- the lifelogging aspect could get hyped, making the whole thing sexy.

But still I am a bit dissapointed, now let's jump on hand and object
recognition!

~~~
Erwin
I don't know whether the technology is there, but I could see AR glasses being
paired with a (RFID? Bluetooth?) ring you wear as a pointing device. The demo
uses speech but I haven't found the Google voice search very impressive so I
have my doubts.

Put it on your finger (or if a cheap and small RFID chip, glue it onto your
fingernail, or even paint each of your fingernails with invisible slightly
radioactive nail polish), pair it with your glasses and you can use your
finger(s) as a pointing device in the AR overlay.

Depending on input resolution, the movements could be subtle -- you don't have
to raise your hands as if conducting an orchestra although that would be fun
to see. Wiggle your fingers to control your headset.

Or how about keyboard trousers. Invisible areas on the outside of your
trousers that you can tap as a small 10-key keyboard.

------
njharman
I've been following wearable computing for very long time. Since Dr Steve
Mann's eyetap and early MIT media lab <http://www.media.mit.edu/wearables/>
and <http://www.remem.org/> with chording keyboard and HUD is how I wanted
future to work.

These glasses look 1/2 as good as prototype and they are hackable at all, then
the future is near. And look matters. I don't have problem stickin out. But
many situations having bunch of wires and contraptions on your head is stickin
out __too __far. esp now days that people think lightbrites are WMDs.

Very, very excited.

------
robbiemitchell
Interesting that, in the demo video, he "shares to his circles" rather than to
a specific circle. Even in the Google+ future, it's easier to share with
everyone than to segment everyone endlessly.

~~~
xxbondsxx
They've changed this on the main site as well. They know most people are just
blasting everything, so that's the default now (at least for me).

------
DanBC
I want face recognition. No more "Hello er, ah, hello! How are you?" moments.

I also want a version that shoots laser beams into my eye.

(<http://slashdot.org/articles/99/04/15/2058223_F.shtml>)

(<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3647437.stm>)

Combined with a chording keyboard (Frogpad (except they don't seem to be
making them anymore) or "The Twiddler" and I can be happy when commuting.

------
duopixel
As much as I like the design, I think Google should first aim at making them
look as inconspicuous as possible by making it look like a normal piece of
eyewear.

There are very few visible pieces of technology that we carry and display in
public (probably only glasses and watches). Visible wearable technology has a
long history of being either geeky or douchebaggish (bluetooth headsets). I'm
suspecting the current incarnation of Google's glasses would elicit both
perceptions.

~~~
nextparadigms
To be honest, the glasses look way more minimalistic than I was thinking. I
was expecting something like full sunglasses - maybe even ones that are bit
bulkier. So from what point of view I'm very impressed.

But I agree that if they got this far already, they can probably make them
even more minimalistic in version 2.0 or 3.0. But really, they look very
modern already. Kind of like some of the best looking bluetooth headsets out
there - just longer.

------
dsirijus
I could name you dozen of IT companies that unveiled concept for a product
that's basically same as this. The only and real question is - can Google pull
it off?

------
sebastianavina
I just want to lay on the beach this vacations, but my cellphone doesn't stop
to ring, I'm attached to my job with my cellphone, and if I turn it off, it's
just rude. This glasses are a real nightmare for me.

~~~
gilrain
This is a problem with your job or possibly your work ethic, not your phone.

------
Tzunamitom
We did a lot of research into AR headsets in my last job. Four years ago they
already had a fully functional system that would "project" 3D organs into a
plastic cadaver, which could be manipulated with a scalpel-like stylus.

There were two key problems - one was the weight (resulting in wearer
fatigue), and the other was the refresh rate which caused nausea during
prolonged use. Neither of these are significant barriers, and given Moore's
Law I wouldn't be surprised if these things are as ubiquitous as smartphones
in 5-10 years.

------
jeffpalmer
This has the potential to be huge, especially since it's the brainchild of
Google. One thing I noticed is that they didn't showcase object recognition of
any type in the promo video. When I heard they were testing these glasses,
Google Goggles is the first thing that came to mind. It would be really useful
to auto-search objects by simply looking at them and issuing a command. I'm
sure it's on their roadmap, if it's not already live in the glasses alpha/beta
product.

~~~
dpezely
Although Google will make this more popular due to their marketing efforts and
brand, it's hardly their brainchild.

Tom Furness developed similar devices decades ago: Once out of the military
lab, this was a key project of the Human Interface Technology Lab at UW in
Seattle in the early 1990's.

Updating for smaller chips and components contributes to the current form-
factor which includes the front-facing camera not present in the earliest
versions.

The upside of course is that this might finally get some traction with
Google's budget and efforts.

~~~
raphman
also:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann#Anonequity_project_....](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann#Anonequity_project_.28Mann.2C_Kerr.2C_and_others.29)

------
altrego99
The hardware to display the AR in the glasses is not what I am concerned
about. What makes me doubt this is the software that will do the speech
analysis, and image analysis. Based on how much less than human our current
attempts of these are (eg. Google Goggles, Siri), it will be a miracle if this
develops into a product which ranks above in practical usability than its
entertainment value.

------
saturdaysaint
Interesting that that the intro video also seems to be a subtle demonstration
of new natural language commands. Kind of a clever way of minimizing "Siri" by
packaging it into something much bigger. I'm curious how some of the actions
are initiated - the video implies that visual recognition/location
awareness/voice commands initiate the search, but I wonder if a button is also
pressed.

------
b1daly
Why does the Google promo video make me feel icky? I already feel like my
attachment to my iPhone is not healthy, I literally feel lost when I don't
have it nearby.

I might be too old to get excited about stuff like this. I suppose if it
helped with my work I would use it, but otherwise I really enjoy looking
directly at the world.

------
sswezey
If the other engineers are anything like Thad Starner (Georgia Tech
professor), this will be an amazing thing! Thad has being working on very
similar projects for ages and cannot be found without his laptop in a bag and
screen on his glasses.

------
hcarvalhoalves
Soon: "Girls around Me" app for Google Glasses.

------
marcamillion
I really hope this sees the light of day and they are able to execute on it
the way it looks in the video. Unfortunately, I have seen too many cool videos
come from research labs or highly paid scientists/engineers at tech companies
and nothing ever comes of it - or rather, in a meaningful way to me anyway.
Microsoft surface anyone?

One of the things I LOVE about Apple is...if they released this video, I know
I could expect to see it on store shelves in a month or at most a few months.
Sometimes even as little as a few weeks.

That's awesome.

With this....only God He knows when we will ever see this.

------
EREFUNDO
Since I was a kid I always dreamed of making a wearable goggles that will let
you see the world very differently, like seeing another dimension. Advertising
wasn't part of the idea....lol

------
jpontyface
Seems like a cool product but glasses are a thing of the past. People moved to
using contacts because of the annoyance of glasses, and wearing them all day
can actually hurt my ears and nose. And once we start taking them off and
putting them in our pockets while not using them, they become a phone with
less features.

I want something like this, maybe in a pair of contacts, but even contacts can
be irritating. How about a genetically engineered eyeball?

~~~
raphman
You want the display to overlay the environment. Contact lenses move with your
eyeball - glasses don't. This means that you would need to precisely track the
lenses somehow - probably with an apparatus affixed to your head. => Glasses
are preferrable.

Regarding genetically engineered eyeballs: what if they get a virus?

------
stcredzero
Only a matter of time before someone implements something along the lines of
"Girls Around Me" for this thing, only it would be "Girl I'm Looking At."

------
varunsaini
I believe that if the product is good then it doesn't matter if you keep it
under wrap or give a peek to people. Google believes in iterative model and
they are keeping that. If they pull it off and sell it in 300-500 $ I can
imagine seeing a lot of people wearing these and updating their facebook
timelines and twitter :), so now we all know why they call Android, and
Android

------
rbarooah
A big question is how soon these can function as a standalone device, or
whether they would be tethered to a phone in your pocket first.

Otherwise, are they much more than a head mount display accessory for Android?

Head mount displays for mobile computers have been in industrial use for some
time - e.g. <http://www.stereo3d.com/hmd.htm>

------
exit
is it a mistake releasing concept videos far ahead of the state of the art?

hopefully what google announces at i/o will be shockingly advanced

------
dbh937
I wonder who will be testing these things... Hope Google has a signup list
like the had with the CR-48!

------
9oliYQjP
These glasses are ugly and unfashionable. But so are bluetooth headsets. I
wonder if they'll follow a similar trend curve of rapidly gaining adoption
while they seem techy-cool, but quickly turn to douchebag-turnoff accessories
as they peak and trail off in adoption.

------
kpanghmc
Very cool. Although now it's going to be even more difficult to tell whether
someone is talking to you, their Bluetooth headset, or their augmented reality
glasses.

I'm hoping they build in Google Translate into these things. They could be the
real life version of the Babel fish.

------
fosk
I want that you make it a platform, expose APIs, and allow developers to
create apps for it.

------
valgaze
I would _love_ to put this into the hands (eyeballs?) of salespeople for stuff
you can't scale well so they can look down a road and see an overlay of
appointments and contacts- a CRM overlay

------
zerop
But wouldnt this make people wearing it, more prone to accident... you are
driving and someone pings you on Google+, the message appears on google
glasses and you appear next to God !! :)

------
charlieok
I want this to replace at least most of the cases in which I'd otherwise be
seen walking around looking at my phone. Compared to that, this can't help but
be an unqualified improvement :)

------
firefoxman1
So the what the people in those Palm Pre commercials had...will soon be real!

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLYmzszg3nM>

------
bmj1
If they opened up an API for this you could have a lot of fun: \- P2P payments
\- Add as friend on FB/follow on Twitter \- See friends in common/shared
network

------
PanMan
Unclear to me is how the interface works. In the demo video, how do you select
an item? By eyesight? How do you click?

The design is more stylish than I expected.

~~~
DevX101
I love the style!

The most elegant (but difficult) solution for selecting items would be to
detect the focus of the eye.

------
jwallaceparker
When I was young my grandfather got me a pair of augmented reality glasses.
They had thick green rims and he also got a pair for my sister, Janine. Her
pair had red rims.

We put the glasses on right away and boy did they augment! After that we
really only took them off to sleep.

About three weeks later our family took a trip to New York City. We were
looking at all the tall buildings and they were really tall and beautiful.

Then we took the glasses off and realized we were in Hoboken!

~~~
sheraz
hahhaha. deep thoughts by jwallaceparker!

------
sabalaba
Looking forward to hacking on these. Hopefully they can redesign them to not
look like Geordi from Star Trek.

------
methodin
Any indication how one interacts with the device aside from voice and the
button for camera? Eye movement?

------
Foy
Just imagine the comedic possibilities created by this device.

Especially the voice activated picture-taking part.

------
chrischen
Something else you can get punched in the face for while walking down the
street.

~~~
DevX101
Warning! Warning! Convicted felon detected in oncoming approach 30 feet ahead.

Take evasive action immediately.

------
mmahemoff
"A group of us from Google[x]"

So this is the first official acknowledgement of Google X, no?

------
rjurney
Why don't they EVER show you what it looks like through the glasses?

------
thret
Imagine what these could do for someone with alzheimer's.

------
joshrotenberg
Looks like a great way to increase pedestrian fatalities.

~~~
msg
If only there was a way to travel autonomously without needing to monitor the
environment visually.

Back to the drawing board, Google.

    
    
      </>

------
jhull
now it all makes sense. they released the self-driving car first so that i can
now click on ads instead of driving. genius

------
deniska
It's the eyePhone from Futurama.

------
aaaassssghghg
Dont anyone think its fake?!!!

------
jhull
holy grail will be to be able to target ads to someones glasses right after
the get in a car crash. "Need a Lawyer? Blink Twice"

------
Hortinstein
anywhere we can sign up for the beta?

------
georgieporgie
I want these glasses, but with lenses. Not just any lenses, I want lenses that
have electronically-controlled, variable tint. Not only would I get the
benefit of sunglasses, but the tint could be run up when I'm significantly
engaged with my built-in display. Sort of an indicator to others to avoid the
social annoyances witnessed in modern, overly discreet mobile phone Bluetooth
headsets (and no, I don't mean black them out and blind me, nor do I mean to
signal muggers as to my distraction in a shady part of town, though I do see
the benefits of Peril Sensitive Sunglasses).

------
jQueryIsAwesome
This will certainly introduce a revolution in the gaming industry in the next
few years... or at least, i hope it does.

~~~
gumbo72
It will, for sure.

------
9k9
Everyone would go crazy with the ability to check a news feed 24/7. I suppose
we'd have to find a way to adapt to it as there are some pretty awesome
advantages.

~~~
orblivion
I keep hoping that the next _real_ revolution will be a way we can _decrease_
the amount of data we get. I can't conceive of how this would work even on a
theoretical level, but I hope someone figures it out.

~~~
koalaman
I've been thinking about this a lot myself. I think that software is
eventually going to have to help us stay disciplined in concentrating on one
thing at a time. Of course people are creeped out by the idea of software that
tells us what to do, or not to do, but I for one would like my phone to remind
me that this is not the time to look at hacker news, and besides, there's
nothing critical on it for me to look at it that can't wait until later.

------
noduerme
The use of all the hipster tropes in their vid is enough to make me change my
mind about never punching people with glasses.

------
naughtysriram
This looks something like the TEDx Sixth Sense by Pranav Mistry.

[http://www.ted.com/talks/pranav_mistry_the_thrilling_potenti...](http://www.ted.com/talks/pranav_mistry_the_thrilling_potential_of_sixthsense_technology.html)

