
A future made of Glass - Madness64
https://medium.com/p/cfc874c9261a
======
alphakappa
I have to respectfully disagree that this is the future. Is the future
comprised of devices that you have to consciously wear on you all the time (I
can barely stand to wear the prescription glasses I'm supposed to wear, let
alone glasses that will occasionally provide me with some utility)

On top of it, is the future of HCI in devices that you have to talk to? (Siri,
Glass) Not only do I have a very hard time getting any voice recognition to
understand my non native accent (beyond common phrases), having to talk to
your devices is an extremely unnatural thing for me to do, unless I'm in
private.

These devices may be futuristic, but this is not the revolutionary future.

~~~
VikingCoder
Why don't you interact with computers in your native language?

~~~
lucian1900
Because that is entirely infeasible for most languages that aren't English.

------
nrivadeneira
I'm always amazed at how much anti-Glass sentiment I see in the tech
community. I personally think it's going to be amazing. The best analogy I can
think of is the heads-up display (HUD) in video games. The current use cases
shown (texting, weather, pictures, etc.) are insignificant in comparison to
the potential for combining with other wearable computing devices such as
Fitbits, Fuelbands, Thalmic MYO's, etc.

Of course, this is an early iteration of the concept, but I see it as a game
changer. Imagine removing the HUD from all of your video games. That
experience sucks.

Now imagine a world where we can combine quantified-self computing, augmented
reality, and new interface devices such as Thalmic MYO with the Glass...that
future is a future I very much want to live in.

~~~
mjn
Maybe that's the fundamental disagreement, because that's a future I don't
really want to live in. I don't like HUDs in videogames for the most part. And
I don't want a bunch of shallow behaviorism everywhere, whether it's called
gamification or quantified-self or life-as-an-A/B-test. The actual device
itself I don't have any particular aversion to.

However so far all that does seem pretty easy to avoid, at least in your
personal life, so I'm not extremely worried about it (gamification in the
workplace may be harder to avoid, depending on your job and job options).

~~~
gknoy
I find your perspective to be refreshingly different than my own. I _love_ the
idea of a HUD - even it it's something I don't use often.

What I had not thought about was the privacy implications, and the more I
think about it, the less happy I feel about people with it on all the time.

Part of me feels this fear is irrational, as I don't have a problem with
people taking video with their cell phones. However, this deep-seated aversion
to it seems more due to the it-might-always-be-on aspect -- similar to how
most of us are OK with the idea of wiretaps when warranted, yet flip out about
the recent intelligence news.

Penny Arcade and some other articles I've read have really reinforced the
perspective that people will want to punch me in the face for using Glass. I
think Glass's biggest hurdle will not be the prospect of looking silly, but of
all of your friends saying "Turn that damn thing off before I break it".

~~~
nrivadeneira
I don't know if I'm in the minority, but I don't really care if people have
Glass on around me. People have cameras with them at all times these days due
to smartphones. The fact that it's not attached to their head is not what's
stopping them from taking photos and video at inappropriate times. I don't see
myself beginning to take unsolicited photos any more than I would have with my
phone (aka never) just because I have Glass on. I imagine the same goes for
most people you have any sort of meaningful interaction with.

------
sveme
There seem to be two major topics governing the front page of hackernews
lately - the NSA leaks and Google Glass (though Glass was obviously much
earlier). And reading through the comments about these two topics feels like
being on two completely different web sites, with completely different
audiences: a device tracking minute details of your life, that is sold by an
advertising company, intended to use all the information available to sell you
even more stuff you don't really need, is hailed nearly uncritically as the
next big thing. A secret service that tries to track all physical and virtual
movements of every living human is rightly criticized as detrimental to
democratic societies.

Glass is a wet dream for intelligence services. I would have expected these
two topics to influence each other much more. Is it because there are indeed
two disjoint HN populations (or rather n disjoint populations), or because
some of a nerd's aggravation is easily soothed by the latest cool gadget?

Disclaimer: I find Glass fascinating and creepy at the same time, so I could
fully understand the latter possibility.

~~~
nrivadeneira
I comment on Glass articles because I'm very excited about it. I don't comment
on NSA articles because I personally don't find it to be an issue and I know
I'll be burned at the stake and deemed an idiot for even considering having a
differing view on privacy than the majority here.

In the first instance, I'm excited and can expect rational discussion. In the
second, I'm more or less indifferent and certainly not masochistic.

------
pseudometa
The future is not made of Google Glass, but will be better because of lessons
learned from it.

Computers will get smaller and smaller and fade into the backgrounds of our
lives. Human Computer Interaction will become be highly centered on touch,
gestures, and speach. Not because they have some amazing technical advantage,
but because that is how we interact with other humans.

Google glass is a step in that direction, but ultimately just a prototye
device that tests a few ideas out. This is not the winning idea that people
want it to be and that Google wishes it was. You can cout out wide adoption
and you can count out revolutionizing anything, because at the end of the day,
it does not fade into the background. What it will do is provide some good
feedback (as any beta product will) to all of us for honing the future of
wearable devices and computing in general.

------
darasen
What I don't get: In a time when we are very aware of government tracking
programs we are being asked to strap a GPS and camera to our heads so that
Google can track us constantly?

~~~
Spearchucker
Agreed. I was ambivalent about Glass before Snowden's leaks. Now there's
absolutely no way. Glass is little more to me now than a white-labeled data
front-loader for the NSA.

Which is a shame in a way. If Glass turns out to be compelling it might have
been the reason for me to sign up for a Google account. Now, no way.

~~~
kmicklas
Tin foil much? Just wait until someone puts Linux on it (i.e. not Android).

~~~
WayneDB
Seriously? The one thing that all the "tin foil" people were talking about for
decades is finally proven beyond a shadow of a doubt - and you're still going
to refer to them in a derisive tone?

------
JonSkeptic
One word: pretentious. The article. Google Glass. All of it. I'll be
interested when that is no longer true (at least for glass, it's too late for
the article).

~~~
Shivetya
When I think of a World of Glass I always go back to Corning's A Day Made of
Glass [http://youtu.be/6Cf7IL_eZ38](http://youtu.be/6Cf7IL_eZ38) which has far
more every day examples we can all believe in

------
deleted_account
"Glass has a packaging so slick and gorgeous it makes you feel like you’re
unboxing an Apple product"

Ha! So much for Google setting their own precedent on quality.

Google is shooting themselves in the foot appealing to reviewer's worst sense
of self-importance. Concierge service and complementary Champagne?

And these reviews! They're so painfully rote: wifi-bluetooth-battery-life-
sucks-now-you-can-check-your-email-in-the-middle-of-a-conversation-needs-more-
iterations-here-are-some-shitty-pictures-of-a-buffet.

Is this really the future?

~~~
leephillips
"Google is shooting themselves in the foot appealing to reviewer's worst sense
of self-importance."

Works for Apple:
[http://daringfireball.net/2012/02/mountain_lion](http://daringfireball.net/2012/02/mountain_lion)

------
pseudometa
Nerd Alert.

Google Glass is the calculator watch of the 90s. But instead of the a pallet
of buttons on a writst, you now have a camera affixed to your face.

~~~
tjr
I want Google Glass connected to the Leap Motion hand movement interface.

------
ambiate
The 'Glass experience' is nothing more than a scripted over-courteous event.
As a developer with social anxiety, my Glass experience was spending quality
time with my wife as we ventured throughout LA.

Unboxing is not interesting to me. Overly-cheery reps are not an experience.
Touring a near-empty facility rivals staring at pictures online. My wife's
comment summed it up: "You just looked disappointed the whole time."

Yet, don't discredit the device. There are amazing chances to improve people's
lifestyles. There will be niches to help navigate people through life in
otherwise impossible-to-assist situations. The to be educated/educators,
handicapped, autistic, businesses and many others may find new approaches to
life through a device like this.

------
nsxwolf
Yesterday I realized Google Glass could cause QR codes to finally take off.

~~~
pseudometa
QR codes are sold by marking folks to other marketing folks. If it is relying
on Google Glass to finally take off, you can put the nails in the coffin right
now.

~~~
nsxwolf
It's the friction that makes it useless. I saw a QR code on the window of a
Chevy Volt that said scan for Volt info. It would have taken a lot longer to
find and use a QR scanner than to just enter Chevy Volt into search on a
mobile browser.

If QR scanning was a first class citizen and I could just look at it and
instantly get the information, I can see QR being used by real people.

------
aedocw
"How many times have you been in a conversation, and picked up your phone to
Google something you’re talking about. And after reading the result, you check
your homescreen, and a few seconds later, you’re reading your tweets or your
Facebook newsfeed, and no longer contributing to the conversation? Being able
to ask Google anything and instantly get the answer without having to use your
phone is magical."

This is a problem of focus and attention, not an interface problem. If you
play with your phone when you're supposedly spending time with friends, glass
is just going to make this significantly worse (because now you're looking
towards me but still scrolling through your FB feed).

"And with Google Now, you know how bad the traffic is and how long your ride
home is going to be without having to ask for it." I use a better solution
today. Waze has routed me around traffic jams with amazing success, and it
didn't cost me anything (since I already invested in my smartphone).

Everything I've read on glass so far seems to be taking some big leaps to
justify the device. As others have said, it will lead us towards some
interesting solutions eventually, but it is definitely not the best solution
to ANYTHING.

------
molbioguy
Google Glass is an innovative product that will surely cause some problems. I
admit I'd love to have one, but given what cellphones have done to life, I
fear that we are rushing into radical changes without due thought.

Privacy issues when Glass users record every interaction they have (and
potentially post to their social networks). Capturing my daugther's first
words is sweet. Capturing my naked partner could be different. No need to hold
up a phone -- very convenient. And it will surely all be there on the web.

Glass also could further the trend towards self-indulgent isolation and
distraction. Are looking at me or reading mail? Texting while driving is bad,
reading tweets and viewing images while driving (all hands free) will be
worse.

People already spend too much time photographing/capturing experiences instead
of actually experiencing them. Glass will accentuate this. The goal in life
should be to live in the present, not record for posterity. And frankly, I
have my own life; I don't want to share every bit of yours...

------
mordae
I few years back, I welcomed these gadgets as awesome ways to improve one's
life, to make it much more interesting, efficient. Nowadays, when I start to
grasp actual capabilities of myself and people around me, after seeing what
power bad people have over the rest, not so much.

In fact, I am scared to death every time technology like this appears. I know
it will be misused, it will become another instrument for hurting people. Or
at least as long as we will tolerate it. And we will. It's what we (smart
people) are good at. Tolerating. Coping. Working around. Fixing things for
ourselves, mocking others who don't understand how.

What do I see in Google Glass? More behavioural programming via advertisements
and/or information manipulation. Further corrosion of privacy (of others,
wearers can turn them off). New symbol of higher social class, even more
prominent than a smartphone.

Yeah, mock me.

------
davmar
i think glass will find more adoption with commercial uses than with
consumers. military, construction workers, police, racecar drivers, pilots,
etc. those people actually can use a HUD for more than just checking twitter
comments and they won't look weird wearing it.

for consumer uses, i hope the future is not glass. people should interact with
people. today our phones can go in our pockets and we can talk face to face.
with glass, we'll talk in this order: face -> glass -> glass -> face.

i do want important info to be surfaced when i need it, but i don't need it as
a HUD. a voice in my ear, or perhaps even something as futuristic as just
"knowing" that i need to make a left at the next light since the computer has
informed the right part of my brain of that.

but please, i don't want to have to compete with glass for your attention.

~~~
WiseWeasel
It's sad there's not more awareness of the optimal form factor for wearable
computing revealed all the way back in 1981 [1], if maybe a bit oversized and
rudimentary by modern technical standards:

[http://cineplex.media.baselineresearch.com/images/312162/312...](http://cineplex.media.baselineresearch.com/images/312162/312162_large.jpg)

[1]
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082186/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082186/)

------
embolism
A future where google gets to control what's in your visual field all day
long.

A future controlled by one company.

I recall that being something people were terrified of when it was Apple in
the driving seat, but I guess Google is Open and is only focused on what's
best for the end user, so it's all fine.

------
MaybiusStrip
Wordy prose, rampant grammatical mistakes, a poorly constructed argument... my
classmates in junior-high wrote more convincingly.

I can almost hear the author patting himself on the back for writing that last
sentence. If the future is making existing solutions to first world problems
slightly more convenient, I'm not interested in being a part of it.

~~~
Madness64
Would love to see if your prose in French is better than mine in English ;)

------
pohl
"What about an RSS reader that you wear on your FACE?" \- Anil Dash

[https://twitter.com/anildash/status/312048420720345088](https://twitter.com/anildash/status/312048420720345088)

------
md224
Champagne and sousveillance? Is this the egalitarian utopia we were promised?

------
bluthru
"Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it
universally accessible and useful."

This goal seems far less noble since unveiling Google Glass.

~~~
Sven7
The best way to achieve that noble goal would be to open up their search index
(unlimited API access) and build a marketplace around search, just as they
have around Android, Youtube and Chrome.

Search has a very long way to go and they can be moving much faster than they
currently are.

~~~
embolism
The goal isn't so noble when you realize that they don't want anyone else
doing it.

~~~
Sven7
I think we have passed the point where anyone else can actually build an
engine that returns results _just_ matching, forget about surpassing, Google
quality.

Since we are where we are, might as well move on to phase two and allow people
to build on top of it. Just look at the random bunch(flights, recipes,
patents...) of 10 or so tabs above the search box. Is that the extent to which
the worlds information can be classified? Is that it?

~~~
embolism
I quite agree, however Google appears to have no intention of allowing anyone
else to be involved, and why would it?

~~~
Sven7
Regulators.

Its going to happen. And I hope they save everyone a whole lot of time and
preempt it.

~~~
embolism
It seems unlikely. So far they seem to be doing a great job of lobbying, and
convincing the government of the idea that competition is only a click away.

