
I am in competition with you for all sorts of experiences – you will lose - infoman
http://glass-apps.org/google-glass-next-2013-robert-scoble
======
DividesByZero
Too often real innovation is lost behind froth and grandstanding like this -
too many excitable nerds and shiny toys, not enough introspection on the
effects of technology on society. Not enough emphasis on problems that need
solving, too much on how to raise more ad revenue or VC money.

I saw this talk live at NEXTBerlin, and while in the audience all I could
think was 'wow, I don't care at all if you win - your life sounds like it must
suck if you're competing for ridiculous minutiae - and what has this got to do
with privacy anyway?'. Questions of privacy - an important pillar of digital
policy in Germany and other EU states - were brushed aside at the prospect of
faster airline tickets and 'competition for experience', whatever that means.

Really? Can Scoble not imagine a world where experience isn't a zero sum game?
Is this the perception of the world we're being locked into by technology?

Google Glass has a lot of potential in some spaces - in teaching, in medicine,
in law enforcement - but I am terrified that its evangelists and early
adopters are brushing aside the concerns of a digital layer in front of real
experiences so readily, as if more technology is automatically a good thing.

~~~
pi18n
I was shocked that he thinks I'd be competing with him for a raise. He's not
even on the same playing field as I am if a raise is what he is after.

~~~
Connaissance
He is obviously talking metaphorically. He knows he is not competing with you
or with any of the many people listening to his talk. The point is, people in
your playing field using better tech than you will win over you.

------
hughw
Sure. You win Scoble. You just go ahead and book that flight or grab that
table. I'll be here in my log cabin in the mountains, looking at the stars,
and losing.

~~~
infoman
looking at the stars and taking pictures while holding your girlfriend with
both hands and not fiddling with your camera

~~~
EliRivers
Certainly a winner at the "hyper competitive dickhead" experience.

------
burningion
I think Scoble might be missing a very important point. Our ability to access
information isn't the problem. We all already have (nearly) instant access to
all the information we'll need.

The thing that worries me most about Glass is that it's solving the wrong
problem. We're not running around in a world where it's too much of a bother
to look at our phone, but instead that we're less and less capable of focus.

If you look at the nature of our technology, we've already (mostly) solved the
problem of information search and retrieval at any time. We all have a very
near the same quality experience when it comes to information.

But where we break apart is in the ability to focus and make new connections
from the data. I wonder whether Glass users are drowning themselves in more
noise, and not really getting the space to create new, meaningful, creative
connections.

I wonder whether we need new ways to disconnect more intensely than we need a
more subtle overlay of noisy information on our reality.

~~~
Karunamon
_> Our ability to access information isn't the problem._

I disagree with you both on this point and your characterization of Glass as a
"subtle overlay of noisy information".

Nowadays, although that information access is quick, it could be quicker and
more seamless. There's a world of difference between:

1\. Fishing out your smartphone from your pants/bag/wherever

2\. Unlocking it (with requisite passcode, thanks corporate IT)

3\. Bringing up the search app

4\. And either saying what you want after invoking the voice search (and
hoping it comes up right, or else you get to do it over again) or typing what
you want (and hoping you made no mistakes).

And:

1\. Saying, at any time, "Ok Glass, search for (thing)", and having the
results played back so you can hear them.

The first one feels contrived and annoying, the second feels passive and
natural in comparison.

Glass is unique in that the first two steps of that transaction are eliminated
outright, and the third is reduced to saying some magic words. The fourth is
greatly mitigated by the fact that Glass is likely in a better position to
capture your voice than the speakerphone mic on your smartphone.

Passive access to information (and I'm saying access, not overlay, for a good
reason) is going to be the next big thing for precisely this reason, ease of
use!

But let's take another example. I'm sure you've seen the posts decrying
someone "missing out" on some event because they were too busy recording it.
Now? That's not a problem anymore. "Ok Glass, record a video". You're done.
You don't have to think about it, you just launch the recording and then go
back to whatever you were doing.

Focus? You barely even see Glass unless you're actively looking up at it.
Indeed, you need to "focus" on it to use it. The transaction is just reduced
from messing with your phone to an upwards glance.

This is also why I disagree with your assessment of glass as being both an
overlay (which it isn't), and noisy (which it isn't, and which would go
against the guidelines anyways).

I'm finding more and more that people who feel they need to "disconnect" are
simply failing at technology. You are no more connected than you let yourself
be! If you are so wired in, by your own choices, that you feel the need to get
away from it all for a length of time, how about just not wiring yourself in
that tightly?

------
nisa
Fluffy marketing bullshit. Sorry.

Privacy concerns are legitimate. Google Glass may not even be the problem. But
the impact of the availability of ever more personal data in the hands of
government and corporations for our society needs to be discussed. People have
a legitimate right to know about their data trails.

PS: The #next conference "stole" their slogan¹ from the 26C3 Chaos
Communication Congress²

1: <http://nextberlin.eu/2013/04/behind-the-scenes-at-next13/>

2: <http://events.ccc.de/congress/2009/>

~~~
DividesByZero
It's not exactly an uncommon phrase...

~~~
nisa
Yes. I won't impeach them. I think it is worth pointing out because it shows a
certain lack of creativity to use a slogan from a _very_ popular conference
held in the same city just some years ago. This and considering their
presentation as leaders in all aspects give me the impression of poor style
from them.

How popular is the phrase for native english speakers?

------
kh_hk
I would add an 'if' to the headline to make it less inflamatory: 'If I am in
competition with you for all sorts of experiences, you will lose'.

I am not competing with you, and I do not care if I take a late flight, or do
not have a reservation to this restaurant because in my mind reality is not
goal driven, but path driven.

------
protomyth
Shallow

Getting the answer or the data isn't really the biggest issue. The problem is
understanding what that data actually means. I am pretty convinced (given the
students I observe), that google helps with data and trivia, but doesn't help
with the understanding of what that trivia means. Put another way, you can
access data faster than someone without the glasses, but can you turn that
data into information?

I am all for the demise of rote learning of names and dates, but I think we
need more tools for explaining the how / why and not the what. You can lookup
the API calls with the glasses, but not know how to do the design of those API
calls.

------
xfs
It's funny how people here automatically start the reactionary rejection of a
new technology taking over our current way of processing information.

It is not really a competition about who lives a better life, or what is the
true experience. It is about how general people's life will be changed by the
product. Scoble's point is very clear: the product gives users power through
technological superiority and let them have a new mean of social display. When
everyone starts to get Google Glass, its function no longer matters; it
becomes a social device.

~~~
DividesByZero
I think the sort of future where I need to buy and use a device from a
corporation to modulate my experience and participate in society is a pretty
shitty future, and we should be doing some thinking about that.

~~~
icebraining
Having to use corporation-made tools to fully participate in society is not
the future, it's the past and present. Cellphones, computers, cars, house
appliances, even (regular) glasses if you have poor eyesight, it's all
required if you want to participate in society as it expects you to.

If you mean from a _single_ corporation, that's just a temporary condition;
competitors are already starting to appear:
[http://www.slashgear.com/telepathy-one-takes-on-google-
glass...](http://www.slashgear.com/telepathy-one-takes-on-google-glass-with-
ultra-sleekness-13273729/)

~~~
DividesByZero
I don't think any of the things you mention are equivalently intrusive. But
it's a point that scares me a little.

------
gyardley
An experience mediated by technology is not the same thing as the original
experience - we can debate whether it makes the experience richer or poorer,
but it certainly makes the experience different.

Even a UI-less, effortless experience transforms the experience. For instance,
passively recording what you see through Google Glass will cause you to view
the world with a mind towards recording and archiving your experience.

While Scoble believes he is winning a competition, he is simply opting into a
different set of experiences - one where he might get access to things like
airline tickets or restaurant reservations a little faster than the rest of
us, but also one where he's also constantly evaluating how to use the
technology he's carrying to interact with the world. Some people will prefer
this set of experiences, while others will prefer the originals.

Both types of people _should_ be able to get what they want, but I worry that
Google Glass will alter the experiences of everybody, not just its users. We
all act and think differently when we're aware we're being recorded - it makes
us more self-conscious, putting us in an 'observe ourselves' mindset that
competes with the 'observe the world around you' mindset. In a world with a
plurality of Google Glass-wearers, we'll have to assume we're constantly being
recorded when around other people, and that's not something I particularly
care to experience.

~~~
icebraining
It should be noted that Glass does not - and cannot, for battery constraints -
record everything the user sees.

------
keithpeter
The examples mentioned in the article (plane flights, tables at restaurants)
involve competition between people in the same place 'competing' because a
given resource is scarce. I'm not making the link to privacy laws at _nation
state_ level. There are buses and trains as well as planes. There will be
slightly later planes. There are _plenty_ of places to eat where I live.

------
cateye
Wait until network effects take place and it creates a lock-in for a specific
vendor. (Besides, congestion will strike and he will also loose a lot of his
races.)

So, it is true, we are in a competition, but not the competition that Scoble
is referring to.

The competition is more about open standards, patent laws and the future of
freedom.

------
coldtea
And then you suffer a tragic family loss or an incurable decease or something,
and you gain some humility and perspective....

~~~
icebraining
<http://scobleizer.com/2006/05/10/bad-news-gets-worse/>

------
StavrosK
Man, I'd love to be in a place where my only worries are if I get the last
table in the restaurant or the last flight home.

Meanwhile, don't we have more important things to do than listen to someone go
"yeah, I can use my apps faster than you"?

~~~
jasonlotito
> Meanwhile, don't we have more important things to do than listen to someone
> go "yeah, I can use my apps faster than you"?

Children dying of hunger in Africa. If you aren't working on that, you are a
bad, bad person and should be ashamed.

Everything else is a waste.

------
ratsbane
This reminds me Falken's law from War Games. True for many games: the best way
to win is to not play.

------
sebastianconcpt
Incredibly simplistic and shallow reasoning.

Scaling anxiety disorders big time.

Here we go...

------
arbuge
I'm guessing that anything Scoble is competing with me for, I probably
wouldn't be very interested in, so he's welcome.

(Except maybe that airline ticket if I don't get one of the remaining two...)

------
infoman
it is the same thing with being able to google really well.

I was about 1000% more efficient than my coworkers at new things, ways and
information because I googled fast and found the information.

~~~
devonbarrett
This. The ability to Google efficiently is severely underrated.

~~~
klibertp
Do you (or someone) know about any tutorial or a book for learning how to
google? Is "how to google" only about phrasing queries, using correct words,
improving query using results from its previous version, using quotes, and so
on, or is it something more?

~~~
devonbarrett
Using my google-fu ;) I found this link which may or may not be any
good(<http://www.googleguide.com/advanced_operators.html>).

I have never used operators myself, I think just the way you structure and
choose your words wisely has the most impact.

------
pfortuny
The future looks like people spending half their lives recording video and
half of it watching the records. Recursion looks possible if you think of it!

------
ef4
All true. But we technophiles are better served by downplaying this aspect of
technology's advance.

A large fraction of people are utterly freaked out by the idea that they'll be
obligated to adopt new technology just to keep up.

Better to give many chances for people to discover on their own that they
really _want_ to use a new technology for positive reasons, rather than out of
fear.

~~~
EliRivers
Many people will discover they don't. I have a mobile phone that is the first
mobile phone I ever had (sucker! I never answered the damn thing anyway!);
someone gave it to me because they were sick of not being able to phone me any
time of the day or night. It's over a decade old and it spends most of the
time switched off. If it does happen to ring, I generally ignore it. I live
quite happily without carrying a phone or smartphone around with me; I suspect
many people will quite happily live without being able to wear their google
interface on their face.

~~~
infoman
yes of course. There are many people without a car, mobile phone or a pension.
There are many ways of live that can be enjoyable. But everything come with a
certain risk that can be minimized with technology.

------
jeffehobbs
This man is a grotesque monster.

------
6d0debc071
If I'm in front of my computer with Ghci, or whatever, open and you're trying
to do the same thing on your Glasses, you'll lose. Oh wow, you can book a
table, or a flight. I care why?

Can I think of things that tech lets me do quicker? Sure. But that's why I sit
in front of a computer for a lot of the day and carry a tablet. Advantage to
Glass is? Not even gonna be on the order of 30 seconds here....

Most of the advantages I can think of to do with Glass just have to do with
having a rich/continuous supply of data - and that'll only really take off
when you can store and cross reference it effectively.

